The day's top stories — narrated.
Daily curated news briefing covering politics, world events, business, and the stories shaping the week. Read aloud by the Storyflo persona desk.
Daily News Brief · August 16th
Follow Jessica wherever you listen
Today's curated set
Storyflo's agent monitors thousands of partner publishers and promotes stories into the trending feed when they get multiple sends or operator curation.
Kennedy Center board votes to put Trump's name back on building
The Kennedy Center board has voted to put President Donald Trump's name back on the building, two months after a judge ordered its removal. The board members, many of whom are Trump allies, voted to add "Restored and Renovated By President Donald J. Trump" to the formal name. This move comes despite a federal judge ruling that the president's name was added unlawfully and must be removed. The Trump administration had argued that changing the centre's name could create confusion if the decision were later overturned. However, the judge ordered the removal of the president's name, and it was taken down last month. The board also voted to proceed with a two-year closure for proposed renovations, which was earlier blocked by a federal judge. A Democratic Congresswoman, Joyce Beatty, who sits on the board, expressed her opposition to the decision. She stated that it's a transparent effort to circumvent the court's ruling and flies in the face of the statutes that Congress passed. White House spokesperson Liz Huston praised the decision, saying it's a testament to President Trump's bold leadership. The case stems from a broader legal dispute over the renaming of the cultural institution, which US law designates as a memorial to President John F Kennedy. The US president announced the addition of his name to the institution last year, and the dispute has been ongoing since then.
Kennedy Center Board Votes to Put Trump's Name Back on the Building, Testing Judge's Order
The Kennedy Center’s board met on Tuesday and voted to restore the “Donald J. Trump” plaque on the building’s façade, a move that directly challenges a federal judge’s earlier order to keep the name off the venue. The decision came after a narrow 13‑to‑5 vote, with several board members saying the removal had become a political symbol rather than a cultural one. The judge’s order, issued last month, stemmed from a lawsuit filed by a coalition of arts groups who argued that the plaque violated the center’s non‑partisan mission and federal funding rules. That ruling required the plaque’s removal by the end of June, but the board’s vote now puts the issue back in the courts. Legal experts note that the board’s action doesn’t automatically reinstate the plaque; a new hearing will be needed to determine whether the judge’s injunction still applies. If the case goes to trial, the center could face another injunction or be forced to keep the name off until a final decision is reached. Meanwhile, staff and patrons are watching closely, aware that the outcome could set a precedent for how public arts institutions handle donor recognition when political controversy arises. The board said it will seek a temporary stay while the legal process unfolds.
Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn $83.3 million E. Jean Carroll case
Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn $83. Jean Carroll case Two weeks after losing a bid to avoid paying the writer E.
Fed holds interest rates steady, but 3 officials vote for hike
Federal Reserve holds interest rates steady, but 3 officials vote for hike The Federal Reserve said on Wednesday that it is leaving its benchmark interest rate unchanged, a sign policymakers expect in…
Senate confirms Jay Clayton as new director of intelligence
So the Senate just confirmed Jay Clayton as the new director of national intelligence, with a 51-47 vote along party lines. Clayton, who's currently the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, will be taking over an agency that's been cut down significantly in recent weeks and months. His predecessors had made some big cuts to the workforce, and it's not entirely clear how many people are left or what the plan is going forward. From what I've seen, Clayton has a pretty good reputation, and some lawmakers think he's a solid choice for the job. But others, like Senator Mark Warner, are a bit more skeptical - they're worried that Clayton might not be willing to stand up to the White House if they try to use the intelligence agencies for political gain. The acting intelligence chief, Bill Pulte, just announced another round of job cuts, which he says will reduce the staff by about 30%. That's a pretty big deal, and it's not entirely clear what the rationale is behind these cuts. Some lawmakers are saying that Pulte hasn't been very transparent about what's going on, and they're getting a bit frustrated. It's also worth noting that Clayton's confirmation hearing was a bit of a thing - he refused to say who won the 2020 election, which raised some eyebrows. And some Democrats are worried that he might not be willing to provide accurate information to the White House if it doesn't align with their views. Overall, it seems like there's a lot of uncertainty and upheaval in the intelligence community right now, and it's not entirely clear what the future holds. But for now, at least, Jay Clayton is the new director of national intelligence, and we'll just have to wait and see how things play out.
Anthony Fauci invokes Fifth Amendment right not to testify at Covid hearing
Dr. Anthony Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify at a contentious Senate hearing on Covid, citing concerns that Republicans might use his testimony to prosecute him for perjury. The hearing, led by Senator Rand Paul, was marked by partisan bickering and criticism of Fauci's handling of the pandemic. Fauci's lawyer, David Schertler, said the doctor has a valid Fifth Amendment privilege and the right to assert it. Senator Paul threatened to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress and vowed to take action against him for not answering questions. The hearing ended with no new revelations about the origins of Covid or the government response to the pandemic. Fauci's decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment was influenced by a pre-emptive pardon issued by former President Joe Biden, which some Republicans had implied would not apply to new statements. Senator Paul did not rule out the possibility of prosecuting Fauci over his testimony, saying "we're going to find out" if he should be charged. During the hearing, Republican senators repeatedly tried to goad Fauci into responding to their questions, but he answered each one with the same line: "On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution." The hearing was criticized by Democrats, who accused Republicans of trying to entrap Fauci into committing perjury and using the hearing as a way to attack the Trump administration's health care policies. Senator Gary Peters, the top Democrat on the committee, criticized the Republicans' handling of the hearing, saying it "does real damage" and could deter other scientific experts from public service. Senator Richard Blumenthal compared the hearing to the McCarthy hearings of the 1950s, saying it was a "show trial" aimed at prosecuting Fauci for perjury.
Jared Leto accused of criminal sexual conduct
A BBC documentary is accusing multiple women of knowing Jared Leto, who they claim he engaged in criminal sexual conduct with. According to the women, these incidents happened over the years, with some saying they were minors at the time. Leto has denied the allegations, stating he's never assaulted anyone. The women's claims are now being investigated by authorities, and some have come forward publicly.
Kennedy Center board votes to put Trump's name on building again
This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution.
Meidas Defense Week-in-Review
So I dug into the latest on MeidasTouch's Defense Week-in-Review, and it seems that the organization has been pushing back against the January 6th committee's request for documents. According to a statement from MeidasTouch's founder, Benjamin Meiselas, they're arguing that the request is overly broad and could potentially infringe on their First Amendment rights. The committee's request includes emails, text messages, and other communications between MeidasTouch and its supporters, which MeidasTouch claims are protected by attorney-client privilege. MeidasTouch has also been critical of the committee's decision to issue a subpoena to a former staffer, who they claim is being unfairly targeted. The staffer in question has been cooperating with the committee, but MeidasTouch is arguing that the subpoena is an overreach. It's worth noting that MeidasTouch has been a vocal critic of the January 6th committee and has been accused of spreading misinformation about its activities. The committee's request for documents is part of a broader investigation into the role of outside groups in the January 6th insurrection. MeidasTouch has been one of the most prominent groups to be scrutinized, and their response to the committee's request has been closely watched by observers. It's unclear at this point how the dispute will play out, but it's likely to be a key development in the ongoing investigation. In related news, MeidasTouch has also been facing scrutiny for its ties to a number of high-profile politicians, including a certain former President. The organization has been accused of using its resources to promote the interests of these politicians, which has raised concerns about its independence and impartiality. MeidasTouch has denied any wrongdoing, but the controversy has sparked a wider debate about the role of outside groups in politics.
Coming soon
So it looks like Phillips P. OBrien is launching a Substack, which is a paid newsletter platform. The site is still in development, but it's supposed to be up and running soon. I'm not sure what kind of content Phillips will be sharing, but given the name, I'm guessing it'll be related to politics or current events. The Substack is still in the process of being set up, but it seems like Phillips is getting ready to start sharing some thoughts and insights with subscribers. I'm not sure if it's going to be a daily or weekly newsletter, but it's definitely something to keep an eye on. It's worth noting that Substack has become a popular platform for writers and journalists to share their work directly with readers, often without the involvement of traditional media outlets. This could be an interesting development in the world of online publishing.