Trump doubles down on expanding deportations in America’s biggest cities
Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for Roc Nation
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Monday doubled down on his goal to conduct mass deportations in some of the country’s biggest cities, specifically those run by Democrats.
As he met with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney at the G7 summit in Alberta on Monday, Trump said Immigration and Customs Enforcement should turn its attention to New York and Chicago in addition to Los Angeles.
“I want them to focus on the cities because the cities are where you really have what’s called ‘sanctuary cities,'” Trump told reporters. “And that’s where the people are.”
The comments came after Trump’s lengthy social media post on Sunday in which said he was ordering ICE to do “all in their power” to oversee the largest mass deportation program in history.
“In order to achieve this, we must expand efforts to detain and deport Illegal Aliens in America’s largest Cities,” Trump wrote.
The president said those cities are “the core of the Democrat Power Center” and accused Democrats of using illegal immigration to influence elections — despite the fact that noncitizens can’t vote in federal or state elections and instances where it occurs are rare. He also claimed without evidence that illegal immigrants were being used to “grow the Welfare State.”
“To ICE, FBI, DEA, ATF, the Patriots at Pentagon and the State Department, you have my unwavering support. Now go, GET THE JOB DONE!” Trump wrote in the post.
Trump’s determination on deportations follows protests in LA and in other areas around the country last week to his administration’s immigration crackdown. This past Saturday, immigration was one focus of nationwide “No Kings Day” demonstrations against Trump and his policies that drew thousands of people.
Amid the pushback, Trump last week shifted his stance on undocumented immigrants who work in the farming and hospitality industries.
Trump acknowledged on social media that his “aggressive policy” was “taking very good, long time workers away.” The Department of Homeland Security later confirmed they received new guidance to pause most raids on farms, restaurants and hotels.
“Our farmers are being hurt badly, they have good workers that have worked for them for 20 years. They are not citizens, but turned out to be great. We will do something about that,” Trump said at a White House event last week.
Such comments undercut what he and his top officials have said would be a focus on the “worst of the worst” violent or criminal offenders in their deportation efforts.
ABC News’ Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump has called for a “major investigation” into several celebrity endorsements former Vice President Kamala Harris received during the 2024 presidential campaign, suggesting without evidence that some of the celebrities were illegally paid for their endorsements.
Some of the celebrities have publicly denied denying being paid any fee at all, and experts say there’s no FEC law barring campaign payments for endorsements.
Among the celebrities the president suggests were illegally paid for their endorsements are Oprah Winfrey, Bruce Springsteen and Beyonce, each of whom appeared at Harris campaign events last year.
“Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did, under the guise of paying for entertainment,” Trump wrote in a pair of social media posts Monday.
The Harris campaign paid production companies founded by Winfrey, Springsteen and Beyonce for services provided during and after the 2024 election — but Winfrey and Beyonce’s mother, who runs her production company, both said the payments were for production costs associated with the events they participated in.
Campaign law experts told ABC News that the Federal Election Commission has no regulations against federal campaigns paying celebrities or influencers for endorsements, nor would they be considered illegal contributions as Trump suggested — as long as those payments are properly disclosed. The Federal Trade Commission oversees disclosure obligations for paid endorsement, the experts said.
Campaign finance disclosures show the Harris campaign paid Winfrey’s company, Harpo Productions, a total of $1 million for “event production” on Oct. 15, 2024, roughly a month after Winfrey interviewed Harris at a “Unite for America” campaign event in Detroit in September.
“I did not take any personal fee. However, the people who worked on that production needed to be paid and were. End of story,” Winfrey said in a social media video in response to Trump’s accusation.
The Harris campaign paid Beyonce’s company, Parkwood Production Media LLC, $165,000 on Nov. 19, 2024, weeks after Beyonce took the stage at a Harris campaign rally in Houston and publicly endorsed Harris, according to campaign records.
Beyonce’s mother Tina Knowles, in a social media video, said the accusation that her daughter was paid for her endorsement is a “lie,” adding that Beyonce also paid for the flights for herself and her team to and from the event.
The Harris campaign paid Springsteen’s production company, Thrill Hill Productions, Inc., roughly $75,000 for “travel and event production” on Nov. 19, 2024, roughly a month after he performed at a Harris campaign rally in Georgia, records show. Springsteen has not publicly addressed the campaign’s payment to his company.
Last year as unfounded claims about the Harris campaign’s payments for celebrity endorsements spread, senior campaign adviser Adrienne Elrod told Deadline, “We do not pay. We have never paid any artist and performer. We have never paid a fee to that person.”
Noting that FEC rules require campaigns to pay fair market value for the ancillary costs of holding events, Elrod told Deadline the campaign has paid “for any ancillary costs for that performance” and that “there are laws that have to be followed that we have followed religiously on this campaign.”
Among the celebrities who have appeared and performed at Trump’s campaign events over the years, ABC News has found no records of the Trump campaign or Trump’s other entities paying them or their companies.
Country singer Lee Greenwood, whose song “God Bless the USA” is frequently featured at Trump rallies and who has performed at Trump campaign events himself, stated on social media in November that he had not been compensated in “any form” by the Trump campaign or the Trump Organization for his campaign appearances, saying he’s “happy to have stood by” Trump.
(WASHINGTON) — Democratic lawmakers sent a series of letters early Thursday morning to nine separate law firms that have struck agreements this spring with the Trump administration, questioning whether the deals for pro bono work in exchange for the reversal of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump or to avoid being targeted in future missives may violate federal bribery, extortion, honest services fraud or racketeering laws.
In correspondence, shared exclusively with ABC News, California Democratic Rep. Dave Min and Maryland Democratic Rep. April Delaney are leading 15 Democratic colleagues in demanding details of the arrangements from the leadership of some of the country’s most elite law firms from Washington to New York.
The firms included in the letter are: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Latham & Watkins LLP, Allen Overy Shearman Sterling LLP, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, and Milbank LLP.
Throughout the spring, Trump announced in posts on his social media platform, fresh agreements with the firms — totaling nearly $1 billion in pro-bono work. Trump’s posts also show that firms agreed to strike Diversity, Equity and Inclusion considerations from their hiring practices — committing to “Merit-Based Hiring, Promotion, and Retention” while also pledging that they would not deny representation to clients based on political views.
The agreements worry the Democratic lawmakers, who believe the deals “capitulate to clear abuse of the law by the Trump administration.”
On April 10, during a Cabinet meeting, Trump floated the idea that the pro-bono commitments could be used to “help” the United States with trade negotiations as he imposes tariffs across the globe.
“So I think we’re going to and trying to use these, these very prestigious firms to help us out with the trade because, you know, we have a lot of countries, but we want to make deals that are proper for the United States,” Trump told reporters.
“By entering into an agreement that appears to be in response to the threat of illegal economic coercion against your firm from the Trump administration, your firm is not simply agreeing to provide certain pro bono services or end certain personnel hiring and retention practices,” the lawmakers caution in their letter. “Agreements of this kind also signal acquiescence to an abuse of federal power, raising serious questions about how or whether your firm would represent clients or take on matters that might be seen as antagonistic to President Trump or his agenda.”
On April 11, the president announced that Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft — a famed Wall Street powerhouse — is among the firms that struck a deal, committing $100 million dollars in pro-bono services itself. Cadwalader is the former law firm of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who served as the president’s former criminal defense attorney in 2024 before joining the current administration.
“Law firms are just saying: ‘Where do I sign? Where do I sign?'” Trump said March 26. “Nobody can believe it.”
“We do not wish to prematurely judge or assess guilt,” the letter states. “Our aim however, is to gather comprehensive information with respect to the formation and implementation of the…agreement and resulting legal and ethical quandaries.”
The letters request details from each firm on its “motivations for entering into this agreement, how was an agreement reached, and what specific terms or promises were made.” The lawmakers also inquire whether the deals comply with state bar ethics requirements, contending that the agreements may raise issues with state bar professional codes of conduct rules for lawyers.
“We are sympathetic to the circumstances in which your firm finds itself, with the Administration using coercive and illegal measures to target certain law firms and threaten their ability to represent and retain their clients,” the letter states, requesting a response from each firm by May 8.
ABC News’ Michelle Stoddart & Katherine Faulders contributed to this report
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s plan to accept a luxury jet donated by the Qatari government to use as Air Force One raises significant security concerns, intelligence experts and government officials say, as President Donald Trump said it would be “stupid” not to accept a free plane.
Trump on Monday defended the administration’s plans to receive a luxury jet donated by the Qatari government during remarks at the White House, calling the donation a “very nice gesture.”
“I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person and say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’ But it was, I thought it was a great gesture,” he said.
Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, slammed the move, arguing that using the plane as Air Force One would “pose immense counterintelligence risks by granting a foreign nation potential access to sensitive systems and communications.”
“This reckless disregard for national security and diplomatic propriety signals a dangerous willingness to barter American interests for personal gain,” Reed said in a statement Monday. “It is an affront to the office of the presidency and a betrayal of the trust placed in any U.S. leader to safeguard the nation’s sovereignty.”
Air Force One a ‘high-value target’
The primary aircraft used in the current Air Force One fleet includes two aging Boeing 747-200 jumbo jets that have been operational since 1990. Despite flying for more than 35 years, the current pair of Air Force One jets are considered some of the safest and secure aircraft in the world.
Many of the security features on the plane remain classified. It has anti-missile defenses or countermeasure systems to protect against surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, and the communication devices can also withstand the pulse of a nuclear blast. It is also outfitted with sophisticated communications capability to allow the president to securely run the country from the plane and protect him from cyberattacks.
“It’s designed to transport the president in a safe way and be able to withstand physical attacks, but to also ensure that the president maintains communication with military, his cabinet, other government leaders in a safe and secure manner,” said John Cohen, an ABC News contributor and former acting Homeland Security official. “Any building or vehicle or airplane that the president is located is a high-value target for foreign intelligence services who want to gather as much information about the president.”
Air Force One can also remain in the air for several days due to its ability to refuel in midair. The plane also houses a small medical facility where doctors could perform surgery if needed.
All of these systems would likely need to be installed on the Boeing 747-8 that Trump would receive as a gift from Qatar.
A jet donated by Qatar would also be a “counterintelligence nightmare,” ABC News contributor Darrell Blocker, a former CIA field operative, said.
“If you go back to almost anything that is given by a foreign government, there are regulations and restrictions and guidelines for ensuring that they’re not being bugged, and a plane would be an absolute nightmare to be able to confirm that it’s not,” Blocker told ABC News Live on Monday. “From an intelligence perspective, it’s not the brightest move.”
Blocker cited that when the U.S. embassy was being built in Moscow in the 1980s, the U.S. had to “take it down to its bare bones” because the Russians “put bugs through every room, every facility.”
“I think the people of Troy, when they accepted that horse, regretted it after the fact also,” he said.
The complexity and time needed to retrofit and inspect the plane raise questions on cost and a timeline.
“Even under the best of circumstances, it’s going to take a significant effort for the military to be satisfied that the aircraft is constructed safely, that it’s not compromised from the standpoint of intelligence collection capabilities being planted on it, and that it is built in a way that it will be able to assimilate the sensitive communications and countermeasure capabilities that are that are present on any plane that’s Air Force One,” Cohen said. “To be done right, it’s not going to happen quickly.”
“In order to adequately ensure that this airplane — which was operated by a foreign government that happens to have a relationship with Iran and China and Russia — in order to ensure that that plane has not had collection capabilities introduced into it when it was constructed, they’re gonna have to basically tear it down to the airframe,” he added.
White House working on ‘legal details’
When asked about the possible transfer of the Qatari-owned Boeing 747 to the Department of Defense, a DOD official said in a statement that they will “work with the White House (and other Interagency departments) to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered for an aircraft used to transport the President of the United States.”
“We have no additional information to provide at this time,” the official added.
The U.S. Air Force referred questions on the matter to the White House.
“The plane will be donated to the Department of Defense, and as with any foreign gift given to the United States government, all proper safety and security protocols will be followed,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told ABC News.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he would not comment on Trump preparing to receive the jet from Qatar because he hasn’t seen the “details.”
The White House is working on the “legal details” of the Qatari government’s donation to the Defense Department, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday in an appearance on Fox News.
“But, of course, any donation to this government is always done in full compliance with the law. And we commit ourselves to the utmost transparency and we will continue to do that,” Leavitt added.
Trump said during remarks at the White House on Monday that he doesn’t plan to use the plane after he leaves office. Pressed by ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott on what he would say to people who view the luxury plane as a personal gift to him, Trump said it was not a gift to him but “a gift to the Department of Defense.”
Sources familiar with the proposed arrangement told ABC News that the plane would be a gift that is to be available for use by Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which time ownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation.
If a private contractor were able to complete the modifications needed to the donated plane before the end of Trump’s presidency, many of the systems installed would then need to be removed should the Trump presidential library foundation take possession of the plane upon Trump leaving office due to the sensitive nature of the technology.
Ultimately, Cohen said he suspects that members of the intelligence community and the military will assess the risk to national security and “the level of effort to minimize the risk to national security.”
“If they’re doing their job, the president’s national security team will explain to him the level of risk that exists if a foreign intelligence service were able to introduce collection capabilities that could intercept face-to-face communications on the plane, electronic communications coming from the plane,” Cohen said. “They should also be explaining to him the level of effort that it will involve in order for that risk to be mitigated. And with that information, he can then make an informed decision on whether and under what conditions to accept the airplane.”
