The service says the Warthog will fly to 2030. Evidence shows a lack of commitment and the irreversible loss of A-10 combat capability is instead just months away.

This September, the A-10 “Warthog” Thunderbolt II was scheduled to make its final flight. Instead, the A-10 deployed again, this time supporting combat operations over the Strait of Hormuz, striking Iranian fast-attack craft and maritime threats near one of the world’s most important shipping chokepoints. The A-10 was also the “Sandy” escort that recovered two downed F-15E airmen from inside Iran. Then, later in April, the Air Force reversed course and announced it would keep the jet flying through 2030.

While the Air Force changed the headline, it has yet to follow through with the harder financial commitment needed to preserve actual A-10 combat power. Its fiscal 2027 budget, released shortly after the extension announcement, funds zero dollars of A-10 modernization, cuts depot maintenance below the service’s own stated requirement, and is crippled by “sunset” policy and institution resistance around the aircraft’s “upcoming divestment.” 

In other words, by the end of this year, the A-10 will be without depot support, without a training pipeline, without weapons-school instruction, and without operational-test capacity. To a community that was scheduled for final retirement this October, every month waiting for the promised extension makes rebuilding slower, costlier, and closer to infeasible. Without action, the A-10 will transition from a combat asset to a line item waiting for liquidation.

A-10 combat capacity requires a meaningful shift in priorities that brings back resources and overcomes institutional resistance. Saving a limited number of aircraft is wasteful unless it is matched with resources, personnel, and policy that make it clear the A-10 is a valuable combat asset. The justification for preserving the A-10 is measurable in combat utility and financially sound reasoning. 

I have no sentimental attachment to the A-10. I flew combat fighters as both an F/A-18 TOPGUN graduate and later as a U.S. Air Force F-22 Mission Commander with more than 2,000 flight hours, including combat deployments to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. Since leaving the cockpit, I have worked closely alongside the A-10 community as it reinvented itself around modern warfare and Indo-Pacific priorities. I care about preserving combat capability and making disciplined present-value force-management decisions grounded in operational reality.

The A-10 was not preserved out of nostalgia. It was preserved because recent operations reminded the Air Force that immediate combat power still matters and the A-10 has proven useful in ways many planners underestimated. Today, it provides unique value unmatched by any of its peer tactical aircraft. It operates from austere locations, supports standoff and maritime strike, and validates emerging lower-cost weapons that reduces pressure on more expensive strike aircraft. 

As noted in the opening of this article, the A-10 also fills a critical combat role many have discounted: Sandy missions supporting combat search and rescue. Recent recovery operations over Iran protecting two F-15E airmen demonstrated again that personnel recovery escort, permissive strike, armed reconnaissance, and low-altitude tactical coordination remain critical and complex combat skills. The A-10 community has been supporting these missions for over 50 years. That wealth of knowledge and experience is being displaced. Without a replacement, the Air Force carries a mission requirement it may prove unable to fulfill. 

Why Preserving The A-10 Was The Right Decision 

For years, the Air Force’s divestment logic rested on several assumptions: that future conflicts would prioritize different force packages, that replacement capability would mature on schedule, and that preserving the A-10 generated less value than retiring it. 

Recent events changed that projection. The A-10 has sustained operations in both Europe and the Middle East. Simultaneously, Air Force strategy in the Pacific has benefited from ongoing A-10 support developing distributed combat employment, maritime strike, and advanced weapons integration. The same platform once dismissed as a legacy close-air-support aircraft is now proving adaptable to several emerging operational problems and service priorities. 

The A-10 is not theoretical surge capacity sitting in storage. It remains active combat power supporting real operational demand today. Combat escort, personnel recovery, permissive strike, armed reconnaissance, and maritime interdiction remain ongoing Air Force missions and long-standing A-10 strengths. 

A less known strength of the A-10 is the leverage it provides as a modernization platform. The A-10 community has quietly become one of the Air Force’s most effective rapid integration ecosystems. Because the aircraft relies heavily on government-owned hardware and software architectures, operators and engineers have been able to test and field new capabilities in weeks instead of years. The community has been behind recent breakthrough integrations including AGR-20 APKWS, Small Diameter Bomb, ADM-160 MALD employment, beyond-line-of-sight communications, maritime strike weapons, and network-enabled command and control. 

Nobody is arguing the A-10 is the future of Pacific airpower. It doesn’t need to be. The aircraft has become a low-cost operational laboratory for rapid tactical adaptation fully integrated into real combat capacity. 

The Air Force is trying to solve exactly these problems across the broader force. It has built doctrine around Agile Combat Employment, dispersed basing, rapid combat regeneration, and operations from degraded infrastructure. The A-10 has honed these skills for more than 30 years, proving proficient in these missions as early as Operation Desert Shield, including highway landings, integrated combat turns, austere maintenance operations, and distributed basing experimentation. 

Preserving one of the few communities with real operational experience executing tactics the broader force is still learning is strategically wise. The A-10’s latest life extension was never simply about preserving an airframe. It was about preserving combat capability, operational experience, and one of the Air Force’s few proven rapid-integration ecosystems.

What The Air Force Will Lose 

The current plan has the service preserving a limited number of airframes while allowing the combat system behind the A-10 to collapse. A fleet that numbered more than 280 aircraft just a few years ago, and 162 at the start of fiscal 2026, is set to fall to 54 next year and just 36 by 2030. The cuts land hardest where the expertise is hardest to rebuild: the Air National Guard’s A-10 force, 47 aircraft as recently as last year, goes to zero, its flying hours swapped for a new cyber mission. What survives risks becoming a ghost-fleet. Of the “three squadrons to 2030” the Chief of Staff has promised, the active-duty force shrinks to a single squadron of 17 jets with no spares behind it. 

Combat capability does not reside in aluminum alone. It resides in maintainers, instructor pilots, operational test teams, weapons officers, logistics pipelines, and institutional continuity accumulated over decades. All of that is currently at risk. The capacity to produce, refine and retain this talent and experience is perishable. Airmen face irreversible career decisions. Maintainers transition to other fleets. Weapons instructors leave. Operational test is blocked. Once assignment pipelines close and personnel move on, the impact compounds quickly. To a community that was previously scheduled for final retirement this October, every month of uncertainty adds to the complexity of sustained readiness. Rebuilding later becomes expensive and slow, if not impossible. 

How perishable A-10 specific knowledge is was documented by the Air Force’s own testing. When the Pentagon ran a 2018–2019 flyoff to determine whether the F-35 could replace the A-10 in close air support, forward air control-airborne (FAC-(A)), and combat search and rescue (CSAR), F-35 pilots had no qualification or training requirement for the FAC(A) and CSAR missions. To make the comparison work, the test had to crew the F-35 with former A-10 pilots, aviators who carried their Sandy and weapons-school training over from the very aircraft being retired. The report demonstrated mission performance depended on the aircrew, not the airframe. 

Years later, in 2023 and 2024, the Air Force still had no close-air-support or CSAR training requirement for any F-35 pilot. In April 2026, the formal A-10 training unit at Davis-Monthan, the 357th Fighter Squadron, the schoolhouse that is home to the Sandy qualification, graduated its last class. On the same day, halfway across the world, A-10 flew the combat rescue mission saving downed aircrew inside Iran. The dissonance between real world combat value and misaligned budget politics will be on full display if the 357th schoolhouse and its Sandy training syllabus are allowed to fully inactivate in just a few months. The Air Force has confirmed there is no transition underway to move the Sandy mission to any other airframe, and no successor qualification program in development.

This is not a new concern. In 2021, the Senate formally recorded that A-10 combat search and rescue had been “100 percent effective” in Operation Allied Force, recovering a downed F-117 and F-16 pilot. The Warthog has now done it again over Iran. Congress has consistently levied the concern but the Air Force and its budget still haven’t made this a real priority.

The Air Force has already invested heavily to preserve A-10 viability well beyond 2030: roughly $1.1 billion to re-wing 173 aircraft, completed in 2019, and a follow-on contract worth up to $999 million to put new wings on the remaining 109, about $2.1 billion in total to extend the entire fleet’s structural life into the late 2030s. But even those investments faced similar institutional resistance inside the Air Force. The service repeatedly placed A-10 funding on its “unfunded requirements” list rather than in its base budget, while funding upgrades to other legacy fighters instead. Congress has consistently met Air Force resistance, such as in 2021 when the service spent just $15.6 million of $100 million Congress had appropriated to sustain the fleet into the 2030s. Allowing the enterprise behind those re-winged jets to collapse now would write off an investment the taxpayer and Congress already paid for and has barely begun to recoup.

