分类： 未分类

War-damaged Gaza building housing displaced Palestinian families collapses, killing at least 20 people

2026-09-16T06:12:00-0400 / CBS/AP

A building housing displaced Palestinian families collapsed in Gaza City on Wednesday, killing at least 20 people, most of them women and children, according to local health officials. The multistory structure was heavily damaged during the Israel-Hamas war and there had been warnings about its safety.

The building was housing about six displaced families when it collapsed on Wednesday morning. At least 15 others were injured, and the 20 dead included eight children and six women, according to the Gaza Civil Defense rescue agency. The toll was expected to rise as more bodies were recovered from the debris.

Video showed civil defense crews surveying the wreckage and using bulldozers to dig people out, including children.

Gaza Civil Defense teams rescue people from a collapsed building, Sept. 16, 2026, in the Al-Sinaa area west of Gaza City, Gaza. Omar Ashtawy/Getty

The building had been partially destroyed in an Israeli strike early in the war between Israel and Hamas. It was not immediately clear what caused the collapse, but in Gaza — where the majority of buildings have been damaged or destroyed— dozens of bombed-out, multistory structures have collapsed throughout the war, particularly during winter weather.

Building collapses have become a major hazard in Gaza. Displaced families have often returned from tent camps to homes damaged by bombardment during the almost three years of war.

Gaza war still simmering despite U.S.-brokered ceasefire

While the heaviest fighting in Gaza has subsided since a fragile U.S.-brokered ceasefire took hold in October

last year, Israel has continued to carry out strikes in the decimated Palestinian territory, including some Monday and Tuesday that killed several people.

A Palestinian man carries an injured child as others receive treatment at Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis, Gaza, following an Israeli strike on the Al-Mawasi area, Sept. 15, 2026. BASHAR TALEB/AFP/Getty

The violence has continued despite a visit last month by Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and a key Mideast negotiator, who met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in an effort to push the ceasefire deal forward.

Speaking a couple weeks after his visit to the region, Kushner directly linked the lack of progress on the rehabilitation of Gaza to Israeli elections set to take place in late October. Polls show it is a tight race between Netanyahu and his opponents.

“We’re working through some political issues in Israel. I think we agree with them on the end state,” Kushner said. “They just have a crazy election, and that makes them a little irrational in certain regards.”

Militants have carried out shooting attacks on Israeli troops, and Israel says its strikes are in response to those and other ceasefire violations.

The Gaza war was sparked by the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel in 2023, which killed around 1,200 people and saw 251 others taken hostage. Israel’s retaliatory offensive in Gaza has killed more than 73,264 Palestinians, including those killed since the ceasefire, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

回应安全担忧 AI巨头推动设立自律监管机构

2026年9月16日 18:19 / 联合早报

• OpenAI透露正与Anthropic和谷歌合作，计划组建行业标准机构，以打造更安全的AI技术。 – 该构想由DeepMind首席执行官哈萨比斯提出，建议成立类似美国金融业监管局的自律机构。 – Cohere首席执行官戈麦斯称，美国AI巨头试图以安全为幌子实行垄断，将小对手挤出市场。 – 进步派参议员桑德斯与前顾问班农不约而同呼吁加强监管AI，但两人提出的应对之策不同。

OpenAI首席执行官奥尔特曼周二说，他有信心AI行业能够安全推行这项技术。 （彭博社）

（华盛顿综合电）在人们对人工智能（AI）潜在风险的担忧升高之际，全球最大的几家AI企业计划组建一个行业标准机构，以打造更安全的AI技术。

OpenAI星期二（9月15日）透露，公司正与Anthropic和谷歌合作推进这一构想。这一构想由谷歌旗下AI实验室DeepMind首席执行官哈萨比斯提出。

哈萨比斯7月撰文，建议成立一个类似美国金融业监管局的行业自律机构，负责在前沿AI系统向公众开放前对它们进行测试。

美国金融业监管局负责监管美国证券经纪商和投资公司。哈萨比斯说，AI行业标准机构将制定评估规程，并与联邦机构及美国国家实验室合作，在涉及国家安全的领域开展测试。

OpenAI首席执行官奥尔特曼周二承认，公众对于企业与国家间的AI竞赛可能会导致安全问题被忽视感到担忧。但他称：“我对我们的公司以及整个行业安全推行这项技术的能力非常有信心。”

与此同时，也有科技业人士担心，AI巨头间的合作将把规模较小的竞争对手挤出市场。加拿大AI公司Cohere首席执行官戈麦斯就称，美国AI巨头试图以安全为幌子实行垄断。

上周，AI研究员科克森指责OpenAI与Anthropic在竞相开发AI的过程中“拿人类生命作赌注”。Anthropic首席执行官阿莫迪过后撰文，呼吁放慢研发前沿AI模型的步伐，奥尔特曼与xAI创办人马斯克对此表示支持。

Meta创始人扎克伯格则反对放缓AI发展。他认为，市场激励机制与法律责任是防范AI技术风险的最佳护栏。

他周二在社媒平台X上写道：“人们不会愿意使用那些与自身意图不符，且不听从指令的智能体。因此，实验室有强烈的内在动力，去提升AI模型与人类意图的一致性。”

