Connect with us

Washington

Kara Swisher Wants to Save the Washington Post From Jeff Bezos

Published

on

Kara Swisher Wants to Save the Washington Post From Jeff Bezos


Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer; Photos: Getty Images

It’s no secret that Kara Swisher has been trying to figure out how to take the Washington Post off Jeff Bezos’s hands, even though it’s not for sale and the billionaire seems unlikely to part with it any time soon. In the latest episode of On With Kara Swisher, she details her reasons for this “quixotic mission”; laments the Post’s recent struggles, including Bezos’s latest editorial meddling; and shares some conversations with trusted advisers about her plan, the Post’s legacy and troubles, and why the paper should and must be saved. Below is her opening pitch.

Advertisement

On With Kara Swisher

Journalist Kara Swisher brings the news and newsmakers to you twice a week, on Mondays and Thursdays.

Kara Swisher: I’m not peacocking … I’m not trying to shame Jeff either. It’s neither a troll, nor a tale of business daring do, though I certainly have the ability to raise the money needed. And I have a plan I think would help get the Post back on its feet.

But here’s the simple truth. This is a love story. So let me begin by telling you it, and I’ll keep it brief. I got my job at the Washington Post by calling the Metro editor and yelling about a story I had seen in the paper. I was covering the story from my college newspaper, which was at Georgetown University, and the Post did a terrible job of it. And I was angry, because I loved the Washington Post and I was disappointed that they did such a bad job. I got the Metro editor on the phone on my first try, and he invited me down to the Washington Post, which at the time was on 15th Street. So I jumped on the M2 bus and rode it down to the Post. And I walked into the Post newsroom for the very first time, and it was love at first sight.

Advertisement

I told the editor my problems that I had with what they had done and how angry I was. And he told me I was obnoxious. Well, I was, but he had let me down, and I said I could do a better job. Right then and there, he hired me as stringer for the Washington Post. And I wrote innumerable stories about the college I was going to. So many, that it got me into the graduate school of Journalism at Columbia. I got my first job in journalism by being irritating, so why should I stop now?

Back to my career there, I later went on to work in the mail room as night copy aid, as a news aid, an intern for style plus, a fill-in for the business section, which morphed into a reporting job, including covering retail workplace issues, and ultimately being the first reporter to cover the Nascent Digital services business in D.C. in the form of a small company in Vienna, Virginia, called AOL, America Online.

It was there I met many people who are now the richest and most powerful in the world. For the most part, they were scrappy entrepreneurs with only a germ of an idea, a difficult road, but lots of aggressive drive. That included Jeff Bezos, who I met in Seattle when I went to check out his startup called Amazon in the 1990s. As I described him in my memoir, Burn Book, up in Seattle, a short and energetic man was lousy at hiding his wanting ambitions, masking him behind a genuinely infectious maniacal laugh, a curiously baby fat face, and an anodyne presentation of pleated khakis, sensible shoes, and a Blue Oxford shirt.

Still from the start, I had no doubt that Jeff Bezos would eat my face off if that’s what he needed to do to get ahead. Feral, in fact, was the first word that jumped into my head when I met Bezos in the mid-1990s. He brought me to an industrial area near the airport, and I watched as he skittered around the warehouse like a frenetic mongoose. We talked a lot in those days, largely because he needed me to shine a light on his efforts at a very dicey time for Amazon. First, when I was at the Post, and then at the Wall Street Journal where I went in 1997 as its first reporter, specifically covering the internet. After a lot of ups and downs, Amazon soared on that mongoose energy.

Fast forward to 2013 when he suddenly, and a surprise to me, bought the Post from the Graham family for $250 million. By then, it was struggling to deal with the digital age, and I was hopeful that Jeff’s innovative spirit and piles of money would save the paper. Even before Bezos came on the scene, I had been warning former Post owner Don Graham that print newspapers were done for.

Advertisement

Despite worries about the tech takeover of media, I hoped Jeff would fully embrace online journalism while holding true to the journalistic standards and ethics of the legacy paper. So I wrote an open letter to Bezos on my media startup, AllThingsD, and offered some advice. “Don’t treat the Post like some precious thing that cannot be touched or changed. While you certainly should respect its vaunted traditions and hue to ethical standards, that does not mean it gets to stay as it is. That’s the big danger here, that you start acting like the steward of history rather than using the fantastic Washington Post brand to make some new history.”

