topics

politics-policy

epstein-files

donald-trump

2026-midterm-elections

immigration

behind-the-curtain

race-and-equity

technology

privacy-tech-regulation

automation-and-ai

tiktok-news

big-tech

social-media

cybersecurity

economy

social-security

inflation

tariffs

federal-reserve

jobs

transportation

business

stock-market-news

retail-news

crypto

media

elon-musk

dealmaking

health

rfk-jr

drug-prices

axios-explains-abortion

public-health

world

israel

axios-explains-ukraine

iran

russia

china

energy-climate

nuclear-energy

climate-energy-policy

climate-change

extreme-weather

alternative-energy

electric-vehicles

science

emerging-tech

biomedicine

newsletters

pittsburgh

atlanta

san-diego

charlotte

boulder

washington-dc

kansas-city

dallas

denver

detroit

des-moines

austin

boston

chicago

cleveland

columbus

houston

indianapolis

miami

nashville

new-orleans

nw-arkansas

philadelphia

phoenix

portland

richmond

salt-lake-city

san-antonio

san-francisco

seattle

tampa-bay

twin-cities

raleigh

huntsville

colorado-springs

axios-local

axios-pro

axios-live

the-axios-show

National

Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló announced Sunday that he will not seek re-election next year and will step down as president of the New Progressive Party, but stopped short of saying he will resign as governor before the end of his term.

Why it matters: Protestors took to the streets last week to demand Rosselló resign over leaked Telegram messages between the governor and his top aides that were reported to include misogynistic, profane and homophobic comments. Some of the messages were reported to have mocked victims of Hurricane Maria, a disaster over which Rosselló's administration has been criticized for mishandling.

Puerto Rico governor says he will not seek re-election amid mass protests

But the embattled governor stopped short of saying he will resign.

Mass protests in Puerto Rico. Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Politics

Ricardo Rosselló

Latin America and Latinos

News and analysis of the scientific advances fueling AI and quantum computing, revolutionizing biology and medicine, and tackling climate change. Science is changing the world and colliding with the global politics that shape it.

Science

Former special counsel Robert Mueller will make his much-hyped appearance on Capitol Hill Wednesday, but neither party expects to learn anything new from Mueller's 5-plus hours of public testimony, according to conversations with more than a dozen members of Congress and staffers involved in the hearing preparations.

The bottom line: Each party sees the hearings as a political opportunity — whether it be Democrats trying to stoke support for impeachment or Republicans seeking to sow distrust in the Justice Department's Russia investigation.

What to expect: The House Intelligence Committee will focus on Volume 1: Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, while the House Judiciary Committee will focus on Volume 2: possible instances of obstruction of justice by President Trump. 

Democratic members on the committees, who have been thirsting for months to have Mueller testify publicly, told Axios they see the hearing as an opportunity for Mueller to educate the American public on the most damaging aspects of his report. 

"The success will be in the TV ratings," Rep. Ro Khanna, who will not be questioning Mueller, said. "The more Americans that watch, the more successful it is."

"Most Americans haven't had a chance to read a 400-page report," House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff told Axios. "This will be the first time they hear from the man who did the investigation himself, not filtered through the misrepresentations of [Attorney General] Bill Barr or anybody else." 

"My fantasy is when I get my five minutes, I'm just going to have him read certain excerpts from his report. And I think that will be very powerful," said Rep. Jackie Speier, a member of the Intel committee.

Why it matters: Roughly 90 Democrats publicly support impeaching Trump, and some lawmakers think that once Mueller opens his mouth, the percentage of Americans who support impeachment will spike.

The other side: GOP committee aides and key members —including Reps. Andy Biggs and Jim Jordan, both members of the Judiciary committee — told Axios that Republicans' biggest goal is pinpointing when Mueller knew there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and why he didn't let the public know sooner that the president wasn't a Manchurian candidate. (Mueller's report didn't establish a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.)

Republicans plan to question Mueller on the origins and integrity of his investigation. And they'll grill him about the anti-Trump sentiments of some FBI agents, specifically Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and why some texts on their work phones weren't preserved. (Note: The Justice Department's inspector general report found that their political biases did not compromise the FBI's work.)

One Republican committee aide said they'll also ask Mueller to identify who wrote the report, and how much of it was written by Andrew Weismann, a top prosecutor on Mueller's team who the aide called "a Clinton guy." (Weismann attended Hillary Clinton's election night party in 2016.)

"Republicans have been prepping for this hearing for weeks," said a GOP source familiar with the preparation, adding that some lawmakers have "spent more time on this than they have on anything else."

Read the redacted version of the Mueller report

Mueller's day on the Hill

It’s shaping up to be one of the most highly anticipated moments of the Trump presidency.

Illustration of Robert Mueller with the area around his mouth called out by vector art circles

Robert Mueller

2024 will be an election year like no other, as President Biden seeks re-election amid economic uncertainty, two wars and questions about his age. His likely foe, former President Trump, faces felony charges and vows revenge on his political enemies. Meanwhile, Americans generally are dissatisfied with those choices and are divided over immigration, race, education and more.

Politics & Policy

President Trump made small talk with the Irish prime minister as they sat in the Oval Office in mid-March, accompanied by a handful of senior American and Irish officials. Trump, who wore a green tie and filled his jacket pocket with a clump of shamrock to honor the Irish leader's annual St. Patrick's Day visit, turned with a half-smile to his hawkish national security adviser John Bolton, according to two sources who were in the room.

"John," Trump asked, "Is Ireland one of those countries you want to invade?"

Behind the scenes: The joke captured how Trump often privately interacts with Bolton, even occasionally in front of foreign heads of state. "John has never seen a war he doesn't like," Trump said in a recent Oval Office meeting, according to a source with direct knowledge. 

Trump often privately ribs Bolton about his public persona, according to sources who've been in Situation Room meetings with them. (Trump teases most of his top advisers and officials in different ways. For example, during discussions of trade with China, Trump has needled Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in front of other senior officials: "Steve, you're so weak. You're so weak. You didn't used to be this way in business. You're so weak now.")

In a SitRoom meeting last year, Trump's national security team was going around the table discussing a topic that was nuanced and had no relation to major military action. A source in the room said that as the conversation got to Bolton, Trump joked: "Ok, John, let me guess, you want to nuke them all?" People in the room "died laughing," the source said.

Between the lines: That's not to say that Trump's view of Bolton is rose-colored. People close to Bolton have recently worried about his job security. Yet while Bolton can rub Trump the wrong way — a well-documented dynamic — and while internal and external Bolton critics often complain to Trump that Bolton will drag him into an unwanted war, Trump still defends his national security adviser in private conversations with critics.

"He gets quite touchy when you bring it up," said a person who has criticized the national security adviser to the president. "He doesn't want anyone to believe he's anybody's pawn."

Trump's Bolton Doctrine: Trump has a strongly held theory of Bolton's value, according to senior administration officials and advisers to the president, including people who have privately recommended to Trump that he fire Bolton. Seven sources who have discussed Bolton with Trump told me the president says having Bolton on his team improves his bargaining position and gives him a psychological advantage over foes like Iran and North Korea.

"Trump thinks that Bolton is a key part of his negotiating strategy," said the same person who described Trump as "touchy" about Bolton. "He thinks that Bolton's bellicosity and eagerness to kill people is a bargaining chip when he's sitting down with foreign leaders. Bolton can be the bad cop and Trump can be the good cop. Trump believes this to his core."

A former senior administration official who remains close to Trump said Bolton's presence on the team "makes other people know that there is going to be that type of voice in the room."

Trump occasionally flips the good cop, bad cop script with his national security adviser. In the expanded bilateral meeting with the Dutch prime minister on Thursday in the Cabinet Room, Trump was criticizing European nations, including the Dutch, for not spending enough to meet their NATO obligations, according to a source familiar with the meeting. At one point, after Trump gave this criticism, he turned to Bolton, who was sitting to his right and said, "But, John, you love NATO right?" 

Bolton gave a very brief defense of NATO. Then Trump started drilling down again on his dissatisfactions, the source said.

Inside the room: A former senior administration official who has watched Trump and Bolton interact said that Trump thinks Bolton is "prepared and very smart," even though he often disagrees with him and becomes exasperated by some of his advice.

Another thing Bolton did early on, which earned Trump's respect, was standing up to former Defense Secretary James Mattis, according to sources with direct knowledge. 

Bolton's predecessor, Gen. H.R. McMaster, had been deferential to Mattis and called him "Sir" or "Secretary Mattis" — conscious of his 3 stars to Mattis' 4. In one of Bolton's early SitRoom meetings with Mattis, he set a new tone, according to a source who was in the room. 

Mattis was giving a history lecture and Bolton interrupted him, according to the source who witnessed the exchange and recalls it vividly. "Jim," Bolton said tapping the table, "let me just stop you there. In 90 seconds you have already been wrong about three things." (Trump was not in the room for that exchange, the source said, but the president caught on that he now had a national security adviser who would stand up to Mattis.)

Why this matters: Several of Bolton's allies outside the administration have been jittery about his standing with the president. One Bolton ally told me he worried that because Bolton doesn't play nice with colleagues or play golf with Trump, he doesn't have the personal chemistry with Trump or the broad goodwill with his administration colleagues to protect him when he's "shaky" with the president.

"Bolton doesn't help himself," said a senior White House official. "He runs as hard as he can and doesn't look to do things nicely or diplomatically."

"When he gets serious about something that he really wants, he can push too hard and too fast without involving everybody, and that makes people really mad," said a former senior White House official.

Trump tells confidants who are concerned about Bolton that they shouldn't worry about his national security adviser dragging him into a war. Early on in Bolton's tenure, Trump told confidants that "Bolton is OK, he wants to start 3 wars a day, but I have him on a leash," according to a former senior administration official.

"He believes that because he, Donald Trump, doesn't want war, then there won't be war," said another person who has discussed Bolton with Trump. This person, like others in Trump's orbit, said they worry Trump's inexperience in government leads him to underestimate how Bolton's seemingly inconsequential decisions could increase the likelihood of a war with Iran.

A source who discussed Venezuela with Trump said that while the president agreed with Bolton on the need for regime change, the president grew irritated at Bolton's aggression. Trump told confidants that Bolton was going too far and that some of the people around him were overly confident that the Venezuelan opposition could remove dictator Nicolás Maduro. 

Another source, a former senior administration official, recalls Trump saying that people he was listening to were too optimistic about the Venezuelan opposition toppling Maduro. "I distinctly remember [Trump] saying, 'I've seen these type of people, people underestimate him [Maduro]. He's not just going to give up and walk away.'"

The bottom line: It's true that Trump has been frustrated with Bolton — sometimes deeply so. But even some who most want Bolton gone grudgingly concede that the hawk who Trump once said would "take on the whole world at one time" may survive for a while yet.

And it doesn't hurt that 3 of the biggest Republican donors in the U.S. — Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer and Bernie Marcus — are all fans of Trump's pro-Israel hawk. Adelson has advocated strongly for Bolton.

"I don't think he's looking to make a change," said a source who has discussed Bolton with Trump. "Not yet."

Why Trump keeps Bolton

Trump has a strongly held theory of Bolton's value, according to senior administration officials.

Animated illustration of a spinning coin with President Trump's profile on one side and John Bolton's on the other.

John R. Bolton

World

Donald Trump

Several of the leading Democratic presidential contenders told Axios that if elected, they would go further than the Trump administration in confronting China over its imprisonment of more than 1 million Uighur Muslims in its Xinjiang region.

Why it matters: It has been two years since the internment camps — which activists say are designed to erase the Uighur identity — first came to light internationally. The Trump administration has considered imposing sanctions on Chinese officials over the camps, but has yet to act amid threats of retaliation. 

Over the last week, Axios asked the top 2020 Democratic candidates how they would address the situation in Xinjiang if elected.

Specifically, would they support putting companies that build the Uighur detention camps and their surveillance system on the Commerce Departments' Entity List? And would they use the Global Magnitsky Act to sanction the people running the camps? 

Would support, at a minimum, both measures: Former VP Joe Biden; Sen. Bernie Sanders and Cory Booker; South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg; and former HUD Secretary Julián Castro. 

Proposed an alternative strategy:  Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand. [Worth noting: Warren is the only senator running for president who signed a bipartisan letter to Trump administration officials in April urging greater export controls and Magnitsky sanctions against Chinese officials overseeing the Xinjiang policy.]

Did not respond to multiple requests for a comment: Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar. [Worth noting: Harris and Michael Bennet are the only senators running for president who did not co-sponsor the Uighur Human Rights Policy Act in January.]

Declined to comment: Former Rep. Beto O'Rourke.

Context: Earlier this week, 37 countries — including North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Russia, among other mostly-authoritarian states — signed a letter defending China's policies in Xinjiang. 

This came shortly after 22 other countries formally condemned China's abuses in the region. 

The bottom line: Most of the world has been largely silent on this issue due in large part to China’s economic clout and penchant for lashing out over criticisms of its internal affairs. Trump administration officials have repeatedly criticized China but not acted on concrete proposals to impose costs on Beijing.

A State Department spokesman told Axios that the Trump administration "remains deeply concerned about these abuses, is committed to holding human rights violators accountable for their actions, and is implementing a whole-of-government response to address these concerns."

"This includes strengthening U.S. diplomatic and public diplomacy efforts around the world, and conducting outreach to U.S. companies with business in Xinjiang to urge them to implement human rights safeguards, thereby ensuring their commercial activities are not contributing to China’s campaign of repression," the spokesman added. Link to the full response.

Editor's note: This piece has been corrected to say that Sen. Michael Bennet also did not sign the Uighur Human Rights Policy Act in January.

Top 2020 Dems would punish China over mass detentions of Uighurs

The Trump administration has yet to act over fear of retaliation.

2020 elections

2020 election

Capital

Axios Capital

Elizabeth Warren understands Wall Street better than any other presidential candidate. She studied it in her previous career as a Harvard professor, and she has effectively built her own think tank inside the Senate, coming up with genuinely novel ideas for how to improve financial regulation.

What to watch: Warren has already received the grudging respect of many on Wall Street. Her diagnoses of where the financial services industry falls short are generally accurate, and her proposed regulations would probably give a competitive advantage to financial giants with large compliance departments.

Driving the news: Warren blasted the private equity industry this week. She understands that bankruptcy and limited liability can be good for capitalism and society as a whole, but that they can also be abused. When that happens, private equity companies can end up making profits from portfolio companies that go bust. Employees invariably bear the brunt, alongside trade creditors and even consumers with gift cards.

Our thought bubble: Private equity is the polite term for what used to be called leveraged buyouts. Mike Milken gave buyouts a bad name in the 1980s, and Warren is betting that private equity is similarly unloved today. Axios' Dan Primack says that Warren's proposals would kill much of the private equity industry, especially the turnaround sector. He may well be right. The question is whether it would be mourned.

What's next: Warren's academic research changed the way bankruptcy was thought about. Her proposal for a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau became reality, with broad public support. When she says that the unbanked spend more on interest and fees than they do on food, she touches a nerve. It's easy to see potential profits for smart financial services industry executives who embrace her legitimate criticisms and try to get ahead of these issues.

Go deeper:  Elizabeth Warren on the issues, in under 500 words

Elizabeth Warren's Wall Street frenemies

She has effectively built her own Senate think tank, coming up with novel ideas for how to improve financial regulation.

An illustration of Warren holding one of her signs.

Elizabeth Warren

Business

White House senior adviser Jared Kushner will travel to Jerusalem and several other capitals in the Middle East next week to discuss how to move forward with the Trump administration’s Israeli-Palestinian peace plan, senior U.S. officials told me. 

Why it matters: This will be an important trip for the progress of the U.S. peace plan — both the economic and political components. The White House is currently in discussions over the timing for revealing the political part of the U.S. peace plan, which has been thrown off as a result of new elections being called in Israel.

President Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East Jason Greenblatt said in an interview with PBS last week that the White House is considering whether or not to release the political part of the peace plan before the Sept. 17 elections. Greenblatt said that no decision has been made and that President Trump will be the one to make the final call. 

The big picture: Kushner will arrive in the region with Greenblatt; Brian Hook, the special envoy for Iran; and Avi Berkowitz, Kushner's deputy. U.S. officials said Kushner and his team are expected to visit Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, Qatar and Jerusalem, but that the final itinerary might still change. 

The U.S. officials said the goal of the trip is to continue talks with Israel and the Arab countries about the economic part of the plan, which was presented during the Bahrain conference several weeks ago. It's also possible Kushner’s discussions in the region will deal with the political part of the peace plan. 

One of the main items Kushner is seeking to promote during the upcoming trip is the establishment of a multinational fund that will bankroll and monitor the plan to boost the Palestinian economy through projects in the West Bank and Gaza. 

U.S. officials told me that 2 weeks ago Kushner met with Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and president of the World Bank David Malpass to discuss the establishment of the multinational fund.

Last week, Kushner met in Washington with the foreign minister of Bahrain, Sheikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa, and proposed basing the fund in Manama. The Bahrainis agreed, but Kushner wants to get other Arab countries on board. Kushner also wants to hear from Arab leaders about how much money they are willing to donate to help boost the Palestinian economy.

Go deeper: My exclusive interview with Bahrain's foreign minister

Scoop: Kushner to travel to Israel, Arab countries for discussions on peace plan

Kushner is seeking to promote the establishment of a multinational fund that will be responsible for boosting the Palestinian economy.

Jared Kushner. Photo: Maciej Luczniewski/NurPhoto via Getty Images

White House peace plan

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

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said on Fox News Sunday that Donald Trump has "violated the law 6 ways from Sunday" and that he would be indicted if he were not president. 

Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace-9 30 48 Am - 9 32 26 Am-2019-07-21

WALLACE: "Why are you putting Mueller and the country through this?"

Nadler: Trump has broken the law "6 ways from Sunday"

Nadler claimed that evidence in the Mueller report suggests Trump would be indicted if he were not president.

Axios

Sunday's top stories

Puerto Rico governor says he will not seek re-election amid mass protests

Mueller's day on the Hill

Why Trump keeps Bolton

Top 2020 Dems would punish China over mass detentions of Uighurs

Elizabeth Warren's Wall Street frenemies

Scoop: Kushner to travel to Israel, Arab countries for discussions on peace plan

Nadler: Trump has broken the law "6 ways from Sunday"

The cost of bail for immigrants is surging

It's Boris Johnson time

Deadly heat wave grips much of the U.S.

Trump administration plans to make changes to U.S. citizenship test