President Trump’s assertion at Tuesday’s Republican Congressional Committee’s annual dinner that the noise from wind power turbines “causes cancer,” is being ridiculed by Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, blasted the president’s claims in a Wednesday call with reporters.

“I’m told that the White House respects my views on a lot of issues,” Grassley said, adding that Trump’s “comments on wind energy — not only as a president but when he was a candidate — were, first of all, idiotic, and it didn’t show much respect for Chuck Grassley as the grandfather of the wind energy tax credit.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi echoed Grassley’s characterization.

“The president is saying that wind power is causing cancer,” Pelosi told reporters on Capitol Hill Thursday. “I associate myself with the remarks of Chairman Grassley. It’s an idiotic statement.”

On Wednesday, Grassley joined a bipartisan group of 19 senators in signing a letter pushing “to ensure American remains a leader in wind energy technology.”

There is no scientific evidence to support Trump’s claim that the noise from wind turbines is correlated with or causes cancer. Asked Wednesday whether Americans should be worried about such a risk, White House spokeswoman Mercedes Schlapp was unable to explain the president’s remarks.

“I don’t have an answer to that,” Schlapp replied.

Connecting the noise from wind power turbines with cancer wasn’t the only dubious claim the president made Tuesday about the alternative energy source.

“If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75 percent in value,” Trump said.

In February, Trump lost a court case against the government of Scotland over the billionaire’s battle to halt construction of an 11-turbine wind farm offshore from his Aberdeen golf resort. The club must now reimburse the Scottish government for legal costs.

Financial disclosure forms show, however, that while Trump’s quixotic fight against the windmills will cost him millions in legal fees, his golf property increased its revenue in 2017.

More in Politics

Why Elon Musk said a House Democrat ‘needs to be expelled’ from Congress

MSNBC

Not a typical dating platform

Read More

Undo

Not a typical dating platform

Read More

Undo

Not a typical dating platform

Read More

Undo

Not a typical dating platform

Read More

Undo

Not a typical dating platform

Read More

Undo

Stephen A. Smith Stuns With Shocking Reversal on Trump

The Daily Beast

Biden signs 50 bills, including 1 backed by Paris Hilton, on Christmas Eve

The Hill

At an October rally in Ohio, Trump also claimed that a downside of wind power was that electrical service stops when the breeze dies.

“When the wind doesn’t blow, just turn off the television darling, please. There’s no wind. Please turn off the television quickly!” Trump said.

Power generated by wind turbines generally is fed into a regional grid that receives energy from a variety of sources so that the lack of wind on a given day does not disrupt electricity.

The depth of Trump’s antipathy for wind power, however, may extend beyond the limits of reason. The man who proudly proclaims he “digs coal” has long railed against wind turbines, including during White House meetings about renewable energy, according to a report by Axios.

“I hate the wind!” the president is said to have told senior administration officials.

_____

Read more from Yahoo News:

• Preet Bharara considered taping Trump because 'the man lies'

• Candidates edge toward discussing slavery reparations

• As immigration sweeps spread fear, activists and sheriffs unite to protect neighbors

• John Hickenlooper wants to be the last Democrat standing.

• Cybersecurity experts urge skepticism over claims Saudis hacked Bezos's phone

• PHOTOS: Amazing ice caves of Iceland

Nearly every exit poll conducted on Election Day found that, more than any other issues, voters’ concerns about the economy helped to return Donald Trump to the White House and put Republicans back in charge of both houses of Congress. Americans who felt the sting of inflation and who had trouble making ends meet, as companies steadily increased prices for essential goods like groceries and clothing, voted in the hopes that a new administration and new Congress would bring relief for their families.

So it is especially surprising that one of the first federal agencies to come under scrutiny from the incoming administration is one that has returned billions of dollars to many of the same consumers who were counting on leaders in Washington to look out for their wallets.

On Nov. 27, Elon Musk — who, along with Vivek Ramaswamy, has been tasked by President-Elect Trump with running a new Department of Government Efficiency — posted on his platform X that he wants to “Delete CFPB,” referring to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The agency, Musk said, was part of a problem of “too many duplicative regulatory agencies” in Washington. But there are no other agencies in the federal government returning money to Americans’ bank accounts in the way the CFPB does.

Since its founding, the agency has returned more than $19 billion in cash to people who have been scammed by financial institutions, including predatory payday lenders and even some of the largest banks in the country. It has done so under Republican and Democratic presidents, including major actions against Wells Fargo and Equifax during President Trump’s first term in office, which, combined, returned $425 million to consumers. (Those actions both began under the Obama administration, but Trump’s CFPB directors oversaw the execution of those fines.)

The money recovered is made available to those who have been impacted by the institutions’ wrongdoing through the CFPB’s victims’ relief fund. To date, more than 200 million Americans have been eligible for payments from the fund. The agency has also cancelled many consumers’ debts altogether and reduced loan principles for many others.

In fact, just days after Musk posted his message on X, the CFPB announced that it was mailing refund checks to more than 4 million people who were scammed by so-called credit repair companies, including Lexington Law and CreditRepair.com, which illegally collected fees from consumers seeking relief for the effects of economic woes weighing down them and their families. The companies will pay $2.7 billion in consumer redress and civil penalties; $1.8 billion of that will go directly to those who lost money as a result of the scam.

It’s no wonder the agency enjoys broad, bipartisan support, with more than eight in 10 Americans supporting the CFPB’s various enforcement actions. In red and blue states, Americans seem to support returning money to those who have been cheated.

The agency’s impact is felt in other ways, too. In Oklahoma, CFPB collected evidence that helped retired Lt. Col. Susan Parisi in her fight against loan company GreenSky — which scammed her into a high-interest loan she never agreed to. The CFPB found that GreenSky was using “deceptive” and “fraudulent” tactics and ordered the company to return $9 million to consumers. My organization is representing Lt. Col. Parisi in her class action on behalf of others who were scammed by GreenSky.

So why is an agency that has been so effective, and returned so much money to so many people, being targeted for “deletion?” Because, in the course of holding wrongdoers accountable, it has crossed paths with some of the most powerful people in the country.

Musk’s post on X, for example, seems to have been prompted by complaints from Marc Andreessen, a venture capitalist whose companies have been sanctioned (and, in the case of LendUp Loans, shuttered) because of CFPB investigations and actions. Andreessen accused the agency of “terrorizing financial institutions,” and was clearly infuriated when the CFPB found that LendUp had misled customers about high-interest loans and overcharged U.S. service personnel.

President-elect Trump and Republicans in Congress should not let Andreessen’s views overshadow the overwhelming opinion among Americans that the agency is doing important work that makes a real difference to those who turn to financial institutions and lenders for help during tough financial times. By one count, even under the first Trump administration’s CFPB directors — who tended to enforce far fewer fines against companies than Biden and Obama appointees — the agency brought more than $1 billion in redress back to consumers’ wallets. That’s direct relief, and money in wallets, for millions of Americans. “Deleting” the agency would almost certainly ensure that no such future relief ever reaches consumers again.

More in Politics

President Joe Biden signs into law first federal anti-LGBTQ+ bill in decades

The Advocate

How can you generate additional income by investing with our AI signal system?News Portal・

AdAd

Learn More

Undo

Hours after suggesting he would seize the Panama Canal, Trump says he wants Greenland, too

INSIDER

GOP lawmaker says House ‘better off’ without ‘volatile’ members

The Hill

Fortunately, neither Musk nor the incoming administration can completely eliminate the CFPB, whose funding comes from the Federal Reserve in a model, upheld by the U.S.  Supreme Court, that is meant to protect it from political meddling. Republicans and Democrats alike should ensure that firewall remains in place, and the CFPB remains on the job, if they’re serious about providing real, meaningful economic relief to Americans.

Sharon McGowan is the chief executive officer of legal advocacy organization Public Justice.

Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.

There’s no place like Miami for the holidays, especially if you’re filthy rich.

David and Victoria Beckham retreated to their tropical winter wonderland to spend some quality time on the water the other day.

According to paparazzi pics, also along for the trip aboard the couple’s multimillion dollar superyacht was their youngest son Cruz, who brought along his girlfriend Jackie Apostel.

The 19-year-old scion and Brazilian singer, 10 years his senior, have been dating a little over a year.

Though there were rumors of tension between Ma Beckham and Apostel in the British tabloids, the two women seemed just fine. Fuzzy pap pics show them hugging it out aboard the luxury vessel named Seven, after dad’s soccer jersey number.

A few months ago, things were a little, um, different, according to the UK’s Mirror.

“Although Victoria is pleased that Cruz seems happy in his relationship, she does have some concerns about the age gap,” an insider told the outlet. “Cruz is still a teenager whereas Jackie is a fully grown woman who is at a different stage in her life and may want things that Cruz is not quite ready for.”

But Apostel seems to have won over Victoria. The former girl bander was in town a few months back to watch an Inter Miami game, and even wore a lacy outfit designed by the onetime Spice Girl, calling it a “dream piece” on Instagram.

Talk of Victoria not getting along with her kids’ partners is nothing new.

The 50-year-old reportedly famously feuded with her now daughter-in-law Nicola Peltz, who married Brooklyn Beckham in an over the top ceremony at her family’s Palm Beach estate in April 2022.

The spat, resolved long ago, was apparently over the fact that Victoria felt excluded during the wedding planning process.

“They can’t stand each other and don’t talk,” a source told Page Six at the time. “The buildup to the wedding was horrendous.”

Claim:

In December 2024, Barron Trump, son of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, gave up his first-class airplane seat to a military veteran.