This is not a theoretical risk. When the F-22 production line closed at 186 aircraft, well short of the original requirement of 750, the assumption was that follow-on capability would arrive to fill the gap. The limited F-22 fleet now bears disproportionate sustainment costs awaiting delivery of the proposed F-47 sometime in the mid-2030s, and even then, the two could serve alongside each other for a period of time. Timing errors in force design can become effectively irreversible, especially once the infrastructure that sustains a capability is dismantled. In the A-10 case, that includes not only the aircraft but also the depot and integration ecosystem that support it. Once those are gone, the option value is gone with them. 

The financial logic behind accelerated divestment is also less straightforward than topline savings figures suggest. Retiring the A-10 does not eliminate operational demand. Combat search and rescue escort, permissive strike, armed reconnaissance, and distributed-operations requirements still exist. Those missions and their costs migrate elsewhere: more flight hours on higher-cost aircraft, additional maintenance burden, increased schoolhouse demand, and greater operational tempo across communities already under strain.

The A-10 offers combat power at a discount through both cost per flight hour and cost per effect on target. Mission specialization means A-10 employing laser-guided rockets, gun, or other comparatively low-cost weapons provides a strong complement to high-end fighter packages and their standoff weapons. 

The Air Force mission, its airmen, and our nation’s combat capacity all stand to benefit from a more complete commitment to the A-10 and its community.

What The Air Force Should Do 

The Air Force must revisit their A-10 commitments to ensure the extension is real. 

Restore and protect the 357th Fighter Squadron at Davis-Monthan. The 357th is the Air Force’s formal A-10 training unit and the institutional home of the Sandy qualification, the schoolhouse where combat-search-and-rescue expertise is produced, refined, and passed to the next generation of aircrew. It graduated its last class in April 2026 and is set to inactivate this year. No successor Sandy qualification program exists across the Department of War, and the Air Force has confirmed none is in development. Inactivating the 357th severs the center of excellence that produces the very capability the service says it values. Reversing that decision is the single highest-leverage action available, and the clearest signal of whether the 2030 commitment is real. The squadron should be retained until a validated replacement for the Sandy mission is stood up and producing qualified aircrew on a replacement platform.

Stabilize the rest of the enterprise through the extension timeline. If the service intends to preserve meaningful capability through 2030, the supporting structure has to survive with it. That means protected funding for depot maintenance, training, operational-test, and maintainer retention. Exempt the A-10 from “sunset” policy where budgets are still being slashed with justification of “upcoming divestment.” Instead, leverage the A-10 operational-test process as a rapid-integration and tactics pathfinder, capturing and transferring those lessons across the broader force before the capability disappears. 

Tie any future divestment to demonstrated replacement readiness, not the calendar. Do not divest the A-10 until there is a trained and capable replacement for each mission it performs. Build a deliberate plan for a clean handoff of mission responsibility and the community knowledge behind it, and gate future retirements on proven replacement capability rather than programmatic timelines.

The case for retiring the A-10 was always a timing argument: accept a measured reduction in near-term capacity in exchange for a better future force. The Air Force already announced the A-10 was back. Now it must fund the decision it already made before the combat capacity disappears anyway.

Paul “Gu$” Garcia is a TOPGUN Navy Fighter Weapons School instructor and graduate who flew combat missions in the F/A-18 across Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. He transitioned to fly the F-22 in the IndoPacific as a member of the Hawaii Air National Guard, leading the Homeland Defense mission for the Hawaii and Guam Air Defense Region for Operation Noble Eagle. He retired from the U.S. Air Force as the lead for PACAF modernization and innovation in 2025. He is Managing Partner and founder of Merge Combinator.

The opinions and views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views or opinions of the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Department of Defense, or any part of the U.S. government.

BBC fans think they’ve spotted a budding relationship on the cards for two fan-favourites.

Casualty viewers believe a romance is unfolding.

The latest episode of the BBC show was full of drama as fans saw the continued fallout of Stevie Nash’s (Elinor Lawless) relationship with junior doctor Matty Linlaker (Aron Julius).

While she is yet to find out her fate at the Holby ED, viewers also saw a relationship come to an abrupt end when Cam Mickelthwaite (Barney Walsh) broke it off with Indie Jankowski (Naomi Wakszlak).

However, as one relationship ends, it seems as though another could be on the cards for two Casualty fan-favourites.

During the programme, Siobhan McKenzie (Melanie Hill) tried to get some of the patients waiting to be seen to leave due to the overcrowding.

Showing them that the black water they’d ingested was nothing to worry about, as someone had put activated charcoal into the water tanks, her demonstration worked as people started to leave.

Jan Jenning (Di Botcher) pointed out that people had started to go to Siobhan before she highlighted a black mark she had on her mouth. When Siobhan failed to wipe it away, Jan sprang into action and took it off for her.

She replied: “Oh, it’s like nobody loved you, as my mother would say!”

When Siobhan asked if she’d managed to get the mark away, BBC fans noticed Jan lingering a little too long as she stared at her intensely.

People on social media were quick to comment on the interaction, as many think a romance is on the cards.

One person on X said: “Jan and Siobhan need to get together.” Another commented: “Is anyone else excited for Jan and Shiv.”

While another person shared: “Jan fancies Siobhan.” A fourth tweeted: “Jan’s eyes. Is she seeing Siobhan in a new light?”

On Reddit, someone else wrote: “Jan and Siobhan? I can see the two maybe getting into a relationship or sharing a drunken kiss, especially with the scenes they shared lately.”

Someone agreed, replying: “I’m not sure if they’re gonna do a full relationship, but like you, I think they’re definitely gearing up for some kind of fling. I hope Siobhan does some happier storylines soon poor woman can’t catch a break.”

Casualty is available to watch on BBC iPlayer.

His release comes after journalist Mousa al-Omar dropped a complaint over online criticism.

British Syrian activist Hassan Akkad has been released from a prison in Damascus after four days detention for alleged criticism of public figures.

Akkad was taken into custody from a cafe in the al-Maliki neighbourhood of Damascus on Wednesday at about 9:45pm local time (18:45 GMT), a statement by his organisation said on Friday.

Akkad is the founder of the “Give Us the Money That You Owe!” campaign, which tracks large financial commitments made by public figures during a donation drive to fund Syria’s reconstruction.

His detention followed a legal complaint filed by Syrian journalist and presenter Mousa al-Omar in relation to “Hassan’s social media activities and public comments” after Akkad criticised al-Omar for allegedly failing to deliver on his financial pledges during the donations campaign.

Public Prosecutor Judge Hossam Khattab confirmed last week that Akkad had been detained due to warrants issued against him for failing to present himself to the Cybercrime Control Division in relation to al-Omar’s complaint. Khattab also said other plaintiffs had filed cases against Akkad for slander and defamation.

The activist’s release on Sunday came after al-Omar told Al Jazeera that he had instructed his lawyer to withdraw the complaint against Akkad, and said that everything pledged to the campaign had been paid.

On Sunday, al-Omar again posted on X that he had withdrawn the complaint against Akkad.

“My legal representative dropped the right and the lawsuit against my brother Hassan this morning and pardoned him for the sake of Almighty God … I was saddened by what he brought upon himself, and I wish him success in his social media activities and I will always be a supporter of him,” he wrote in Arabic.

Akkad, who is also a filmmaker, was imprisoned twice by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime for documenting anti-government protests in 2011.

After fleeing Syria, he stayed in the Middle East before making an 87-day journey across Europe to reach the UK in September 2015.

Video of his gruelling trip was included in the documentary series, Exodus: Our Journey to Europe, which went on to win a British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) Award.

Keely Hodgkinson pulled out of the 400m final at the UK Athletics Championships moments before Sunday’s race.

The Olympic 800m champion has been competing over the shorter distance in a bid to improve her first-lap speed and challenge for the 800m world record this summer.

After qualifying from Saturday’s heats, she warmed up for the final in Birmingham but stepped off the track right before the finalists were put under starters’ orders.

Hodgkinson looked emotional as she stood at the side of the track before making her way back inside the Alexander Stadium.

The 24-year-old endured an injury-disrupted 2025 and her shock withdrawal on Sunday comes four weeks before the London Diamond League meeting, which she had earmarked for a tilt at the 800m world record.

More to follow.

Sitting in the control room of their home studio known as the Centre of Mental Arts (COMA for short), Long Beach husband-and-wife duo Scott Montoya and Julia Kugel smile as they discuss new music they recorded for their band Soft Palms. Their new album, titled “In Echo,” has been in the works for over five years. The 10-song album, out Friday on Everloving Records, was inspired by their frustration about how they feel the world has devolved since 2020.

“The first record I was like, ‘I want to give the world a hug,’” Kugel says. “And then this one I was like, f— this world.”

For Kugel and Montoya, the album serves as the latest chapter of their creative and personal journey. The pair met in 2012 at a music festival in Dallas (“The most romantic city,” Kugel quips), while playing in the Atlanta-based band the Coathangers and Orange County’s the Growlers, respectively. They bonded over a shared disgust at gladiator shoes, and soon thereafter, were in a relationship.

By 2017, they were married and settled in Long Beach. Despite Kugel’s role in the Coathangers at the time (Montoya left the Growlers in 2016), the couple wanted to form a band. Previously, they recorded a pair of songs that constituted Kugel’s second solo seven-inch single. That experience made them comfortable knowing they could balance their professional and personal lives.

“He’s super easy to work with,” Kugel says of Montoya, who sits beside her, trying to hide a smile. She looks at him and continues, “he’s very talented and very patient.”

“When we were in our other bands, we used to meet up on tour,” Montoya, who also produces and engineers for other artists, says. ”You see the absolute worst of people on tour … so this is nothing.”

To kickstart Soft Palms, Kugel drew from a batch of songs she had previously written that had no home. Being able to record in their own studio allowed the pair to craft songs without feeling any pressure to meet a deadline.

By late 2019, the pair put the finishing touches on their self-titled debut. When the record was released in July 2020, the pandemic was still in full force. The pair were disappointed and upset by the state of the world, and after a few years of stewing, Kugel and Montoya got started on a second album.

Don’t be fooled by its breezy ’60s-analog vintage pop sound. Soft Palms are angry, and that informs the spirit of “In Echo.”

The pair points to “Radio” as the album’s bellwether. First released in 2025, the song rails against how, over the past handful of years, people have fought for the sake of fighting, with no end in sight.

More strikingly, on the biting “Nervous as Hell,” Montoya points to Fox News as “infecting everyone’s parents.”

“I did some digging because I couldn’t believe something that hateful existed,” he says of the network, specifically its landmark $787-million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems. “It turned it from this horrible thing into this s— business that has taken advantage of the elderly and destroyed families.”

That anger continues on the angsty rocker “The Wedding Song.” Kugel points to attending a wedding where a family member married a “total raging maniac,” and how they dealt with the buildup of delicately balancing being cordial yet firm.

“He [the family member] goes, ‘I just want you to show up and shut up!” she says. “I was like, ‘Well, firstly, f— you. Then secondly, this is a song — you just handed me gold.”

Since settling in Long Beach, for the last 10 years Kugel and Montoya took it upon themselves to help foster a positive, artistic community. It’s that mindset that pushed them to found and operate their 501(c)(3) nonprofit called Studios for Schools with the goal of providing recording equipment to underprivileged schools.

Their DIY work ethic in entertainment was also the driving force behind Happy Sundays, a free Long Beach-based music festival. Running for 10 years, the fest created a block party in the city’s Zaferia neighborhood that eventually expanded into a full weekend of shows across stages set up at local businesses to host a diverse lineup of veteran and up-and-coming area bands. Though the event was paused this year so they can focus on the new album and book, the couple plan to bring it back in 2027.

“It was like a statement in that way of like f— these giant prices, VIP experiences and all of that stuff,” Kugel says. “It’s the anti-music festival and a celebration of community.”

Keeping with that spirit, and drawing from the experiences of their two-decade careers, last month the pair released a book titled “How to Be Self-Reliant in the Music Business.” The genesis of this self-published guidebook occurred when the pair realized they were not receiving a portion of a royalty stream they were owed. They knew that if they were in the dark on the issues they thought they knew, others likely were as well.

“We decided to turn it into a book because we realized there’s so much stuff that few artists know about on their own,” Montoya says. “I want people to understand the scope of what they’re actually getting into, and the reality of their situations.”

“It’s a very thorough overview,” Kugel adds.

The book includes information beyond what one would find in Donald S. Passman’s longstanding industry bible “All You Need to Know About the Music Business.” With assistance from a lawyer friend and a CPA family member, the pair addresses topics ranging from backstage etiquette to managing social media to dealing with record labels and publishing companies. They hope that it will provide a blueprint for bands old and new to better navigate music’s notoriously choppy waters. Their accessible, snack-size chapters move fluidly as they explain the realities artists face in 2026.

Battling through the disappointment of the first part of the decade allowed Kugel and Montoya to find their creative way. Armed with this infusion of activity across various disciplines, the couple is inspired to continue to shake their way out of the past. Though focused on their impending U.S. and European tour, the duo promise that the next Soft Palms album won’t take as long and are mulling over their next music-industry book project. For now.

“It’s a lot to keep up with all of these projects,” Montoya says. “We work all day, every day. And it’s been cool to see signs that it’s paying off.”

The U.S. Department of Justice — make that the U.S. Department of “Justice” — is sniffing around Gavin Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

This is widely seen as a throw-me-in-the-briar-patch gift from President Trump, coming as California’s governor edges ever closer toward a 2028 run for the White House. The presumed effort to cut down a political foe could instead boost Newsom’s chances of winning the Democratic nomination, or so it’s being suggested.

After all, look at how Trump’s verbal bludgeoning elevated former Rep. Adam Schiff. The House has typically been a dead end for lawmakers seeking statewide office in California. Today, the former Burbank congressman and Trump tormentor is a United States senator.

In truth, however, it’s far too early to say how the investigation of Newsom and his wife plays out politically, not least because it’s unclear whether there’s merit to the probe or if it’s merely a fruitless search-and-destroy mission by Trump’s Department of Retribution, Vengeance and Settling Old Scores

Beyond that, the first ballots of the 2028 campaign won’t be cast for roughly a year and a half. The Democratic National Convention, where the party will install its nominee, doesn’t begin for another 778 days.

Your friendly political columnist won’t resort to that hoariest of cliches about such-and-such duration being a lifetime in politics. But for some perspective, let’s go back 778 days.

President Joe Biden was running for reelection and about to challenge Trump to a pair of early debates. Trump was sequestered in a New York City courtroom being prosecuted on 34 felony counts.

A lot happened in the weeks and months that followed, including Biden’s self-immolation on the debate stage and Trump’s criminal conviction. A lot more will happen in the weeks and months to come. There’s no telling what. But it’s safe to say the fight for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination will not be decided by anything that’s taken place in June 2026.

Still, Newsom is once again sunning himself in the national spotlight and for that he has Trump to thank.

With his exquisitely tuned political antennae, the governor jumped out front of the president by announcing last week the feds were targeting him and his wife. (Naturally, Newsom’s revelation was accompanied by a rage-bait email — subject line: “Because I am thinking of running for president” — that denounced the “political witch hunt” and asked for money.)

“After calling for my arrest last year, Donald Trump directed his Department of Justice to investigate me,” Newsom said in a 4 ½-minute, direct-to-camera video that framed the investigation before prosecutors had the chance. “And just in the last week, I’ve learned his campaign has reached my own home: To get me, he’s coming after my wife, Jen.”

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Newsom and his wife both adamantly denied any wrongdoing and, of course, they must be presumed innocent until and unless proven otherwise.

But there was something a bit disingenuous about the governor’s chivalrous defense. Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker who calls herself California’s “First Partner,” is no mere housewife baking cookies and holding teas, in the famous words of Hillary Rodham Clinton. (Hold the outrage, folks, this is not some retrograde criticism of career-seeking women.)

Among her many public-facing activities, Siebel Newsom heads The Representation Project, a nonprofit focused on challenging gender stereotypes. The organization has faced criticism for accepting donations from companies that lobby the governor, so it’s not unreasonable to ask whether those interests have improperly sought to influence Newsom by giving money to Siebel Newsom’s causes.

My Times colleagues reported that an investigation related to Siebel Newsom has been underway for about a year and was launched by federal prosecutors in Sacramento based on whistle-blower information provided in California. It was not, their source said, the result of a directive out of Washington.

A second probe, they reported, is related to Newsom’s ex-chief of staff, Dana Williamson, who pleaded guilty last month to bank and wire fraud involving a scheme to steal campaign funds from Xavier Becerra, the Democratic candidate for governor.

The problem with all this federal sleuthing is the utter lack of credibility attached to Trump’s Justice Department. Which is what happens when you turn the department into an arm of Trump’s malevolent fiefdom and deploy its prosecutors as henchmen targeting the president’s perceived enemies.

“This is a huge problem,” Randall Eliason, former chief of the Public Corruption Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, told Politico. “In any political corruption prosecution, the defense almost always claims it is a ‘political witch hunt,’ that prosecutors are targeting him or her for some political reason.

“The best defense to that has always been [the Justice Department’s] tradition of independence from politics and long track record of pursuing corruption cases based only on the facts and law, without regard to political considerations,” Eliason said. “The Trump administration has abandoned that independence without even trying to hide it.”

The probe of Newsom and his wife presents more questions than answers.

It’s grody, but not criminal on its face, for lobbyists to curry favor with the governor by throwing cash at his wife’s endeavors — if, in fact, that’s been the case. Special interests spending money to gain access and influence is about as common in Sacramento and other capitals as statues, domed buildings and manicured lawns.

So why then are the feds investigating Newsom? Why now? Is there any fire, or is it all a lot of smoke?

Perhaps most important, where can you turn to get an impartial answer?

The decision on Stokes and Atkinson brings an element of closure to an extraordinary period, as English cricket has had to deal with yet another off-field controversy.

Without Stokes and Atkinson, an inexperienced England team showing five changes to the one that won the first Test was soundly beaten in the second.

It means Stokes will be back for a crucial decider at Trent Bridge, with England desperate for a series win to alleviate pressure that has grown over the dismal Ashes winter and this latest chaotic episode.

And while Stokes’ return as a leader and all-rounder is vital for his team, there will be renewed scrutiny on his relationship with the rest of the England hierarchy, in particular head coach Brendon McCullum.

All of Stokes, McCullum and director of cricket Rob Key denied the captain and coach were at odds during the Ashes, when England were hammered 4-1.

Speaking on Sunday, after the loss at The Oval, McCullum said he is ready to work with Stokes again.

“We’ve worked together intimately for four years,” said McCullum. “We’ve achieved some cool things and let ourselves down in other things.

“Our motivation, belief and ambition for this side has not wavered. We have robust conversations all the way through and I think that is to be expected when you’re in positions of leadership. There is a mutual respect to how we operate with those.

“I anticipate we’ll be able to work together really well in the week coming and I’m sure that both of us have that same vision for this cricket team.”

Historic negotiations between Iran and the United States are officially underway, marking the start of what mediators describe as a crucial 60-day process.

Joseph Soto is an activist and co-founder of the Transgresores collective. This 34-year-old, who holds a degree in performing arts, has emerged as a leading figure in the defense of the rights of the sexual and gender diversity community in Venezuela, with a particular focus on raising awareness about trans men.

How was the transition process to a trans man in Venezuela amid a full-blown crisis?

It was undeniably very complex. The years 2016–2017 saw a worsening of the socioeconomic crisis in Venezuela as a result of the US blockade and sanctions, which had a drastic impact on day-to-day life, public services, and the population’s living standards. Everything pointed to the fact that, in order to transition, I would have to leave the country, but I decided not to. There had to be some way to be a trans man in Venezuela.

It was difficult, not only because of the material and socioeconomic conditions, but above all because of the lack of information and the void of references surrounding the issue of trans masculinity. Historically, trans women have shouldered the burden of visibility within the struggles for sexual diversity. When we talk, for example, about the 1969 Stonewall riots, trans women played a leading role. Trans men, on the other hand, have not taken on that protagonism.  It caused me a great deal of anxiety to not know what to do, where to start, or where to go. I figured it out by researching, studying, seeing how things were done in other countries, reading medical protocols, analyzing different perspectives, and acquiring theoretical tools to develop my own process. But also by making connections and building networks here. That’s what saved me.

In the end, it was challenging but not impossible. And that’s exactly how I began to make connections with activists and advocates in the field of sexual and gender diversity, who in turn put me in touch with trans peers who were here in Venezuela. That allowed me to navigate the initial challenges of my gender identity transition, which involved building a collective of trans men called Transgresores.

In general terms, how would you describe the access to healthcare and medical treatment for trans people in Venezuela?

I believe there is a great need for discussion, training, and awareness-raising among healthcare workers regarding the care of our population. In addition to the inherent weaknesses of the public healthcare system, resulting from the US blockade and internal mismanagement, which create endless hurdles for receiving care at a hospital or affording treatment at a clinic, there is also the anxiety stemming from the possibility that a medical professional might be prejudiced or lack knowledge about trans issues. 

The trans community doesn’t just go to healthcare centers for issues related to their gender transition, such as hormone replacement therapy or surgery. We may also experience general illness or suffer an accident, and prejudice stemming from ignorance can affect the quality of care we receive. It’s happened to me. Once I went to the hospital in Lidice (Caracas) for a swollen lymph node in my armpit, but when I mentioned that I was trans, the doctor refused to treat me, telling me to go to my primary care physician or an endocrinologist. He couldn’t even prescribe some ibuprofen. Prejudice won out. 

Worse still is the treatment of transgender women. Discrimination persists, and the medical field is no exception. But we exist, and we have the right to healthcare. It seems like something very basic, but it’s work that still needs to be done. In the current context, with the Coexistence Program and the call made by the acting president herself for the recognition of sexual diversity, there is an opportunity for the Ombudsman’s Office, which has been facilitating this debate, to collaborate with the governing bodies in the healthcare sector to develop a training and awareness-raising process. 

In other Latin American countries such as Cuba, or certain provinces in Argentina and Uruguay, there are established protocols and transition processes. This is provided through the public healthcare system, including access to hormones and surgical procedures if that is what the person desires. However, in Venezuela, there is no public health policy established and regulated by the state geared toward the care of transgender people. Before that can happen, there must be a rigorous debate since, in addition to transgender people, gay men and lesbians also suffer this type of discrimination.

Two issues stand out on the gender and sexual diversity agenda: marriage equality and legal name and gender changes for transgender people. Can you explain why these two issues are so central? And what other demands does the movement have?

In what concerns marriage equality, the Venezuelan sexual and gender diversity movement submitted a bill to the National Assembly in 2014. In other words, work has already been done on this issue, including going through the various legal steps required by the Venezuelan legal framework to present a bill of this magnitude to the legislature. But in the end, that debate did not proceed. It was shelved despite having met all the requirements. That is why we still demand a debate, to overcome the fear of recognizing other forms of family and to integrate ourselves as subjects of equal rights within our legal framework. That would allow, for example, our partners to have inheritance rights. 

Regarding the issue of legal name and gender changes for transgender people, there are two key points. The first is that for trans people, when the name registered on legal documents does not match how we see ourselves, it can often expose us to situations of violence and discrimination in administrative procedures or when dealing with law enforcement. There have been instances of discrimination, violence, and abuse by the police when they identify a person as trans. 

The second reason is that there is no need to create a new right. What is needed is to enforce and implement an existing one. The Organic Law on the Civil Registry establishes that every citizen of this country has the right to change their name at least once if it is humiliating or does not correspond to their gender. That is why the Venezuelan sexual and gender diversity movement has been so vocal in demanding this provision. As for other demands, there is the issue of the right to a life free from violence and discrimination, because discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation is still very much alive in Venezuela. Certain municipalities have proposed decrees on this matter, but I believe that is insufficient. We need a legal framework that establishes penalties and, above all, addresses all the various forms of discrimination faced by our community.

In other interviews and articles, you have talked about the harm suffered from studying in religious schools, despite the law establishing that education should be secular. As we witness a major offensive from evangelical groups in national politics, what is your perspective?

Indeed, the rise of conservative religious thought is a threat to sexual and gender diversity. But at the end of the day, this is nothing new. We are the cultural product of [Spanish] conquest and colonization, and from that point on, the Catholic religion was imposed. 

Now, [Protestant] fundamentalist groups are definitely on the rise both nationally and regionally. But I believe the threat does not lie in religious thought itself, because this country is not inhabited solely by Christians. It is a melting pot of religions, beliefs, and faiths. I believe that our commitment must be precisely to celebrate, through sexual and gender diversity, that religious pluralism, so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of any group. My call is for sexual diversity to provide the country with a roadmap, a vision of a truly diverse, respectful society that aims for recognition and is free from violence and discrimination. We must engage in a meaningful debate about the kind of society we want to build. This involves addressing educational, cultural, and media issues.

Most of the country is focused on socioeconomic issues, and this is pushing other important questions to the backburner. What does the sexual and gender diversity movement propose in these circumstances?

I believe that the diversity movement owes a debt to the country because it has often limited itself to merely making demands and pointing out the shortcomings of the Venezuelan state and the Venezuelan people, but it has also failed to develop a strategic, programmatic vision to offer the country a vision of governance and an institutional framework.

My view is that we need to open up a broader debate and reestablish spaces for discussion within collectives, organizations, and platforms. Migration has also disrupted spaces for activism, because many sexual, gender, and diversity activists left the country. But it’s time to regroup and rise to the challenge of the times. What do we propose for the country in the present context? How do we see it? That is the debate we are called upon to have. I cannot definitively say what the sexual and gender diversity movement proposes because it is a debate that has yet to take place. But our approach cannot be limited to marriage equality and sexual identity.

You have also expressed concerns about a sector of the LGBTIQ+ community subordinating its agenda to the dynamics of foreign funding. Can you elaborate on this?

On this topic, I am referring to the fact that many of the sexual and gender diversity initiatives or forms of activism have been limited by NGOs since the international humanitarian system entered the country, as a result of sanctions, the crisis, and so on. In this kind of activism, political action has fallen short because it has been restricted solely to activities outlined within a given project sponsored by a specific funder, and it has lost its own organic character. It cannot be that the only spaces for us to meet and discuss are fully determined by the timelines, categories, and demands of a specific NGO project.

We must have our own agenda, with our own perspective and objectives. One that, above all, is guided by sexual and gender diversity activism and struggle. We have the responsibility and the challenge of overcoming this logic to reclaim an organic structure linked to concrete spaces of work and transformation, to a community, to a specific educational institution, to our territories, with our own agendas, categories, and timelines, not those predefined by an external organization. 

The idea is not to demonize external funding, but our actions cannot be completely determined by it. Furthermore, these project activities fall short of the transformation we owe to our society. This is a personal perspective, and I’m sure I’ll get a lot of hate for it, but painting a bike lane with a rainbow flag in wealthy parts of eastern Caracas doesn’t bring about real change, even if resources, information, media coverage, and human effort are devoted to it. In terms of social and structural transformation, it achieves nothing; it leaves no lasting impact. We need a deeper, more strategic vision that harnesses the transformative potential we possess as a collective, as organized actors in society. That is why we must rebuild the movement.

ROXY Horner stripped down to her birthday suit to ring in another year as the family celebrated in style.

The 35-year-old model married her comedian hubby Jack Whitehall in April and was taken to her “favourite stay” in the UK for her birthday.

The famous couple and their two-year-old daughter Elsie stayed in the Lion Lodge at the Port Lympne safari resort in Kent.

Roxy shared a reel of photos to her Instagram that included her floating nude in a luxurious Scandinavian bath that overlooked the lion reserve.

The model also shared a photo of Elsie enjoying the bath as lions roamed outside their window.

They also got up close and personal with some giraffes, including getting the opportunity hand feed them.

FOXY ROXY

Roxy Horner stuns in sheer dress as she steps out with boyfriend Jack Whitehall

name game

Jack Whitehall admits he apologised to Becky Hill after ‘classist’ nickname

Other photos in Roxy’s post included them enjoying a high tea lunch and cruising in a buggy as they looked at the animals.

Finally, Roxy shared a video of Jack playing with Elsie as he looked in on her sitting in a open vehicle.

“For my birthday we stayed in a Lion lodge at my favourite stay in the uk @portlympnepark… So peaceful. Mine. Cuddles. Majestic creatures. Happy birthday to me. My favourite creatures to interact with,” Roxy captioned the post.

Roxy is no stranger to posing in bath tubs and shared snippets of her honeymoon where her and Jack rode on the Orient Express.

She posed in a decadent bath as they travelled from Venice to Paris.

Posting snaps of the train and dining carriage, Roxy wrote online: “Having a bath on a train is so romantic.”

IF you’ve spent the last few months telling yourself you’ll book your summer holiday “next week,” don’t panic. You’re in good company.

This year, British holidaymakers are leaving it later than ever to lock in their summer breaks.

Normally, playing chicken with the calendar is terrible news for your bank balance. But right now, I’m seeing something interesting.

Because summer is staring us down, hotels with empty beds and airlines with empty seats are gently slashing prices to get bookings over the line.

And the result is some genuinely surprising short-haul beach bargains are sitting on the board for under £400pp.

I’ve crunched the numbers and picked out ten spots where your late-booking budget will stretch way further than you think.

Puerto del Carmen, Lanzarote, Spain

If you want a completely foolproof option, Lanzarote rarely misses.

Puerto del Carmen is an absolute staple, and right now, it’s delivering significantly better value than a lot of mainland Spanish resorts.

You get the reliable Canary sun, decent beaches, and enough life going on that you won’t get bored.

I spotted a five-night stay at the THB Flora from £370pp this August.

What makes this hotel a solid pick for me is the location – it’s close enough to the main strip when you want a drink, but tucked far enough away that you aren’t fighting a crowd just to claim a sunbed in the morning.

Icmeler, Turkey

Icmeler has always been the smarter, slightly more sophisticated neighbour to Marmaris.

The bay is stunning, the beach is framed by pine hills, and it completely avoids the chaotic mega-resort energy you find elsewhere in Turkey.

And this year, it’s consistently overdelivering for the price.

Case in point: five nights at the Petunya Konak Boutique Hotel is coming in from £385pp this August.

This hotel feels way more boutique than your standard package hotel too.

The pool setup is hidden away in the gardens, giving you a level of quiet that is gold dust during peak August.

Cavtat, Croatia

Dubrovnik may be grabbing all the headlines these days, but Cavtat remains one of Croatia‘s smartest-value coastal towns.

It serves up the exact same crystal-clear Adriatic water and postcard waterfront dining, just minus the suffocating levels of tourism.

If you’ve never done Croatia, a five-night stay at the Epidaurus Hotel from £385pp this August is a brilliant place to start.

The real win here is the logistics: you’re perfectly placed to enjoy Cavtat’s laid-back vibe, but you can hop on a quick boat ride into Dubrovnik whenever you fancy a bit of sightseeing.

Lagos, Algarve, Portugal

Lagos might just be my favourite corner of the Algarve.

It manages to balance unreal, cliff-backed beaches and a character-packed old town without feeling like a plastic tourist trap.

Finding peak summer deals here under the 400-quid mark is a massive result.

I dug up five nights at the Aqualuz Suite Hotel Apartamentos from £388pp this August.

And the selling point at this hotel, for me, is space. Because you get an apartment setup to actually spread out in, while still being an easy stroll from both the sand and Lagos’ top-notch independent restaurant scene.

Qawra, Malta

Malta doesn’t always get the attention it deserves for a summer beach break, which on this occasion plays into the hands of us holiday deal finders.

Because it offers guaranteed scorching weather, great swimming spots, and some of the warmest evening temperatures in Europe.

If you’re bored of the usual Spain or Turkey rotation, it’s a top shout.

You can grab five nights at the Best Western Premier Malta from £295pp this August.

And frankly, this place looks and feels much more expensive than the price tag suggests.

The rooftop pool alone looks like it belongs to a luxury city-break hotel rather than a budget summer deal.

Puerto Pollensa, Majorca, Spain

If you want Majorca but want to skip the neon lights and rowdy strips, Puerto Pollensa on the north coast is tough to beat.

It’s got a beautiful, relaxed bay and a classic, old-school Mediterranean feel.

I’ll be honest – this is normally a premium area, but 2026 keeps throwing curveballs that I love catching.

Because I found a five-night stay at the Club del Sol Aparthotel from £393pp this August, giving you a foothold in one of the prettiest, most civilized parts of the island while keeping your budget completely under control.

Playa del Ingles, Gran Canaria, Spain

Gran Canaria is a reliable destination for Brits for a reason.

If you’re scrambling for a last-minute getaway, Playa del Ingles is an easy win thanks to its massive beach and lively town center – this place is built for convenience.

I clocked five nights at the Servatur Waikiki from £400pp this August.

It’s right on the money in terms of location too, as you’re close to the beach, close to the nightlife, and it serves as a great, no-nonsense base for a classic sun-and-beer holiday.

Elounda, Crete, Greece

Elounda is proof that you don’t need a luxury budget to stay in one of Crete’s most scenic spots.

It’s known for its clear waters and charming little harbour, and is exactly the kind of place that usually charges a premium just for the view.

However, I spotted a five-night stay at the Alikes Hotel Apartments from £373pp this August.

And this hotel puts you right in the heart of the village, so you can easily wander between the tavernas and waterfront bars without needing to budget for taxis.

Sunny Beach, Bulgaria

Bulgaria has been sneakily dominating the budget travel market for years, and while Sunny Beach is famous for being cheap, the actual standard of the hotels has shot up recently.

Which now puts the destination in a perfect spot – overdelivering on quality compared to what you pay.

Just look at this: I found a five-night stay at the Lion Sunny Beach from £388pp this August.

And this place perfectly highlights what modern Bulgaria does well: it’s contemporary, stylish, and comfortable, without ever making you feel like you’ve compromised just to save a few quid.

Vlore, Albania

If there’s one destination you need to look at before everyone else ruins it (sorry), it’s Albania.

The Albanian Riviera has been gaining serious traction in the last couple of years, and Vlore sits right in the perfect spot.

The beaches are stellar, the water rivals Greece, but the prices haven’t caught up with the quality yet.

But in my experience, that window won’t stay open forever.

This summer, you can lock in five nights at the Valza Boutique Hotel from £388pp in August.

It’s a sleek, boutique property that you’d easily pay double for if it were sitting across the water in Italy or Croatia.

My advice? Get this one booked before the rest of the UK finds out.

*Prices correct at the time of publication.

HARRISBURG, Pa. — Six months after President Trump warned states not to regulate artificial intelligence, they are increasingly doing just that.

Congress has stalled on producing federal regulations of artificial intelligence as states forge ahead and scrutinize how chatbots interact with children, how AI systems are used by employers and what developers must do to try to prevent an AI-caused catastrophe.

State lawmakers have stepped back from earlier, wider-ranging attempts to regulate AI that were vetoed or otherwise derailed by governors who viewed the measures as too onerous toward the industry’s development, including efforts to hold developers accountable for bias in AI systems.

But they are returning with legislation that is more targeted and, often, probes the corners of life where Americans interact with AI but may not know it.

Presidential power versus state power

Trump’s move to restrain states’ actions on AI drew criticism from members of both political parties and civil liberties and consumer rights groups who worried that banning state regulation would amount to a gift to AI giants, who enjoy little to no oversight.

Trump has made AI a top national and economic security priority, and he said that letting states clutter the regulatory playing field for an industry that’s spending trillions of dollars and driving the economy is too risky in the race with China for AI superiority.

Trump issued an executive order that directed the attorney general to create a task force to challenge state laws that are more than “minimally burdensome,” and directed the Commerce Department to draw up a list of problematic regulations. It also threatened to restrict funding from a broadband deployment program and other grant programs to states with AI laws.

The White House said it wouldn’t target state laws that seek to prevent fraud and protect consumers and children.

In the meantime, the Trump administration released a “national policy framework” in which it urged Congress to preempt state AI laws that are out of step with its regulatory worldview and to pass legislation to protect children, intellectual property rights and free speech. A recent bipartisan draft proposal in the House was met with withering criticism from key Democrats and Republicans.

The White House has given no indication that it has made good on its threat to enforce the president’s executive order by going to court against a state’s AI law or withholding money. In a statement, it said the Trump administration is “eager to work with partners” to enact its policy framework.

States seem largely unrestrained by Trump

Trump’s executive order didn’t seem to discourage states from trying to regulate how AI is used. More bills have been introduced this year than last, including by Republicans, said Justine Gluck, policy director of the Future of Privacy Forum, a nonprofit that advocates for data privacy in technology and whose members are from industry, academia and civic groups.

In Illinois, legislation on the desk of Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker piggybacked on elements of laws passed last year in California and New York that require developers of large advanced AI models to create protocols to prevent their systems from causing catastrophes such as a biological weapons attack, power outage or large-scale hack.

Illinois added a requirement that AI developers must get an independent auditor to review whether they are complying with their own policies. Analysts see it as a step toward requiring AI developers to take greater accountability for their products.

The bill’s sponsor, Democratic state Sen. Mary Edly-Allen, brushed aside Trump’s threat.

“I don’t know if you’ve met Illinois, but we’re pretty independent,” Edly-Allen told the Associated Press.

The bill drew nearly unanimous support, signaling a willingness by members of Trump’s party to cooperate with Democrats in filling the AI regulatory vacuum left by the federal government.

This kind of legislation is expected to expand to other states.

Regulating chatbots, especially for children

A growing number of states are imposing restrictions on how AI chatbots can interact with people, especially children. A mix of Republican- and Democratic-led states have passed such laws this year, including Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Nebraska and Oregon.

In many cases, states want companies to tell people when they are interacting with AI instead of a human. Many want chatbots to be restricted in how they interact with minors, parents to have control over their child’s access, and data given to chatbots to be kept private.

In recent weeks, Connecticut enacted provisions for companion chatbots that sustain an ongoing relationship with a human. Under them, a chatbot must not be able to interact with someone under 18 unless it is programmed against encouraging self-destructive behavior and provides parents with tools to manage the child’s use.

Transparency in AI and decision-making

In California, lawmakers are advancing the “No Robo Bosses Act of 2026” to prohibit employers from relying solely on AI to fire or discipline workers, and an expansion of how the state regulates AI chatbots, including banning chatbot outputs to children from being used for advertising.

Colorado in May required companies that deploy AI systems in important areas such as employment, education, housing or banking to tell people when AI is being used to influence a decision made about them.

It was a stab at regulating what researchers say is the bias inherent in AI systems that sort through a consumer’s data and render consequential decisions — including who gets hired, a home loan or medical care. But it watered down a 2024 law aimed at preventing AI’s penchant to discriminate, amid pressure from Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.

In Connecticut, lawmakers required employers who are using employment-related AI systems to tell employees or job applicants that they are interacting with AI.

Meanwhile, Connecticut, Washington and Utah required AI developers to embed data into digital content that will allow users to determine whether the content — such as photos or video — has been created or altered by AI.

More laws are possible this year.

Some Republican-led states hold back

In Florida, the state House refused to advance what Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis called his AI “Bill of Rights” legislation. It included provisions to give parents control over their children’s access to companion chatbots and to require companies that use chatbots to tell consumers when they are interacting with AI instead of a human.

Florida House Speaker Daniel Perez, a Republican, said Trump had made it clear that the federal government should be in charge of AI regulation. DeSantis panned that idea, noting that the federal government isn’t acting.

In Utah, progress stalled on legislation modeled on laws in New York and California after the White House sent a one-sentence memo to lawmakers there to warn that it was “categorically opposed” to the bill.

Levy writes for the Associated Press.

June 19 (UPI) — The Trump administration plans to stop funding HIV programs in South Africa under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief over policy differences.

The U.S. State Department is winding down the funds South Africa receives from PEPFAR to care for the roughly 8 million people there who are living with HIV, Semafor, Politico and The BBC reported.

PEPFAR was launched in 2003 by former President George W. Bush and, over the last two decades, has partnered with health authorities in more than 50 nations to save 25 million lives and prevent millions of new HIV infections, State Department figures show.

President Donald Trump in a February 2025 executive order accused South Africa of permitting discrimination against white Afrikaners and has slowly pulled back U.S. funding for its HIV programs over the last year.

“The United States has decided to initiate a phased drawdown of PEPFAR programming in South Africa following South Africa’s failure to make demonstrable progress on policy requests by the administration,” State Department officials told Semafor.

Upon retaking office in 2025, President Donald Trump took aim at the program as part of his administrations efforts to slash federal government spending, with specific attention paid to South Africa, which has the largest number of people living with HIV in the world.

Since 2003, more than $8 billion has been sent to South Africa to both care for people living with HIV and distribute medications that can prevent spread of the virus, though funds sent there have been halved in each of the last two years.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa earlier this month announced that the country was working Gilead to launch the company’s twice-yearly HIV prevention drug Lenacapavir, generic versions of which are set to be manufactured and sold there.

Experts have raised concerns that ending support for PEPFAR programs could lead to millions more HIV infections globally, potentially canceling out 20 years of progress against the virus.

The Trump administration and some of its Republican allies in Congress have said, however, that the program was never meant to be permanent and should be wound down.

WE all know that Universal is building its very first European theme park right here in the UK.

While it’s setting up base in Bedford, it could have been somewhere else completely – and it happens to be the ‘coolest’ city in Britain.

Planning documents revealed that Universal had previously considered building its upcoming theme park on the outskirts of Milton Keynes.

But when certain “terms could not be agreed”, a site in Bedford was picked instead.

Milton Keynes is just a half an hour drive away from Bedford but is completely different being a city, and in Buckinghamshire.

Last year, Milton Keynes was named one of the top ten destinations for Brits to visit in 2025 behind the likes of Milan, Rome and Tokyo.

SCHOOL’S OUT

Just 6 weeks until school summer hols! Cheap all inclusives where kids go FREE

CHEAP DATE

Our fave cheap European destinations with flights under £20 & hotels from £24pp

The city was even declared one of the ‘coolest’ places to live last year by The Times.

There’s plenty of activities to do in Milton Keynes – most of which you’ll find at Xscape.

Inside there’s everything from indoor skydiving to bowling, arcades, climbing walls, trampolines, escape rooms – even indoor ski slopes.

For restaurants, there are high-end spots on 12th Street and plenty of bars too.

Milton Keynes has its own theatre too with plays and touring West End musicals on throughout the year.

Nearby is Willen Lake which is popular for watersports like paddleboarding, kayaking, aqua parcs and open water swimming.

There’s also Woburn Safari Park and Woburn Abbey which has a 3,000-acre deer park.

Bletchley Park which was once the top-secret home of Britain’s World War Two Codebreakers sits just outside of the city centre.

Visitors can spend the day at the attraction which celebrates the place where Alan Turing helped to crack Enigma and save millions of lives.

Tickets for adults start from £25.87, for children (between 12-17) entry starts from £13.50, for children aged 8-11 tickets cost £6.75.

The new Universal theme park will be constructed in Bedford and it has recently announced that it will be officially called ‘Universal United Kingdom Resort’.

The park was given the green light last year with work on the site starting in early 2026.

Once open, it will be the first Universal theme park in Europe, and it’s scheduled to open in 2031.

As for what kind of themed lands and rides would open at the UK Universal, very little is known.

But there are rumours suggesting that some could be based on James Bond, Paddington, Lord of the Rings, Minions, Jurassic World, and Back to the Future.

There’s also expected to be hotels on-site as well as a new train station.

An old clip has resurfaced showing Andy Burnham saying Israel would be his first overseas visit if elected as UK Prime Minister. The new MP for Makerfield is under the spotlight amid expectations he’ll challenge Labour leadership. Here’s what he’s previously said about Israel-Palestine.

Voicemails for Isabelle’s Zoey Deutch is dating a fellow comedy star – here’s what we know about their secretive relationship

Zoey Deutch is captivating audiences once more, this time starring opposite Nick Robinson in Netflix’s unmissable romantic comedy Voicemails for Isabelle.

The heartfelt rom-com follows Deutch’s driven young baker Jill, who relocates to San Francisco for an opportunity to work under renowned but tyrannical Chef Bastien (portrayed by Nick Offerman), who transforms her professional life into a waking nightmare.

Meanwhile, her sister Isabelle (Ciara Bravo) has battled cancer throughout most of her existence. Following her sudden death, Jill processes the devastating bereavement by continuously calling her phone number and recording voicemails.

Yet these recordings are actually reaching real estate agent Wes (Robinson) after he acquires a new mobile, and he starts developing feelings for the enigmatic woman on the other end.

With Voicemails for Isabelle poised to become another enormous Netflix success this weekend, here’s what we’ve discovered about Deutch’s romantic life beyond the camera, reports Wales Online.

Who is Zoey Deutch dating?

The 31 year old Deutch is well-versed in romantic comedies, having secured her breakthrough performance alongside Glen Powell in 2018’s Set It Up.

She’s also Hollywood royalty as the daughter of Pretty in Pink director Howard Deutch and Back to the Future actress Lea Thompson.

Watch Netflix hits like Beef season 2 for free

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

from £15

Sky

Get the deal here

Sky is giving away a free Netflix subscription with its new Sky Stream TV bundles, including the £15 Essential TV plan. This lets customers watch live and on-demand TV content without a satellite dish or aerial and includes the new season of Beef.

Deutch has been romantically involved with actor and comedian Jimmy Tatro, 34, since 2021.

Following his breakthrough performance in Netflix’s mockumentary series American Vandal, viewers may spot him from recent productions Theater Camp, You’re Cordially Invited and Scream 7.

In September 2025, the couple revealed they had been secretly engaged for three months through a joint Instagram post.

Posting a charming photograph from the proposal, which took place during a sunny beach getaway, they captioned it: “three months engaged to the love of my life”.

Their engagement appears to remain intact, as Deutch featured images of them together in a carousel posted to her account in April this year, with the caption “one less lonely girl”.

Prior to her romance with Tatro, Deutch was in a five-year relationship with actor Avan Jogia, whom she met at the 2012 Kids’ Choice Awards.

Although they parted ways in 2017, the former couple went on to appear alongside each other in The Year of Spectacular Men and Zombieland: Double Tap, indicating they maintained an amicable split.

Following her separation from Jogia, Deutch had a brief romance with Dylan Hayes, also an actor.

Details about their relationship remain scarce, although they were photographed attending several public events as a couple.

Voicemails for Isabelle is available to stream on Netflix.

WASHINGTON — Colombian presidential candidate Abelardo de la Espriella has vowed to crush criminal groups and slash government programs. He promises to bomb “narco-terrorist” camps and build sprawling mega prisons if he wins Sunday’s runoff election.

De la Espriella’s views have earned him the vociferous backing of President Trump, who has broken with White House tradition by publicly seeking to tip the scales in foreign elections — particularly in Latin America.

After Trump gave his “complete and total endorsement” to De la Espriella, whom he referred to by his nickname, “El Tigre,” the candidate posted an AI-generated image of a bald eagle and a tiger, with American and Colombian flags waving side by side.

“You have paved the way for the people to defeat the entrenched powers that have long held sway,” he wrote to Trump. “In Colombia, we have now begun to follow the same path.”

De la Espriella, a political newcomer who built his campaign around gym workout videos and vows to “disembowel” the left, is part of a new wave of far-right, MAGA-aligned politicians in Latin America openly borrowing from Trump’s playbook, presenting themselves as outsiders who will trim the government, curtail immigration and militarize law enforcement.

In a region that remains plagued by high crime and inequality after a decades-long period of leftist domination known as the “Pink Tide,” the playbook appears working.

More Latin Americans now identify with the right than at any time over the last two decades, according to polling firm Latinobarómetro. A series of conservatives have won presidential elections in recent years, giving Trump a slate of willing partners as he seeks to expand U.S. power in the region, combat drug cartels and counter growing Chinese influence.

President Trump meets with El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele, in the Oval Office of the White House on April 14, 2025.

(Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images)

Among Trump’s many allies are Argentina’s Javier Milei, a libertarian firebrand whose dramatic cuts to state services were a blueprint for Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE; and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, a mano dura autocrat who housed U.S. deportees in his notorious prisons to assist Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa has welcomed U.S. Special Forces, who are attacking drug traffickers in his country, and Chile’s José Antonio Kast has pledged a border wall along his country’s frontier with Peru and Bolivia in his quest to “make Chile great again.”

