USA ESTA Travel Pass News

Language barriers between users worldwide are breaking down as the social networking service X (formerly Twitter) introduces an automatic translation service. According to IT media outlets such as TechCrunch, X launched a feature that automatically translates posts globally on the 7th following a pilot program.

Nikita Beer, X’s Head of Product, stated on her X account, “By launching the automatic translation feature globally, we will ensure that posts uploaded to X in any language reach users around the world.” In a separate post prior to this, she added, “Post in your language. Post your culture and daily life, and make your country the next trend,” and further explained, “The greatest cultural exchange in history has just launched.”

While users could previously change posts in other languages on X to their preferred language via a ‘translate’ function, the difference this time is that they can view them in their desired language immediately without any separate operation. The translation function utilizes the Grok model, an AI chatbot developed by xAI, founded by Elon Musk.

Since the service’s introduction, X users have shown mixed reactions. In domestic online communities, the sight of users from various countries sharing empathy regarding similar cultures through X has garnered significant attention. Conversely, on the online community Reddit, lengthy comments were posted on posts seeking ways to disable the automatic translation function, with users complaining that the translation quality was too poor or that it was bothersome.

Asahi Shimbun reported, “Watching posts continuously appear on X, one feels both danger and hope at the same time,” adding that “some are reconsidering their views by exchanging messages with people from countries they thought they disliked.”

Since the start of the second Trump administration, visa barriers for international students dreaming of studying in the United States have been steadily rising. Last year, the rejection rate for international student visas (F-1) soared to 35%, marking the highest level in the past decade. This effectively means that one out of every three applicants failed to receive a visa.

According to an annual report released by Shore light, an organization specializing in international education, the global F-1 visa rejection rate for 2025 is projected to reach 35%. This figure is even higher than the previous peak recorded in 2020, when visa screening was tightened due to the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. The report analyzed that this increase in visa rejections acted as one of the main causes of the sharp decline in international student enrollment for the fall semester of 2025. In particular, the rise in rejection rates was concentrated in specific regions.

Students from Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia were found to have been the most significantly affected. In the case of Africa, approximately 64% of F-1 visa applicants were rejected, resulting in a severe situation where effectively “more than half were eliminated.”

This figure represents a significant increase from 43% in 2015 and a 5-percent point rise from the previous year. In some countries, the situation is even more serious, with cases reported in Sierra Leone and Somalia where the rejection rate exceeded 90%. Changes in India, once one of the largest sources of international students for the U.S., are also notable. India’s student visa rejection rate surged from 36% in 2023 to 61% in 2025. This nearly twofold increase in just two years demonstrates that obtaining a visa is becoming increasingly difficult even for traditional student supply nations. In contrast, South America showed a different trend.

The visa rejection rate for South American students decreased from 31% in 2022 to 22% in 2025, recording a gradual decline over the past four years. However, as it remains high compared to 10 years ago, it is difficult to view this as a complete improvement. Europe maintained a relatively stable trend. The visa rejection rate for applicants from Europe has remained largely unchanged over the past decade and is projected to be low at around 9% by 2026. This suggests that there may be differences in the application of visa screening standards by region.

Reflecting these trends, the number of Korean international students in the U.S. continues to decline. According to the ‘Open Doors’ report, an annual international student statistic by the Institute of International Education (IIE), the total number of Korean international students enrolled in U.S. universities, graduate schools, and language institutes for the 2024–25 academic year was 42,293, a decrease of approximately 2% from the previous year.

Excluding the 2020–21 (39,491) and 2021–22 (40,755) academic years, when the COVID-19 pandemic was severe, this marks the lowest level since 2010. The number of Korean international students has been generally declining since peaking at 73,351 in the 2010–2011 academic year. The report points out that current visa policies are undermining the “principle of merit-based selection.”

Controversy regarding equity is also being raised, as outcomes can vary significantly based on country of origin or region rather than academic ability or potential. In fact, it is reported that as a system where most applicants from certain countries are rejected becomes entrenched, the number of cases where students give up on studying in the U.S. altogether is increasing. Experts warn that tightening visa barriers could have a negative impact on the competitiveness of U.S. higher education in the long run. This is because international students play a crucial role not only in tuition revenue but also in research, innovation, and the labor market.

Concerns are being raised that a decline in the influx of international talent, particularly in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) fields, could lead to a weakening of the United States’ global competitiveness. Meanwhile, the rise in visa rejection rates is analyzed to be the result of a complex interplay of factors, including concerns over illegal immigration, political and diplomatic variables, and stricter screening criteria. However, there are also significant criticisms that the lack of clear disclosure of criteria is increasing uncertainty for applicants.

Shoreright pointed out, “If an international student’s chances of admission are determined by their country of origin rather than academic performance or financial ability, the fairness of the U.S. visa system could be undermined.” Ultimately, visa strategy is emerging as a crucial variable for studying in the United States. While the U.S. remains the world’s largest destination for international students, the prevailing view is that the threshold has become much higher than before.

Inside Higher Ed, a media outlet specializing in higher education, analyzed that the increase in F-1 visa rejection rates also contributed to the decline in the number of international students at U.S. universities during last fall semester.

Southwest Airlines’ new policy requires oversized passengers to purchase an extra ticket or be denied boarding. The photo shows economy class seats on a Southwest Airlines flight. (Associated Press) Southwest Airlines’ new policy sparks outrage! It forces plus-size passengers to buy an extra ticket. You must present your plane ticket; otherwise, you will not be allowed to board.

The Daily Mail reported that Southwest Airlines had said overweight passengers could buy extra tickets in advance and get a refund later or get an extra seat at the gate for free. The regulations have now been changed so that if ground staff believe a passenger is too large to fit in one seat, the passenger must purchase an additional seat at the boarding gate.

“Passengers occupying adjacent seats must also purchase the required number of seats. Armrests are considered clear boundaries between seats.” Passengers criticized Southwest Airlines for its vague wording and problematic execution, arguing that it judged passengers by their appearance.

TikTok influencer Samrya dubbed the policy a “fat tax” and expressed her dissatisfaction in a post, saying, “The official website says that if you take up the seat of the passenger next to you, you have to buy an extra seat. But when you get to the airport, they just stare at you,” Samrya said.

“They have no criteria for deciding who needs to pay for an extra seat. It’s blatant discrimination. It’s entirely up to the discretion of the ground staff that day and discrimination against obese people.”

Passenger Kari McCaw recounted his experience of being stopped by airport staff while en route to Las Vegas. The ground staff told McCaw that she needed to buy a second seat, or she wouldn’t be allowed to board. McCaw said that although she had never been asked to buy two seats before, she felt she was being treated differently because of her size.

“They just casually looked me up and down,” McCaw said.

Jessica Skinner was rushing from Tampa International Airport (TPA) to Austin when she was stopped at the ticket counter, where ground staff insisted she was too big to fit. As a result, she missed the baggage check-in deadline and had to rebook her flight.

Skinner had already lost 200 pounds and didn’t need an extra seat, but she still borrowed money from her family to buy a plane ticket for that day. Kenny Slack was flying from Houston to Kansas and was treated differently by ground staff because he was 100 pounds heavier than he was before and had previously been subject to the larger passenger policy. Some passengers also said that even if there were no special markings on the inaugural flight, they were asked to buy an extra seat on connecting or return flights.

Fitness blogger Stella Kittrell filmed a video experiment in which she deliberately changed into the clothes that made her look the slimmest, went to the airport, was not stopped by Southwest Airlines, boarded the plane smoothly, and sat comfortably in her seat.

Jerry Morrell, CEO of the American fast-food chain Five Guys, recently did something quite remarkable. He announced that he would fund a $1.5 million bonus for his employees as compensation for the company’s disastrous “buy one get one free” promotion.

It’s rare for a boss to give employees extra money, and Jerry’s words added a dramatic twist. In a media interview, he joked, “I don’t want someone shooting me in the back after the promotion, because we really messed it up…” Clearly, Jerry’s “shoot in the back” refers to the infamous Luigi Scout shooting of the CEO of a healthcare giant.

On one side is the evil capitalism described by the American public as “deliberately denying insurance and exploiting the people,” and on the other is a wealthy young talent willing to stand up for the common people. After Scout’s killing of the CEO, many Americans viewed him as a symbol of justice. The narrative that “Luigi shot and killed a financial tycoon, terrifying all the wealthy and powerful” has a natural ability to spread, making many people fans of Luigi.

