News
Anti-Trump Protests Get Underway Across the Country
They came out in defense of national parks and small businesses, public education and health care for veterans, abortion rights and fair elections. They marched against tariffs and oligarchs, dark money and fascism, the deportation of legal immigrants and the Department of Government Efficiency.
Demonstrators had no shortage of causes as they gathered in towns and cities across the country on Saturday to protest President Trump’s agenda. Rallies were planned in all 50 states, and images posted on social media showed dense crowds in places as diverse as St. Augustine, Fla.; Salt Lake City and rainy Frankfort, Ky.
“Pouring rain, 43 degrees, biting wind, and people are still here in Albany in the thousands,” said Ron Marz, a comic book writer who posted a photo of the crowd at the New York State Capitol on X.
While crowd sizes are difficult to estimate, organizers said that more than 600,000 people had signed up to participate and that events also took place in U.S. territories and a dozen locations across the globe.
On Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, the protest stretched for nearly 20 blocks. In Chicago, thousands flooded Daley Plaza and adjacent streets, while, in the nation’s capital, tens of thousands surrounded the Washington Monument. In Atlanta, the police estimated the crowd marching to the gold-domed statehouse at over 20,000.
Mr. Trump, who was playing golf in Florida on Saturday, appeared to be largely ignoring the protests. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Some of the demonstrators waved American flags, occasionally turned upside down to signal distress. Many, especially federal workers and college students, did not want to speak on the record for fear of retaliation. Right-wing slogans like “Stop the Steal” were co-opted in defense of Social Security, medical care and cancer research.
“I’m tariffied. Are you?” one placard read. Global financial markets tumbled this week at Mr. Trump’s announcement of tariff increases, which many economists warned would raise prices for U.S. consumers. Republicans in Congress wrestled over budget proposals that included cuts to Medicaid and SNAP food benefits.
Rob Ahlrichs, a Baltimore resident who attended the protest in Washington with his two sons and his wife, Katherine Sterner, put out a sign with a graph depicting stock market indexes plummeting that read, “Did you vote for this?”
In Chicago, Marilyn Finner, 65, who works in customer service, said she had never attended a protest but that she felt compelled to take part on Saturday because she was concerned about threats to retirement benefits.
“Eventually I want to receive my Social Security that I paid for,” she said. “I’ve been working since I was 13 years old. I’m fighting for my Social Security and everybody else’s.”
The mass action, with the deliberately open-ended name “Hands Off!,” was planned at a time when many Democrats have bemoaned what they see as a lack of strong resistance to Mr. Trump. The president has moved aggressively to punish people and institutions that he views as out of step with his ideology.
Don Westhoff, a 59-year-old accountant, was another first-time protester. He voiced outrage at the administration but had words for Democrats as well, saying they needed an infusion of younger leaders to oppose the president.
“We want to let the elected Democratic officials know that good is no longer good enough,” he said. “They need to fight.”
Multiple concerns prompted Katrin Hinrichsen to drive six hours from her home in Tolland, Conn., to Washington to attend. She held a sign with names of legal residents with foreign passports whom the Trump administration has moved to deport for allegations of antisemitic speech and gang activities.
Her 18-year-old son is transgender, she said, and she feared his losing access to gender transition care. “Now suddenly he’s a hate object, just because that’s politically convenient,” she said. “I’m just furious.”
The rallies were organized by Indivisible, MoveOn and several other groups that led protests about abortion rights, gun violence and racial justice during the first Trump administration. Organizers said they hoped to shift the emphasis to pocketbook issues like health care and Social Security, with the message that Mr. Trump is making life harder for the average American while benefiting his richest allies.
They also moved away from focusing on massive demonstrations, like the 2017 Women’s March on Washington, to instead plan hundreds of local gatherings in communities large and small.
Concerns varied by location. In Ketchum, Idaho — population 3,555 — cuts to the Forest Service generated deep concern, said Fiona Smythe, 56, a resident who attended a protest that she said drew more than 500 people. One sign showed Smokey Bear and read, “Only you can prevent forest fires. Seriously. We’ve been defunded. It’s just you now.”
Some demonstrators had specific issues, while others opposed the Trump administration and MAGA movement in general. “Hands off my money, rights, democracy,” one sign proclaimed. “Make lying wrong again,” said another. Elon Musk, the billionaire heading Mr. Trump’s slash-and-burn attack on the federal bureaucracy, was a popular target.
“I feel like the MAGA people have corrupted and co-opted the American flag and the idea of patriotism,” said Barbara Santarelli, 77, a retired health care worker draped in a flag who participated in the New York City rally. She described herself as a Jewish centrist who was concerned about her retirement benefits, attacks on universities and freedom of speech, the war in Gaza, and due process rights.
Before the event, she recounted, her daughter expressed concern for her safety. But she said attending the protest was something she had to do. “The soldiers, they go to war to defend democracy,” she recalled saying. “At my age, this is how I go to war to defend democracy.’”
In Chicago, Glynn Tipton, a 45-year-old pharmaceutical professional, said he was attending to make friends feel safer.
“I’m a generic white guy, so they aren’t coming for me,” he said. “There’s a lot of my friends who are Jewish, trans, in the military or sick, and they’re not doing OK. It’s OK for me to stand out here, so I should for the ones who are afraid.”
Many protesters said they had been directly affected by cuts to federal jobs and grants. In Atlanta, Johnny Johnson, 34, said he had been hired by the Internal Revenue Service, moved, fired and rehired in a matter of months.
“I dipped into my 401(k) because I didn’t know what was going to happen,” he said.
In Denver, veteran Trump protesters said there was a noticeably smaller Latino presence on Saturday than there had been at demonstrations during the first Trump term. “You notice there’s not a lot of Chicano people out here? It’s because people are scared,” said Brian Loma, 49, an environmental organizer who set up a tent in the snow selling hot chocolate. The government seemed to be “ripping up green cards,” he said. “It’s crazy.”
Among the demonstrators in New York City was Melissa Jackson, 41, a former special education teacher and the mother of a 3-year-old on a specialized learning plan for students with disabilities.
“I think it’s ridiculous. New York, the United States, is the melting pot. Like, what do we want? Like, not diversity, not inclusion?” she said, adding that she was also concerned about cuts to public education. “We’ve come too far to take so many steps back.”
Robert Chiarito, Sean Keenan, Kristen Nichols, Wesley Parnell and Zolan Kanno-Youngs contributed reporting.
News
Video: Rob Reiner and His Wife Are Found Dead in Their Los Angeles Home
new video loaded: Rob Reiner and His Wife Are Found Dead in Their Los Angeles Home
transcript
transcript
Rob Reiner and His Wife Are Found Dead in Their Los Angeles Home
The Los Angeles Police Department was investigating what it described as “an apparent homicide” after the director Rob Reiner and his wife, Michele, were found dead in their home.
-
“One louder.” “Why don’t you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number and make that a little louder?”
By Axel Boada
December 15, 2025
News
BBC Verify: Videos show impact of mass drone attacks launched by Ukraine and Russia
How has the UK government performed against its key pledges?published at 11:18 GMT
Ben Chu
BBC Verify policy and analysis correspondent
Around a year ago Prime Minister Keir Starmer launched his “Plan for Change” setting out targets he said would be met by the end of this Parliament in 2029.
So ahead of Starmer being questioned by senior MPs on the House of Commons Liaison Committee this afternoon, I’ve taken a look at how the government has been performing on three key goals.
House building
The government said it would deliver 1.5 million net additional homes in England over the parliament.
That would imply around 300,000 a year on average, but we’re currently running at just over 200,000 a year.
Ministers say they are going to ramp up to the 1.5 million target in the later years of the parliament – however, the delivery rate so far is down on the final years of the last Conservative government.
Health
The government has promised that 92% of patients in England will be seen within 18 weeks.
At the moment around 62% are – but there are signs of a slight pick up over the past year.
Living standards
The government pledged to grow real household disposable income per person – roughly what’s left after taxes, benefits and inflation.
There has been some movement on this measure with the Office for Budget Responsibility forecasting 0.5% growth in living standards on average a year.
However that would still make it the second weakest Parliament since the 1970s. The worst was under the previous Conservative government between 2019 and 2024 when living standards declined.
News
Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Stance on Epstein Testimony Nov. 3
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
Hon. James Comer
Hon. Robert Garcia November 3, 2025 Page 2
compel Attorney General Bondi to release what you have stated is a large trove of unseen files, which the public to date is still waiting to see released.
Your October 22 letter does not provide a persuasive rationale for why deposing the Clintons is required to fulfill the mandate of your investigation, particularly when what little information they have may be efficiently obtained in writing.
You state that your investigation into the “mismanagement” of the Epstein and Maxwell investigations and prosecutions requires the depositions of three individuals: former President Clinton, former Secretary of State Clinton, and former Attorney General William Barr – who was serving in the first Trump Administration when Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide in federal custody. Compounding this inexplicable choice of deponents, you also have chosen not to depose the dozens of individuals whose links to Mr. Epstein have been publicly documented.
My clients have been private citizens for the last 24 and 12 years, respectively. President Clinton’s term ended six (6) years before allegations surfaced against Mr. Epstein. Former Secretary of State Clinton’s position was in no way related to law enforcement and is completely afield of any aspect of the Epstein matter. While neither of my clients have anything to offer for the stated purposes of the Committee’s investigation, subpoenaing former Secretary Clinton is on its face both purposeless and harassing. I set forth in my October 6 letter the facts that she did not know Epstein, did not travel with him, and had no dealings with him. Indeed, when I met with your staff to learn your basis for including former Secretary Clinton, none was given beyond wanting to ask if she had ever spoken with her husband about this matter. Setting aside the plainly relevant consideration of marital privilege, this is an entirely pretextual basis for compelling former Secretary Clinton to appear personally in this matter.
It is incumbent on the Committee to address the most basic questions regarding the basis for singling out the Clintons, particularly when there is no obvious or apparent rationale for it, given the mandate of the Committee’s investigation. Your October 22 letter does not provide such a justification. And your previous statements, belied by the facts, that President Clinton is a “prime suspect” (for something) because of visits to Epstein’s island betokens bias, not fairness. You said, on August 11:
“Everybody in America wants to know what went on in Epstein Island, and we’ve all heard reports that Bill Clinton was a frequent visitor there, so he’s a prime suspect to be deposed by the House Oversight Committee.”
“1
Regrettably, such statements are not the words of an impartial and dispassionate factfinder. In fact, President Clinton has never visited Epstein’s island. He has repeatedly stated that, the Secret Service has corroborated that denial, Ghislaine Maxwell’s recent testimony to Deputy Attorney General Blanche reconfirmed this, as did the late Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her
Fields, “Comer: Bill Clinton ‘Prime Suspect’ in Epstein Investigation,” The Hill (Aug. 12, 2025).
-
Alaska1 week agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas1 week agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Washington6 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa1 week agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL1 week agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Iowa2 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Cleveland, OH1 week agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World1 week ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans