‘Very thoughtful guy’: Mike Johnson runs cover for ‘Nazi imagery’ MAGA candidate

Alexander Willis
September 13, 2026 

RAW STORY



U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) gives remarks to the media following a vote in the House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 1, 2026. REUTERS/Aaron Schwartz

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) doubled down Sunday on his support for a GOP candidate who has called children "c-- trophies" and embraced "Nazi imagery" online, claiming Brandon Herrara is the "common sense" choice.

Johnson brushed off questions from CNN's Jake Tapper on Sunday about his endorsement of Herrera by insisting the content was just "his persona online.”

Herrera is the GOP nominee in a race to represent Texas’ 23rd Congressional District, having narrowly lost the GOP primary in 2024 by just over 400 votes. Before entering politics, Herrera was a prominent online influencer known for controversial remarks, including joking about veteran suicide and voicing support for the Confederacy.

“Brandon Herrera, before he started becoming a congressional candidate, he’s a YouTuber, and he has said some offensive, sexually explicit, crude things about women and children,” Tapper said before playing a clip of Herrera calling children “c-- trophies.”

“He’s also in a video testing a Nazi-era sub-machine gun, he called it the ‘original ghetto blaster,’ you see him goose stepping to a Nazi marching song… I have to say, I know you’re not a voter in that district, you didn’t nominate this guy, but I was surprised to see you endorse him and fundraise for him.”

Johnson admitted that Herrera’s language was “detestable,” but fiercely defended the controversial candidate as being a “very thoughtful guy.”

“Brandon Herrera has been out running a very effective campaign. He has apologized for all that — he was a podcaster and a provocateur and tried to get attention,” Johnson said. “Now, he’s running as a very serious candidate for Congress and a very thoughtful guy.”

Johnson also argued Herrera was "far superior" to his Democratic opponent and described the race as a "contrast election between common sense and crazy."

Herrera's opponent is Katy Padilla Stout, a former school teacher.

'Will you condemn this?' Republican's post sparks national debate about GOP racismKathleen Culliton

September 13, 2026 

RAW STORY

U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) speaks to reporters outside the Senate chamber in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump saying he may temporarily drop the nomination of Todd Blanche to be U.S. attorney general, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 30, 2026. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

A three-sentence tweet from a state-level candidate has sparked a nationwide uproar about racism in the Republican Party.

A conservative U.S. senator, an MS NOW panel, a rising star in the Democratic Party, and a host of local GOP politicians publicly spoke out against a comment from the Republican nominee for Texas Railroad Commissioner on Sunday.

"Are other Republican elected officials going to condemn the intolerance and racism, or look the other way while it becomes normalized?" asked Texas Sen. John Cornyn. "This is how great political parties self-destruct."

The comment in question came from Bo French, who shared a picture of what appears to be a screenshot of celebrating students at a Texas Longhorns football game.

"I heard UT graduation this year looked like this," Bo French wrote on X. "I didn’t believe it. The problem is now obviously far worse than anyone imagined."

French later replied to Cornyn's condemnation by doubling down on his race-based rhetoric.

"Generations of Texans have invested billions of dollars into UT," French wrote. "Today it is filled with foreign nationals and Leftists who boo Ted Cruz. John Cornyn says we should accept decline."

State Rep. James Talarico, running for the U.S. Senate in Texas, thanked Cornyn for speaking out against French and called on his competitor, Attorney General Ken Paxton, to do the same.

"Racism has no place in Texas," Talarico wrote. "Will you condemn this blatant racism or will you cower to extremists?"

Paxton's campaign did not immediately condemn the post online or respond to a request for comment from the Texas Tribune, which reported the Republican Senate nominee has supported French’s campaign and claimed he would make "a great Railroad Commissioner.”

Other local Republicans were outraged.

State Rep. Jared Patterson (R-TX) joined his colleague across the aisle in condemning French's remarks with a lengthy statement.


"This is racist. It is wrong. And I condemn it without reservation," he wrote. "There is absolutely nothing Christian or conservative about looking at a crowd of young Texans at a college football game, seeing the color of their skin, and declaring that they are a 'problem.'”

State Rep. Jeff Leach (R-TX) posted a picture of his son Brady at the game in question.

"Bo thinks it’s a 'problem' they don’t all look like and have the same skin color as Brady," Leach wrote. "I think that’s racist — and it makes me sick."

"Please delete this," begged state Rep. Lacey Hull (R-TX). "This post breaks my heart. I see college kids cheering on their football team. I see Texans."

MS NOW host Antonia Hylton devoted an entire segment to her concerns about the rising number of conservative campaign scandals linked to Nazi rhetoric, misogynistic commentary and Ku Klux Klan attire.

Molly Jong Fast argued Cornyn was correct in his warning that the conservative party might self-destruct, calling it a "leopards-eating-faces scenario."

French police officers suspended over racist video as far-right links emerge

Four municipal police officers in the southern French city of Carcassonne remain suspended on Thursday as prosecutors investigate racist, sexist and homophobic remarks caught on a police body camera.


Issued on: 10/09/2026 - RFI

A police officer stands outside the municipal police headquarters in Carcassonne, southern France, on 9 September 2026. Four officers have been suspended over a video containing racist, sexist and homophobic remarks that is under investigation by prosecutors. © Ed Jones / AFP

The daily newspaper Midi Libre this week revealed a recording made by a police officer's body camera, without his knowledge, while on patrol in November 2025.

Midi Libre said the officer who made most of the remarks was a member of France's far-right National Rally (RN) who had worked with the party's security service and provided security for RN president Jordan Bardella during a visit to Carcassonne in February.

The RN said on Wednesday it had expelled him from the party and removed him from its security service.

"It is an isolated incident and a purely fabricated affair," RN vice-president Louis Aliot said on French broadcaster Franceinfo on Thursday.

"Ever since Marine Le Pen took the reins of the party, people who have no place here have been systematically shown the door. You cannot gauge what people are thinking, any more in the RN than in the Socialist party or the Communist party."
Carcassonne investigation

A judicial investigation into the recording is continuing, with witnesses still to be questioned and potential victims to be identified. The investigation began after the officer at the centre of the case filed a complaint over the recording.

The Carcassonne prosecutor's office said it was "implementing the measures (...) allowing for the suspension and subsequently the withdrawal of the accreditation of the municipal police officers concerned who do not meet the standards of integrity required for their duties".

Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez said on social media on Wednesday that he had ordered an inspection of the Carcassonne municipal police.

He condemned the racist, homophobic and misogynistic remarks as unworthy of the municipal police uniform and the values of the French republic.

Midi Libre said the officer provided security for Bardella when the RN president visited Carcassonne on 7 February 2026 to support the mayoral campaign of Christophe Barthès.

During a press conference on Wednesday, Carcassonne's RN mayor denounced the officers' remarks as "disgusting and inexcusable".

His administration received the conclusions of an administrative investigation into the incident on 19 May, Barthès said.

"The inquiry failed to establish with certainty the identity of the authors of each of the recorded remarks," he said.

The prosecutor's office said it had not yet received the conclusions of that investigation.

In the video, the officer responds after a female resident called police because she had hit an animal.

"No, it might be a migrant, a little Kirikou," he says, before imitating an African accent. "Kirikou in the savanna (...) he came to France, he gets hit by a vehicle."
Political reactions

The case drew condemnation from across the political spectrum. Aurore Bergé, minister delegate responsible for equality between women and men and combating discrimination, described the remarks on French broadcaster RMC as "absolutely unacceptable".

Opposition politicians also used the case to attack the National Rally over racism.

"This is what France would look like under an RN government. Unrestrained and encouraged hatred," Renaissance presidential candidate Gabriel Attal said.

The criticism also came from the left, with hard-left France Unbowed (LFI) accusing the RN of failing to distance itself from its past.

"Those who spend their time trying to detoxify the image of the National Rally should open their eyes: nothing has changed in this party, which is infested with racism and fascism," LFI national coordinator Manuel Bompard said.

(with newswires)

Eiffel Tower row over Hindu sect BAPS unites French politicians – but divides Indian diaspora


France got a crash course on the Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS), a Hindu sect at the heart of an Eiffel Tower strike this week. But for Indians in France who have been trying to raise awareness of far-right Hindu groups, it comes too late. As the 2027 election campaign goes into high gear, some fear the issue will be politicised by the French far right.


Issued on: 09/09/2026 - FRANCE24
By: Leela JACINTO

Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS) Hindu monks participate in a religious ceremony in front of the Eiffel Tower on September 3, 2026. © Kenzo Tribouillard, AFP


On Saturday, September 5, as members of a Hindu sect were set to make a splash visit to the Eiffel Tower, an organisation of progressive Indians living in France held a public meeting in Paris to shed some light on the religious group and the international spread of Hindu nationalism, which has been turbocharged during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tenure.

The French press was invited to the event organised by the Indian Alliance Paris (IAP) and co-hosted by three other organisations, including France’s CGT union. Speakers at the public meeting included activists and researchers from France, as well as the US and India, who joined via video link. They focused on the Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS), a sect that was opening a large new temple in a Paris suburb. Issues were raised and addressed, a documentary was screened, and a press statement was released after the event.

But there was not much coverage in the French press of a weekend meeting held by one of many diaspora groups in Paris.

That changed on Monday, when the Eiffel Tower was closed after staff went on strike over female workers being removed and replaced by men during a private tour by a BAPS delegation of the Paris landmark.

Suddenly, BAPS and its giant temple in Bussy-Saint-Georges, an eastern suburb located between the French capital and Disneyland Paris, was all over the news. Audiences got a crash course on a sect practicing a “very conservative form of Hinduism” with “close links” to the Modi administration.