Jerry’s use of this allusion is clearly intended to satirize the situation and prove he’s not the cold-blooded, exploitative CEO type. Last month, Five Guys celebrated its 40th anniversary, and after discussions with management, Jerry decided to run a buy-one-get-one-free promotion across all its stores nationwide.

On the day of the promotion, employees prepared for opening as usual, but the overwhelming influx of customers completely packed every store. Employees worked tirelessly from opening to closing but still couldn’t finish their work.

Jerry later admitted he never expected customers to be so enthusiastic: “I always thought it was funny that people participated in promotions. I never thought promotions worked before, I just tried a buy-one-get-one-free promotion, and the result was unexpected. I couldn’t believe so many people participated. I thought sales would increase by about 20% at most, but sales increased by 130% that day. So, I felt like I messed up.”

Because of the overwhelming orders that day, the employees were on the front lines suffering, and Jerry felt it was necessary to give them “compensation for their hardship.” After the event, the company announced that it would give each of the 1,500 stores a $1,000 bonus, totaling about $1.5 million, all of which would be distributed to employees to recognize their excellent performance under the pressure of huge orders.

Jerry joked that he originally planned to use the bonus money to buy his wife a fur coat: “She still looks at me like I’m an idiot. But I think it’s all worth it. The employees work very hard and are under a lot of pressure.”

The bonus alone would have been enough for the media to report on for a while, but Jerry chose the most attention-grabbing tactic: comparing himself to the CEO who was shot and killed.

However, netizens remained unconvinced, feeling the wealthy man hadn’t given enough, and such a small favor didn’t deserve their praise: “Only $1,000 per store… pathetic. If you pay your employees their full wages every day, you don’t have to live in fear of this bluff. Or just give each employee $1,000 directly; that’s at least the bare minimum for showing goodwill. Billionaires are so out of touch with reality.”

Enrollment in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in Virginia has reportedly decreased following the recent expiration of the “expanded premium tax credit.” With approximately 370,000 subscribers recorded on the Virginia ACA Health Insurance Marketplace, about 33,000 of them have discontinued their insurance. A simple calculation suggests a decrease of about 9% in total subscribers.

Keven Patchett, Director of the State Health Exchange, stated at a recent State Corporation Commission forum, “About 33,000 people have discontinued their ACA insurance since the subsidy expired.” This represents the largest decline recorded in the first quarter of this year, and it is analyzed that some have withdrawn because they could no longer afford the premiums or have switched to plans with lower coverage levels.

The expiration of the “Expanded Premium Tax Credit,” which was temporarily expanded during the pandemic, is cited as a major factor behind the recent decline in subscribers. This program broadened the scope of existing ACA subsidies to lower insurance premium burdens for income earners exceeding 400% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). However, with the termination of the expanded subsidy, those with incomes above 400% of the FPL no longer receive any subsidies. Consequently, some subscribers are showing a tendency to either be unable to maintain their insurance or to choose lower-cost alternatives.

Sim Yeon-sik, an Obamacare insurance agent, explained, “In the case of Virginia, the number of Obamacare subscribers decreased compared to the previous year.” He added, “The biggest reason is that due to the expiration of the Expanded Premium Tax Credit, premiums for those above 400% of the FPL—based on a two-person household—more than doubled; those who previously paid around $600 in premiums now pay over $1,200.” In contrast, neighboring Maryland saw a slight increase, rising from approximately 247,240 subscribers in 2025 to approximately 255,610 in 2026.

It is assessed that the increase in enrollment and retention was achieved due to factors such as the introduction of state-level subsidy programs. Agent Sim stated, “In the case of Maryland, the state government provided separate subsidies even after the extended subsidy ended, so the fluctuation in ACA enrollment actually increased slightly.”

Nationwide, ACA enrollment also showed a downward trend following the discontinuation of extended subsidies and premium increases. The number of ACA subscribers is projected to reach 24.2 million by 2025, while the number of subscribers this year stands at 23 million, representing a decrease of approximately 1.2 million (5%).

