Trump and Xi hold long-awaited call, Chinese state media reports
Florence Lo-Pool/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping on the phone Thursday amid a trade war between the two countries — and during the call, Trump said Xi invited him to visit China.
In a social media post, Trump said the leaders discussed “some of the intricacies of our recently made, and agreed to, Trade Deal.” Trump said the call lasted about one and a half hours, and the leaders exclusively talked trade.
Trump added that it “resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries.”
He added that U.S. and Chinese negotiating teams “will be meeting shortly at a location to be determined.”
The president said that Xi invited him to visit China and Trump extended an invitation for Xi to visit the U.S.
The call happened at Trump’s request, Chinese State News Agency Xinhua reported.
Their conversation is a significant development amid the trade war between the U.S. and China, the world’s two largest economies.
On Wednesday, Trump wrote on his conservative social media platform: “I like President XI of China, always have, and always will, but he is VERY TOUGH, AND EXTREMELY HARD TO MAKE A DEAL WITH!!!”
This is the first confirmed time the leaders have spoken since Trump returned to the White House in January. Trump has alluded to a previous call with Xi, but he nor the White House have ever confirmed if that took place since he took office in January.
Their conversation comes after Trump accused China of violating a deal negotiated by top officials in Geneva last month to roll back high tariff rates for 90 days. The agreement saw the U.S. drop the rate on Chinese goods coming to the U.S. from over 145% to 30%. China lowered its levy on U.S. goods from 125% to 10%.
“So much for being Mr. NICE GUY!” he wrote on his conservative social media platform.
Beijing pushed back on Monday, saying it “firmly rejects unreasonable accusations” and that it was the U.S. that “unilaterally provoked new economic and trade frictions.”
Hassett said “the two of them will talk about the Geneva agreement, which we’re all very favorably inclined towards, thinking this is a huge step forward. But then what happened is that people had to — in China — had to give us licenses for things, and the licenses, we believe, have been slow rolled is something that the presidents want to talk about this week.”
Hassett also said that U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer’s team and their counterparts in China are “talking every day trying to move the ball forward on this matter.”
Greer said on CNBC last week that China was slow-walking approval of export licenses for rare earth materials, which was also a part of the Geneva agreement.
Meanwhile, Chinese leaders said recently that they have their own concerns about U.S. restrictions on tech exports and the Trump administration’s attempt to revoke Chinese student visas.
(WASHINGTON) — Gathered on the Senate floor after a 26-hour, record-breaking vote-a-rama series, senators voted hastily on two final Republican-led amendments before getting to the main event: final passage of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”
Vice President JD Vance was presiding over the chamber after breaking a tie on a previously considered wraparound amendment to the bill. It was assumed that he would soon break another tie on the bill’s final passage, with a number of Republican holdouts remaining to make the vote math still uncertain.
It was just a matter of who would be the third “no” vote Republicans could afford to lose and still pass the bill. Sens. Thom Tillis and Rand Paul had already committed to voting it down.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski was widely thought to be the last opponent, with a temporary SNAP carveout for her state of Alaska hanging in the balance down until the last minute.
When the final vote started, Murkowski was seated in the second row near the middle of the chamber. Next to her was Mississippi GOP Sen. Roger Wicker and next to him was another moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who eventually proved to be the third and final GOP “no” vote.
Collins, dressed in a hot-pink pantsuit, votes near the top of the alphabet. But she left near the beginning of the vote’s final passage to go to the cloakroom. She missed her chance to vote when her name was called, coming out shortly after and walking directly to Murkowski. Collins put her arm around Murkowski, and then went up to the clerk and put her thumb down: no. She then left the chamber.
Focus was then squarely on Murkowski, whose vote could have tanked the entire bill. But former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell came up to sit next to her. The two talked quietly and then shook hands. When her name was called, Murkowski quietly said “Aye.”
Senators had added additional sweeteners for her state, including a provision aimed at insulating Alaska from some of the bill’s harshest impacts on SNAP.
She then started to leave the chamber, shaking hands with GOP Sens. Jerry Moran of Kansas and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana before exiting.
Afterward, Murkowski told ABC News’ she “struggled mightily with the [bill’s] impact on the most vulnerable in this country.”
“I needed help, and I worked to get that every single day. And did I get everything that I wanted? Absolutely not,” she added.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune didn’t speak to either woman after their votes. He was seated in his chair in the front of the chamber.
Collins later explained her vote in a statement: “My vote against this bill stems primarily from the harmful impact it will have on Medicaid, affecting low-income families and rural health care providers like our hospitals and nursing homes.”
She also said she had problems with cuts to energy tax credits and that the rural hospital relief fund that was created to try to get Republican holdouts to vote for the bill was insufficient.
ABC News’ John Parkinson and Lauren Peller contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — The deadly mid-air collision at Reagan Airport in January was years in the making, the operations manager of the DCA air traffic control tower on the night of the accident told the National Transportation Safety Board on Friday.
“I don’t think this accident occurred that night,” Clark Allen, the operations manager, said at the investigative hearing. “I think it happened years before we’ve talked about, you know, resources, whether they were available or unavailable at certain time frames, folks being listened to or not being listened to at certain times. This was not that evening. It was a combination over many years that I think that built up to that evening.”
The NTSB concluded three days of hearings late Friday, during which the agency’s investigators questioned officials from the Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Army, American Airlines regional subsidiary PSA Airlines and other parties over January’s mid-air collision between an American Airlines regional jet and an Army Black Hawk helicopter over Washington, D.C., that killed 67 people.
It was the nation’s first major commercial airline crash since 2009.
During the hearings, the NTSB was told that the Army helicopter never heard the command from the air traffic controller to “pass behind the CRJ” as the transmission was stepped on. It was also revealed that the plane’s pilots were not warned by the controller that there was a helicopter nearby or cleared to fly near the helicopter.
NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy also called out the FAA for not sharing a full list of who was working in the control tower the night of the crash until July 6, months after the accident.
Pilots likely didn’t know how high they were flying The NTSB’s investigation found discrepancies in the altitude data shown on radio and barometric altimeters on Army helicopters after conducting test flights following January’s accident.
It is likely that the helicopter crew did not know their true altitude due to notoriously faulty altimeters inside this series of Black Hawks, according to the investigation. At their closest points, helicopters and planes flew within 75 feet of each other near DCA, an astonishingly close number. During the hearings, the NTSB was told Army Black Hawks can often have wrong readings and a margin of error of +-200 feet.
“I am concerned there is a possibility that what the crew saw was very different than what the true altitude was. We did testing in May that shows concerns with the altimeters, the barometric altimeters on the 60 Lima. So we are concerned, and it’s something we have to continue to investigate how significant is 100 feet in this circumstance,” Homendy told reporters on Wednesday.
Army officials told the NTSB investigators that they plan to inform other military aviation officials of the altitude discrepancy by September, but NTSB board member Todd Inman criticized this for a lack of urgency.
The Army officials said they are also addressing it by mentioning it in the public testimony.
“I hope every Army aviator is not having to watch the NTSB.gov livestream to figure out if there’s a discrepancy in their altitudes and planes that are flying around,” Inman said.
Disconnect between DCA controllers and FAA leadership NTSB investigators and board members noted that there seems to be a “disconnect” between the information they are getting from the FAA officials versus what the employees have shared with them during the interviews.
“What we’re trying to understand is where the disconnect is because what we have is for example, reports from controllers today that are saying there were 10-15 loss of separation events since the accident,” Homendy said.
Tension in the tower Chair Homendy noted air traffic controllers crying during interviews with investigators following the crash, adding the controller whose voice is heard talking to the doomed aircraft has not returned to work. Tensions have been so high in the tower following the crash, a shouting match turned into a fist fight this spring, ending with a controller being arrested.
Some employees say they feared getting transferred or fired if concerns were brought up to their superiors.
“I hundred percent agree with you. There definitely seems to be some barrier in communication where the people that impacts it the most are not hearing the things that the FAA is moving forward on and that needs to be addressed. I agree,” said Franklin McIntosh, acting chief operating officer of the Air Traffic Organization — the operation arm of the FAA.
“I wholeheartedly agree and I will commit to you and everyone on the board in the panel that I will start working this immediately to make sure whatever those barriers are occurring, that it stops,” McIntosh said. “Clearly someone in the facility doesn’t feel like they’re getting the help that they should be getting and quite honestly if that word’s not getting down, then we need to do a better job in breaking through whatever that barrier is.”
The FAA has pushed back on claims of employees being removed or transferred out of the tower as a result of the collision.
“So we didn’t remove anybody as a result of an accident,” said Nick Fuller, acting deputy chief operating officer with the Air Traffic Organization.
Homendy challenged that assertion saying, “I think many would disagree, since it was done pretty immediately. Also the NTSB had to weigh in several times to get people help in the tower.”
NTSB investigators also pressed FAA officials over controllers who manage DCA airspace feeling pressured to “make it work” due to the large volume of aircraft in the airspace near the airport.
“We have many non-standard tools that we use in order to be able to bring a significant amount of airplanes into DCA, ” said Bryan Lehman, air traffic manager at the Potomac Terminal Radar Approach Control, which manages air traffic control in the region, while also adding that they do take “pride in it,” but that it gets too much after a certain point.
Lehman also testified at the hearing that controllers sent a memo to their superiors in 2023 requesting a lower arrival rate for airplanes, but the concerns were dismissed and Congress approved more flights for DCA.
ADSB policy for Army Despite calls from lawmakers and the NTSB for mandated Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast (ADSB) — technology that makes the aircraft more visible to the tower, other aircraft and the public — on all aircraft, including military aircraft, it remains a point of hesitation for the Army.
All aircraft flying over 18,000 feet are required to have ADSB but certain aircraft, including military aircraft, are exempt from transmitting ADSB location when flying for security reasons.
“I’m pretty sure most people are aware of the fact that it’s inherently open source,” Army Lt. Col. Paul Flanigen told the hearing panel on Friday. “It has some spoofing vulnerabilities which make it non-conducive for those sensitive missions, which not just the army, but all of DOD has to operate on.”
As previously reported by ABC News, the helicopter involved in the accident was not transmitting ADSB out, meaning it wasn’t transmitting its location for other aircraft nearby to see where it was.
A Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) — which detects other aircraft in close proximity — was also not installed in the helicopter, according to the investigation.
The NTSB made a recommendation nearly two decades ago asking the FAA to require ADSB on all aircraft but it was not implemented. The point was brought up again during the hearings.
“Does the FAA right now support requiring any newly manufactured aircraft registered in the U.S. be equipped with ADSB in?” Homendy asked.
McIntosh said yes and showed support towards requiring aircraft to be equipped with ADSB out as well.
Experts have said it’s more effective when an aircraft is equipped with both ADSB in and out so they can transmit their location and also receive the location of other aircraft in its near proximity.
A bill in Congress titled the “Rotor Act” was introduced earlier this week by Sen. Ted Cruz, which would require all aircraft, including military aircraft, to transmit ADSB location when flying. Notably, the newly appointed FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy were present at the news conference and showed their support towards the legislation.
The NTSB’s investigation into the cause of the accident continues and a final report is expected by January 2026.
“We do this to improve safety certainly but we all do this with each of you in mind and your loved ones that were lost tragically with you in mind not just on the CRJ but also PAT 25 so we will continue on and hope to complete this investigation within a year,” Homendy said in her closing remarks on Friday.
(NEW YORK) — The redistricting battle gripping Texas has put a spotlight on the ongoing debate over gerrymandering and its long-term effects on the electorate.
Sam Wang, the founding director of the Electoral Innovation Lab and the creator of the Gerrymandering Project , a research lab focused on creating the most fair district maps, told ABC News that state leaders from both sides of the aisle have changed election boundaries to make it stacked with constituents who vote in their favor.
In the last 20 years, with access to advanced computer algorithms, those gerrymandering attempts have become more egregious as whole counties have been divided up with pinpoint precision, resulting in districts with areas with outlandish shapes, he said.
“Gerrymander is partisanship maximized above all of the other things,” Wang said.
The practice was first identified and coined in 1812 when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that redrew the state’s congressional maps to benefit the Democratic-Republican party. Maps are typically redrawn at the beginning of each decade to reflect changes in the population from the latest census.
Kareem Crayton, the vice president of the Washington D.C. office of the Brennan Center for Justice, who has spent years researching redistricting, told ABC News the redistricting campaigns since the 2000s have led to a systemic cycle of gerrymandering, especially in the South.
“States like Florida and Texas have the worst examples of gerrymandering,” he said.
But Crayton also pointed out that states with Democratic majorities, like Illinois, have responded with their own maps that also skew districts in their favor, leading to an endless cycle.
“All of these states are looking around at each other like ‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ thinking who’s going to fire first,” he said, referring to the Western film. “There is no sheriff in town saying this is not helping everyone.”
While Republican and Democratic leaders in those states have contended they are redrawing their maps to adequately reflect their communities, Wang said the math and geography aren’t backing their arguments.
Wang’s lab created a mathematical algorithm that creates district maps using key demographic factors. Racial demographics from the Census, environmental and geographic information from local data and other public sources are used to create district maps that remove political bias. Those maps are then compared to the district maps currently in place.
“That tells us what someone who didn’t care about political parties would do,” he explained. “We have harnessed the power of computer simulation to see what would be neutral.”
Texas is one of the 15 states in the map that earned an F grade based on the Gerrymander Project’s formula.
Although the state legislature and congressional delegation are led by a Republican majority, Texas’s current districting map is divided in a way that gives the GOP an advantage, according to the project. The analysis shows that the redistricting negates a challenging vote.
Travis County, for example, includes the city of Austin, which has leaned Democratic, but the county includes five congressional districts around it. By not including Austin in the suburban areas, the congressional district will lean Republican, according to the analysis.
The Gerrymander Project’s analysis found that the county splits in Texas, which is the number of districts within a single county, are higher than the average split per state, based on its analysis.
For example, more dense Dallas County is home to five congressional districts, and two of the districts’ boundaries extend into the next county.
Such division leads to confusion among voters as to what their district is, according to Crayton.
Crayton said that such county splits have led to more examples of elected officials running unopposed.
“If you’re a candidate from an opposing party, you’re going to have an uphill battle trying to run in a district where the majority of the voters are registered to the majority,” he said.
“We’ve seen it happen all of the time where a Democrat or Republican simply won’t put the time and effort to run because the gerrymandered district puts the odds against them,” Crayton said.
Although the majority of the states that got the project’s F grade are in the South and show more of a Republican advantage, the experts warned that blue states in other parts of the country have used gerrymandering as well.
Illinois, which is one of the Midwest states with an F grade, is the prime example, they said.
Its current map, which was adopted in 2021, contains non-compact districts, which leads to unequal voter density per area, and more county splits than the average, according to the Gerrymander Project.
One egregious example is the state’s 13th congressional district, which covers a nearly 2,300 square mile boundary that extends from its southern point near the border with Missouri to Springfield, right in the center of the state, and then east to the city of Champaign.
The boundaries keep a huge concentration of Democratic leaning voters, according to the Gerrymander Project.
Wang noted that the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision that ruled gerrymandering for party advantage cannot be challenged in federal court has removed key guardrails for preventing states from taking part in severe party redistricting.
The case involved gerrymandering allegations in North Carolina, and while the court’s majority ruled that the practice may be “incompatible with democratic principles,” federal courts had no jurisdiction in reviewing those cases.
Wang said that most states have taken gerrymandering to their limit and made it extremely hard for state legislatures to revert their boundaries to more fair areas.
“The lemon has been squeezed dry,” he said.
However, Wang noted that gerrymandering cases have prompted the public to speak out and take action to turn the tide and rein in gerrymandering in some key states.
Virginia, for example, used a special master in 2022 to draw up its current maps following a court case brought by the state’s constituents and some local elected officials.
The court ordered the special master to create district maps to adhere to federal requirements of population equality, the Voting Rights Act mandates, state constitution and statutes in its districting process.
As a result of its changes, the state, which has a slight Democratic majority in its state legislature, has no partisan competitiveness in its congressional districts, according to the Gerrymander Project, which awarded Virigina an A rating.
The district’s geography is “Fairly compact” and has the national average number of county splits, according to the project’s analysis.
Wang said ballot initiatives that removed the legislature from the districting process have risen in popularity in many states and have made a huge difference.
Arizona, which also has an A rating by the project, has been using an independent redistricting commission after voters passed a ballot initiative in 2000 that changed state regulations.
The state, which has a Republican majority in its state legislature, does not have a partisan advantage in its state districts, according to the Gerrymandering Project. Its districts are seen as “fairly compact” and are the average number of county splits, according to the analysis.
Crayton and Wang said the state-run solutions to redistricting are a good step forward, but ultimately, it is going to take Congressional legislation to end partisan influence in these maps.
Wang said that public opinion has consistently shown that constituents seek fair maps regardless of their political affiliations.
“If Congress were to really pursue it, it could be bipartisan and get a lot of support,” he said of legislation that prohibited gerrymandering tactics. “And we’ve seen it work.”
