Connect with us

News

Zohran Mamdani stuns Democratic establishment in New York mayor race

Published

on

Zohran Mamdani stuns Democratic establishment in New York mayor race

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Zohran Mamdani, the leftwing Democrat feared by Wall Street, is on course to win the party’s mayoral primary for New York City, sending shockwaves across US politics.

Mamdani, a democratic socialist who has called for higher taxes on the rich and assailed US support for Israel in Gaza, stunned Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York state, in the Democratic primary race on Tuesday.

His success will reverberate across Wall Street and among the billionaire donors, including hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, who backed his rival. It will also intensify the debate among Democrats as they seek a convincing political strategy to take on Donald Trump.

Advertisement

“Tonight, we made history,” Mamdani told hundreds of jubilant supporters in Queens on Tuesday night. “I will be your Democratic nominee for the mayor of New York City.

“When we no longer believe in our democracy, it only becomes easier for people like Donald Trump to convince us of his worth, for billionaires to convince us that they must always lead,” he said.

New York leans towards Democrats, and Mamdani’s victory gives the 33-year-old a major advantage in the election later this year to replace Eric Adams as the city’s mayor — one of the most powerful positions in US domestic politics.

Cuomo conceded defeat late on Tuesday in a contest that is widely seen as a referendum on the future of the party.

“Tonight was not our night, tonight. It was Assemblyman Mamdani’s night,” Cuomo told supporters at a post-election party, adding that he had called Mamdani to congratulate him.

Advertisement

Unofficial results on Tuesday night showed Mamdani with a seven-point lead over Cuomo, with more than 90 per cent of the vote counted.

The final result will depend on the tally in the city’s ranked-choice system, which allows people to pick up to five candidates in order of preference. The winner will be officially declared on July 1, at the earliest, after all other candidates’ votes have been reallocated.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Following Trump’s victory over Kamala Harris in last year’s presidential election, the Democrats have been riven between a progressive wing exemplified by New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and moderates such as Pennsylvania US Senator John Fetterman, who has praised Trump.

Mamdani ran his campaign on a pledge to make life more affordable for New Yorkers, whose cost of living has soared since the Covid-19 pandemic. If elected, he says he will raise taxes on the rich to fund free buses and childcare, as well as city-owned grocery stores.

Advertisement

The progressive candidate tapped into a groundswell of support among younger voters — an electoral strategy that will be studied by Democrats nationally as they try to win back youthful voters who backed Trump in November.

“In the words of Nelson Mandela: it always seems impossible until it’s done,” Mamdani said on X following the result.

Ocasio-Cortez, who has tapped into a similar voter base, congratulated Mamdani on Tuesday night, saying in a social media post, “billionaires and lobbyists poured millions against you and our public finance system. And you won.”

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Cuomo, a fixture of New York state politics for more than four decades, was long seen as the frontrunner. But the centrist found himself fighting an increasingly serious challenge from the upstart Mamdani, who has a huge following on social media.

After resigning as governor four years ago amid accusations of sexual harassment, which he denies, Cuomo entered the mayoral race in March.

Advertisement

Cuomo committed to restoring the Democratic party’s appeal among working class voters, promising to hire more police officers, improve safety on the subway and remove red tape to build more affordable housing.

His campaign was built on the thesis that the Democratic party had been “hijacked”, and that it “doesn’t fight for working people anymore”.

Cuomo’s campaign enjoyed a big fundraising advantage over rivals in the final weeks of the race, buoyed by large contributions, including from former mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Combined, outside fundraising groups spent more than $20mn. Mamdani’s campaign relied on small contributions, with more than 21,000 donors, roughly 75 per cent of whom gave less than $100.

Eric Adams, the incumbent mayor, will run in the November general election as an independent. His approval rating stands at just 20 per cent after he was indicted last year on charges of bribery and fraud in a case that was later dismissed.

Advertisement

News

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

Published

on

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

new video loaded: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

transcript

transcript

Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

“What a [expletive] embarrassment.” “Look at this guy.” “What’s with all the fascists?” “The Lord is with you.” “Where’s the bad hombre? What did this guy do?” “He’s out here working to support his [expletive] family.” “Gestapo agents.” “Oh yeah, shake your head, tough guy.” “This is where you get the worst of the worst right here, hard-working builders.” “Crossing the border is not a crime. Coming illegally to the United States is not a crime, according to you.” “C’mon, get out of here.” “Take him to a different hospital.”

Advertisement
A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

By Ernesto Londoño, Jackeline Luna and Daniel Fetherston

December 17, 2025

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Published

on

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Journalists report outside BBC Broadcasting House in London. In a new lawsuit, President Trump is seeking $10 billion from the BBC for defamation.

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP

Not content with an apology and the resignation of two top BBC executives, President Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit Monday against the BBC in his continued strategy to take the press to court.

Beyond the legal attack on yet another media outlet, the litigation represents an audacious move against a national institution of a trusted ally. It hinges on an edit presented in a documentary of the president’s words on a fateful day. Oddly enough, it also hinges on the appeal of a niche streaming service to people in Florida, and the use of a technological innovation embraced by porn devotees.

A sloppy edit

At the heart of Trump’s case stands an episode of the BBC television documentary program Panorama that compresses comments Trump made to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before they laid siege to the U.S. Capitol.

Advertisement

The episode seamlessly links Trump’s call for people to walk up to the Capitol with his exhortation nearly 55 minutes later: “And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you don’t have a country anymore.”