Controversy over the effectiveness of the “blue law,” which restricts Sunday retail sales in Bergen County, New Jersey, persists, leading to speculation that it could be abolished depending on the outcome of ongoing lawsuits. According to a report by The Record on the 9th, the Paramus town government filed a lawsuit alleging that the massive shopping mall “American Dream” in East Rutherford violated the blue law. Meanwhile, it has been reported that three major shopping malls in Paramus have stated that they would also disregard the blue law if American Dream continued to operate on Sundays.

The blue law is a regulation that prohibits businesses from operating on Sundays, excluding essential retail sectors such as food, restaurants, bakeries, gas stations, and pharmacies, in accordance with Christian Sabbath traditions. While

blue laws have largely been abolished across the United States, they remain in effect in Bergen County, New Jersey. Consequently, retail stores in Bergen County are not permitted to sell items such as furniture, clothing, and home appliances on Sundays. However, all approximately 120 stores located at the American Dream Mall, which opened in 2019, operate without restrictions even on Sundays. This is because the site is owned by the New Jersey State Authority for Sports and Expo, meaning it is not subject to the Blue Law.

In response, the Paramus Township government has filed a lawsuit against the American Dream Mall in state court. The plaintiffs argue that while Paramus is home to numerous large malls like the Garden State Plaza and various retail stores, most close on Sundays in accordance with the Blue Law, whereas the American Dream Mall is disregarding it. The issue of who is effectively responsible for enforcing the Blue Law is also coming to the fore.

The Paramus Township government has raised concerns, stating, “Relevant authorities, such as the Bergen County government, are aware that the American Dream Mall continues to violate the Blue Law but are failing to enforce the law.” Neither the East Rutherford Township government, where the American Dream Mall is located, nor the State Authority for Sports and Expo, which owns the site, have issued a clear stance regarding the enforcement of the Blue Law.

In this regard, legal experts pointed out, “This lawsuit raises fundamental questions about whether Bergen County residents want the Blue Law,” adding that “depending on the outcome of the lawsuit, there could be a movement within Bergen County political circles to abolish the Blue Law.”

The process for electing the next UN Secretary-General is set to begin in earnest. According to the UN on the 6th, an “interactive dialogue” with candidates to succeed current Secretary-General António Guterres will be held on the 21st and 22nd.

In a letter sent to member states on the 2nd, Annalena Baerbock, President of the UN General Assembly, announced that an interactive dialogue session with the four candidates for the next Secretary-General would be held at the UN headquarters in New York for two days starting on the 21st. The debates are conducted with two candidates per day, divided into morning and afternoon sessions, with each candidate speaking for three hours.

Currently, there are four registered candidates: former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, Argentine International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi, former Costa Rican Vice President Rebecca Greenspan, and former Senegalese President Macky Sall. As the next head of the United Nations, they are scheduled to deliver a “Vision Statement” outlining their policy directions.

Member states may request three minutes to speak, and civil society organizations can also submit questions in advance. The event is broadcast online, allowing the public to watch. This type of debate was first introduced during the 2016 election of current Secretary-General António Guterres, implemented to enhance transparency and move away from past closed-door elections.

At the time, Secretary-General Guterres, who had been overlooked, distinguished himself during the debates, rapidly emerging as a leading candidate and ultimately leading to his election. This debate is also expected to go beyond mere formalities and serve as a substantive arena for candidates to demonstrate their actual operational capabilities for the United Nations over the course of three hours.

Participating member states are expected to evaluate the candidates with consideration for UN reform and friendly relations with their own countries. The debates may not be a one-off event but could continue. Diplomatic circles anticipate that the pool of candidates will also change through additional registrations or withdrawals. A specific schedule for the future has not yet been set.

To be appointed Secretary-General, a candidate must secure the approval of at least nine of the 15 Security Council member states; in particular, none of the five permanent members—the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, China, and France—must exercise their veto power.

On the 6th, U.S. military leaders, including President Donald Trump, held a briefing at the White House to share the “survival story” of the two crew members of the U.S. F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jet shot down by Iranian forces. The full details of this operation, considered the most difficult mission in U.S. military history, were revealed directly by high-ranking officials rather than the U.S. media.

President Trump, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Kaine, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe conducted the briefing. The U.S. Air Force F-15E fighter jet was struck and crashed in the southwestern inland region of Iran. During the crash, the pilot in the front seat (call sign Dude-44-Alpha) and the weapons systems officer in the rear seat (call sign Dude-44-Bravo) ejected with a time difference.