“We tried to highlight this issue. We tried to tell them that these people are very conservative and they are very misogynistic. But it didn’t really come into the spotlight,” said IAP secretary Joy Banerjee, listing the many ways his organisation attempted to reach out to left-leaning French political parties. “Suddenly, the mask was dropped on Monday because of the strike.”

The Eiffel Tower reopened to the public on Tuesday. BAPS released a statement noting that, “To our knowledge, at no time was access to the Eiffel Tower denied to anyone. Nevertheless, we sincerely apologise for any pain or inconvenience caused.”

By then, every French politician worth their salt – and with an eye on the 2027 election – had commented on the fracas. Socialist Paris Mayor Emmanuel Grégoire promised an investigation. Valérie Pécresse, president of the Île-de-France Paris metropolitan area and member of the conservative Les Républicains party, expressed her “shock” on X. French far-right leader Marine Le Pen also got into the act, noting that, “In France, we will never accept that the presence of women be limited."

Just days after many diaspora Indians in France opposed to Modi’s policies got together to raise awareness of BAPS, some were worried about a French far-right, anti-immigrant backlash. On Tuesday morning, the IAP took to X to warn that, “the Eiffel Tower story must not become fodder for more racism,” adding, “BAPS does not represent all Hindus and it certainly does not represent India.”

It was not the first time a progressive diaspora group in the West has tried to raise awareness of the inroads far-right ideologies from their homeland were making in their new countries. Many of them have spent months and years watching as Western leaders, driven by economic or geopolitical interests, ignore their warnings and lay out the red carpet for nationalist demagogues without raising human rights concerns. Now, as the far right extends its reach across Western Europe, many fear the awareness amounts to too little, too late.

From village temple to global network

Founded in 1907 with the consecration of a mandir, or temple, in the village of Bochasan in the western Indian region of Gujarat, BAPS is a denomination of the Swaminarayan Sampradaya, a Vaishnavite sect of Hinduism.

From a little-known village temple, BAPS has grown into a global organisation that manages more than 1,300 temples and more than 5,025 centres across India, North America, Europe, West Asia, Africa and Australia.

The BAPS temple on the outskirts of Paris – believed to be the biggest in Europe built in the traditional style – was inaugurated on Sunday with a video message delivered by the Indian prime minister.

The private Eiffel Tower visit was part of the events from September 3-14 marking the opening of the BAPS temple, billed as a 13-day “festival of culture” that included a procession of boats gliding down the Seine River last week.

In his inauguration address, Modi hailed the temple was as a symbol of bilateral cooperation. "A magnificent temple stands ready today in France and it will not only enrich France's diversity but also energise the cultural relations between India and France," he said.

Under the Modi administration, the construction of temples has been a potent emblem of Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism, propagated by India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the political wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a vast volunteer paramilitary group founded nearly a century ago.

The RSS is an umbrella organisation that includes trade unions, youth groups, prayer associations and women’s groups that are collectively known as the “Sangh Parivar”, or Sangh Family. In addition to the Sangh Parivar, there are also several Hindu right-wing groups and independent actors that follow and spread the Hindutva ideology without formal RSS connections, enabling BJP administrations to maintain plausible deniability when necessary.

“Since Modi came to power, when many BJP politicians do their world tours, they often stop and do a photo-op at a BAPS temple somewhere in the world. So somehow BAPS, even though it isn't traditionally considered part of the Sangh Parivar as such, has become an institution that has very openly been a place for the Indian government to kind of show off because these temples tend to be very big and opulent,” said Sunita Viswanath, co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights, a US-based NGO advocating for pluralism and social justice from a Hindu faith perspective.

On Saturday, for instance, as the IAP was holding its public awareness meeting in Paris, RSS Supreme Leader Mohan Bhagwat was visiting a BAPS temple in London’s Willesden area. Bhagwat was in London after a visit to the US, where he was the keynote speaker at a jam-packed event at New York’s Madison Square Garden. It was followed by a stop in Canada, where he addressed a major gathering in Toronto.

At a media briefing in New Delhi on Tuesday, Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal was asked about the Eiffel Tower incident. “We are aware of the opening of the temple of BAPS in Paris. As to the particular issue, this is a matter purely between the entities concerned,” he said.

When asked whether India was now distancing itself even though Modi had participated in the inauguration, Jaiswal stated, “It is a common practice for [the] prime minister to convey his good wishes on such occasions. In this case it was done virtually. There is no cause for any comment in this regard.”

Controversy in the US

The Eiffel Tower incident is not the first controversy BAPS has faced abroad.

In May 2021, following an FBI raid on a BAPS temple construction site in Robbinsville, New Jersey, six Indian stone workers filed a lawsuit alleging that the sect “weaponised India’s caste system” by coercing men, mostly Dalits from the lowest rungs in India’s social hierarchy, to work under “abysmal” conditions.

Following reports by the New York Times detailing forced labour allegations, the lawsuit was later expanded to include BAPS temple construction sites across the US.

In September 2025, months after President Donald Trump’s second inauguration, the US Department of Justice closed the case without providing a cause.

BAPS North America welcomed the move, noting in a statement that the US government’s “decision to end this investigation sends a clear and powerful message” that their temple is “a place of peace, service, and devotion”.

Cover image: © France 24
01:42

‘Strategic partnership’ obscures scrutiny

Critics however say organisations promoting Hindutva overseas attempt to mobilise Hindu communities abroad to provide support to the RSS and BJP. Indian researchers, activists and journalists in the diaspora critical of Hindutva project face trolls, threats and accusations of promoting "Hinduphobia".

In their press statement following Saturday’s public event, the IAP noted that Hindutva groups overseas “also present a deceptive face of their politics by coating it in the language of multiculturalism and pluralism in order to broaden their appeal”.

Given the controversies and numerous reports of work conditions at BAPS temple sites, diaspora Indians opposed to far-right Hindu nationalism say they are surprised the sect got the green light from French authorities for the Paris temple project.

Viswanath, whose US-based NGO has closely monitored the BAPS case in New Jersey, said she was particularly dismayed by French authorities. “The case [in New Jersey] was only dismissed because we have Trump in power. Of course, he's going to dismiss this case. But France, I would think, would be different, since it’s not being run by a far right-wing party. I would think there are different ethical standards,” she said.

In 2023, when Modi made high-profile visits to the US and France, Viswanath was one among many activists calling on the Biden and Macron administrations to raise human rights issues. Their calls fell on deaf ears in Washington and Paris. Three years later, the co-founder of Hindus for Human Rights says she is not surprised by the BPS controversy in France. “It's not a surprise, but it’s certainly very disappointing that they weren't paying attention,” she said.

BAPS has a history of controversies over its gender policies. At a 2024 event in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata, women seated in the front rows of a gathering of chartered accountants were asked to move away before a speech by a religious leader affiliated with BAPS.

During BAPS religious ceremonies, the “enforcement of strict separation of men and women” has been described as one of the “distinctive features” of the sect, reported the Indian Express, quoting an academic study.

Given its history, Banerjee is particularly irked about conservative French politician Pécresse’s posts denouncing the gender discrimination at the Eiffel Tower. “She's the president of Île-de-France. She didn't inquire about BAPS?” he asked incredulously.

Pécresse, who presided over the temple’s inauguration in Bussy-Saint-Georges on Sunday, stated that the BAPS temple was part of the “strategic partnership” between India and France. “Have French authorities, at all levels, naively or deliberately turned a blind eye to the promoters of this temple construction project?” questioned an IAP statement released Tuesday.

“The French political parties, even the left parties, have not been very interested,” said Banerjee, admitting that economic interests, such as the sale of French Rafale fighter jets to India, enables politicians to celebrate “cultural exchanges” without careful scrutiny.

The one-day Eiffel Tower strike may usher in a change at long last, Banerjee says. “What is happening now is very interesting," he said. "Maybe they understand that they made some mistake rolling out the red carpet to this organisation which is really linked to the Hindutva programme.”

‘Was this a state visit?’ Indian opposition leader raises serious questions over Paris BAPS temple

Cover image: © France 24


Issued on: 09/09/2026 
Play (05:42 min) From the show

François Picard is pleased to welcome Anish Gawande. He sees the controversy surrounding the inauguration of the BAPS temple near Paris as more than an isolated dispute over the treatment of female staff at the Eiffel Tower. From his perspective, the incident exposes a broader and insufficiently scrutinized intersection of religion, diplomacy, political power, labor practices, and diaspora politics. At the center of his argument is an ambiguity over the boundary between private religious and state-sanctioned activity.

Gawande questions why senior Indian diplomatic representation and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s remarks evoking India-France relations accompanied the inauguration if the ceremony was not official. He highlights Modi’s longstanding political association with BAPS, while also highlighting controversies and allegations surrounding the organization’s social, labour and political practices abroad.

Gawande challenges the notion that the new temple is solely representative of Hinduism in France, highlighting the country’s diverse Hindu traditions and Indian communities. He warns that the Eiffel Tower controversy may acquire a political life beyond BAPS itself, particularly if it becomes material for far-right narratives about immigrants, religion, and national identity in France. His central contention is therefore institutional as much as political: the controversy should prompt scrutiny of how the project was facilitated, how land was allocated, whether labour protections were respected, and where the boundaries between religious organizations and state power were drawn.

BY:  François PICARD

Can Trump trust the UK's 7th Prime Minister in 10 years?