Trump’s attorneys argue that the presentation gives viewers the impression that the president incited the violence that followed. They said his remarks had been doctored, not edited, and noted the omission of his statement that protesters would be “marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

As NPR and other news organizations have documented, many defendants in the Jan. 6 attack on Congress said they believed they had been explicitly urged by Trump to block the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump’s lawsuit calls the documentary “a false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump.”

The lawsuit alleges that the depiction was “fabricated” and aired “in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election to President Trump’s detriment.”

Advertisement

While the BBC has not filed a formal response to the lawsuit, the public broadcaster has reiterated that it will defend itself in court.

A Nov. 13 letter to Trump’s legal team on behalf of the BBC from Charles Tobin, a leading U.S. First Amendment attorney, argued that the broadcaster has demonstrated contrition by apologizing, withdrawing the broadcast, and accepting the executives’ resignations.

Tobin also noted, on behalf of the BBC, that Trump had already been indicted by a grand jury on four criminal counts stemming from his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, on the Capitol grounds.

The appeal of BritBox

For all the current consternation about the documentary, it didn’t get much attention at the time. The BBC aired the documentary twice on the eve of the 2024 elections — but never broadcast it directly in Florida.

That matters because the lawsuit was filed in Florida, where Trump alleges that the program was intended to discourage voters from voting for him.

Advertisement

Yet Tobin notes, Trump won Florida in 2024 by a “commanding 13-point margin, improving over his 2020 and 2016 performances in the state.”

Trump failed to make the case that Floridians were influenced by the documentary, Tobin wrote. He said the BBC did not broadcast the program in Florida through U.S. channels. (The BBC has distribution deals with PBS and NPR and their member stations for television and radio programs, respectively, but not to air Panorama.)

It was “geographically restricted” to U.K. viewers, Tobin wrote.

Hence the argument in Trump’s lawsuit that American viewers have other ways to watch it. The first is BritBox, a BBC streaming service that draws more on British mysteries set at seaside locales than BBC coverage of American politics.

Back in March, then-BBC Director General Tim Davie testified before the House of Commons that BritBox had more than 4 million subscribers in the U.S. (The BBC did not break down how many subscribers it has in Florida or how often Panorama documentaries are viewed by subscribers in the U.S. or the state, in response to questions posed by NPR for this story.)

Advertisement

“The Panorama Documentary was available to BritBox subscribers in Florida and was in fact viewed by these subscribers through BritBox and other means provided by the BBC,” Trump’s lawsuit states.

NPR searched for Panorama documentaries on the BritBox streaming service through the Amazon Prime platform, one of its primary distributors. The sole available episode dates from 2000. Trump does not mention podcasts. Panorama is streamed on BBC Sounds. Its episodes do not appear to be available in the U.S. on such mainstream podcast distributors in the U.S. such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Pocket Casts, according to a review by NPR.

Software that enables anonymous browsing – of porn

Another way Trump’s lawsuit suggests people in the U.S. could watch that particular episode of Panorama, if they were so inclined, is through a Virtual Private Network, or VPN.

Trump’s suit says millions of Florida citizens use VPNs to view content from foreign streamers that would otherwise be restricted. And the BBC iPlayer is among the most popular streaming services accessed by viewers using a VPN, Trump’s lawsuit asserts.

In response to questions from NPR, the BBC declined to break down figures for how many people in the U.S. access the BBC iPlayer through VPNs.

Advertisement

Demand for such software did shoot up in 2024 and early 2025. Yet, according to analysts — and even to materials cited by the president’s team in his own case — the reason appears to have less to do with foreign television shows and more to do with online pornography.

Under a new law, Florida began requiring age verification checks for visitors to pornographic websites, notes Paul Bischoff, editor of Comparitech, a site that reviews personal cybersecurity software.

“People use VPNs to get around those age verification and site blocks,” Bischoff says. “The reason is obvious.”

An article in the Tampa Free Press cited by Trump’s lawsuit to help propel the idea of a sharp growth of interest in the BBC actually undercuts the idea in its very first sentence – by focusing on that law.

“Demand for Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) has skyrocketed in Florida following the implementation of a new law requiring age verification for access to adult websites,” the first paragraph states. “This dramatic increase reflects a widespread effort by Floridians to bypass the restrictions and access adult content.”

Advertisement

Several legal observers anticipate possible settlement

Several First Amendment attorneys tell NPR they believe Trump’s lawsuit will result in a settlement of some kind, in part because there’s new precedent. In the past year, the parent companies of ABC News and CBS News have each paid $16 million to settle cases filed by Trump that many legal observers considered specious.

“The facts benefit Trump and defendants may be concerned about reputational harm,” says Carl Tobias, a professor of law at the University of Richmond who specializes in free speech issues. “The BBC also has admitted it could have done better and essentially apologized.”

Some of Trump’s previous lawsuits against the media have failed. He is currently also suing the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Des Moines Register and its former pollster, and the board of the Pulitzer Prize.

Continue Reading

News

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Published

on

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

new video loaded: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

transcript

transcript

Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

Our office will be filing charges against Nick Reiner, who is accused of killing his parents, actor-director Rob Reiner and photographer-producer Michele Singer Reiner. These charges will be two counts of first-degree murder, with a special circumstance of multiple murders. He also faces a special allegation that he personally used a dangerous and deadly weapon, that being a knife. These charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility parole or the death penalty. No decision at this point has been made with respect to the death penalty.

Advertisement
Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

By Shawn Paik

December 16, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending