National

In a New York magazine cover story published Friday, author E. Jean Carroll accused President Trump of raping her in a dressing room of New York's Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s.

Why it matters: Carroll's accusation is the 16th allegation of sexual misconduct or assault levied against the president throughout his time in public life — all of which he has denied.

Trump was caught on tape in 2005 during filming for an episode of "Access Hollywood" discussing groping and kissing women and saying that "when you’re a star, they let you do it." That tape was given to the Washington Post during the 2016 election.

The White House issued a statement on Friday evening in which Trump claimed he  "never met this person in my life," despite the New York magazine article featuring a photo of Trump and Carroll together in 1987.

Between the lines: It's unusual to see a sexual assault allegation written in first person — the piece is an excerpt from Carroll's forthcoming book "What Do We Need Men For: A Modest Proposal?" — but Carroll says she disclosed the incident to two friends soon afterward, which New York magazine says it verified.

The big picture: The Trump account is only one portion of Carroll's piece, which includes her recounting other instances of alleged sexual assault at the hands of multiple men — including former CBS CEO and Chairman Les Moonves. She claims Moonves forced himself on her in a Beverly Hills hotel elevator after she interviewed him for a 1997 Esquire piece.

Go deeper: The lasting health effects of sexual assault

Trump faces rape accusation from author E. Jean Carroll

It is the 16th allegation of sexual misconduct or assault levied against the president.

E. Jean Carroll in 2015 and President Trump. Photos: Astrid Stawiarz/Getty Images for ELLE; Peter Summers/Getty Images

Politics

Donald Trump

Politics & Policy

Amidst all the tension this week, it's worth stepping back for a minute to remember that President Trump doesn't have a permanent secretary of defense.

Why it matters: Running the Pentagon is no small task for a permanent, seasoned chief. It's a huge undertaking for a temp, the AP reminds.

Trump said today that he called off yesterday's retaliatory strike against Iran upon learning about its expected death toll compared to zero casualties for an unmanned drone.

New this afternoon: Trump is expected to nominate soon-to-be acting Secretary Mark Esper — who was the secretary of the Army until acting Secretary Patrick Shanahan dropped out of the confirmation process — in the near future, the N.Y. Times reports.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer: “With everything going on in Iran and all the provocations and counteractions, and to have no secretary of defense at this time is appalling ... It shows the chaos in this administration. They have so many empty positions, revolving doors, in the most sensitive of security positions.”

What's next: "For the moment both Shanahan and Esper have been attending White House and other meetings and taking part in debates over how to respond to Iran’s destruction of the drone," the AP notes.

The bottom line: "The law prohibits Esper from being nominated for the job while also serving as acting secretary. If he is nominated, he’ll have to step down and move to another job until the Senate votes on his confirmation. So that would mean yet another acting secretary meantime."

Go deeper: How Trump and Iran got to the brink of war

Trump's temps

Running the Pentagon is a huge undertaking for a temp.

Iran

World

Conflicts, policies and powers are intersecting and shaping the world. Breaking news and analysis of national security, foreign policy and global crises.

Without significant near-term cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, all of the ice in Greenland could be lost within the next millennium, a new study finds. 

Why it matters: The Greenland Ice Sheet is the second-largest ice sheet in the world, containing enough water to raise global sea levels by 23 feet if it were to melt completely. While a 1,000-year timeframe sounds extremely long, it is unusually speedy in geologic time, and the resultant sea level rise would drown many coastal megacities long before the year 3000. 

In fact, the study shows that melting at the present rate could contribute between 19 to 63 inches to global sea level rise within the next two centuries alone — greater than previous estimates, according to NASA, which helped sponsor the new research. 

What they did: For the study, published in Science Advances, researchers used an open source computer model that captures how outlet glaciers, large rivers of ice ending in the sea, will respond to various amounts of climate warming. 

They investigated the sources and magnitude of uncertainty in projections of Greenland ice loss by running their the model 500 times out to the year 3000 for each of three possible future climate scenarios, each time adjusting key land, ice, ocean and atmospheric variables to test their effects on ice melt rate. 

What they found: The study found that Greenland will likely become ice-free within 1,000 years unless greenhouse gas emissions are substantially cut. Here are the results for the three specific emissions scenarios they examined:

Under a scenario consistent with achieving the Paris climate agreement's temperature targets, Greenland could lose between 8 to 25% of its mass, the study found, contributing to between 0.59–to 1.88 meters, or 1.93 to 6.16 feet, of sea level rise. 

Under an emissions pathway that features modest emissions reductions, the ice sheet would lose between 26 to 57% of its mass, the study shows, yielding between 1.86 to 4.17 meters, or 6.10 to 13.6 feet, of sea level rise. 

And if the world were to continue on a roughly business as usual emissions course, then Greenland could lose between 72 and 100% of its mass by the year 3000, adding between 5.23 to 7.28 meters, or 17.1 to 23.88 feet, of sea level rise. 

Between the lines: The study points to the risk of an escalating sea level rise crisis throughout the next several centuries unless carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel burning, deforestation and other sources are slashed in the near term. 

Once set in motion, the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets will stay in motion for a long period, meaning that waiting to cut emissions would lock in many more meters of sea level rise. 

The study refers to this phenomenon as the "committed sea level rise," with ice melt continuing well beyond when global average surface temperatures are stabilized.

Such findings are consistent with other studies that have shown ice sheets taking centuries to millennia to stabilize following an initial pulse of rapid global warming. 

But, but, but: The study is based on computer modeling that takes into account  prescribed, but imperfect, scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions. It's possible that future emissions will turn out quite differently, and that the models used are missing important features that help regulate the Greenland Ice Sheet. 

However, the study notes that the uncertainties may actually underplay global temperature increases.

The research does not incorporate the newest data on how ocean warming is affecting glacial melt along Greenland's coasts. Josh Willis, who leads a NASA program examining the ocean-ice melt connection, tells Axios that his team's findings show this study's melt projections may need to be increased.

"I think it's likely we will find that the ocean has a bigger impact than was accounted for in this study," Willis, who was not involved in the new study, said via email. 

What they're saying: "While sea-level rise in the next decades may be considered small by some people, the next decades will determine the mid and long-term future of our planet. It will not only affect our children but many generations down the road," study lead author Andy Aschwanden tells Axios in an email. 

Go deeper: Rising sea levels could cost the U.S. trillions

The Greenland Ice Sheet could be lost without emissions cuts

That could raise global sea levels by 23 feet.

A large iceberg has broken the surrounding layer of consolidated sea ice. 

A large iceberg with areas of open water nearby. Photo: NASA/Linette Boisvert

Science

Global warming

Energy

Climate change

Breaking climate science and policy coverage as extreme weather events reshape communities. Keep tabs on the race to a low carbon economy, which may be bumpy as governments, climate tech startups and major oil and gas companies race to find their niche amid the changing energy landscape.

Energy & Climate

Axios AI+

This week's release of "Harry Potter: Wizards Unite" isn't just the debut of a highly anticipated mobile game: it's also a glimpse into the future of augmented reality and location-based gaming.

Why it matters: This gives Niantic, which also is the San Francisco-based creator of "Ingress" and "Pokemon Go," a chance to show how it can work with partners — and begin to turn the game system it has created into a platform others companies can build upon.

Details: In an interview, Niantic CEO John Hanke said much of the "Harry Potter" gameplay, user interface and animations were developed by Warner Bros., with Niantic contributing a lot of the technology.

What's next: Hanke said that Niantic now has a rich platform built on real-world points of interest and "spawn points" along with multiplayer battle mechanics. The next step is to get more outside developers working on it.

"It really creates an awesome palette for a team that wants to come in and build something," Hanke said.

The next step in that process is a contest for developers with their own ideas on what could be built on top of that platform.

This week, Niantic announced 10 finalists for that effort.

The big picture: Hanke said "Wizards Unite" reflects lessons learned from "Pokémon Go."

The AR features, for example, don't require players to keep holding their phone in front of them, a nod to the fact that many "Pokémon Go" players turned off the feature.

And while "Wizards Unite" also encourages people to get out and walk, Hanke said there are more things that can be done at home or work, without having to walk outside.

Niantic is also building pieces that will become more relevant when AR moves from the phone screen to some sort of glasses, a leap that is still a bit away.

"We’re really excited about glasses," Hanke said. "It’s a handful of years out. Probably not next year, but probably not too far off."

Hanke, who wore a Gryffindor scarf to work Thursday, said he has played a lot of Harry Potter games and promised that "Wizards Unite" comes the "closest to any of enabling that fantasy, certainly my fantasy, of becoming a wizard."

As for Niantic's recent move to drop Apple Watch support, Hanke said it was a question of resources that could better be used serving all players rather than a small subset. But, he said he remains "enamored" with the Apple Watch and wearables, particularly as they become standalone devices. "This is sort of a temporary retreat from this space. I suspect we will be back."

Watch for a "Harry Potter: Wizards Unite" event later this summer, Hanke added.

Go deeper: How to play "Harry Potter: Wizards Unite"

Niantic's Harry Potter-size step into an augmented reality future

The game reflects lessons learned from "Pokémon Go."

In this image, Tiffany Haddish stands outside on stage with the poster for Wizards Unite behind her.

Tiffany Haddish speaks at the Harry Potter: Wizards Unite Celebration Event on June 18, 2019. Photo: Joe Scarnici/Getty Images for WB Games

Technology

Augmented reality

Artificial Intelligence

Gaming

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

President Trump confirmed Friday that the U.S. was "cocked & loaded" to strike Iran last night, a move that could have accelerated the path to war.

How we got here: The strike had been ordered in response to Iran's shooting down of a U.S. drone earlier this week, but the trend toward conflict began in earnest last year when the president announced that the U.S. would pull out of the internationally negotiated Iran nuclear deal.

May 8, 2018: Trump announces that the U.S. will pull out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. 

That kicks off a "maximum pressure" campaign intended, at least officially, to yield a new, far more comprehensive deal. New rounds of sanctions are implemented in August, November and — most recently — April.

Iran initially continues to comply with the deal, and the European signatories work desperately to save it.

May 5: National Security Adviser John Bolton issues a statement referring to impending Iranian attacks and announces a U.S. aircraft carrier is en route to the region.

May 8: On the anniversary of Trump’s withdrawal, Iran announces it will increase uranium production.

May 9: Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan presents plans for 120,000 U.S. troops to be deployed to the Middle East in the event of an Iranian attack, per the New York Times.

May 10: The U.S. sends additional military hardware, including a warship, to the Middle East.

May 12: Four oil tankers — two Saudi, one Emirati, one Norwegian — are attacked near the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. later accuses Iran.

May 14: Armed drones strike two Saudi pumping stations. Houthi rebels operating in Yemen claim responsibility.

May 15: The U.S. orders a partial evacuation of its embassy in Baghdad, Iraq.

June 13: With Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Tehran and diplomacy apparently on the table, two more tankers — one Norwegian and one Japanese — are struck near the Strait of Hormuz.

June 17: Iran announces that it will breach uranium enrichment levels under the 2015 deal in 10 days.

June 17: The U.S. announces it will send an additional 1,000 troops to the Middle East.

June 20: Iran shoots down a U.S. drone it says was in its airspace. The U.S. provides evidence it was over international waters.

June 20: Trump approves strikes "on a handful of Iranian targets" but calls them off at the last minute, the NYT reports.

June 21: Iranian officials tell Reuters they received a message from Trump warning of impending U.S. attacks and seeking dialogue as Trump confirms he felt the planned strikes were "not proportionate."

Go deeper: Israeli officials say Iran won’t de-escalate without stronger U.S. response

How Trump and Tehran came to the brink of war

The president confirmed that the U.S. was "cocked & loaded" to strike.

Trump displays a presidential memorandum on the Iran deal withdrawal. Photo: Xinhua/Ting Shen via Getty Images

President Trump confirmed that his administration had readied a series of strikes against Iran in response for shooting down an unmanned drone in a Friday Twitter thread.

"We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights [sic] when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone."

President Obama made a desperate and terrible deal with Iran - Gave them 150 Billion Dollars plus I.8 Billion Dollars in CASH! Iran was in big trouble and he bailed them out. Gave them a free path to Nuclear Weapons, and SOON. Instead of saying thank you, Iran yelled Death to America. 

I terminated deal, which was not even ratified by Congress, and imposed strong sanctions. They are a much weakened nation today than at the beginning of my Presidency, when they were causing major problems throughout the Middle East. Now they are Bust! 

On Monday they shot down an unmanned drone flying in International Waters. We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone. 

I am in no hurry, our Military is rebuilt, new,  and ready to go, by far the best in the world. Sanctions are biting & more added last night. Iran can NEVER have Nuclear Weapons, not against the USA, and not against the WORLD!

Go deeper: How Trump and Tehran came to the brink of war

Trump confirms he stopped retaliatory Iran strike

He said it was "not proportionate" to shooting down a drone.

Never miss a major world story

Macro

Axios Macro

Big companies have been cutting deals with activist shareholders, putting away the boxing gloves as a way to dodge negative publicity.

Why it matters: While activists are making a lot of noise, the silence —and behind-the-scenes dealmaking — is more representative of what's really going on. 

The big picture: With investors of all sizes pressing their agendas on public corporations — from hedge funds seeking to block mergers to issue-oriented shareholders pursuing social and environmental agendas — top executives have started negotiating upfront, aiming to reduce the number of loud confrontations and proxy battles.

American-style activism has caught on abroad and is rising in countries like the U.K. and Japan. But in the U.S., where investors first started building up stakes in companies and picking high-profile fights, the number of public showdowns is way down this year, despite some splashy exceptions.

Not since 2015 have so few U.S. companies faced public demands from activists in the during this spring’s big proxy season, which runs through the end of June, according to research firm Activist Insight. 

Activism outside of the U.S., meanwhile, is spiking. The U.K. had its busiest first-quarter in recent years while Japanese companies saw a record 30 campaigns last year, per CNBC.

Between the lines: American companies have grown more experienced and sophisticated about managing shareholder activism, aided by armies of lawyers, consultants and bankers who have built up specialized practices in this field. 

In their dealings with hedge funds, U.S. companies are often settling before a disagreement escalates to an all-out proxy fight. In the first quarter, all of the corporate board seats gained by hedge funds were won via settlements, according to Lazard.

Bed, Bath & Beyond, under pressure, gave 4 board seats to a trio of activist hedge funds and booted its CEO.

PG&E, the utility, settled with hedge funds that wanted to switch up its board and select a new CEO.

Campbell Soup settled with activist hedge funder Dan Loeb just days before a fight was put to a shareholder vote, giving him some board seats and input on choosing the next CEO.

"Proxy fights are very expensive and distracting for management efforts," Paula Loop, head of PwC's Governance Insights Center, tells Axios. “It's a lot less costly to settle, in most cases.”

Unlike in the past, there's a lot of U.S. shareholder activism that Wall Street and Main Street never hear about. 

Behind-the-scenes negotiations have led to fewer ESG proposals — environmental, social, governance— making it onto the ballots at companies’ annual shareholder meetings this spring.

More proposals are being withdrawn, a recent trend that's expected to continue this year, according to ISS, a proxy advisory firm. This typically happens when a company and a shareholder group reach a truce behind closed doors.

"Companies are more willing to discuss, more willing to listen, and it de-escalates the situation," Jason Day, a partner at the law firm Perkins Coie who advises public companies on stockholder activism, tells Axios. “Or the company has a nice conversation, and it doesn't move to the public sphere."

The other side: This trend by no means spells the end of big, public battles.

Bill Ackman, who has a big stake in United Technologies, came out against the company’s tie-up with Raytheon.

Carl Icahn has sued Occidental Petroleum, after opposing its plan to purchase Anadarko.

Dan Loeb, who also opposes the United Technologies/Raytheon deal, is pushing Sony to sell its semiconductor business.

There’s been lots of headline-grabbing activity on the ESG front, primarily among issue-oriented shareholders. Asset managers and proxy advisors who recommend how shareholders should vote —who typically don't stir up controversy during proxy season, but whose weight can sway management — have lately been starting to align themselves with ESG issues. 

HSBC Global Asset Management is a part of a group asking companies like ExxonMobil and Amazon for more transparency about the environmental impact of their operations.

Glass Lewis, the proxy advisory firm, came out this year to recommend that shareholders vote against nominating committee chairs on boards without a single female director.

Wall Street plays nice with shareholder activists

Top execs are negotiating upfront, looking to reduce loud confrontations and proxy battles.

Illustration of the Wall Street sign with peace sign stickers all over it

Business

Activist shareholders

Top stories & latest news on the Federal Reserve, real-time data, plus the biggest shifts happening in the U.S. and global economy.

Economy

After a record economic expansion, the coronavirus pandemic sent the U.S. economy into a recession as unemployment soared to staggering heights. The country now faces urgent questions about how much stimulus is needed for reeling consumers and businesses, and what a recovery might look like.

Economy & Business

Note: Fiscal years begin October 1 of the previous calendar year; Data: Department of Homeland Security; Chart: Chris Canipe/Axios

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has deported more immigrants this fiscal year than any full fiscal year of Donald Trump's presidency, but it has yet to reach Barack Obama's early deportation levels, according to new internal Department of Homeland Security figures obtained by Axios.

Why it matters: With four months left in the fiscal year, it puts Trump's deportations in perspective and shows the reality behind the anti-immigrant pledges that have come to define his presidency. 

By the numbers: Under the Obama administration, total ICE deportations were above 385,000 each year in fiscal years 2009-2011, and hit a high of 409,849 in fiscal 2012. The numbers dropped to below 250,000 in fiscal years 2015 and 2016.

Under Trump, ICE deportations fell to 226,119 in fiscal 2017, then ticked up to over 250,000 in fiscal 2018 and hit a Trump administration high of 282,242 this fiscal year (as of June). 

ICE and DHS didn't respond to a request for comment.

State of play: Trump kicked off his 2020 campaign with a familiar pledge to deport millions of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S., and announced that ICE will begin a series of raids across the country next week. 

Yes, but: Such a pledge is ambitious given the current pressures on the agency and its limited resources. As the AP points out, ICE  is "already overwhelmed, lacking staff, funding and detention space for its current work. And any massive roundup that includes deportation of families would be sure to spark outrage."

How companies profit from immigrant detention

Number of ICE detainees under quarantine for mumps and chicken pox spikes to 5,200

Trump isn't matching Obama deportation numbers

But there have been more deportations so far than any other full fiscal year of Trump's presidency.

Immigration

Finish Line

Axios Finish Line

With its acceleration of Prime shipping from two days to one, Amazon established a new normal. Soon after, Walmart and Target came out with their own super-speedy shipping options.

Why it matters: Flying, trucking and delivering millions of packages a day comes with a cost — as shoppers demand faster and faster speed, there has been a sharp environmental impact.

The big picture: Consumers have gotten hooked on speed — and the efficiencies that e-commerce injected into retail are getting erased because now there are more deliveries of smaller numbers of packages. 

The annual sustainability report from UPS, one of the biggest enablers of the e-commerce boom, says it emitted 13.8 million metric tons of CO2 while delivering 5.1 billion packages in 2017, by ground and air.  

Emissions from FedEx, the other major shipper, were 15.1 million metric tons in 2017. The U.S. Postal Service emitted about 4.3 million metric tons of CO2 in 2016. (Numbers from both include all mail, including e-commerce and personal packages and letters.)

Together, that's equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of just over 7 million cars, per an EPA calculator. It's almost the combined total number of cars in the states of Illinois and Tennessee. It's also about 0.5% of the total 6 billion metric tons of U.S. CO2 emissions per year. That's "not huge, but it's big. And it's growing," says Costa Samaras of Carnegie Mellon University.

On top of UPS, USPS and FedEx, many other players in parcel delivery — including Amazon itself — are adding to the total impact.  

"Nobody is looking at the environmental footprint of being consumers with all of this convenience" 

Beth Davis-Sramek, professor of logistics, Auburn University

The backdrop: In theory, e-commerce is good for the environment, says Don Mackenzie, who leads the University of Washington's Sustainable Transportation Lab. Instead of a neighborhood worth of people driving to stores in their personal cars to shop, one truck can deliver everything. But that calculus is changing.

"There are climate benefits to e-commerce, but those disappear as delivery gets faster and faster," says Miguel Jaller, a professor at UC Davis. "It goes against everything they have been achieving in terms of efficiency."

Now, flashy memberships that offer free, fast shipping regardless of the size of a cart have eliminated shoppers' incentive and the shippers' ability to bundle goods. They're instead ordering a steady stream of packages to their doorsteps, pushing e-commerce and logistics companies to keep up by adding trucks, jets and even air hubs.

Amazon started it with Prime, which offers free shipping on 100 million products, whether you order a cartful of things or just one box of tissues. Amazon's retail rivals, Target and Walmart, have done the same:

Walmart has come out with free next-day delivery for orders of $35 or more. 

Target has long had a $99 membership program that offers free same-day delivery, and it has just announced same-day for non-members who are willing to pay a flat fee of $9.99.

The increasing warehouse space required to support the barrage of orders also has an impact.

E-commerce companies are building more and more warehouses, particularly on the outskirts of cities, so they can cut delivery times to a few hours. About 255 million square feet of warehouse space is under construction in the U.S., per a new CBRE report — and all of it needs light, heat and air conditioning, notes CMU's Samaras. 

And there's more: The packing material that goes into delivery boxes is a major driver of the global plastics crisis, says Axios energy columnist Amy Harder.

But, but, but: There are ways to curb e-commerce's hit to the environment.

Drone delivery uses less energy than vehicles, Samaras tells Axios. "They're super-light and charged by electricity, and electricity is getting cleaner." Both Amazon and Walmart have filed a slew of drone patents.

Electrifying truck fleets can also make a dent, and many shippers, like Amazon and UPS, are adding EVs to cut emissions, but drones are still the cleanest delivery method, Samaras says.

In a statement to Axios, Amazon said it is committed to bring down its contributions to climate change:

"We’ve eliminated more than 244,000 tons of packaging materials and avoided 500 million shipping boxes, and with anticipated and continued progress in electric vehicles, aviation bio fuels, and renewable energy we have set an ambitious goal to reach 50% of all Amazon shipments with net zero carbon by 2030."

Target said it aims to reduce its carbon footprint by 30% by 2030.

Walmart did not respond to an email. Its 2018 report on sustainability set a goal to reduce emissions 18% from 2015 to 2025.

The climate stakes of speedy delivery

Flying, trucking and delivering millions of packages a day comes with a cost.

Illustration of a package with an earth logo on it and the words "fragile, handle with care"

Future

President Trump authorized military action against Iran for shooting down a U.S. surveillance drone on Thursday, but then abruptly pulled the plug on the operation as it was already underway on Thursday night, the New York Times reports, citing several senior administration officials.

Why it matters: This is the latest in a series of escalating tensions between the two nations amid the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign. Last week, the administration accused Iran of attacking oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz, a key international waterway.

Details: It is unclear why the president called off the strike, per the Times. It is also unclear whether Trump may order a strike in the future.

The backdrop: Earlier Thursday, Trump told reporters he thought the drone attack was a "mistake," and said he thought it may have been carried out by someone who "was loose and stupid."

Meanwhile, the Pentagon characterized the downing of the drone as "dangerous and escalatory," and claimed it was "an unprovoked attack on a U.S. surveillance asset that had not violated Iranian airspace."

The strike would have been Trump's third military action against targets in the Middle East. The administration has previously carried out two strikes against targets in Syria. 

Neither the White House nor the Pentagon responded to the Times' request for comment, and "no government officials asked The New York Times to withhold the article," per the Times. 

Report: Trump ordered retaliatory Iran strikes, then reversed decision

This is the latest in a series of escalating tensions between the 2 nations amid the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign.

Friday's top stories