President Trump explained that because the aircraft was flying at high speed, this difference resulted in a “distance of several miles in a matter of seconds” between the two. The fact that they were isolated behind enemy lines was recognized around 10:10 PM on the 2nd (4:40 AM Iran time). The first to be rescued was the pilot. Twenty-one aircraft were deployed to rescue him.

Local Iranians even filmed the HH-60 Jolly Green II helicopters and HC-130 Combat King II refueling tankers flying at low altitudes and speeds during the rescue operation and posted the footage on social media. The pilot was rescued on the afternoon of the 3rd after a seven-hour aerial operation during daylight hours when the risk of attack was high. During this process, Iranian military fire was opened, resulting in minor injuries to the rescue team members. Heavily armored A-10 Thunderbolt II Warthog attack aircraft, capable of low-speed flight, were escorting the rescue team, but one of them was hit by Iranian anti-aircraft fire during close-range combat.

The A-10 attack aircraft, having moved near the Strait of Hormuz, crashed into the sea when it was determined that a normal landing was impossible, and the pilot was rescued. The distress signal from the missing weapons systems officer was intercepted by the CIA on the 4th, the following day. Defense Secretary Hegseth reported that the message in his first signal was “God is good.”

Media reports followed stating “one rescued, one missing.” Consequently, the Iranian military blockaded the area around the F-15E crash site in Kogiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad provinces and offered a reward for the missing person. He had sustained an ankle injury and was bleeding during the escape. Relying on a single pistol and a radio beacon, he hid in a crevice in the mountains and climbed a ridge over 2,000 meters high to evade the Iranian military’s search network.

Chairman Cain explained that the officer, who held out alone for nearly 48 hours, “made many of our efforts possible with his absolute will to survive.”

Because the Iranian military deployed a massive force to capture him alive, more aircraft and special forces were mobilized this time. President Trump announced that a total of 155 aircraft were deployed for the second rescue operation, including four bombers, 64 fighter jets, 48 aerial refueling tankers, and 13 rescue planes. President Trump explained that the Department of Defense and the CIA conducted a diversion operation against the Iranian military by “dispersing” troops to multiple locations so that the Iranian military could not determine the exact location of the missing officer, stating, “They (the Iranian military) thought we were in seven different locations. And they were very confused.”

There was also a crisis situation just before the rescue was successful. This involved the explosion of two MC-130J transport aircraft, which was also reported in the U.S. media. While there were reports that the incident was caused by the aircraft’s nose wheels getting stuck in the runway sand or by mechanical failures occurring during the operation, President Trump’s explanation is closer to the former.

President Trump stated that it was determined there were weight and other issues preventing the transport plane from taking off with all troops on board from the “wet sand” at the site, which was “more like farmland than a runway,” and that “we blew them up because we didn’t want anyone to inspect our anti-aircraft equipment and other gear.”

He explained that instead, three small helicopters capable of “landing on sand” were deployed. President Trump reported that “those helicopters were lowered from the plane in mid-air and reassembled their rotors and other components within 10 minutes,” after which personnel at the site were evacuated in three separate groups at 15-minute intervals.

The officer was moved to “friendly territory” between midnight on the 4th and the transition into the 5th. Chairman Cain emphasized the rescue principle that “the U.S. military leaves no one behind.” Secretary Hegseth likened the rescue to the Christian holiday of Easter, stating, “He hid in a cave on Good Friday, stayed in a crevice all Saturday, and was rescued on Sunday. He flew, leaving Iran at sunrise on Easter Sunday. It is like a pilot being reborn.”

It is reported that hundreds of special forces personnel, including members of Navy SEAL Team 6—the U.S.’s elite special forces unit—were deployed for this rescue operation. Team 6 is the most elite team within the Navy SEALs and is the unit that successfully carried out the operation to kill Osama bin Laden in 2011. During the briefing, when President Trump asked, “Approximately how many troops were deployed in this operation?”, Chairman Cain replied, “I want to keep it a secret.”

Ahead of the upcoming U.S. midterm elections in November, a new political fundraising group has emerged to support the Donald Trump administration’s artificial intelligence (AI) policies.

Online media outlet Axios reported on the 29th that a non-profit organization called “Innovation Council Action” plans to invest over $100 million (approximately 150 billion won) in this year’s elections to support the Trump administration’s agenda of AI deregulation and the early establishment of infrastructure.

On its website, the group explains that it is using the “AI Action Plan” announced by President Trump last July and the White House’s national policy framework as its guidelines. This organization, which opened an office in Washington, D.C., and began quietly raising funds last year, has compiled scorecards for lawmakers evaluating their level of support for Trump’s AI policies, and uses this to decide which targets to support or oppose. The group is led by Taylor Budowitch, former White House Deputy Chief of Staff, who previously led MAGA, a Super PAC that raised funds for President Trump’s presidential campaign, and the non-profit organization Defense of America (SAG). It also receives the support of David Sachs, Co-Chair of the White House Council of Science and Technology Advisors, who served as the “AI Tsar” of the Trump administration.

Chairman Sachs stated, “Innovation Council Action will play a pivotal role in driving the innovation agenda led by President Trump and the current administration,” adding, “I welcome the committee’s support at this critical juncture.” Unlike other Super PACs, this organization is classified as a non-profit and is not obligated to disclose its donor list. In U.S. elections, political funds flowing through such non-profit organizations are referred to as “dark money.”

In addition to this, there is a super PAC called “Leading the Future” in the U.S. tech industry that supports President Trump’s deregulation of AI. However, NBC reported that this super PAC, which raised $125 million (approximately 190 billion won) with support from OpenAI CEO Greg Brockman and Andreessen Horowitz (a16z), has drawn concern from the White House for pursuing bipartisan support that includes not only Republican but also Democratic candidates. The fact that Josh Blasto, one of the executives leading Leading the Future, is a former aide to Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (New York) also appears to have influenced this distancing.

Meta also invested $65 million to launch two Super PACs—”Forge the Future,” which supports the Republican Party, and “Making Our Tomorrow,” which supports the Democratic Party—to block sporadic AI regulations.

Additionally, Antropic, which is currently engaged in litigation with the government after being recently designated as a “supply chain risk” company by the Department of Defense, donated $20 million (approximately 30 billion won) last month to “Public First Action,” which calls for stricter AI regulations.

On the 29th, marking the one-month mark of the war with Iran, President Donald Trump posted a letter from a pastor on his social media. The letter is said to have been sent to President Trump on October 15 of last year by Franklin Graham, a prominent evangelical pastor from North Carolina.

In the letter, Pastor Graham stated, “The ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the return of the hostage’s home are remarkable achievements,” adding, “Your leadership is historic.” He then quoted a passage from the New Testament Gospel of Matthew stating, “Peacemakers are blessed,” and wrote, “Mr. President, that is exactly you.” Pastor Graham said, “You told the press that you might not go to heaven,” adding, “You may have answered as a joke, but it is a very important matter to know with certainty that your soul is safe in God’s presence and will spend eternity there.”

On October 13 of last year, when asked by reporters on his private plane whether he thought his chances of going to heaven had increased due to mediating the Gaza ceasefire agreement, President Trump replied, “I don’t think I’m going to heaven. I probably am not going to heaven.”

In a Fox News interview on August 19 of last year, President Trump also said, “I want to try to go to heaven, if possible,” while expressing his desire to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and save people. Emphasizing to President Trump the importance of repentance for sins and faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ on the cross, Pastor Graham said, “If you accept it by faith… you will certainly go to heaven. I promise.”

Reverend Graham is the son of the late Reverend Billy Graham, who led large-scale evangelical rallies in Korea. Immediately after President Trump’s defeat in the 2020 presidential election, he stated that the results were not official and that one should be cautious in accepting them; however, he later revealed that “President Trump definitely lost.”

He also served as a bridge for Trump’s visit to Korea during his first term. Attention is focused on the background of President Trump’s decision to disclose a letter on the theme of “peace” that he received about five months ago while mediating a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, amidst the ongoing war with Iran that has caused heavy casualties and a global economic crisis. The day President Trump disclosed Reverend Graham’s letter also falls within the Christian season of Lent, which commemorates the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus mentioned in the letter.