And for the first decade of owning the company, he was a very good owner, trying all manner of updating tech and supporting the newsroom and hiring a really great editor named Marty Baron. It was not the glory days of Ben Bradlee and Kay Graham, but it was a solid effort, even if the paper always seemed to lag behind the New York Times. Mostly, he kept his mitts off, which was the right thing to do. He even quietly endured endless attacks from President Donald Trump in his first administration. Again, it was the right thing to do, and he was public about that commitment.

Here’s what he said to Axel Springer’s CEO, Mathias Döpfner, about his role at the Post back in 2018.

Jeff Bezos: As the owner of the Post, I know at times the Post is going to write stories that are going to make very powerful people, very, unhappy.

Mathias Döpfner: Are you upset if they’re writing critical stories about Amazon, which they do?

Bezos: No, no, I’m not upset at all. When I first bought the Post

Advertisement

Döpfner: Would you ever interfere?

Bezos: Never.

Döpfner: No?

Bezos: Never. I would be humiliated to interfere. I would be so embarrassed, I would turn bright red. And it is nothing to do with… I don’t even get so far… I just don’t want to. For me, it would feel icky. It would feel gross. It would be one of those things, when I’m 80 years old, I would be so unhappy with myself if I interfered. Why would I?

Döpfner: Yeah.

Advertisement

Bezos: I want that paper to be independent.

He went on to say that telling the newsroom what to do would be like taking controls from the pilots of a plane. But when the Trump Circus left town and the inexorable decline of the traditional media business accelerated, losses mounted, and Jeff started to make one bad move after another.

In 2023 after bringing in former Microsoft executive, Patty Stonesifer, who was well-liked at the Post, despite having to preside over layoffs and buyouts, Bezos then shows Will Lewis to take over as the new CEO. Lewis had tried to be a media entrepreneur, emphasis on tried, and had been a former CEO of Dow Jones and publisher of the Wall Street Journal. And before that, a senior executive at Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp back in the days of the U.K. phone hacking scandal. And one of the first things he did after taking his job at the Post, after trashing the reporters for not wanting to change, which was entirely untrue and obnoxious, in not the good way, was apparently trying to kill a story about his own alleged involvement in that scandal. And then Lewis ousted then executive editor Sally Buzbee, the first woman to serve in that role, newsroom morale plummeted.

Then last October, Bezos decided the Post would end a decades long practice and pulled the newsroom’s planned endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris. That Bezos himself made the decision, not Lewis, is according to the Post’s own reporting. While he certainly was within his rights to do so, the timing was curious, and there was fallout. 300,000 Post readers canceled their digital subscriptions in response. No surprise, a growing number of editors and reporters started leaving as newsroom morale plummeted once again, that included my wife, former Opinion editor, Amanda Katz.

And at the dawn of Trump 2.0, there have been other examples of the Post seeming to obey in advance. In January, Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist Ann Telnaes resigned after she said Opinion editor, David Shipley rejected her cartoon depicting Bezos and other tech billionaires bending the knee before Trump. Last month, the Post pulled an ad deal that called on Trump to fire Elon Musk. And just in case that wasn’t enough, Bezos and many other tech billionaires paid a million dollars plus to yuck it up on stage with Trump during the inauguration. Jeff looked like a prop and a stooge.

Advertisement

Finally, last week, Bezos announced that the Post Opinion section would be refocused to only publish pieces that are “in support and defense of personal liberties and free markets,” which in libertarian billionaire nincompoop speak roughly translates to, “Personal liberties means doing whatever the fuck I want. Free markets means doing whatever the fuck I want.” Now, I love capitalism too, but what that means in practice is incomprehensible and really just dumb. That move, essentially, forced the resignation of the Opinion editor, David Shipley, who declined as Bezos noted not to say hell yes. Hell no was the right response. That was a far cry from that 2018 interview:

Bezos: I would be humiliated to interfere. I would be so embarrassed, I would turn bright red. And it is nothing to do with… I don’t even get so far… I just don’t want to. For me, it would feel icky. It would feel gross.

I don’t know if Bezos is now so comfortable with all this interference that he’s gotten over the ick factor, but the rest of us haven’t. As far as I’m concerned, he has killed the Post legacy of justice, fairness, commitment to the First Amendment, accountability, an epic badassery created by Ben Bradlee and Kay Graham. Here’s former Post reporter, Martha Sherrill:

We were always asking more, and we’re pretending we didn’t know things that we maybe we thought we knew. But at the same time, you had to kind of have the balls to put the story together.

The problem is that Bezos isn’t just any owner. He’s one of the top tech titans in the world, and his real business interests are in Amazon and Blue Origin and not the Post. Now, the biggest competitor to Blue Origin, Elon Musk, is working directly with Trump running DOGE, and I think Jeff wants some of that sweet, sweet government money. Owning an independent media company that is reporting on a presidency and administration that could make or break him, even if he was not such an embarrassing cheerleader, has become a clear conflict of interest.

I don’t want to buy the Washington Post to put it on nostalgia shelf like some precious tchotchke. Even though the Post reportedly lost $100 million last year and about $77 million a year before, I believe there’s an opportunity here.

This excerpt has been edited for length and clarity.

Advertisement

The rest of the episode is a wide-ranging discussion of the Washington Post’s past, present, and future among Kara and former Post writer Sally Quinn, media legend Tina Brown, reporter and critic Oliver Darcy, former Post national editor Cameron Barr, and others. Listen to it on Apple or Spotify.

On With Kara Swisher is produced by Nayeema Raza, Blakeney Schick, Cristian Castro Rossel, and Megan Burney, with mixing by Fernando Arruda, engineering by Christopher Shurtleff, and theme music by Trackademics. New episodes drop every Monday and Thursday. Follow the show on Apple PodcastsSpotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.



Source link

Advertisement

Washington

Washington Lands QB From Stanford

Published

on

Washington Lands QB From Stanford


On Monday, On3 Sports insider, Hayes Fawcett, was first to report that former Stanford quarterback Elijah Brown transferred to Washington, officially ending his tenure on The Farm. This comes nearly two weeks after Brown entered the transfer portal, and he will head to Seattle with three years of eligibility remaining.

Brown will presumably to be the backup to Demond Williams at Washington. Williams, who signed a $4 million deal to play for the Huskies at the end of the season, initially entered the transfer portal himself on Jan. 8.

But after backlash and threatened legal action by the university, he ultimately decided to stay with the program for the ’26 season. As a result, Brown will likely use this season to continue to develop and compete for the starting job in 2027 after Williams’ presumed departure for the NFL.

Advertisement

A former four-star recruit, Brown started for parts of two seasons at Stanford, playing in three games with one start as a true freshman, which was limited due to an early season injury.

Advertisement

As a redshirt freshman in 2025, Brown played in six games with three starts, finishing the season with 829 pass yards, four touchdowns and two interceptions. His best game of the season came against North Carolina on Nov. 8, where he threw for 284 yards, one touchdown and one interception in a 20-15 loss.

A star at Mater Dei High School in Santa Ana, California, Brown started all four of his years at the school and became only the fourth player in school history to earn the starting quarterback job as a freshman.

In his sophomore season, after throwing for 2,581 yards and 30 touchdowns, Brown led Mater Dei to a perfect 12-0 record and the CIF Open Division Title. As a junior, Brown once again shined for Mater Dei, throwing for 2,785 yards, 31 touchdowns and four interceptions as the program went 12-1.

After another dominant season that saw Brown throw for over 2,900 yards and nearly 40 touchdowns while winning another state title, he committed to Stanford over offers from several other big name schools including Alabama, UCLA, Arizona, Georgia and Michigan. After signing with the Cardinal, he became the highest rated quarterback to commit to the school since Tanner McKee in 2018.

Advertisement

But Brown’s college career has been far from what was expected. After a promising college debut against Cal Poly in his true freshman season, Brown injured his hand and missed basically the whole season, playing in only two other games where he struggled.

Advertisement

In 2025, Brown lost the starting job in training camp to Ben Gulbranson and even after replacing Gulbranson late in the season, he never was able to get Stanford’s offense to that next level. When he found success, it was typically late in games once the outcome was more or less decided.