英伟达公司首席执行官黄仁勋也淡化AI行业需要新安全法规的说法，称市场力量已足以推动企业安全地创新。

知情者透露，特朗普政府高官周二与Anthropic高管举行了线上会议，讨论AI的安全风险。美国总统特朗普此前称，有关AI风险的警告是“骗局”。

进步派参议员桑德斯与特朗普前顾问班农周二出席华盛顿一场活动时，则不约而同呼吁加强监管AI。美国左右两翼代表人物罕见地意见一致，反映出人们对AI安全风险的忧虑日益加深。

桑德斯说，他将提出永久禁止开发超级人工智能的立法草案，并把这种技术与核武器相提并论。他还呼吁美国与主要竞争对手中国谈判一项全面条约，内容包括暂停开发先进AI与超级智能。

班农也支持给超级人工智能的研发踩刹车，并指科技业高管不可信任，但提出的应对之策与桑德斯不同。

班农认为立法耗时太久，特朗普应行使行政权力设立相关监管机构。他也反对与中国谈判，主张美国应彻底切断与中国AI领域的联系。

What the Supreme Court’s cryptic mail ballot ruling means for future elections

2026-09-16T08:00:29.249Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/16/politics/supreme-court-mail-ballot-wont-be-last-word

The Supreme Court’s recent patchwork of election-related decisions gives the public scant clues of how the justices would act if faced with a crucial dispute this fall that would definitively settle which party controls Congress or what to expect in 2028.

The justices’ unsigned order Monday rejecting President Donald Trump’s plan to let the US Postal Service possibly refuse to deliver ballots was cryptic. And an earlier June decision, similarly rejecting an attempt to foist new rules on mail-in ballots, came down to a single vote.

Some justices, notably Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, have echoed the Trump administration’s unsubstantiated claims of fraud regarding mail-in voting. And Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested on Monday an openness to letting the Postal Service control ballots in the future, perhaps for the 2028 presidential election cycle.

Washington lawyer Donald Verrilli, a former US solicitor general in the Obama administration, said on Tuesday that he anticipates continued legal conflict around mail-in ballots.

He observed that although no evidence exists that such ballots are conducive to fraud, that drumbeat is “in the air,” reinforced by Alito’s dissent Monday night.

“As the rest of this electoral cycle unfolds, and into 2028,” Verrilli said at a Georgetown Law panel, “I think there’s going to be a lot of turbulence around these issues.”

The nine justices, dominated by six conservatives, have moved haltingly through cases, suggesting some concern about chaos for voters but also hewing to their established priorities.

Amid a torrent of lawsuits challenging administration policy since Trump returned to office in January 2025, litigation involving electoral practices is especially high stakes. Such cases determine cherished voting rights and the ability of all citizens to be represented by elected officials.

Earlier this year, the majority retrenched on the 1965 Voting Rights Act and provided state legislators greater latitude to draw maps that may dilute the voting power of Blacks and Latinos. Several states immediately began redistricting to eliminate “majority-minority” districts and give Republican candidates an advantage. The court allowed some of those changes to go ahead in the middle of the primary election season.

While Monday night’s order was a clear win for the Democratic-led states and voting-rights advocates who sued to block the Postal Service regulations from being enforced, it lacked a robust signal from the justices themselves.

The two-sentence order was devoid of any underlying legal reasoning. It said only, “The Government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court’s preliminary injunction. And the equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this Court do not favor a stay.”

Perhaps the terseness was the result of the cross-ideological compromise among the justices, but those sentences merely reflect guideposts for dissolving a lower court injunction, such as whether that the government can show it is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim and is likely to suffer irreparable harm without the stay.

The justices said nothing about the myriad issues that had been explored by lower court judges, related to the constitutional and statutory powers of the dueling parties and the feasibility of the Postal System screening plan.

Top Democrat on Senate Judiciary Panel reacts to the Supreme Court’s legal blow to Trump’s mail-in ballot plan

1:53 • Source: CNN

Top Democrat on Senate Judiciary Panel reacts to the Supreme Court’s legal blow to Trump’s mail-in ballot …

1:53

In his brief concurrence, Kavanaugh wrote, “there is at least a fair prospect that the final rule falls within the Postal Service’s statutory authority,” appearing to provide another possible vote in favor of Trump’s efforts.

State election officials, voting rights advocates and political operatives have been closely anticipating how the Supreme Court might affect this year’s midterms and possibly lay groundwork for the presidential election in 2028.

Disputed state electoral practices have become a staple of the justices’ docket and will likely continue through – and possibly after – the November 3 elections. The House of Representatives and Senate are currently controlled by Republicans. Democrats have a chance to flip at least the House and maybe both chambers.

Kavanaugh talks Bush v. Gore case (2000)

1:20 • Source: CNN

Kavanaugh talks Bush v. Gore case (2000)

1:20

Trump’s reaction to the 2020 election, when he lost to Joe Biden yet insisted the results were fraudulent, still shadows ballot controversies, as does the memory of the 2000 Bush v. Gore litigation.

In that case nearly 26 years ago, the Supreme Court essentially decided the contest between then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore by stopping ballot recounts in Florida and ensuring that the state’s decisive electoral votes went to Bush, the Republican candidate.

Outraged Tuesday about the justices’ order, Trump denounced his three appointees who apparently joined the majority against his plan to screen states’ mail-in ballots. (Only Alito and Thomas dissented publicly, but there was no recorded vote.)

In his first term, Trump had named Neil Gorsuch in 2017; Kavanaugh in 2018; and Amy Coney Barrett in 2020.

Trump declared in a Truth Social post: “These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of the original selves.”

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the Justice Department would continue to try to restrict mail voting.

“There should be nothing surprising about what we’re trying to do when it comes to mail-in voting, which is we want to make sure that there is safe voting and that there is integrity, free and fair elections, and that there is one person placing one vote and that that person is eligible to vote,” Blanche said Tuesday during a rare White House Rose Garden appearance.

In Monday’s case, the postal rules finalized in late August would have forced states to submit lists of eligible voters to the US Postal Service. The rules also called for new envelope requirements, including tracking barcodes. Without them, the USPS would have prohibited the delivery of ballots.

About 30% of voters across the country cast their ballots by mail, rather than in-person. People in the military, the elderly and disabled especially rely on mail-in ballots.

The state challengers, led by California, had argued that the Trump plan was unworkable as well as unlawful. Democratic and Republican state and local election officials warned throughout the summer that the USPS proposal could have led to mass disenfranchisement. Some states had already sent out ballots, and officials had been told there may not even be enough envelopes nationwide to start over.

A separate Supreme Court mail-in ballot dispute in June arose from a Trump-endorsed challenge to Mississippi’s five-day grace period for receipt of mail ballots postmarked by Election Day.

By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court snubbed the Republican National Committee lawsuit against Mississippi. Barrett, who wrote for the majority, said that federal election-day laws, which designate the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, did not prevent Mississippi from counting properly postmarked ballots up to five days later.

Addressing the RNC and Trump claims of fraud in that case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, Barrett added, “Election fraud and its appearance are serious issues. Like other such issues, however, they must be addressed through the democratic process.”

Foreshadowing where Alito would land on Monday, he penned the dissenting statement in June, raising the specter of “voter fraud that may further undermine Americans’ faith in the integrity of this country’s elections.”

Blanche: We’re going to comply with decision on mail-in voting

4:59 • Source: CNN

Blanche: We’re going to comply with decision on mail-in voting

4:59

Alito was joined in the RNC case by Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

On Monday night, he drew support only from Thomas. They argued for broad Postal Service authority, and, as they addressed the government’s interest in enforcing the rule, they echoed the administration’s arguments about enhancing “the visibility of Federal Ballot Mail in order to better detect fraud.”

Alito further compared some of the challengers’ claims to a “Hail Mary pass … unlikely to be successfully completed here.”

研究：空气污染或增加自杀风险

2026年9月16日 18:27 / 联合早报

研究人员说，环境污染可被纳入自杀预防策略考量，自杀预防也应被视为公共卫生问题。 （示意图/iStock）

（伦敦综合讯）一项国际研究发现，空气污染可能与较高的自杀风险有关。

英国《卫报》报道，英国贝尔法斯特女王大学科学家分析29项研究后发现，接触空气中的细颗粒物和二氧化氮（nitrogen dioxide），与自杀死亡、自杀未遂及出现自杀念头的风险上升有关。

研究人员还对另外16项研究进行分析，结果显示，二氧化硫（sulphur dioxide）、臭氧等空气污染物，以及噪音污染，可能与较高的自杀风险有关。不过，光污染和水污染与自杀风险之间的关系尚不明确。研究结果刊登在《流行病学与社区卫生期刊》。

研究人员说，环境污染可被纳入自杀预防策略考量，自杀预防也应被视为公共卫生问题。他们认为，通过减少污染、加强跨领域合作和采取针对性的公共卫生措施，可能有助于降低自杀风险。

不过，多名专家提醒，研究只能显示污染与自杀风险存在关联，并不能证明空气污染直接导致自杀念头或行为。

英国慈善机构撒玛利亚会（Samaritans）高级研究与实证主管穆迪说：“自杀原因十分复杂，已有证据显示，多种因素都会影响自杀风险。我们不能忽视人们生活的环境，尤其是居住条件方面的不平等。”

英国皇家精神科医学院成人精神科系主任范尼克尔也指出，空气污染与社会经济状况、城市生活、身体健康和居住环境等因素密切相关，这些因素也会影响心理健康。

剑桥大学生物统计学教授伯吉斯也指出，污染地区可能在其他方面存在差异，因此仍需进一步研究确认因果关系。

世界卫生组织数据显示，全球每年有超过72万人死于自杀，自杀也是全球15至29岁人群第三大死因。

全球民调：超六成受访者支持绕开美中两国开展合作

2026年9月16日 19:29 / 联合早报

调查显示，61%受访者支持各国在没有美国或中国参与的情况下合作。图为2026年9月14日，美国得克萨斯州休斯敦举行的二十国集团（G20）能源部长会议。 （彭博社）

（华盛顿路透电）一项全球民调显示，尽管民众持续支持国际合作，对国际机构的信任度也有所上升，但对美国或中国担任全球领导角色的接受度偏低，不少人甚至视两国为威胁。

这项由洛克菲勒基金会委托、在34个国家访问超过3万5000人的调查显示，近七成受访者认为，过去一年全球局势恶化。只有38%认为未来五年本国经济会改善。印度和中国的经济乐观情绪分别下跌26和16个百分点，至50%和56%。

尽管普遍悲观，仍有57%受访者认为，各国应合作解决安全等全球挑战，即使需要在部分国家利益上作出妥协。这个比例高于去年调查的55%。

调查也显示，61%受访者支持各国在没有美国或中国参与的情况下合作。

与此同时，60%的受访者接受加拿大在国际事务中发挥领导作用，接受日本和澳大利亚的人分别为58%和55%。欧盟和英国分别为55%和54%，联合国为52%。相比之下，接受美国和中国发挥领导作用的受访者分别只有39%和37%，俄罗斯更低，仅26%。

洛克菲勒基金会副主席佩洛夫斯基说，民调结果显示，加拿大总理卡尼倡导的“中等强国”路线在全球具有公信力。卡尼也曾说，中东战争反映全球秩序失灵。

佩洛夫斯基说：“这反映美国全球领导地位正严重削弱。人们正在讨论全球问题的解决方案，不再问美国人怎么看。这是沉重打击。”

另外，发展中国家与发达经济体的看法差异明显。发展中国家有53%受访者接受中国担任全球领导角色，发达国家则只有23%；对俄罗斯的看法相差27个百分点；对美国则相差17个百分点。

过去一年，国际机构的信任度普遍上升。世界卫生组织的信任度从61%升至69%，联合国则从58%升至62%。

世界银行、国际货币基金组织和国际刑事法院去年在调查中均未获及格评价，今年的信任度增幅最大。世界银行信任度从46%升至55%，国际货币基金组织从43%微升至51%，国际刑事法院从48%升至54%。世界贸易组织则从50%升至57%。

排除受访者对本国的评价后，42%受访者视俄罗斯为重大威胁，认为美国和中国构成重大威胁的分别为34%和30%。

美国则被15个国家的受访者视为最大威胁，其中印度尼西亚受访者比率最高，达73%；巴西为59%、墨西哥为58%、土耳其为57%。

El-Sayed grilled on Piker, Israel and socialist ties after Mike Rogers skips Senate debate

El-Sayed accused his absent GOP opponent of trying to make the race ‘about the color of my skin or how I pray’

September 16, 2026 5:30am EDT / Fox News

By Alec Schemmel

El-Sayed pressed to ‘100% disavow’ Hasan Piker comments

Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed responds to questions about his relationship with the controversial streamer. (WJBK)

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/0329a123-dac9-4d27-ad8c-a0727f52d4d8

Listen to this article

6 min

Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed faced roughly an hour of pointed questions Tuesday over his ties to controversial streamer Hasan Piker, his views on Israel, campaign money and his socialist ties after his Republican rival Mike Rogers declined to participate in a scheduled debate in Detroit Tuesday night.

El-Sayed offered one of his most explicit condemnations yet of Piker’s controversial rhetoric, declined to give a yes-or-no answer when pressed on U.S. recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and pushed back on questions about his relationship with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) during the wide-ranging conversation with the moderator.

Rogers did not attend Tuesday’s event after declining the station’s invitation earlier in the day, leaving El-Sayed to field questions from moderator Roop Raj, viewers and members of the studio audience.

FOX 2 said both campaigns were invited on Aug. 5, the day after Michigan’s primary, and that El-Sayed quickly accepted, while Rogers did not formally decline until the morning of the Tuesday debate due to objections over Raj serving as the moderator, arguing he was biased.

EL-SAYED’S LIBERAL AGENDA CLASHES WITH MUSLIM VOTERS WHO BACK HIM ANYWAY: ‘MALE VERSION’ OF ILHAN OMAR

Michigan Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Abdul El-Sayed pushed back on questions about his ties with controversial Twitch streamer Hasan Piker.(Emily Elconin/Getty Images)

On Tuesday evening, Raj pressed El-Sayed on whether he could “completely, 100%” disavow offensive comments Piker had made. The question came just two days after El-Sayed resisted questioning about Piker during an appearance on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

“Absolutely,” El-Sayed responded to Raj about disavowing Piker’s controversial comments, before specifically addressing the streamer’s recent remarks about Jewish Americans.

“When Hasan made these comments about Jewish Americans and Jewish Michiganders, I disavowed them entirely,” El-Sayed said.

EL-SAYED DISTANCES HIMSELF FROM HASAN PIKER AFTER DISTURBING REMARKS ABOUT JEWISH AMERICANS

Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive candidate in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan, talks poolside with streamer Hasan Piker at a party for content creators supporting his campaign Monday, Aug. 3, 2026, in Detroit.(Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

El-Sayed went further Tuesday when Raj continued pressing him, saying there were “many, many things” Piker has said that he disagreed with and specifically pointing to the streamer’s comments about 9/11 and Jewish Americans. Still, El-Sayed defended his decision to engage with Piker, arguing that speaking with someone does not amount to endorsing all of that person’s views and saying he wanted to offer Piker’s millions of followers “a pathway back into our politics.”

Meanwhile, El-Sayed declined to give a yes-or-no answer when pressed on whether the United States should continue recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, instead saying he believes “in equal rights to peace, dignity and self-determination for Palestinians and Jewish Israelis alike.”

“People ask this question about the right of the state that actually exists to exist, but I never get asked about the right of the state that does not exist to exist,” he continued. “I don’t get asked about whether or not the state that exists has a right to use our tax dollars to do heinous things. I don’t get asked about whether or not the kids in Detroit have a right to their tax dollars, so I just think the premise of the question is built around trying to ask people to agree to the current status quo that we have seen become a deeply unstable, deeply violent equilibrium.”

ABDUL EL-SAYED PROTESTED AGAINST ‘EX-TERRORISTS’ WHO CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY, UNEARTHED REPORT REVEALS

Democratic Senate candidate from Michigan Abdul El-Sayed speaks with reporters during a Student Meet and Greet at the Michigan Theatre in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on August 26, 2026.(JEFF KOWALSKY / AFP via Getty Images)

At another tense point, El-Sayed accused Rogers of trying to turn the race into a “culture war” focused on El-Sayed’s ethnicity and Muslim faith. The accusation came as El-Sayed bypassed a direct answer on whether he would return campaign contributions from individuals affiliated with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Fox News Digital previously reported that El-Sayed’s campaign received more than $115,000 from at least 41 individuals who worked for, previously worked for or held leadership roles with CAIR, which has faced longstanding controversy over alleged ties to Hamas and was named as an unindicted co-conspirator by federal prosecutors in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing case. CAIR has also been designated a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and formally designated or labeled as such in Florida and Texas.

MICHIGAN SENATE HOPEFUL CALLS AIPAC DONATIONS ‘LEGALIZED BRIBERY,’ REMAINS SILENT ON OTHER DONATIONS

El-Sayed defended the organization as a civil rights group and accused Rogers of trying to make the election “about the color of my skin or how I pray.”

The exchange came after El-Sayed repeatedly criticized Rogers over his own campaign funding, accusing the Republican of being beholden to corporations. El-Sayed also questioned Rogers earlier in the event over his attendance at American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) fundraisers while discussing Israel.

Former Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, seen campaigning in Kalamazoo County, Michigan on Oct. 3, 2024, is mounting a second straight Republican campaign for the Senate in the key Great Lakes battleground state.(Mike Rogers campaign)

“I believe in an America that is big enough for all of us: Mike Rogers, Donald Trump, JD Vance,” El-Sayed said Tuesday night. “They believe that some people are more American than others. They think that if you pray a different way, your family comes from a different place, that somehow there’s an asterisk on your American identity.”

Raj, the moderator, followed up, noting that, “JD Vance is the father of the children to an Indian American,” and adding that the “second lady is an Indian woman who came to this country.”

EL-SAYED’S HASAN PIKER PROBLEM FOLLOWS HIM TO DEM CONVENTION AS JEWISH VOTERS BREAK RANKS

“I think there is diversity amongst that party,” he said.

Vice President JD Vance and second lady Usha Vance with their children, including newborn baby Alec.(Second Lady Usha Vance @SLOTUS on X)

El-Sayed also pushed back Tuesday night when he was questioned about his relationship with the DSA and whether he shares significant values with the group.

“I’m not a part of the organization,” El-Sayed responded before defending his view of capitalism and arguing that corporate consolidation, rather than government regulation, poses the greater threat to free markets.

“We don’t live in capitalism. We live in corporatism,” he continued. “You don’t have to be a socialist to believe that people deserve health care. You don’t have to be a socialist to believe that we need good roads.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Michigan Democratic candidate for Senate Abdul El-Sayed and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) greet the crowd after El-Sayed spoke at The People V. The Powerful rally at the Detroit Opera House on July 18, 2026, in Detroit, Michigan.(Sarah Rice/Getty Images)

El-Sayed has repeatedly rejected the socialist label and described himself as a capitalist. The DSA did not endorse his Senate campaign, though prominent democratic socialists have supported, or have been affiliated with his candidacy. CBS News reported last month that El-Sayed said he was not part of DSA but believed the group’s supporters should be welcomed into the Democratic Party’s coalition.

Fox News Digital previously reported that El-Sayed spoke at six events held by DSA chapters between 2017 and 2020, including a 2019 fundraiser where he served as a keynote speaker. Socialist organizers have also described El-Sayed as a “longtime friend of Detroit DSA,” while El-Sayed told the Wall Street Journal in July that he was “not technically or practically DSA.”

The candidates are scheduled to meet Oct. 8 at WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids and again Oct. 21 at WXYZ in Detroit ahead of the November general election.

Alec Schemmel is a Politics Reporter for Fox News Digital who is originally from Charlotte, North Carolina but now resides in the Washington D.C.-Baltimore Metro Area.

Warsh’s words may matter more than the anticipated Fed rate hike

2026-09-16T10:01:45.685Z / Reuters

WASHINGTON, Sept 16 (Reuters) – The Federal Reserve is expected on Wednesday to hike interest rates for the first time since 2023, a decision driven by stubbornly high inflation and a global rise in borrowing costs that will heighten scrutiny of how U.S. central bank chief Kevin Warsh describes the first monetary policy change on ​his watch.

Raising rates will fly in the face of what President Donald Trump envisioned when he named Warsh to lead the Fed earlier this year, saying he expected his appointee to lower them. The president recently threatened to impose new import ‌tariffs if the Fed does not reduce the cost of borrowing.

But lifting the Fed’s policy rate by a quarter of a percentage point to the 3.75%-4.00% range is a step that has become almost inevitable, with inflation seemingly stuck above the central bank’s 2% target, long-term global borrowing costs shifting higher, and Warsh facing doubts about his willingness to go against Trump’s demands.

The pressing question now is how Warsh frames the policy decision, and whether global bond investors see it as a credible response to inflation that has been above target for more than five years and which has moved up since the start of Trump’s current term in the White ​House.

“If they hike and it is unanimous — that is a strong signal,” particularly if accompanying economic projections show policymakers anticipate another rate hike this year and perhaps again in 2027, said Robert Sockin, chief U.S. economist at PGIM. Though Warsh ​says he wants to avoid saying too much about the rate path, Sockin, who sees three U.S. hikes in the cards, said the Fed chief’s speech at the Jackson Hole economic symposium in Wyoming last month included language ⁠that would fit the moment.

“I look at this as a cousin to his guidance at Jackson Hole. That if inflation does not move back down with sufficient speed, we have more work to do,” Sockin said. “What would be challenging is if … he sounds ​dovish and says this is a small calibration. Markets would react poorly to that.”

INFLATION STUCK ABOVE 2% TARGET

The Fed is due to release its monetary policy statement at 2 p.m. EDT (1800 GMT) along with updated quarterly economic projections that will include officials’ estimates of the appropriate year-end ​policy rate. The group was evenly divided in the projections released in June, with nine of 19 feeling rates would need to rise by at least a quarter of a percentage point by the end of 2026, and nine anticipating they could remain where they are or drop a quarter of a percentage point.

Warsh, who dislikes the “dot plot” chart of rate projections, did not submit one of his own.

Since then, support for a rate hike has been building. Three policymakers dissented in favor of a rate increase at the July 28-29 meeting, and several others have said since that they were ready to raise rates unless ​inflation showed signs of falling soon.

It has not.

The Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index, the measure the Fed uses for its 2% target, increased at a 3.7% annual pace in June and July after a steady rise through much of last year. Data due on September ​30 is expected to show little if any change.

Though many economists still feel inflation pressure is likely to ease eventually, oil’s recent rise back above $100 a barrel, Trump’s unveiling of fresh tariffs on Canada, and his threats of more import duties, and continued economic growth amid an AI ‌spending boom have ⁠raised enough risk for Fed officials to consider taking action.

Warsh acknowledged as much in his recent Jackson Hole speech, saying policymakers needed to be confident “that underlying inflation is moving to our objective, clearly and at sufficient speed,” while noting recent data “do not tell me that underlying trends have meaningfully improved.”

BOND MARKET’S PULL

The global bond market is also pulling the Fed towards higher rates. Yields on the 10-year U.S. Treasury, for example, on Tuesday climbed above 5% to a 19-year high.

The across-the-board rise in rates has convinced many economists and investors of a secular trend towards higher borrowing costs independent of inflation, issuer risks or other factors that determine market-based rates. That sort of shift would mean short-term rates would need to rise just for a central bank to maintain the same monetary policy footing. As it is, many Fed ​officials, including Warsh, feel the central bank’s current policy stance ​is not pressuring the economy much.

Global bond market dynamics may ⁠be one reason the Trump administration could tacitly welcome a Fed hike. Upending well-baked-in rate hike expectations could intensify questions about Warsh’s inflation-fighting credibility, leading to even higher long-term rates if investors anticipate rising inflation and demand more compensation for it.

Yields on government bonds like the 10-year Treasury are benchmarks for consumer credit items like home mortgages, which still carry elevated financing costs despite Trump’s pledge to make ​life more affordable, an issue that may figure heavily in his party’s effort to keep control of Congress in the midterm elections in November.

Market pricing currently puts the odds of a hike ​on Wednesday at greater than 90%. ⁠That expectation is not in itself a reason to hike, and Warsh in his Jackson Hole speech cautioned against the “hall of mirrors” that can trap officials if they start adopting the views of financial markets that are, in turn, reflecting what they hear from the Fed.

“There seems to have been a market echo chamber pushing up expectations despite a limited amount of incoming data,” Standard Chartered analysts John Davies and Steve Englander wrote in a note, arguing the Fed should remain on hold this week. “There is a very low cost to waiting.”

But whether a rate hike is characterized ⁠as a one-off, ​a first step with others perhaps to follow depending on incoming data, or some other formulation, Warsh’s post-meeting press conference will be as important as the policy ​decision itself.

“There’s a ton of risk around this meeting and — especially — the press conference,” Robin Brooks, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, wrote on Substack. With investors pricing four rate hikes between now and next June, “Warsh will be asked — over and over — where he stands on that, and I’m not sure there’s a good way for him ​to respond. The big risk is that he comes off as dovish relative to what markets price, in which case we end up with a long-end (bond) selloff even though he’s hiked to anchor those very same yields.”

Reporting by Howard Schneider; Editing by Dan Burns and Paul Simao

Trump’s successful revenge tour and 8 other takeaways from the 2026 primaries

2026-09-16T09:00:29.116Z / CNN

The 2026 primary season featured the rise of democratic socialist and anti-Israel candidates on the left, a host of incumbents losing primaries, President Donald Trump getting revenge but also seeing his hold on his base waver, and a bare-knuckle redistricting push by Republicans that could reverberate for years to come.

All of it set the stage for a midterm election in which Democrats seem to have a chance to flip both the House (which appears likely) and the Senate (which appears possible), thanks to Trump’s historic unpopularity.

But before we turn completely to that, let’s reflect on some takeaways from the past six and a half months of nominating contests, which culminated in the Delaware primary Tuesday night, and what they could tell us about what’s to come.

Here’s what we learned.

Trump’s standing with his base is weaker than ever right now, and it showed.

In total, 10 Trump-backed candidates lost GOP nominating contests for Congress or statewide office – including five candidates for governor and six candidates in the month of August alone.

The 10 losses is equal to the combined total defeats of Trump-backed candidates across the 2018, 2020 and 2024 elections, per a CNN review of Ballotpedia data, though it was slightly less than in 2022 (12). Of course, back in 2022 there was some question about whether Trump could make a political comeback.

Trump’s overall endorsement record is strong, and virtually any candidate would want his backing in a primary. But it was far from a silver bullet. And that reinforces the idea that voters on the right aren’t taking their cues from him as much as they used to.

While some Trump-backed candidates lost, he generally did well when he really went after people in high-profile ways.

He ousted Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky after the congressman spearheaded the push to release the Epstein files and broke with him on several other issues. He knocked off Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of seven Republicans to vote to convict him at his second impeachment trial. He took down 6 of 8 Indiana GOP state senators who killed a redistricting map he really wanted. And he ousted Sen. John Cornyn of Texas in a very high-profile primary runoff.

Self-described democratic socialists are still a small proportion of the candidates Democrats nominated – less than 1%, per a Brookings Institution study. But they’re winning nominations in bigger and bigger races.

After New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson’s wins in 2025, democratic socialists defeated three House incumbents and are on course for their largest congressional contingent ever – possibly in the double-digits.

And while they largely only won nominations in heavily blue districts, they were nominated in a swing congressional district in Michigan and for Senate in Florida. That doesn’t even include Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, who shares some of the movement’s sensibilities but doesn’t call himself a democratic socialist.

Democratic socialists are also expected to win the Washington, DC, mayor’s race and could win in Los Angeles too.

They did come up short in a much-watched primary for Wisconsin governor, where state Assemblywoman Francesca Hong lost after the Democratic establishment fought hard to prevent her nomination – and showed it still had some influence. But the fact that Hong got that close to victory was pretty remarkable, in and of itself.

Despite Republicans lifting socialism up as their big 2026 boogeyman, the results and recent polling suggest Americans aren’t terribly worried about electing the right kinds of democratic socialists.

In fact, recent polls have shown voters are actually more concerned about electing MAGA candidates than ones who identify with socialism. And a New York Times/Siena College poll this week showed just 30% of likely voters said they would prefer not to vote for a democratic socialist.

While there has been lots of focus democratic socialists and El-Sayed possibly costing Democrats important races, he’s very much the exception. By and large, Democrats appear to have recruited and nominated candidates who fit their areas well and appeal to voters personally – including Senate candidates like Josh Turek in Iowa, former Rep. Mary Peltola in Alaska and former Gov. Roy Cooper in North Carolina.

A recent CNN review showed the Democratic Senate nominee was more popular than the Republican in every top race except Michigan.

Future primaries are apparently going to be moving targets, thanks to Republicans’ move to start a redistricting arms race this election cycle.

While we had seen mid-decade redistricting before, Republicans ramped it up in a way we simply haven’t seen in modern history – all to draw just a handful of additional seats that favor their side. That caused Democrats to respond in kind where they could try to offset those GOP gains.

All told, Republicans netted as many as nine seats that are now favorable to them – which could matter in a close battle for the House majority. (If Democrats have a good year, though, they could win a number of those seats.)

The Supreme Court also ruled in a way that makes it easier for Republicans to eliminate majority-Black districts in the South, which launched another wave of redistricting efforts and could significantly reduce Black representation in Congress.

What this likely means is that, absent some kind of agreement between the parties or legislation, the two sides are just going to keep redrawing these maps whenever they can and whenever there is an advantage to be gleaned. That will likely lead to more upheaval and fewer competitive races in the years to come.

The Democratic base has spent the last couple years adopting a sharply critical view of Israel, and that figured significantly in some high-profile 2026 Democratic primaries.

Israel supporters didn’t lose all the races, but the issue emerged as a major one in a number of races, including El-Sayed’s narrow victory over Rep. Haley Stevens, Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan’s win in the Democratic Senate primary, and the primary upsets of Reps. Adriano Espaillat and Dan Goldman of New York and Shri Thanedar of Michigan, among others.

Even in races where the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) helped a victorious candidate, its advertisements tellingly didn’t focus on the Middle East.

Scandals can still sink politicians – if they’re bad enough

Trump has spent years seeing scandals bounce off him like he’s made of Teflon. But the 2026 primary season suggested he’s still unusual in that regard.

On the Democratic side, California governor candidate Eric Swalwell and Maine Senate nominee Graham Platner both dropped out in the face of sexual assault allegations that they denied. Across the aisle, Texas Rep. Tony Gonzales dropped out of his primary runoff amid revelations of an affair with a staffer who died by suicide, and Reps. Andy Ogles of Tennessee and Cory Mills of Florida lost primaries in part thanks to personal baggage.

But Rep. Max Miller of Ohio remains on the ballot, despite ugly allegations from his ex-wife that emerged after he won his primary. And Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton defeated Cornyn in a primary runoff despite his own extensive baggage, including past criminal charges and an impeachment.

All have denied wrongdoing.

No fewer than 13 incumbents lost primaries for reelection to Congress – an unusually high number, historically speaking. They lost due to a variety of reasons, including anti-Israel sentiment, Trump’s revenge tour and districts being redrawn in ways that made it more difficult for incumbents.

But this dynamic also arguably showed up in statewide races, where voters didn’t seem to have much interest in elevating members of Congress. Most of those who sought promotions lost in those primaries, too.

沙特与胡塞冲突持续 美国更新旅游警告吁勿到沙特也门边境

2026年9月16日 19:46 / 联合早报

隶属于沙特支持的也门政府人员星期二（9月15日）在焦夫省（Al-Jawf）与胡塞武装驳火。 （法新社）

美国国务院更新针对沙特阿拉伯的旅行警告，提醒美国公民不要前往沙特与也门接壤的边境，并要求驻沙特的美国政府人员不得前往距离也门边境约32公里以内的地区。

新华社报道，美国务院星期三（9月16日）在旅行警告中说，美国公民应认真重新考虑出行计划，因存在安全风险，美国政府在上述地区向美国公民提供紧急服务的能力有限。

美国务院称，自美国和以色列2月对伊朗发起军事行动以来，伊朗对沙特发起无人机和导弹袭击的威胁持续存在，也门胡塞武装也威胁要再次袭击沙特。

胡塞武装星期一（14日）向沙特哈立德国王空军基地发射数十枚弹道导弹和无人机。沙特主导的多国联军发言人马利基星期二凌晨说，胡塞武装使用弹道导弹和无人机“对沙特多地的民用目标”发动袭击，造成13名平民受伤。

U.S. slaps South Africa with new sanctions due to alleged discrimination against White people

September 16, 2026 7:11 AM EDT / CBS/AP

The Trump administration has announced that it will impose travel bans on officials it claims are responsible for discrimination against White people and other minority groups in South Africa.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday he would revoke U.S. visas or reject visa applications from foreign nationals found to be responsible for, or complicit in, enacting or enforcing laws and policies that allow uncompensated land seizures, race-based discrimination and the incitement of violence against minority ethnic and racial groups in South Africa.

“The United States will not allow such behavior to go unchecked,” Rubio said in a statement. “These actions directly undermine peace, economic stability, and the rule of law, and they are incompatible with the pillars of America’s foreign policy.”

The South African government has strongly rejected U.S. allegations of discrimination against whites, calling the claims made by the administration since President Trump returned to office last year baseless and a result of misinformation.

Rubio didn’t identify any officials who would be targeted with the travel restrictions, though a lobby group for minority White people in South Africa has previously called for the U.S. to sanction officials of the African National Congress party, the party of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and the largest in South Africa’s Parliament.

It’s the latest move by the Trump administration to sanction South Africa over its claims that white people, and especially the Afrikaner group, are being discriminated against by their Black-led government. Afrikaners are descended from mainly Dutch and French colonial settlers who first came to South Africa in the 17th century. They were at the heart of South Africa’s previous apartheid system of racial segregation.

There are approximately 4.5 million White people in South Africa’s population of 62 million, which also includes White people with British or other heritage.

The U.S. has cited a contentious South African law that allows the expropriation of unused private land without compensation in some circumstances, affirmative action policies that advance opportunities for Black people and others, and a small number of violent crimes against White farmers as evidence of a larger anti-White stance in South Africa.

The Trump administration has also strongly criticized South Africa’s move to accuse U.S. ally Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza in a highly emotive case in the United Nations’ top court. Israel vehemently denies that allegation.

The U.S. has enforced a series of other sanctions against South Africa during Mr. Trump’s second term for purported anti-White and anti-American policies. They include barring South African officials from meetings of the Group of 20 economic bloc this year in the U.S., and phasing out aid for South Africa’s HIV treatment program.

The U.S. has also launched a refugee program for Afrikaners and other White people, claiming baselessly that they are victims of a humanitarian emergency in South Africa.

The State Department argued that Afrikaners faced “escalating hostility,” including critical statements by politicians and a December raid by South African authorities on a U.S. refugee processing center. At the time, South African officials said they had arrested Kenyans who were working at the center illegally, but the U.S. condemned the raid.

The U.S. says the sanctions are because South Africa hasn’t changed its policies.

“This visa restriction policy is only the first step in a series of escalatory measures that will show America’s firm resolve in this matter,” the official U.S. Ambassador to South Africa account posted on X on Wednesday, referring to Rubio’s visa announcement.

Rubio said on social media that “As Mr. Trump has made clear, the South African people are being failed by a government that is destroying its economy through an obsessive pursuit of racial grievance against the Afrikaner minority.”