Britain's Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Defence Secretary Wes Streeting visit Submarine Academy for Skills and Knowledge (SASK), BAE Systems, on July 30, 2026 in Barrow in Furness, United Kingdom. Christopher Furlong/Pool via REUTERS

The Conversation 

August 01, 2026

One of the first things Andy Burnham did on July 20, 2026, after assuming the role of Britain’s prime minister was make a long-distance call to Donald Trump.

The U.S. president later revealed some of the details of his conversation with “the new gentleman,” noting that they discussed “opening up North Sea oil” – a topic seemingly close to Trump’s heart.

But there have as yet been few clues on how Burnham intends to manage the “special relationship” between the U.S. and U.K. Certainly, that task will not have been made easier by the Labour Party leader’s past comments about Trump or those of his foreign secretary, Ed Miliband – a “racist, misogynistic self-confessed groper,” was Britain’s now top diplomat’s assessment of the U.S. leader back in 2016.

As an expert in U.K. politics and trans-Atlantic relations, I know that dealing with Trump will be a foreign policy priority for Burnham.

However, the challenges for the special relationship go beyond navigating personalities. Indeed, the enduring political instability in the U.K. since 2016 and the Brexit referendum that saw the U.K. exit the European Union is spilling over into foreign policy. Leadership turnover is hindering important reforms at home, but it is also preventing the U.K. from developing a clear strategy on the international stage.
Instability here to stay?

The U.K. has experienced a striking leadership carousel in the past decade.

Burnham is the sixth prime minister since David Cameron resigned in the aftermath of the Brexit referendum in June 2016. And the turnover has also applied to other senior government positions. Miliband has become the the ninth foreign secretary over that period.

This pattern of instability is highly unusual from a historical standpoint. Not since the 1820s has there been as many different prime ministers within the span of 10 years. And this past decade also marks a significant deviation from the rest of the post-World War II era – the period in which the special relationship navigated the reconstruction of Europe, the Cold War, the rise of China and threats from international terrorism.

Between 1945 and 2016, U.K. prime ministers averaged five years in power; since then it has dropped to just 24 months.

Post-2016 prime ministers have been ultimately brought down for different reasons, including repeated scandals, poor choices and lost elections.

But in all cases, their leadership was eroded by deep structural forces, especially the impact of Brexit.

Like prime ministers before him, Burnham is inheriting a sluggish economy, in part due to the significant economic costs of exiting the European market. He is also in charge of an economy that is more exposed to Trump’s attacks against the rules-based trading order, while unable to benefit from the shock absorbers provided by the EU’s large internal market.

Domestically, Brexit has deeply polarized the British electorate into new identities – leavers and remainers – who are less loyal to existing political parties. This has led to increased electoral volatility, which has helped to accelerate the fragmentation of British politics. For the first time in a century, there is a strong chance that the next prime minister will not be from one of the two main established parties, Labour and the Conservatives.

The shift to a more multiparty system has led to more competitive local elections, with more vulnerable seats and members of Parliament elected thanks to very small majorities in their constituencies. This shift has moved in tandem with the growing dynamic of parliamentarians becoming more rebellious and less loyal to their leadership.

In other words, Burnham faces a tall order if he is to put a wedge in the revolving door at No. 10 Downing St., the residence of Britain’s prime minister.
Short-lived tandems

The impact of the prime minister carousel has not been confined to domestic politics – it is difficult to maintain a consistent and coherent foreign policy when those dictating it keep changing. This is particularly meaningful for the special relationship, as Brexit has made the U.K. more dependent on the U.S. Granted, much of the present attention will center on how Burnham manages, or not, his ties with Trump.

But leadership instability has and will continue to present additional challenges for the U.K.-U.S. partnership.

First, while not as drastic as in the U.K., U.S. politics are also experiencing more turnover than usual since 2016. Faith in the U.S. government plummeted to 17% in 2025, with voters increasingly irritable and impatient. This is also translating into greater volatility. At least one chamber of Congress has changed hands every two years since 2018, with the streak likely to continue in the midterms in November. And the succession of three one-term presidents has not happened in over a hundred years.

As a result, leadership ties between the U.S. and the U.K. have failed to build any momentum. In the past decade, the average tandem has barely lasted more than a year. At best, Burnham could coexist with Trump for a little over two years, with much of that including the latter’s lame-duck period.
Unclear post-Brexit strategy

Meanwhile, U.S. statesman Dean Acheson’s famous 1962 quip that “Great Britain has lost an empire and has not yet found a role” still rings true.

Exiting from the EU presented a profound challenge for the U.K. and what role it should play on the international stage. Brexit, after all, undermined Britain’s ability to play the role of bridge between America and Europe.

Yet, Burnham hardly inherited a clear path to follow for a post-Brexit Britain. This is not surprising considering that divided societies are less equipped to maintain a long-term strategy.

Successive leaders after 2016 failed to develop a clear post-Brexit doctrine, relying instead on an ad hoc balancing act between an Atlantic path, more cooperation with European partners and strategic autonomy. That does not bode well for the special relationship, at a time when the U.K. is grappling, like others, with the key dilemma of how to defend Europe without the U.S.
Strong headwinds

If Burnham does want to preserve and bolster the special relationship, he will need time in office to counter the current strong headwinds.

Historically, the partnership between the U.S. and the U.K. has endured testing times and similarly politically mismatched leaders. Burnham is seen as to the left of predecessor Keir Starmer in the center-left Labour Party – some way off Trump’s brand of conservatism. But Tony Blair and George W. Bush overcame divergent political ideologies a generation ago to forge a close relationship.

But back then, the special relationship relied on deeper institutional ties, whether cultural, diplomatic, military or in the field of intelligence. Yet, the impact has been somewhat blunted of late by Trump’s very personalized diplomacy. Trump’s mistrust of the bureaucracy has limited Britain’s ability to benefit from its deep ties with the American foreign policy establishment.

Moreover, Trump’s deep unpopularity in the U.K. – just 13% had a favorable opinion of Trump, compared to 83% who held an unfavorable opinion – is spilling over into perceptions of the special relationship. Increasingly, Britons are viewing the U.S. as a necessary partner, as opposed to an ally with which it shares close values. Such growing disaffection is not a one-way street, with American approval of Britain dropping by 15% in the past five years. It also builds on part of the MAGA base that views the U.K. as in decline and having lost its way.

As such, Burnham has inherited a tall task domestically and internationally. He will have to tackle the same challenges of Brexit that toppled his predecessors while shaping a more coherent post-Brexit future for the U.K. Confronting both would go a long way toward stabilizing the special relationship.

Garret Martin, Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer, Co-Director Transatlantic Policy Center, American University School of International Service

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

CNN torn apart for claiming outrage over Trump’s MISOGYNIST attack on its reporter

President Donald Trump takes the lectern to deliver remarks at the WHCA Dinner at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Washington, D.C., July 24, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Thomas Kika

July 27, 2026 

ALTERNET

CNN took a beating online this week, as various commentators called out the network for its participation in the White House Correspondents' Dinner (WHCD) after reports emerged that its "leadership was furious" over comments President Donald Trump made attacking its journalists.

The latest WHCD took place on Friday evening, having been delayed when a gunman attempted to carry out a shooting at the previously scheduled event. CNN had a notable presence at the dinner, with anchor Wolf Blitzer presenting an award to Wall Street Journal reporters who uncovered new ties between Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. Trump also took aim at anchor Kaitlin Collins during his address that night, comparing her appearance to that of Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender influencer who has been the target of considerable right-wing outrage, with the remark being criticized as both misogynistic and transphobic.

On Monday, Semafor released a new report noting that CNN staffers were "livid" about Trump's attack on Collins, with some leaders at the company reportedly considering "scaling back" its involvement in next year's dinner or "skipping it altogether." The outlet had previously committed to attending the event to celebrate the work of its reporters and to avoid seeming like they were making a political statement by opting not to attend.

Given CNN's participation in the event, and the hand it had in boosting its profile this year, several prominent users across social media raked the network over the coals in response to the report, suggesting that they should not have attended it at all, as well as for their extensive coverage of Trump overall.

"They ought to be furious at themselves for sustaining the dinner with their attendance," journalist John Harwood wrote in a post to X.

Responding to Harwood's post, Canadian journalist Annie Dufour shared her own reaction to the WHCD from Friday.

"From Canada, this was painful to watch as a journalist," she posted. "American Media has fallen short of its role as a pillar of democracy. Complacent. Coy. Accommodating. A Vichy Press, almost. When it should have been unyielding, brave, and bold. You reap what you sow."

"They should scale back their coverage of the lunatic president who spewed all of this hate at Kaitlan and CNN. And journalism as a whole," journalist Sophia A. Nelson posted.

"They were also shocked to discover that gambling is going on at Rick's Cafe in Casablanca," journalist Brian Lowery posted, referencing a scene from a classic film to suggest that Trump's diatribe should have been an obvious outcome.

The Growth of Grassroots Resistance Movements Within the United States

Eric Toussaint

 July 28, 2026

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

One of the key factors in understanding Donald Trump’s foreign policy is not to view the United States as a homogeneous bloc standing united behind its president. Throughout his first term (2017–2021) and his second term, which began in January 2025, Trump has faced internal resistance on a considerable scale. This resistance has taken many forms: mass mobilisations, trade union action, election campaigns, international solidarity movements, civil disobedience and the emergence of left-wing candidates in certain major cities.

These struggles have at times succeeded in curbing, altering or delegitimising certain policies of Trump’s. They have also revealed the existence, within American society itself, of a deep-seated conflict between an authoritarian, nationalist and reactionary agenda, and democratic, egalitarian and internationalist aspirations.

Women’s mobilisations for the right to abortion

As soon as Trump arrived at the White House in January 2017, millions of women took to the streets as part of the Women’s March, organised the day after his inauguration. This movement was one of the largest mobilisations in US history. It expressed rejection of Trump’s sexism, his misogynistic remarks and his desire to undermine reproductive rights.

The Women’s March in January 2017 remains one of the largest demonstrations in US history, with an estimated turnout of between three and five million people. It immediately demonstrated that Trump’s election had sparked mass opposition, particularly amongst women, minorities and progressive movements.

The issue of abortion took centre stage when the Supreme Court – bolstered by Trump’s appointments of conservative justices – overturned the Roe v. Wade ruling in June 2022, during Joe Biden’s term of office. This ruling had guaranteed the constitutional right to abortion since 1973. This decision sparked a wave of protests across the country and contributed to a strong electoral mobilisation in favour of candidates supporting the right to abortion.

In response to the overturning of the Roe v. Wade ruling in June 2022 by the Supreme Court, which was influenced by Trump and his camp, the American electorate was called upon to vote directly on abortion in sixteen states between 2022 and 2024. In thirteen of these, the side in favour of maintaining or extending the right to abortion won the vote, including in several conservative states such as Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, Ohio, Missouri and Arizona. These results show that the desire to criminalise abortion does not enjoy uniform majority support amongst the American electorate and that it provokes significant popular resistance, including in Republican strongholds.

As such, the defence of women’s rights has become one of the main focal points of opposition to Trump and Trumpism.

Environmental and scientific protests

The March for Science, held in April 2017, was a direct response to Trump’s climate scepticism and his attacks on federal scientific agencies. Around one million people took part in demonstrations in more than six hundred towns and cities, denouncing the questioning of scientific data on climate change.

The People’s Climate March, also in 2017, brought together around 200,000 people in Washington and several hundred thousand across the country. It protested against the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and policies favouring the fossil fuel industry.

Protests against gun violence

Following the Parkland shooting in Florida in February 2018, the March for Our Lives movement mobilised between one and two million people, mainly young people. More than 800 demonstrations took place across all fifty states. This movement challenged Trump’s support for the gun lobby, the National Rifle Association (NRA), and helped to make gun control a major political issue.

Teachers’ strikes

The teachers’ strikes of 2018 and 2019 marked a turning point in American social struggles. More than 500,000 teaching and school staff took part in strike action across several states, many of which are conservative. These protests called for pay rises, better funding for state education and a reduction in educational inequalities.

Black Lives Matter and the fight against systemic racism

The Black Lives Matter movement, which emerged in the wake of police violence against African Americans, reached its peak in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis. The Black Lives Matter movement represented the largest wave of mobilisation in recent American history. Following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020, protests took place in over two thousand towns and cities. Some studies estimate that between fifteen and twenty-six million people took part in at least one protest, which would make it the largest protest movement in US history.

Trump responded by adopting a confrontational stance. He labelled some protesters ‘thugs’ and threatened to deploy the army against the demonstrations. This response reinforced the perception of a president who supports a militarised police force and refuses to acknowledge the existence of systemic racism.

Black Lives Matter has, however, achieved significant progress: the scrutiny of certain police practices, debates on police funding, the removal of racist symbols in several cities, and the inclusion of the issue of structural racism in the national political debate.

After 6 January 2021

The storming of the Capitol by Trump’s supporters on 6 January 2021 sparked a wave of protests in defence of democracy. Demonstrations took place in many American cities to condemn the attempt to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election and to demand the protection of democratic institutions.

Solidarity with Palestine

The Palestinian question has become another major area of internal resistance. During Trump’s first term, the recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in 2017, followed by the relocation of the US embassy, sparked strong opposition amongst sections of American society.

This opposition intensified from 2023 onwards with Israel’s genocidal war against Gaza, a war which received active support from Joe Biden’s Democratic administration.  The movement continued during Trump’s second term. Hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated in major US cities to denounce US military and diplomatic support for Israel.

University campuses have played a central role. Students have organised sit-ins, occupations and divestment campaigns targeting companies linked to the Israeli military-industrial complex. Despite often brutal repression, these protests have helped to shift the public debate: for the first time in decades, a significant proportion of American youth are openly questioning Washington’s unconditional support for Israel.

Mobilisations in solidarity with Palestine reached unprecedented levels from 2023 onwards. On the largest days of action, several hundred thousand people demonstrated simultaneously in major US cities. University sit-ins spread to over a hundred universities and colleges, directly involving tens of thousands of students and leading to hundreds of arrests.

Protests against ICE and immigration policies

Trump’s immigration policies also sparked massive resistance. As early as 2017, protests against the ‘Muslim Ban’ – which barred entry to nationals of several predominantly Muslim countries – swept through US airports.

The separation of thousands of migrant children from their parents at the border with Mexico sparked international outrage. The ‘Families Belong Together’ movement organised large-scale demonstrations to demand the reunification of families.