New head coach Tavita Pritchard has a strong reputation for developing quarterbacks which could have benefitted Brown, but after Stanford signed Davis Warren from Michigan, in addition to bringing in new recruits such as Michael Mitchell Jr., the QB room got too crowded for Brown.

Now, Brown will be coached by another elite offensive mind in Jedd Fisch, a coach he hopes will bring out the best in him and have him playing like the four-star recruit he came into college as.

Recommended Articles:



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Our reporting showed Washington ranks last in green energy growth. Now the state is working to speed it up

Published

on

Our reporting showed Washington ranks last in green energy growth. Now the state is working to speed it up


FILE – In this Feb. 10, 2010, file photo, power lines from Bonneville Dam head in all directions in North Bonneville, Wash. (AP Photo/Don Ryan)

Don Ryan / AP

This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with Oregon Public Broadcasting. Sign up for First Look to get OPB stories in your inbox six days a week.

Washington state has launched a sweeping effort to speed up construction of renewable energy projects, prompted by reporting from Oregon Public Broadcasting and ProPublica that chronicled how the state came to rank dead last in the nation for renewable energy growth.

Advertisement

Washington’s Department of Commerce, which works on state energy policy, has offered up state employees to help the federal Bonneville Power Administration process its backlog of renewable energy projects — though it remains uncertain whether the agency will accept the offer.

Bonneville, which owns 75% of the Northwest’s power grid, must sign off before wind and solar developers who wish to connect to its grid can break ground.

Meanwhile, four state agencies have recommended that Washington’s Legislature provide incentives for utilities to upgrade transmission lines, plan “microgrid” energy projects that don’t need to connect to Bonneville’s power lines, and create a new state agency to plan and potentially pay for major new transmission corridors. A bill to create such an authority had a hearing on Jan 21.

The Commerce Department, the Department of Ecology, the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, and the Utilities and Transportation Commission are also meeting regularly to diagnose what’s holding up more than a dozen high-priority wind, solar, and energy storage projects that could make an outsized difference.

Joe Nguyễn, who recently stepped down as the state’s commerce director, said there’s added urgency to get the work done since OPB and ProPublica last year showed that other states like Iowa and Texas have made far more progress than Washington.

Advertisement

“We’re forcing these tough conversations that have never been done before,” Nguyễn, a former state senator who helped pass Washington’s law setting a deadline to go carbon-free, said during a recent public forum. He spoke at the panel just before leaving the state Commerce Department in January to take a job as head of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce.

“We probably have to modify some policies, we’re going to amend some things, we have to make strategic investments, but I think that’s a good thing,” Nguyễn said at the forum. “I’m not daunted by the task.”

Under Bonneville, projects face longer odds of successfully connecting to the electrical grid than anywhere else in the country, OPB and ProPublica found.

The federal agency weighs how many new transmission lines and substations will be needed to carry the added load, and it has historically been slow to pay for such upgrades, renewable energy advocates have said. Often, the burden falls on the builders of the wind and solar projects.

Washington and Oregon lawmakers failed to account for this obstacle when they required electric utilities to phase out fossil fuels. Combined with rapid growth in electricity demand from new data centers powering artificial intelligence, studies now predict rolling blackouts in the Pacific Northwest within the next five years.

Advertisement

Inspired by OPB and ProPublica’s reporting, the Seattle nonprofit Clean & Prosperous published a report this month identifying energy high-potential projects that could generate enough power for 7 million homes and contribute $195 billion to the state’s economy if built by 2030. Kevin Tempest, research director for Clean & Prosperous, said the fact that Washington ranked 50th nationally for green power growth was poorly understood until the recent news coverage.

“I don’t think that we were aware of just how stark it was,” said Tempest, whose group advocates for “entrepreneurial approaches” to eliminating fossil fuels and promoting economic growth. “So that really opened our eyes and, I think, accelerated a lot of conversations.”

Separately, in Oregon, Gov. Tina Kotek recently signed two executive orders intended to speed up the construction of energy projects. Kotek, too, said the news reports helped galvanize policymakers.

Nguyễn told OPB and ProPublica their reporting made him realize “the people who talk about clean energy are not actually doing it.” But now, he said, “Washington state’s desperately trying.”