Rating:

In December 2024, a video circulated online that claimed Barron Trump, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's youngest son, gave up his first-class seat to an elderly veteran. The video received more than half a million views, as of this writing.

Users flooded the video with comments, appearing to believe the story. "He was taught the right way how to honor veterans and to respect all," a top comment read.

But we found no evidence this incident ever happened. The story originated on Elite Stories and quickly spread to other YouTube accounts (the veteran appeared differently in most video thumbnails), but no credible outlets reported such a story, which would be highly newsworthy.

The video also displayed signs of AI-generation — YouTube flagged it as "altered or synthetic content."

Lastly, the description of the video included a disclaimer that clarified the channel posted only fictional stories:

The stories presented on this channel are entirely fictional and crafted solely for entertainment. Any resemblance to real events, individuals, or situations is purely coincidental and unintentional. These narratives are not intended to depict, reference, or represent any actual occurrences, persons, or entities.

In sum, because we found no evidence this story was true, and the description of the video confirmed it was "entirely fictional," we rate this claim as false.

Sources:

- YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUGzv4MOgfs. Accessed 24 Dec. 2024.

Fans of the NFL may have to open their wallets to make sure they catch every Week 17 game this year.

The NFL will make its Netflix debut this year with two games set to be broadcast on the streaming giant's platform on Christmas. The move has left football fans with questions on how they'll be able to watch the doubleheader feature.

One of the biggest questions is whether a Netflix subscription will be required to watch both games. For fans living outside of the local markets for each game – Baltimore, Houston, Kansas City and Pittsburgh – the answer is: technically, no.

Here's the full breakdown on viewing options for the NFL's Christmas doubleheader in 2024:

Do I need a Netflix subscription to watch the NFL Christmas games?

The short answer is yes.

Netflix and the NFL partnered ahead of the 2024 season for the rights to broadcast at least one game on Christmas through the 2026 season. As a result, the simplest way for fans to watch both games this year is on Netflix.

NFL viewers can subscribe to any Netflix plan – from their "standard with ads" option for $6.99/month to "premium" at $22.99/month – to get access to Wednesday's doubleheader broadcast.

However, there are a few notable exceptions.

Fans with a subscription to the NFL's premium subscription service, NFL+, can stream each game on their mobile device using the NFL app.

In addition, football fans who live in one of the local markets of the competing teams on Christmas can watch that team's game on their local CBS affiliate station.

That is to say, Kansas City Chiefs fans living in Kansas City and Pittsburgh Steelers fans living in Pittsburgh have access to a local broadcast of the Steelers-Chiefs game on their respective affiliates. The same is true for Baltimore Ravens and Houston Texans fans living in Baltimore or Houston.

Here's the list of local affiliates that will carry the two NFL Christmas games:

• Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Kansas City Chiefs

  • CBS-PIT: KDKA

  • CBS-KC: KCTV

• Houston Texans vs. Baltimore Ravens

  • CBS-HOU: KHOU

  • CBS-BAL: WJZ-TV

Christmas NFL games 2024

Both of this year's Christmas NFL games are potential previews for AFC playoff matchups.

Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Kansas City Chiefs

• Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

• Venue: Acrisure Stadium

• Time: 1 p.m. ET

• Streaming: Netflix

• Channel: Local CBS affiliate (Pittsburgh, Kansas City markets ONLY)

Since Christmas falls on a Wednesday this year, all four of the competing teams will play on Saturday in Week 16 in order to get an extra day of rest.

The Chiefs will be coming off a game against the Texans that could push them one step closer to clinching the AFC's No. 1 seed if they win. For the Steelers, a Saturday win over the Ravens would give them the head-to-head sweep they need to clinch the AFC North title.

When Kansas City and Pittsburgh face off on Christmas, it's possible the only thing at stake will be the Steelers' seeding. However, it's also possible that – with a Week 16 loss – Pittsburgh will need a victory Wednesday to avoid losing ground in the division race if the Ravens win later in the day.

NFL PLAYOFF SCENARIOS: Ravens, Packers among teams that can clinch in Week 16

Houston Texans vs. Baltimore Ravens

• Location: Houston, Texas

• Venue: NRG Stadium

• Time: 4:30 p.m. ET

• Streaming: Netflix

• Channel: Local CBS affiliate (Houston, Baltimore markets ONLY)

This game has more potential seeding implications.

The Texans have already clinched the AFC South title but could be pushing for a better playoff position on Christmas, pending some other results around the league in Week 16 and the outcome of the Chiefs-Steelers game.

If the Ravens lose in Week 16, their Dec. 25 matchup might be the final thing they need to secure a postseason spot. But if they beat the Steelers on Saturday, both Christmas clashes will have big implications for the AFC North title race with just one week left to play.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: NFL Christmas games: Do I need a Netflix subscription to watch?