Trump might soon gain another ideological bedfellow in Peru with the election of Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of late autocrat Alberto Fujimori. With ballots still being counted, Fujimori was on track for a narrow victory

In a sea of nations led by conservatives, the left now retains power in just three key countries: Mexico, Colombia and Brazil.

It faces serious challenges in two of them.

Ahead of October’s presidential election in Brazil, incumbent Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a leftist stalwart and one of the last vestiges of the Pink Tide, has been polling even with Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former President Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally convicted of convening a Jan. 6-style insurrection.

Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro, right, with President Trump during a dinner at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., on March 7, 2020.

(Alan Santos / Associated Press)

And then there’s Colombia, where De la Espriella, a criminal defense attorney, surged ahead in the first round of voting and this weekend faces off against Sen. Iván Cepeda, an ally of leftist President Gustavo Petro.

Petro drew Trump’s ire by denouncing the U.S. military campaign to oust leftist President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela and a spate of lethal U.S. attacks on alleged drug boats.

Petro slammed Trump’s endorsement of De la Espriella, calling on Colombians to “vote freely and not allow ourselves to become either slaves or anyone’s colony.”

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum also accused Trump of electoral interference after the U.S. announced drug trafficking charges against several members of her ruling Morena party and The Times revealed that two more sitting governors are under investigation.

“Is it truly a legitimate interest to combat organized crime?” Sheinbaum asked of the U.S. investigations. “Or are we perhaps witnessing how sectors of the American far right … intend to influence the 2027 election in our country?”

President Trump meets with Argentine President Javier Milei during the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 23, 2025, in New York.

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

The White House has declined to comment on Sheinbaum’s criticism. But Trump earlier this month warned Mexico that his administration is “focused on coming in by land” to deter drug trafficking.

“President Trump has been clear that Mexico must do more to combat the drug cartels running rampant in their country,” a White House official told The Times when asked whether Trump is planning a military operation there.

Trump, who publicly backed Kast and President Nasry Asfura of Honduras, as well as Milei’s political party ahead of Argentina’s midterm elections last fall, has openly mused that he should charge money for endorsement of leaders in foreign countries.

Guillaume Long, who served as foreign minister in Ecuador under leftist President Rafael Correa and who is now a fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, criticized Trump’s “unprecedented, unabashed interventionism in Latin American politics.”

“There are a number of taboos that have been broken,” he said.

Long added that Latin America is mirroring the United States in its political divisions. “I think we’re likely to see in the coming decades a very polarized politics,” he said. “And that doesn’t bode very well for political stability.”

Much of Trump’s activity in the region, including the deposing of Maduro, has been presented as part of a war on drug cartels, which the White House has formally declared terrorist organizations. Long described that rationale as a “pretext” for expanding U.S. political and economic influence in the region.

Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, are escorted by federal agents as they make their way to an armored car for a trip to a federal courthouse in Manhattan on Jan. 5.

(XNY/Star Max/GC Images)

He said he believed that focus on cartels had pushed some Latin American politicians to the right “because they think being security hawks will make them popular with the Trump administration.”

But James Bosworth, the founder of Hxagon, a company that provides political risk analysis in Latin America, said many leaders in the region have come to tough-on-crime policies on their own.

“I think that some of the hemisphere is willing to play along with it because the hemisphere has issues, including security issues, where the U.S. can be of assistance,” Bosworth said. “Many Latin Americans do want a greater military focus, so there’s certain alignment that’s occurred.”

Conversely, Mexican journalist Alex González Ormerod said he believes Trump has been influenced by Latin American leaders, including Bukele, who suspended civil liberties and began locking up alleged gang members en masse in 2021.

“I think there’s a lot of cross-pollination going on,” he said, crediting groups like the Conservative Political Action Conference, a gathering of right-wing activists and elected officials that has hosted events in Brazil and Argentina.

Many analysts cautioned that Latin America operates on a pendulum, swinging every few years between right and left.

“There’s a lot of evidence that voters are just unhappy and voting for the opposition, and then losing patience very quickly with whoever is in office,” said Benjamin Gedan, director of the Latin America Program at the Stimson Center.

Voters dissatisfied with the status quo so often vote out incumbents there is a phrase for it: voto castigo, or “the punishment vote.”

Ceballos reported from Washington and Linthicum from Mexico City.

England head coach Brendon McCullum says he is ready to work with Ben Stokes when the captain returns for the third Test against New Zealand at Trent Bridge.

Stokes and pace bowler Gus Atkinson were made unavailable for the huge second-Test defeat pending an investigation into an incident in a London nightclub.

The results of the investigation are still to be confirmed, but McCullum has confirmed Stokes will return as captain, a position he has held since 2022, in Nottingham.

“Ben will be back,” said McCullum. “He’ll be back and he’ll be captain.”

Following a 4-1 Ashes series defeat that was dogged by off-field problems, both Stokes and McCullum denied their relationship had deteriorated in Australia.

Then, following England’s win in the first Test since the Ashes – against New Zealand at Lord’s – Stokes broke the team’s midnight curfew in celebrating the victory.

On his relationship with Stokes, McCullum told BBC Test Match Special: “You’re just trying to make sure you’re very communicative right throughout.

“We all got the same ambition, which is to make English cricket a very good team and to try to achieve results on the field, and that hasn’t changed.”

McCullum said he has spoken to Stokes “every day” since the nightclub incident, which occurred in the early hours of Monday, 8 June.

The New Zealander also confirmed England director of cricket Rob Key has visited Stokes this week.

UK minister says Starmer considering ‘political realities’ after Labour rival Andy Burnham secured decisive by-election win.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is weighing whether to resign within days, according to media reports, amid mounting pressure from his own Labour Party following a decisive by-election win by his rival, Andy Burnham.

Expectation is growing that Starmer could announce a resignation timetable as soon as Monday, the same day Burnham is sworn in as a lawmaker after winning Thursday’s vote by a wide margin – a result that has reportedly emboldened Labour figures, including Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, to call for Starmer to step aside.

A resignation would lead to the United Kingdom’s seventh prime minister in a decade, a rapid rate of churn in the country’s modern history.

Starmer has been under growing pressure to step down after months of declining popularity, policy missteps and scandals.

In February, the premier came under fire when revelations from the Epstein files about Peter Mandelson, whom Starmer appointed as the UK’s ambassador to the US in December 2024, came to light.

Burnham, Greater Manchester mayor since 2017, has made clear he intends to challenge to lead the slumping centre-left party, warning in his by-election victory speech that it had a “final chance to change”.

If successful, he would become prime minister by default, given that the governing Labour has a huge parliamentary majority.

Starmer is deeply unpopular with voters, according to polling.

YouGov, a global public opinion and data analytics firm, reports that only 19 percent of British people have a positive opinion of the prime minister, and he ranks as the ninth most popular Labour politician.

Starmer has insisted he will fight any attempt to oust him.

But the emphatic nature of Burnham’s win in the Makerfield constituency in northwest England, where he nearly doubled Labour’s majority, has increased the internal pressure on Starmer to quit.

Business Secretary Peter Kyle said on Sunday that Starmer was “making time to reflect on the political realities, challenges and opportunities that he finds himself in”.

“He has been engaging in conversations with a wide, wide range of people,” Kyle told the Sky News broadcaster after having what he said was a “frank” conversation with Starmer on Friday.

The Observer newspaper headlined on its cover on Sunday that Starmer was “expected to resign” the following day, while the Sunday Telegraph also reported he was “ready” to go, citing allies of the embattled British leader.

The Observer said Starmer would “set out a timetable for his departure”, noting he had been holding weekend talks at Chequers, the countryside retreat for prime ministers.

Labour’s drubbing in local and regional polls in England, Scotland and Wales last month intensified the pressure on him.

The fallout from the polls saw Makerfield’s previous Labour MP resign to allow Burnham to stand there.

Burnham, a former MP and government minister under ex-prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, is due to be sworn back into parliament on Monday.

From the so-called soft-left wing of Labour, he reinforced his reputation as the party’s most popular figure by easily beating the hard-right populist Reform UK party’s candidate in this week’s by-election.

Reform, led by Brexit architect Nigel Farage, had won all of Makerfield’s wards in last month’s local elections.