During his second term, protests against ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) intensified in response to raids, deportations and detention centres for migrants. Solidarity networks were set up in several cities to protect people facing deportation and to document abuses committed by the immigration authorities. These actions mobilised several hundred thousand people on an ongoing basis in more than 16 major cities and hundreds of rural or suburban towns.

Thousands of actions relating to migrants’ rights and opposition to ICE have been recorded across all 50 states. If we include the No Kings protests (see below), more than 10 million people have taken part in street demonstrations to denounce anti-migrant policies and ICE’s methods.

The ‘No Kings’ movement

The ‘No Kings’ movement emerged as a direct response to Trump’s authoritarian excesses. It condemns the concentration of presidential power, attacks on democratic institutions, threats against the media and the desire to govern by decree.

The ‘No Kings’ protests brought together citizens of diverse political persuasions, united by their refusal to see the United States move towards an increasingly authoritarian regime. This movement served as a reminder that the defence of democratic freedoms remains a central issue in the resistance to Trumpism.

The No Kings movement is one of the most significant expressions of opposition to Trump’s second term. The main national days of mobilisation, particularly in 2026, brought together, according to estimates, between three and five million people in more than 1,500 towns and cities. This scale makes it one of the largest anti-Trump mobilisations since the Women’s March of 2017.

Here are three key dates in the No Kings mobilisations:

+ 14 June 2025 (No Kings 1.0): Around 5 million people across more than 2,100 locations.

+ 18 October 2025 (No Kings 2.0): Around 7 million people at over 2,700 venues.

+ 28 March 2026 (No Kings 3.0): Around 8 million people gathered at over 3,300 venues.

LGBTQ+ protests

Trump’s policies aimed at restricting the rights of transgender people, particularly in the armed forces and in certain areas of public life, have met with strong opposition. Between 2022 and 2026, protests against anti-trans laws brought together tens of thousands, and even hundreds of thousands, of people on certain national days of action.

Trade union and social resistance

We must not overlook the role of trade unions and social movements. The years 2021–2026 were marked by a resurgence of labour struggles in the United States: strikes in the automotive industry, ‘ ’ in the service sector, at Amazon warehouses, in Starbucks cafés and in the education sector.

These protests often went beyond wage demands to denounce social inequalities, job insecurity and the excessive power of large corporations. They demonstrated that a significant section of the American working class identifies with neither the Democratic Party’s neoliberalism nor Trump’s reactionary nationalism.

Electoral successes of the left: the case of Zohran Mamdani

Resistance to Trump is not limited to street protests. It is also expressed in the electoral arena, notably through the emergence of left-wing candidates in certain major cities.

The case of Zohran Mamdani is particularly significant. A member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), he won the Democratic primaries for the New York mayoral election, defeating candidates backed by the Democratic Party establishment. He was elected mayor of New York in November 2025 despite threats from Trump and a campaign waged against him by 26 US billionaires who, according to Forbes magazine, spent over 22 million dollars to prevent him from being elected. Fortunately, the will and energy of the people, particularly among the younger generation, triumphed over the power of money and capital.

His campaign, centred on affordable housing, free public transport, taxation of great wealth and solidarity with Palestine, mobilised a large section of the youth and the working classes. It demonstrated that a left-wing political alternative can emerge in the United States, despite the weight of the two-party system and the influence of money in election campaigns.

Mamdani’s success is part of a broader trend, which includes the victories of figures such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and other progressive elected representatives. This American left remains in the minority, but it represents a growing force capable of challenging both Trumpism and the centrist tendencies of the Democratic Party.

A multifaceted resistance

Internal resistance within the United States shows that Trump’s political agenda faces deep-seated and enduring opposition.

If we take these various waves of mobilisation together, we can see that tens of millions of people have, at one time or another, taken part in protest actions against Trump’s policies or against the authoritarian, racist, patriarchal, warmongering and neoliberal tendencies of Trumpism.

These movements do not form a homogeneous bloc, but constitute a mosaic of resistance that cuts across the whole of American society: women, African Americans, Latin Americans, students, workers, scientists, academics, environmental activists, LGBTQ+ rights advocates and supporters of democracy.

These protests have at times achieved tangible victories, but they also face growing repression, the power of the conservative media and the country’s political polarisation. Symbolic of this repression, Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti, who were attempting to intervene during operations against migrants in Minneapolis, were both killed by ICE officers.

Nevertheless, these movements are fundamental to understanding the limits of Trump’s power. They serve as a reminder that, even at the heart of the world’s leading imperialist power, there are social and political forces that challenge authoritarianism, racism, patriarchy, militarism and neoliberal policies.

Thus, the history of Trumpism cannot be written solely from the perspective of the White House. It must also be told through the lens of the millions of people who, on the streets, on campuses, in workplaces and at the ballot box, have resisted and continue to resist his political agenda.