Asian Entertainment Industry

Former President Trump on Wednesday knocked billionaire conservative megadonor Charles Koch as “highly overrated.”

His comments were in response to reporting from June that Koch raised tens of millions of dollars to try to find an alternative to the former president in 2024.

“Very stupid, awkward, and highly overrated Globalist Charles Koch of the Koch Network doesn’t have a clue,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social, his social media platform.

“He said his best years were the four years during the Trump Administration, and now his people are aimlessly throwing away other people’s money,” Trump continued. “Watch what happens to Charles Koch!”

In his post, he included a link to a June article from The New York Times reporting that the Koch political network raised more than $70 million to “help Republicans move past” the former president and to support candidates up and down the ballot. Trump is the current front-runner in the 2024 GOP presidential primary race by a reliable double-digit margin.

The Times also reported that the Koch-affiliated Americans for Prosperity Action network would be wading into the GOP primary battle for the first time since it began nearly 20 years ago.

Charles and his brother, David Koch — who died in 2019 — resisted Trump’s rise to the presidency in 2016 but supported his Supreme Court picks, and many officials in the Koch network ended up working under the Trump administration.

The Koch brothers have been majorly influential in conservative politics. Their network spent nearly $500 million in GOP races and supporting conservative policies in the 2020 election cycle.

GOP presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) criticized fellow contender Vivek Ramaswamy in an interview published Thursday, calling the biotech entrepreneur “wrong” on his positions regarding Taiwan and Israel.

During an interview with conservative radio show host Hugh Hewitt, Scott was asked about Ramaswamy’s position on Taiwan. The 38-year-old GOP candidate has said he would protect Taiwan until the U.S. has semiconductor independence from the county.

“Well, we should always be loyal to our allies, lethal to our adversaries. We should be unequivocal in our commitment to our allies. Taiwan is an ally of ours. We should make sure that they have the resources, the weaponry, and frankly, not on backorder, already delivered,” Scott told Hewitt.

“As president of the United States, I will deliver the weapons necessary to keep Taiwan safe, including missile defense systems as well as other weapons that they’re not getting out of the Biden administration,” he continued.

“Vivek, he’s just wrong on this topic. He’s wrong on making sure that we protect Israel until 2028. You cannot put an expiration date on our allies. It’s just dead wrong, and it could lead to the loss of life, and certainly lead to the loss of confidence in the greatest nation on God’s green Earth,” he added.

The U.S. has sought to maintain a “strategic ambiguity” toward Taiwan, under which the government doesn’t necessarily clarify what the U.S. response would be if China or another country targets Taiwan.

But President Biden has often elaborated further and argued that the U.S. would be willing to militarily defend Taiwan if it were attacked, forcing the White House to clarify that Biden’s remarks do not mark a change in the country’s position.

Ramaswamy said during an interview with Hewitt last month that under his presidency, the U.S. would defend Taiwan until 2028, when the U.S. has achieved semiconductor independence.

“And after that, our commitments to Taiwan, our commitments to be willing to go to military conflict, will change after that, because that’s rationally in our self-interest,” Ramaswamy said.

During an interview with NBC News correspondent Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC later in the month, however, he clarified that after 2028, “we will resume our position of strategic ambiguity.”

Scott’s comments also reference Ramaswamy’s views on Israel, which have also been the subject of attacks by other opponents. The GOP entrepreneur has said that he would negotiate an Abraham Accords 2.0 that he contended would incorporate Israel into the rest of the Middle East such that it wouldn’t be necessary to continue providing aid to the country after 2028.

Scott’s comments may mark a shift in approach to his opponents, as he has branded himself as a positive, optimistic GOP candidate. The senator has largely avoided attacking other contenders but has been trailing in the polls as of late.

The Hill has reached out to Ramaswamy’s campaign for comment.

Former President Trump called on Republicans in Congress to “defund all aspects” of the “weaponized” Biden administration ahead of the Sept. 30 government shutdown deadline, declaring it their “last chance” to halt his “political prosecutions.”

Why it matters: House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is desperately trying to unite his conference around a new plan to fund the government for 30 days, following a series of rebellions by GOP hardliners. Trump’s intervention could further complicate his efforts to pass the so-called “continuing resolution.”

“Trump opposes the continuing resolution,” tweeted Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), a key Trump ally and McCarthy critic. “Hold the line.”
“[Republicans] failed on the debt limit, but they must not fail now. Use the power of the purse and defend the Country!” Trump posted on Truth Social Wednesday, hours after a GOP conference meeting appeared to produce the first signs of a breakthrough in weeks.
Between the lines: It’s unclear whether Trump has the sway among House Republicans that he once did. Several of his most loyal allies, like Gaetz, are already opposed to McCarthy’s plan.

Flashback: Trump was president during a 35-day government shutdown in 2018 and 2019 — the longest in U.S. history.

The shutdown — which began while Republicans had control of both chambers of Congress — stemmed from Trump’s demand for more than $5 billion for his southern border wall.
The former president eventually relented despite achieving no concessions, damaging his approval rating in the process.

Billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch is stepping down as chairman of Fox Corp. and News Corp., effective mid-November, he announced Thursday.

Why it matters: Murdoch, 92, is considered one of the most influential media figures in the modern era.

His son, Lachlan Murdoch, will replace him as chair of both firms.
Rupert Murdoch will be appointed chair emeritus of both companies.
Details: In a note to staff, Murdoch said, “For my entire professional life, I have been engaged daily with news and ideas, and that will not change.”

“But the time is right for me to take on different roles, knowing that we have truly talented teams and a passionate, principled leader in Lachlan who will become sole Chairman of both companies.”
The big picture: Murdoch steps down at a time of major transition.

Fox Corp. sold its entertainment assets to Disney for $71 billion in 2019, leaving it mostly focused on live television news and sports, as the cable industry continues to face record cord-cutting.
News Corp’s business has expanded in recent years to include more business data and services. Its publishing business faces a looming threat from artificial intelligence.

The U.N. Climate Ambition Summit on Wednesday marked a potential turning point in the global effort to limit the severity of climate change.

The big picture: For more than three decades, world leaders have gathered to discuss the increasing urgency of this issue. Yet there has been staunch resistance to centering those conversations around the biggest cause of climate change: burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas for energy.

Driving the news: That changed on Wednesday in New York, when U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres used his convening power to put fossil fuels in the spotlight of a one-day gathering.

In an unusual move, he instituted strict criteria in order for leaders to get a speaking slot, which led to a showcase of outspoken first-movers on climate action.
This also excluded heads of state from nations previously recognized as climate leaders, including President Joe Biden and U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, for failing to bring new actions to the table.
Zoom in: In vivid terms, Guterres warned that “humanity has opened the gates of hell,” in the form of extreme weather-related events, citing recent wildfires, floods and searing heat.

He zeroed in on fossil fuels as the key culprit behind these developments, urging leaders to move faster toward renewables, while seeking to cut emissions and fossil fuel production.
“The move from fossil fuels to renewables is happening — but we are decades behind,” Guterres said.
“We must make up time lost to foot-dragging, arm-twisting and the naked greed of entrenched interests raking in billions from fossil fuels,” he said.
What they’re saying: “There is no bigger threat than fossil fuels,” Tuvalu Prime Minister Kausea Natano said at the summit.

“This climate crisis is a fossil fuel crisis,” said California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), to a round of applause. “It’s not complicated.”
Between the lines: The summit did not yield policy breakthroughs, but rather was intended to galvanize action and debate leading into the next round of global climate talks, happening in Dubai later this year.

In that sense, the new focus around phasing out fossil fuels may help reframe the possible outcomes from COP28.
Unlike previous climate summits, “I think it’s really clear that a fossil fuel phaseout is a major topic on the table here in New York and at COP28,” said Camilla Fenning, a program lead on the fossil fuel transition team at the think tank E3G.

Activists celebrated how fossil fuels were put front and center on Wednesday, saying it marked an inflection point in the climate fight.
“There is no question today was a turning point,” said Tzeporah Berman, chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative.
Reality check: The contradictions embodied by the U.S. and the U.K. illustrate why reaching consensus on fossil fuel provisions at COP28 or a future COP will be so difficult.

The U.S., for example, has spent the past year implementing the most far-reaching climate law yet passed, but it remains a top global oil and gas producer and exporter.
On Wednesday, Sunak walked back some elements of his government’s pioneering net zero emissions commitments.
The intrigue: The president-designate of COP28, Sultan al-Jaber, told leaders at the summit that a phase-down the use of fossil fuels is “inevitable,” and that COP28 will be about tackling greenhouse gas emissions in large quantities, at the gigaton scale.

His views on phasing down fossil fuel production, however, clashes with that of Guterres but is in line with major energy-producing countries around the world.
Al-Jaber is championing the goal of tripling the global use of renewables by 2030.
“We need to be practical, realistic, and sober about what it’s going to take, to allow for the world to continue to evolve and to progress, and to grow in a way that is responsible, while also building the new energy system that will consist of zero unabated fossil fuel,” al-Jaber told Axios in an interview Tuesday.
Yes, but: The meaning of “unabated” is up for debate but is generally taken to mean using technologies to capture emissions from the use of fossil fuels.

The bottom line: The summit may not have resulted in tangible agreements, or fancy new targets and timetables. But it put the world on notice that the biggest cause of climate change is no longer as solid of a red line at such gatherings than in previous years.

India suspended visa services for Canadian nationals on Thursday, marking a sharp escalation in the diplomatic crisis between the two countries.

Driving the news: Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau earlier this week alleged that agents of the Indian government may have been involved in the June killing of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen, on Canadian soil.

India has denied the allegations, calling them “absurd and motivated.”
State of play: BLS International, the third party that processes visa applications for India in Canada, announced on its website this week that it would suspend its visa services starting Sept. 21 until further notice due to “operational reasons.”

India issued an advisory Wednesday warning Indians considering travel to Canada to “exercise utmost caution” due to “growing anti-India activities and politically-condoned hate crimes and criminal violence in Canada.”
Canada’s Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc dismissed the news of the travel advisory, telling reporters, “Canada is a safe country,” the New York Times reported.
Zoom out: Earlier this week India and Canada engaged in a tit-for-tat expulsion of diplomats.

The Canadian Prime Minister’s office did not return Axios’ request for comment.

Democrats secured victory in two state-level special elections this week, extending an impressive winning streak that Biden campaign officials cited today as they appealed to supporters to stop panicking about polls.

Why it matters: Down-ballot, low-turnout state elections aren’t necessarily a harbinger for national contests. But the trend is unmistakeable: In 30 special elections this year, Democrats have outperformed by an average of 11 points, according to a 538 analysis of each seat’s base partisanship score.

The analysis doesn’t take into account the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, city elections and ballot referendums where Democrats have also dominated — largely by campaigning on abortion rights.
Driving the news: In Pennsylvania on Tuesday, Democrats defended a one-seat majority in the state House for the fifth time this year, outperforming Biden’s 2020 margin in an Allegheny County seat by eight points.

In New Hampshire, a Democrat won by 12 points in a district Trump narrowly carried in 2020, putting the party within one seat of ending the GOP’s state government trifecta. The Republican who lost, Jim Guzofski, is an election denier who claimed “prophets” told him Trump won in 2020.
What they’re saying: “You can keep talking about polls 14 months out, but this is what I’ve been looking at all year,” tweeted Obama 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina of the trend in special elections.

S&P 500 index

The Fed didn’t touch rates Wednesday. And stocks still didn’t like it.

Why it matters: The share slide suggests that year’s market rally may be based in part on unrealistic expectations that the Fed will quickly flip toward cutting rates if the economy continues to look like it could pull off a soft landing.

State of play: As expected, on Wednesday at 2pm ET, the Fed announced it was leaving its policy rate in place at 5.25%-5.5%.

But the market started to go downhill once Fed chair Jerome Powell got behind the podium for the post-announcement news conference at 2:30.
The S&P 500 ended the day down 0.9%. The interest rate-sensitive Nasdaq dropped 1.5%.
Zoom in: Powell maintained a pretty effective poker face through much of the meeting, fending off efforts to pin him down on what the Fed would do next.

Yes, but: Seasoned observers noted that, with inflation still high, he didn’t sound especially eager to explore the idea of cutting rates.

“We’re prepared to raise rates further if appropriate and we intend to hold policy at a restrictive level until we’re confident that inflation is moving down sustainably,” Powell said, in one of the comments that market analysts focused on.
The bottom line: Wednesday seemed to convince more investors there’s little sign of rate cuts any time soon.

Labor force participation rate of women who gave birth in the previous 12 months

The percentage of women who recently gave birth and remained part of the workforce reached a decade-plus high-water mark last year, per new census data.

Why it matters: Motherhood often knocks women out of the labor force, at least temporarily — slowing their career and earnings growth and contributing to the gender pay gap.

By the numbers: 66.6% of U.S. women who gave birth in the previous 12 months were in the labor force as of 2022, per the latest American Community Survey.

That’s compared with 66.5% in 2021, and 61.6% in 2010.
Driving the news: Remote and flexible work is making it easier for new moms to juggle both parenting and their careers, Axios’ Emily Peck has reported. (In fact, the workplace gender gap is at a record low.)

That’s true for new dads, too — but women tend to bear the brunt of work/life priority changes brought on by parenthood.
Between the lines: One complicating factor in all of this: the skyrocketing cost of child care, which is driven in part by a lack of supply and low caretaker pay.

As care gets more expensive, more and more families are put in the difficult position of deciding whether it makes sense for both parents to work, or for one to stay home and watch the kids.
Often, it’s mothers who wind up staying home — in part because they likely make less to begin with.
Yes, and: Vital pandemic-era federal funding for child care centers is about to dry up, likely deepening the affordability crisis as supply is further outstripped by demand.

“70,000 child care centers, looking after 3.2 million children, may close after the funding runs out, according to one widely cited estimate from The Century Foundation,” Emily reports.
What we’re watching: Whether this trend continues into the fully post-pandemic years.

Some employers are desperately trying to drag workers back to the office, but are finding mixed success as many employees embrace a lifestyle that affords better flexibility — whether to raise a family, pursue a hobby or simply avoid a stressful commute.

A new report card from the AI Policy Institute grades the legislative AI proposals that are currently gaining the most traction according to how they line up with U.S. public sentiment.

Driving the news: A survey of 1,118 voters conducted by YouGov Sept. 2 to 6., is the report card yardstick.

Why it matters: Politicians and wannabe presidential candidates are increasingly touting plans for AI regulation, but those policies don’t always align with what voters say they want.

Between the lines: The AI Policy Institute advocates “political solutions to potential catastrophic risks” from AI. Its report card judged proposed AI regulation based on various attributes, including how the proposal adapts to advancements, how it discourages high-risk AI deployment, and how it reduces the proliferation of dangerous AI.

The AIPI notes that current proposed policies focus on addressing immediate harms as opposed to more long-term existential threats of AI.
Polling shows that voters want future-proof AI regulation that take into account unknown threats.
The big picture: Americans are consistently telling pollsters they they favor guardrails for AI, especially with regards to election security.

What they’re saying: Voters “expect tech companies to be responsible for the products they create” said Daniel Colson, executive director of the AIPI.