‘Things that we can control’

Most of the high-priority projects identified by the state and by Clean & Prosperous are waiting for approval to connect to Bonneville’s substations and transmission lines so that developers move toward construction.

Advertisement

The federal agency’s review process historically has been sluggish and often puts the onus on a single energy developer to invest tens of millions of dollars in upgrades or else wait until another developer comes along to shoulder some of the cost. In addition, state officials in Oregon and Washington must also sign off on the location planned for new power lines and wind or solar farms — a process with its own bottlenecks.

“There are a myriad of reasons why projects are not happening,” Tempest said. “It’s different for each case.”

But he said across all projects, Bonneville is “a common feature for some of the new facilities not breaking ground.”

Bonneville spokesperson Kevin Wingert said in an email that the agency has implemented several reforms over the past year to enable faster connections to its grid. For example, the agency began studying clusters of projects collectively, based on their readiness, and expects its first study to be done at the end of the month.

Wingert said the agency has identified 7 gigawatts worth of projects — roughly the capacity of Grand Coulee hydroelectric dam, Washington’s largest power plant — that it says it’s on pace to have online within five years. It expects to have more than double that amount connected and energized by 2035.

Advertisement

In the near term, the state is focusing on grid improvements to the transmission system it can make without Bonneville, according to Casey Sixkiller, director of the Washington Department of Ecology.

He said Washington will work to help projects connect to some part of the roughly 25% of the region’s grid that is operated by investor-owned and public utilities.

“I think the point is for us in Washington, trying to find, as we wait for BPA, who’s years behind, what are the other things that we can control that we should be prioritizing and trying to move forward?” Sixkiller said.

Kurt Beckett, chair of Washington’s Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, which issues site permits for energy projects, said localized improvements that can be made outside of Bonneville’s grid are cheaper and will have tangible, immediate results. They also have the benefit of “buying time for the bigger, harder upgrades that Bonneville’s in charge of.”

Bonneville says it plans to spend $5 billion on nearly two dozen transmission lines and substation improvements, but many of those projects are years away with no firm deadline.

Advertisement

What’s within Washington’s control in the near term is to streamline state permitting of projects that have received or don’t need Bonneville’s approval.

The need was highlighted by the passage last year of President Donald Trump’s so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which will phase out key federal energy tax credits and set a July 4 deadline for projects to break ground. The credits cover as much as 50% of construction costs for most solar and wind farms.

More than 200 wind, solar and battery storage projects theoretically could meet the deadline “should development processes improve,” Clean & Prosperous concluded in its report. The group said it was a reference to both Bonneville’s role and the state’s.

Sixkiller said Washington leaders are prioritizing a smaller list of 19 proposed projects they think have the best chance of beating the July deadline. In some cases, the developers already have a connection agreement with Bonneville in place. In two, the projects will connect to power lines run by a utility.

An offer of help

In addition to actions taken by state agencies, Washington lawmakers are considering a bill that would ease the state’s reliance on Bonneville to build new power lines. That would come in the form of a state transmission authority — a new state agency in charge of planning transmission routes, acquiring land and working with developers to build new lines.

Advertisement

It could also eventually pay for projects. Washington lawmakers are calling for a report on what financing tools, such as the ability to issue bonds, the new transmission authority will need.

The bill has support from environmental groups, labor unions and energy developers. However, lobbyists for large industrial energy consumers and for Bonneville’s public utility customers opposed the bill, saying they supported the intention to build more transmission but wanted the state to focus on relaxing its permitting requirements to let utilities solve the problem.

For the time being, state officials told OPB and ProPublica they are working to shore up Bonneville’s ability to do the work that the region’s grid needs.

Beckett said he hopes the state can help Bonneville with the agency’s self-imposed goal of cutting the average time a project spends in the queue from 15 years down to five or six.

Agencies have offered Bonneville some of their staff to help its analysts complete grid connection studies, which Washington officials said makes sense because the state, in many cases, is already reviewing the same projects that are awaiting the federal agency’s permission to connect.

Advertisement

Bonneville hasn’t said yes yet. Wingert said Bonneville’s interconnection studies have “numerous technical and regulatory requirements” that make them “inappropriate or infeasible” for the state to conduct on BPA’s behalf.

But, he said, the agency was open to working with the state to speed projects up at some point.

“There may be opportunities to coordinate efficiencies between state policies and BPA’s interconnection processes in the future,” Wingert said.

Nguyễn said that technical requirements shouldn’t keep Bonneville from accepting the state’s help in vetting projects or analyzing their impact on the grid, and that state employees could help with the less technical aspects of the report if needed.

“If you want us to bring you lunch so your analysts can go faster, we will do it,” he said. “That’s the level of seriousness I have about getting transmission built.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Washington

Southwest Washington’s Gluesenkamp Perez calls for Noem to step down

Published

on

Southwest Washington’s Gluesenkamp Perez calls for Noem to step down


U.S. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Southwest Washington, on Saturday called for Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to step down following the shooting death of a man in Minneapolis by a federal agent.

“It’s unacceptable to have another needless death in Minnesota, and it’s unacceptable to have elected officials, candidates, and administration officials continue to throw gas on this fire, or tacitly encourage assaults on law enforcement and anyone else,” Gluesenkamp Perez said. “The situation is un-American and Secretary Noem needs to step down.”

A Border Patrol agent shot and killed 37-year-old Alex Pretti, a protester in Minneapolis, on Saturday.

Gluesenkamp Perez’s call that Noem step down came after Gluesenkamp Perez voted to fund DHS on Thursday amid concerns from other Democrats that the legislation did not limit President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts.

Advertisement

“When fishermen in Pacific County get in trouble out on the water, the Coast Guard makes sure they’re safe. When there’s flooding or landslides in Southwest Washington, FEMA helps our families get back on their feet. The Department of Homeland Security is extremely important to my community. I could not in good conscience vote to shut it down,” Gluesenkamp Perez said in a statement on Thursday.

Meanwhile, on Sunday, Democratic Sen. Jacky Rosen called for the impeachment of Noem, saying that she believes Noem is attempting to “mislead the American public” about the fatal shooting of Pretti.

The call from Rosen, a moderate who was part of the group that helped Republicans end the 43-day government shutdown last year, comes amid a growing fury from congressional Democrats who have also vowed to block funding for the Homeland Security Department. A House resolution to launch impeachment proceedings against Noem has the support of more than 100 Democrats, but few Senate Democrats have so far weighed in. Oregon Democratic U.S. Reps. Maxine Dexter and Suzanne Bonamici also support impeaching Noem.

“Kristi Noem has been an abject failure leading the Department of Homeland Security for the last year — and the abuses of power we’re seeing from ICE are the latest proof that she has lost control over her own department and staff,” Rosen said in a statement to The Associated Press.

Rosen said Noem’s conduct is “deeply shameful” and she “must be impeached and removed from office immediately.”

Advertisement

Impeachment proceedings are unlikely in the GOP-controlled Congress, but mounting Democratic outrage over the violence in the streets of Minneapolis is certain to disrupt Senate Republican leaders’ hopes this week to quickly approve a wide-ranging spending bill and avoid a partial government shutdown on Jan. 30.

And while some moderate Democrats have been wary over the last year of criticizing the Trump administration on border and immigration issues, the fatal shootings in Minneapolis of Pretti on Saturday and Renee Good on Jan. 7 have transformed the debate, even among moderates like Rosen.

Noem defends fatal shooting

The Nevada senator’s call for impeachment followed Noem’s quick defense, without a full investigation, of the fatal shooting of Pretti by a Border Patrol agent. Videos of the scene reviewed by The Associated Press appear to contradict statements by the Trump administration that the shots were fired “defensively” against Pretti as he “approached” them with a gun. Pretti was licensed to carry a concealed weapon, but he appears to be seen with only a phone in his hand in the videos.

During the scuffle, agents discovered that he was carrying a 9 mm semiautomatic handgun and opened fire with several shots, including into his back. Officials did not say if Pretti brandished the weapon.

Noem said Pretti showed up to “impede a law enforcement operation.”

Advertisement

“This looks like a situation where an individual arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement,” Noem said Sunday.

In her call for Noem’s impeachment, Rosen cited other issues beyond the current ICE operations. She said Noem has also “violated the public trust by wasting millions in taxpayer dollars” on self-promotion and cited reports that the Coast Guard purchased her two luxury jets worth $172 million.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending