campaign

WASHINGTON — The State Department is warning U.S. diplomats of attempts to impersonate Secretary of State Marco Rubio and possibly other officials using technology driven by artificial intelligence, according to two senior officials and a cable sent last week to all embassies and consulates.

The warning came after the department discovered that an impostor posing as Rubio had attempted to reach out to at least three foreign ministers, a U.S. senator and a governor, according to the July 3 cable, which was first reported by the Washington Post.

The recipients of the scam messages, which were sent by text, Signal and voicemail, were not identified in the cable, a copy of which was shared with the Associated Press.

“The State Department is aware of this incident and is currently investigating the matter,” it said. “The department takes seriously its responsibility to safeguard its information and continuously takes steps to improve the department’s cybersecurity posture to prevent future incidents.”

It declined to comment further due to “security reasons” and the ongoing investigation.

It’s the latest instance of a high-level Trump administration figure targeted by an impersonator, with a similar incident revealed in May involving President Trump’s chief of staff, Susie Wiles. The misuse of AI to deceive people is likely to grow as the technology improves and becomes more widely available, and the FBI warned in the spring about “malicious actors” impersonating senior U.S. government officials in a text and voice messaging campaign.

The hoaxes involving Rubio had been unsuccessful and “not very sophisticated,” one of the officials said. Nonetheless, the second official said the department deemed it “prudent” to advise all employees and foreign governments, particularly as efforts by foreign actors to compromise information security increase.

The officials were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

“There is no direct cyber threat to the department from this campaign, but information shared with a third party could be exposed if targeted individuals are compromised,” the cable said.

The FBI has warned in a public service announcement about a “malicious” campaign relying on text messages and AI-generated voice messages that purport to come from a senior U.S. official and that aim to dupe other government officials as well as the victim’s associates and contacts.

This is not the first time that Rubio has been impersonated in a deepfake. This spring, someone created a bogus video of him saying he wanted to cut off Ukraine’s access to Elon Musk’s Starlink internet service. Ukraine’s government later rebutted the false claim.

Several potential solutions have been put forward in recent years to the growing misuse of AI for deception, including criminal penalties and improved media literacy. Concerns about deepfakes have also led to a flood of new apps and AI systems designed to spot phonies that could easily fool a human.

The tech companies working on these systems are now in competition against those who would use AI to deceive, according to Siwei Lyu, a professor and computer scientist at the University at Buffalo. He said he’s seen an increase in the number of deepfakes portraying celebrities, politicians and business leaders as the technology improves.

Just a few years ago, fakes contained easy-to-spot flaws — inhuman voices or mistakes such as extra fingers — but now the AI is so good, it’s much harder for a human to spot, giving deepfake makers an advantage.

“The level of realism and quality is increasing,” Lyu said. “It’s an arms race, and right now the generators are getting the upper hand.”

The Rubio hoax comes after text messages and phone calls went to elected officials, business executives and other prominent figures from someone who seemed to have gained access to the contacts in Wiles’ personal cellphone, the Wall Street Journal reported in May.

Some of those who received calls heard a voice that sounded like Wiles’, which may have been generated by AI, according to the newspaper. The messages and calls were not coming from Wiles’ number, the report said. The government was investigating.

Lee writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Eric Tucker and David Klepper contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — Zohran Mamdani has won New York City’s Democratic mayoral primary, a new vote count confirmed Tuesday, cementing his stunning upset of former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and sending him to the general election.

The Associated Press called the race after the results of the city’s ranked choice voting tabulation were released and showed Mamdani trouncing Cuomo by 12 percentage points.

In a statement, Mamdani said he was humbled by the support he received in the primary and started turning his attention to the general election.

“Last Tuesday, Democrats spoke in a clear voice, delivering a mandate for an affordable city, a politics of the future, and a leader unafraid to fight back against rising authoritarianism,” he said. “I am humbled by the support of more than 545,000 New Yorkers who voted for our campaign and am excited to expand this coalition even further as we defeat Eric Adams and win a city government that puts working people first.”

Mamdani’s win had been widely expected since he took a commanding lead after the polls closed a week ago, falling just short of the 50% of the vote needed to avoid another count under the city’s ranked choice voting model. The system allows voters’ other preferences to be counted if their top candidate falls out of the running.

Mamdani, who declared victory the night of the June 24 primary, will face a general election field that includes incumbent Mayor Eric Adams as well as independent candidate Jim Walden and Republican Curtis Sliwa.

The former governor, down but not out

Cuomo conceded defeat just hours after the polls closed last week but is contemplating whether to run in the general election on an independent ballot line. After the release of Tuesday’s vote count, Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzopardi said, “We’ll be continuing conversations with people from all across the city while determining next steps.”

“Extremism, division and empty promises are not the answer to this city’s problems, and while this was a look at what motivates a slice of our primary electorate, it does not represent the majority,” Azzopardi said. “The financial instability of our families is the priority here, which is why actionable solutions, results and outcomes matter so much.”

Mamdani, a 33-year-old democratic socialist and member of the state Assembly, was virtually unknown when he launched his candidacy centered on a bold slate of populist ideas. But he built an energetic campaign that ran circles around Cuomo as the older, more moderate Democrat tried to come back from the sexual harassment scandal that led to his resignation four years ago.

The results, even before they were finalized, sent a shockwave through the political world.

Democratic support?

Mamdani’s campaign, which was focused on lowering the cost of living, claims it has found a new blueprint for Democrats who have at times appeared rudderless during President Trump’s climb back to power.

The Democratic establishment has approached Mamdani with caution. Many of its big players applauded his campaign but don’t seem ready to throw their full support behind the young progressive, whose past criticisms of law enforcement, use of the word “genocide” to describe the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza and “democratic socialist” label amount to landmines for some in the party.

If elected, Mamdani would be the city’s first Muslim mayor and its first of Indian American decent. He would also be one of its youngest.

Opposition mounts

For Republicans, Mamdani has already provided a new angle for attack. Trump and others in the GOP have begun to launch broadsides at him, moving to cast Mamdani as the epitome of leftist excess ahead of consequential elections elsewhere this year and next.

“If I’m a Republican, I want this guy to win,” said Grant Reeher, a political science professor at Syracuse University. “Because I want to be able to compare and contrast my campaign as a Republican, in a national election, to the idea of, ‘This is where the Democratic Party is.’”

New York City’s ranked choice voting model allows voters to list up to five candidates on their ballots in order of preference. If a single candidate is the first choice of more than 50% of voters, then that person wins the race outright. Since no candidate cleared that bar on the night of the primary, the ranked choice voting process kicked in. The board is scheduled to certify the election on July 15.

Mamdani has been a member of the state Assembly since 2021, and has characterized his inexperience as a potential asset. His campaign promised free city buses, free child care, a rent freeze for people living in rent-stabilized apartments, government-run grocery stores and more, all paid for with taxes on the wealthy. Critics have slammed his agenda as politically unrealistic.

Cuomo ran a campaign centered on his extensive experience, casting himself as the only candidate capable of saving a city he said had spun out of control. During the campaign, he focused heavily on combating antisemitism and leaned on his name recognition and juggernaut fundraising operation rather than mingling with voters.

Confronted with the sexual harassment allegations that ended his tenure as governor, he denied wrongdoing, maintaining that the scandal was driven by politics and that voters were ready to move on.

Cuomo did not remove his name from the November ballot last week, ahead of a procedural deadline to do so, and has said he is still considering whether to mount an actual campaign for the office.

Adams, while still a Democrat, is running in the November election as an independent. He dropped out of the Democratic primary in April after he was severely wounded by his now-dismissed federal bribery case. Though he had done little in the way of campaigning since then, he reignited his reelection operation in the days after Mamdani declared victory, calling it a choice between a candidate with a “blue collar” and one with a “silver spoon.”

Izaguirre writes for the Associated Press.

The success of Zohran Mamdani in New York City’s Democratic primary for mayor is thrilling for Hari Kondabolu, a stand-up comedian who’s been friends with him for 15 years.

Mamdani stunned the political establishment when he declared victory in the primary on Tuesday, a ranked-choice election in which his strongest competition, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, conceded defeat.

When he launched his campaign, the democratic socialist ranked near the bottom of the pack. Now, the 33-year-old state assemblyman has a chance to be New York City’s first Asian American and Muslim mayor.

Mamdani’s family came to the United States when he was 7, and he became a citizen in 2018. He was born to Indian parents in Kampala, Uganda.

For Kondabolu, this moment is not just exciting, but emotional.

“I think so many of us have had those experiences in New York of being brown and in a city that has always been really diverse and feels like ours. But after 9/11, like you start to question it like, is this our city too?” Kondabolu said. “And 25 years later … it’s surreal, like this is the same city but it’s not because we’ve elected this person.”

Mamdani’s campaign has piqued the interest of many Indian, Pakistani and other South Asian Americans, as well as Muslims — even those who may not agree with Mamdani on many issues. Some see his rise as a sign of hope in a city where racism and xenophobia erupted following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Riveted by the primary election

Many of New York City’s more than 300,000 South Asian residents have been inspired by Mamdani’s extraordinary trajectory.

“My mom was texting her friends to vote for him. I’ve never seen my mother do that before,” Kondabolu said. “So the idea that it’s gotten our whole family activated in this way — this is, like, personal.”

Snigdha Sur, founder and chief executive of the Juggernaut, an online publication reporting on South Asians, has been fascinated by the response from some people in India and the diaspora.

“So many global South Asians … they’re like, ‘Oh, this guy is my mayor and I don’t live in New York City,’” Sur said.

At the same time, some are also concerned or angered by Mamdani’s past remarks about Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whom he called a “war criminal.”

In 2005, Washington revoked Modi’s visa to the U.S., citing concerns that, as chief minister of the state of Gujarat, he did not act to stop communal violence during 2002 anti-Muslim riots that left more than 1,000 people dead. An investigation approved by the Indian Supreme Court later absolved Modi. Rights groups have accused Modi’s government of widespread attacks and discrimination against India’s Muslims and other minorities.

In Michigan, Thasin Sardar has been following Mamdani’s ascent online. When he first heard him, the candidate struck him as “genuine” and he felt “an instant connection,” he said.

“As a Muslim American, this victory puts my trust back in the people,” said Sardar, who was born and raised in India. “I am happy that there are people who value the candidate and his policies more than his personal religious beliefs and didn’t vote him down because of the color of his skin, or the fact that he was an immigrant with an uncommon name.”

New York voter Zainab Shabbir said family members in California and elsewhere have also excitedly taken note.

“My family in California, they were very much like, ‘Oh, it’s so nice to see a South Asian Muslim candidate be a mayor of a major city,’” she said. A brother told her Mamdani’s rise is a great example for his kids, she said.

But the 34-year-old — who donated, voted and canvassed for Mamdani — said it was his vision for New York City that was the draw for her. She and her husband briefly chatted with Mamdani at a fundraiser and she found him to be “very friendly and genuine.”

She suspects that for some who aren’t very politically active, Mamdani’s political ascent could make a difference.

“There’s a lot of Muslim communities like my parents’ generation who are focused a lot more on the politics back home and less on the politics here in America,” said Shabbir. “Seeing people like Zohran Mamdani be in office, it’ll really change that perspective in a lot of people.”

Embracing Indian and Muslim roots

Supporters and pundits agree that Mamdani’s campaign has demonstrated social media savvy and authenticity. He visited multiple mosques. In videos, he speaks in Hindi or gives a touch of Bollywood. Other South Asian American politicians such as Democratic Bay Area congressman Ro Khanna praised that.

“I love that he didn’t run away from his heritage. I mean, he did video clips with Amitabh Bachchan and Hindi movies,” said Khanna, referencing the Indian actor. “He shows that one can embrace their roots and their heritage and yet succeed in American politics.”

But his triumph also reflects “the urgency of the economic message, the challenge that people are facing in terms of rent, in terms of the cost of living, and how speaking to that is so powerful,” Khanna said.

Tanzeela Rahman, a daughter of Muslim immigrants from Bangladesh, said she grew up “very low income” in New York.

“I felt seen by him in a way politicians have not seen me ever,” the 29-year-old financial systems analyst said. “I think very few people in government understand … how hard it is to survive in New York City.”

She found Mamdani to be “unabashedly Muslim” and also “a voice, who, literally, to me sounds like a New Yorker who’s stepping in and saying, ‘Hey, let’s reclaim our power,’” she said.

While Mamdani has been speaking to the working class, he had a somewhat privileged upbringing. His mother is filmmaker Mira Nair and his father, Mahmood Mamdani, is a professor at Columbia University.

He lived in Queens but attended the Bronx High School of Science. Even as a teen, he cared about social justice, recalled Kondabolu, his comedian friend.

His campaign messaging on issues such as affordable housing and free bus rides might not resonate with South Asian households in New York City who have income levels above the median. But his campaign and “great kind of sound bites” earned support from that demographic too, according to Sur.

“It was, I think, a surprise that he did so well among the wealthiest, including his own community,” Sur said.

Mamdani’s outspoken support for Palestinian causes and criticism of Israel and its military campaign in Gaza resonated with pro-Palestinian residents, including Muslims, but caused tension in the mayor’s race. Some of his positions and remarks on the charged issue have drawn recriminations from opponents and some Jewish groups, though he’s also been endorsed by some Jewish politicians and activists.

Racism and xenophobia

Mamdani’s success immediately elicited strong anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant rhetoric from some high-profile conservatives on social media, including pro-Trump media personality Charlie Kirk, who posted that “legal immigration can ruin your country.” In response, Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.), the youngest member of Congress, wrote on X: “For years they sold people the lie of ‘we have no problem if you come the right way!’”

Mamdani’s supporters aren’t concerned that racism and Islamophobia will distract from his campaign. Those feelings clearly weren’t “enough for him to lose” the primary, Kondabolu said.

“There’s a new generation that wants their voice heard, and that generation came out in full force, not just by voting, but by, like, getting all these other people to be emotionally invested in this candidate,” he said. “That’s extraordinary.”

Tang and Fam write for the Associated Press. AP writer Matt Brown in Washington contributed to this report.

Veteran Los Angeles political consultant Rick Taylor said he was pulled aside by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents while returning from a trip abroad, asked if he was from California and then separated from his family and put in a holding room with several Latino travelers for nearly an hour.

“I know how the system works and have pretty good connections and I was still freaking out,” said Taylor, 71. “I could only imagine how I would be feeling if I didn’t understand the language and I didn’t know anyone.”

Taylor said he was at a loss to explain why he was singled out for extra questioning, but he speculated that perhaps it was because of the Obama-Biden T-shirt packed in his suitcase.

Taylor was returning from a weeklong vacation in Turks and Caicos with his wife and daughter, who were in a separate customs line, when a CBP agent asked, “Are you from California?” He said he answered, “Yeah, I live in Los Angeles.”

The man who ran campaigns for L.A.’s last Republican mayor and for current Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla when he was a budding Los Angeles City Council candidate in the 1990s found himself escorted to a waiting room and separated from his family.

There, Taylor said he waited 45 minutes without being released, alleging he was unjustly marked for detention and intimidated by CBP agents.

“I have no idea why I was targeted,” said Taylor, a consultant with the campaign to reelect L.A. City Councilwoman Traci Park. “They don’t talk to you. They don’t give you a reason. You’re just left confused, angry and worried.”

The story was first reported by Westside Current.

Former Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said the incident brought to mind Sen. Alex Padilla, who was arrested and handcuffed June 12 while trying to ask a question during a Los Angeles press conference by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

“My former chief of staff and political consultant, Rick Taylor, was detained at Miami International Airport by federal authorities after returning from an international vacation,” he said in an email. “As Senator Alex Padilla said a couple of weeks ago, ‘if it could happen to me, it could happen to anyone.’ This Federal government operation is OUT OF CONTROL! Where will it end?!”

A representative from the Customs and Border Protection in Florida said an inquiry made by the Los Angeles Times and received late Friday afternoon will likely be answered next week.

“If Mr. Taylor feels the need to, he is more than welcome to file a complaint online on our website and someone will reach out to him to try and get to the bottom of things,” CBP Public Affairs Specialist Alan Regalado said in an email.

Taylor, a partner at Dakota Communications, a strategic communications and marketing firm, said he was more concerned about traveling and returning to the U.S. with his wife, a U.S. citizen and native of Vietnam.

He said he reached out to a Trump administration member before leaving on vacation, asking if he could contact that individual in case his wife was detained.

The family flew American Airlines and landed in Miami on June 20, where he planned to visit friends before returning to Los Angeles on Tuesday.

In a twist, Taylor’s wife and daughter, both Global Entry cardholders, breezed through security while Taylor, who does not have Global Entry, was detained, he said.

He said after the agent confirmed he was a Los Angeles resident, he placed a small orange tag on his passport and was told to follow a green line. That led him to another agent and his eventual holding room.

Taylor described “95% of the population” inside the room as Latino and largely Spanish-speaking.

“I was one of three white dudes in the room,” he said. “I just kept wondering, ‘What I am doing here?’”

He said the lack of communication was “very intimidating,” though he was allowed to keep his phone and did send text message updates to his family.

“I have traveled a fair amount internationally and have never been pulled aside,” he said.

About 45 minutes into his holding, Taylor said an agent asked him to collect his luggage and hand it over for inspection.

He said he was released shortly after.

“The agents have succeeded in making me reassess travel,” Taylor said. “I would tell others to really think twice about traveling internationally while you have this administration in charge.”

Israel is no longer concealing its intention to forcibly displace Palestinians from their homeland, as it now announces this plan more openly than ever before through official rhetoric at the highest levels, said Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor in a report issued today.

Through actions on the ground and institutional measures designed to reframe the crime as “voluntary migration”, explained Euro-Med Monitor, Israel has attempted to implement its displacement campaign by exploiting the international community’s near-total silence, which has enabled the continuation of the crime and Israeli impunity despite the unprecedented nature of humanity’s first livestreamed genocide.

“Israel is now attempting to carry out the final phase of its crime, and its original goal: the mass expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine, specifically from the Gaza Strip. For a year and a half, Israel has carried out acts of genocide, killing and injuring hundreds of thousands of people, erasing entire cities, dismantling the Strip’s infrastructure, and systematically displacing its population within the enclave. These actions aim to eliminate the Palestinian people as a community and as a collective presence.”

The current plans for forced displacement, said the Geneva-based rights group, are a direct extension of Israel’s long-standing, settler-colonial project, aimed at erasing Palestinian existence and seizing land. What distinguishes this stage, it added, is its unprecedented scale and brutality.

“Israel is targeting over two million people who have endured a full-scale genocide and have been stripped of even the most basic human rights, under coercive, inhumane conditions that make living any sort of a normal life impossible. Israel’s deliberate objective is to pressure Palestinians into leaving by making it their only means of survival.”

Having succeeded in revealing the weak principles of international law, such as protections for civilians based on their perceived racial superiority or lack thereof, Israel is now reshaping the narrative once again.

READ: Gaza reaches WHO’s most critical malnutrition level amid Israeli blockade

“Armed with overwhelming force and emboldened by the international community’s abandonment of legal and moral responsibilities, Israel seeks to portray the mass expulsion of Palestinians as ‘voluntary migration’,” said the group. “This is a blatant attempt to rebrand ethnic cleansing and forced displacement using dishonest language — like ‘humanitarian considerations’ and ‘individual choice’ — and is a direct contradiction of legal facts and the reality on the ground.”

Euro-Med Monitor emphasised that forced displacement is a standalone crime under international law, because it involves the removal of individuals from areas where they legally reside, using force, threats, or other forms of coercion, without valid legal justification.

“Coercion, in the context of Israel’s genocide in the Gaza Strip, goes beyond military force. It includes the creation of unbearable conditions that render remaining in one’s home practically impossible or life-threatening.” A coercive environment includes fear of violence, persecution, arrest, intimidation, starvation or other forms of hardship that strip individuals of free will and force them to flee.

“Israel has already committed the crime of forced displacement against Gaza’s population, having driven them into internal displacement without legal grounds and in conditions that violate international legal exceptions, which only permit evacuation temporarily and under imperative military necessity, while ensuring safe areas with minimum standards of human dignity,” said Lima Bustami, Director of Euro-Med Monitor’s Legal Department.

“None of these standards have been met. In fact, Israel has used this widespread and repeated pattern of displacement as a tool of genocide, aimed at destroying and subjecting the population to deadly living conditions.”

Bustami added that although the legal elements of the crime are already fulfilled, Israel is further escalating it to a more lethal level against the Palestinian people, manifesting its settler-colonial vision of expulsion and replacement. “Now it is attempting to market the second phase of forced displacement — beyond Gaza’s borders — as ‘voluntary migration’: a transparent deception that only a complicit international community — one that chooses silence over accountability — would accept.”

Today, the people of the Gaza Strip endure catastrophic conditions that are unprecedented in recent history, said Euro-Med Monitor. “Israel has obliterated all forms of normal life; there is no electricity or infrastructure, and there are no homes, no essential services, no functioning healthcare or education systems, and no clean water services.”

Indeed, the group’s report notes that around 2.3 million Palestinians are confined to less than 34 per cent of the Strip’s 365 square kilometres. Approximately 66 per cent of the territory has been turned into so-called “buffer zones”, or areas that are completely off-limits to Palestinians and/or that have been forcibly depopulated through Israeli bombings and displacement orders. “Most of the population is now living in tattered tents amid the spread of famine, disease and epidemics and an accumulation of waste, conditions symptomatic of the near-complete collapse of the humanitarian system.”

Moreover, Israel continues to systematically block the entry of food, medicine and fuel; destroy all remaining means of survival; and obstruct any efforts aimed at reconstruction or restoring even the minimum conditions for a healthy life.

“These conditions in place are not the result of a natural disaster,” the Euro-Med report says pointedly. “They have been deliberately engineered by Israel as a coercive tool to pressure the population into leaving the Gaza Strip. The absence of any genuine, voluntary alternative for Palestinians in the enclave renders this situation a textbook case of forcible transfer, as defined under international law and affirmed by relevant jurisprudence.”

READ: Israel advocate says, ‘I’m OK with as many dead kids as it takes’

According to Bustami, “While population transfers may be permitted in certain humanitarian contexts under international law, any such justification collapses if the humanitarian crisis is the direct consequence of unlawful acts committed by the same party enforcing the transfer. It is impermissible to use forced displacement as a response to a disaster one has created, a principle clearly upheld by international tribunals, particularly the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.”

Framing this imposed reality as a “voluntary” migration and an option not only constitutes a gross distortion of truth, said Euro-Med Monitor, but also undermines the legal foundations of the international system, erodes the principle of accountability, and transforms impunity from a failure of justice into a deliberate mechanism for perpetuating grave crimes and entrenching the outcomes of such crimes.

“Repeated public statements from the highest levels of Israel’s political and security leadership have escalated in intensity over the past year and a half, and expose a clear, coordinated intent to displace the population of the Gaza Strip. In a blatant bid to enforce a demographic transformation serving Israel’s colonial-settler agenda, senior Israeli officials — including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir — have publicly called for the expulsion of Palestinians from the Strip and for the settlement of Jewish Israelis in their place.”

Netanyahu expressed full support in February 2025 for US President Donald Trump’s plan to resettle Palestinians outside of the Gaza Strip, describing it as “the only viable solution for enabling a different future” for the region. Likewise, Smotrich announced in March that the Israeli government would back the establishment of a new “migration authority” to coordinate what he termed a “massive logistical operation” to remove Palestinians from the Strip.

Ben-Gvir, meanwhile, has openly advocated for the encouragement of “voluntary migration” coupled with calls to resettle Jewish Israelis in the territory.

The human rights organisation referred to the 23 March decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to establish a dedicated directorate within the Ministry of Defence, to manage what it calls the “voluntary relocation” of the Gaza Strip’s residents to third countries. “This is evidence that this displacement is not a by-product of destruction or political rhetoric, but an official policy,” it noted. “This policy is being implemented through institutional mechanisms, directed from within Israel’s own security apparatus, with full operational powers, executive structures, and strategic goals.”

READ: Israel bombing kills 4-year-old twin girls as they slept in Gaza

Furthermore, current Defence Minister Israel Katz’s statement on the new directorate confirmed that it would “prepare for and enable safe and controlled passage of Gaza residents for their voluntary departure to third countries, including securing movement, establishing movement routes, checking pedestrians at designated crossings in the Gaza Strip, as well as coordinating the provision of infrastructure that will enable passage by land, sea and air to the destination countries.”

The true danger of establishing such a directorate, said Euro-Med Monitor, lies not only in its institutionalisation of forced transfer, but in the new legal and political reality it seeks to impose. “It rebrands displacement as an ‘optional’ administrative service while stripping civilians of their ability to make free, informed decisions, therefore cloaking a war crime in a veneer of bureaucratic legitimacy.”

Any departure from the Gaza Strip under current circumstances cannot be considered “voluntary”, it added, but rather constitutes, in legal terms, forcible transfer, which is strictly prohibited under international law. “All individuals compelled to leave the Strip retain their inalienable right to return to their land and property immediately and unconditionally. They also have the full right to seek compensation for all damages and losses incurred as a result of Israeli crimes and rights violations, including the destruction of homes and property, physical and psychological harm, the assault on human dignity, and the denial of livelihood and basic rights.”

Under its obligations as an occupying power responsible for the protection of the civilian population, Israel is prohibited from forcibly transferring Palestinians and bears full legal responsibility to ensure their protection from this crime.

The rules of international law, particularly customary international law and the Geneva Conventions, require all states not to recognise any situation arising from the crime of forcible transfer and to treat it as null and void. States are also obligated to withhold all material, political and diplomatic support that would contribute to the entrenchment of such a situation.

“International responsibility goes beyond mere non-recognition,” said the rights group. “It includes a legal duty for states to take urgent effective steps to halt the crime, hold perpetrators accountable, and provide redress to victims. This includes ensuring the safe, voluntary return of all displaced persons from the Gaza Strip, and providing full reparations for the harm and violations they have suffered. Any failure to act in this regard constitutes a direct breach of international law and complicity that could subject states to legal accountability.”

READ: Israeli air strike hits Gaza children’s hospital

Euro-Med Monitor said that the international community must move beyond deafening silence and abandon paltry rhetorical condemnations, which have come to represent the maximum response it dares to make in the face of the livestreamed genocide unfolding before its eyes. “It must act swiftly and effectively to halt Israel’s ongoing project of mass displacement in the Gaza Strip and prevent it from becoming an entrenched reality. This action must be based on international legal norms, a commitment to justice and accountability, and an honest reckoning with the root structural cause of the crimes: Israel’s unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory since 1967.”

Endorsing or remaining silent about Israeli plans to forcibly transfer Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip not only exonerates Israel but rewards it for its illegal conduct by granting it gains secured through mass killing, destruction, blockade, and starvation, said the organisation. “This is not just a series of war crimes or crimes against humanity, it embodies the legal definition of genocide, as established by the 1948 Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.”

All states, individually and collectively, must uphold their legal obligations and take all necessary measures to halt Israel’s genocide in the Gaza Strip.

This includes taking immediate, effective steps to protect Palestinian civilians and to prevent the implementation of the US-Israeli crime of forcible transfer that is openly threatening the Strip’s population.

“The international community must impose economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions on Israel for its systematic and grave violations of international law. This includes halting arms imports and exports; ending all forms of political, financial and military support; freezing the financial assets of officials involved in crimes against Palestinians; imposing travel bans; and suspending trade privileges and bilateral agreements that offer Israel economic advantages that sustain its capacity to commit further crimes.”

The rights group insisted that states must also hold complicit governments accountable — chief among them the United States — for their role in enabling Israeli crimes through various forms of support, including military and intelligence cooperation, financial aid and political or legal backing.

“The ethnic cleansing and genocide taking place right now in the Gaza Strip would not be possible without Israel’s decades-long unlawful colonial presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. This is the root structural cause of the violence, oppression, and destruction in the besieged enclave,” concluded Euro-Med Monitor. “Any meaningful response to the escalating crisis in the Strip must begin with dismantling this colonial reality, recognising the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, and securing their freedom and sovereignty over their national territory.

“As Israel and its allies must be compelled to abide by the law, international intervention is the only path to ending the genocide, halting all forms of individual and collective forcible transfer, dismantling the apartheid regime, and establishing a credible framework for justice, accountability, and the preservation of human dignity.”

OPINION: Palestinian voices are throttled by the promotion of foreign agendas

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Published on
24/06/2025 – 18:17 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

The Brazilian ambassador to the EU has told MEPs in Brussels that a disinformation campaign surrounds the trade deal signed in December 2024 between the EU and the Mercosur countries – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay.

Pedro Miguel da Costa e Silva strenuously countered the arguments of the deal’s critics during a hearing of the Parliament’s trade committee on Tuesday.

“The occurrence of animal diseases is much higher in the EU than in Brazil. It shows the need to check the veracity of some narratives,” the ambassador said, holding up a sheet of paper and adding: “In any case, I need to stress that nothing in the agreement changes the right of the EU and its member states to protect human, animal, or plant health.”

The Mercosur agreement aims to establish a transatlantic free trade zone encompassing 750 million people and nearly one-fifth of the global economy.

The EU member states have yet to adopt the deal, but some – led by France – oppose it, facing strong domestic resistance from environmental activists and farmers who argue that it would create unfair competition and fail to uphold environmental and phytosanitary standards.

“The debate about this agreement has not always been a balanced one. Some people want to apply a unique benchmark to Mercosur and ask us to engage in an endless loop of negotiations,” Da Costa E Silva said.

He denounced what he described as unfair treatment of the deal when compared to others the EU has negotiated – citing recent agreements between the EU with Chile or Mexico, and those under discussion with India and the US – claiming these haven’t faced the same kinds of “accusations, and unreasonable demands and expectations”.

The ambassador also sought to counter the arguments raised by farmers concerned that their Brazilian counterparts would gain unfair competitive advantages.

“The [market] access we received in products considered sensitive by the European producers is very limited,” he said. And he claimed that some Brazilian standards are more stringent than European. “For example: the share of land that our farmers need to set aside for the protection of native vegetation varies from 20% of their properties in the south of Brazil to 80% in the Amazon region. This is far beyond the requirements asked of European farmers.”

Reporting from Washington — President Obama and Hillary Clinton both expressed surprise Thursday that a $400-million cash payment to Iran early this year has suddenly become an issue in the presidential campaign.

After all, Obama had publicly disclosed the payment to Iran at a White House news conference in January called to announce implementation of the historic Iran nuclear deal.

At a news conference Thursday at the Pentagon, Obama did little to hide his bemusement at having to answer questions about the payment.

“There wasn’t a secret,” he said. “We announced [it] to all of you.”

He described the money as the return of Iranian funds from a dispute dating back to the 1970s.

The administration could not send the money in dollars or send a wire transfer of funds because of U.S. sanctions, Obama said, so the money was delivered in other currencies

“We couldn’t send them a check,” he said.

The president flatly rejected allegations that the $400 million was a ransom for four Americans who were released from Iranian custody at about the same time.

The idea that the U.S. would have paid ransom “defies logic,” Obama said, and would have betrayed the families of other Americans held unjustly around the world — many of whom he has met with personally.

He took the opportunity to defend the landmark nuclear accord that the U.S.-led international coalition reached with Iran more than a year ago. The agreement has “worked exactly the way we said it was going to work,” he said.

The impetus for renewed questions about a publicly announced settlement was a Wall Street Journal account of the transaction, which revealed that the $400 million was “converted into other currencies, stacked onto the wooden pallets and delivered to Iran on an unmarked cargo plane,” as the paper described it.

The existence of the deal itself was indeed disclosed and reported in real time, covered by the Los Angeles Times and others.

But what’s old can still be news, especially given the pace of the modern news cycle. Put it in the midst of a presidential campaign and all bets are off.

Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, has questioned the payment for two days.

“I woke up yesterday and I saw $400 million dollars, different currencies, they probably don’t want our currency,” Trump said Thursday in Portland, Maine. “Four hundred million dollars being flown to Iran. I mean, folks what’s going on here? What is going on?”

Trump again cited a video that he said shows an “airplane coming in and the money coming off.”

“That was given to us has to be by the Iranians,” he said. “You know why the tape was given to us? Because they want to embarrass our country. They want to embarrass our country. And they want to embarrass our president.”

But his campaign has acknowledged to CBS News that the video, in fact, shows Americans landing in Geneva, Switzerland, and wasn’t provided by Iran.

Stephen Miller, a senior policy advisor to Trump’s campaign, still insisted that “nothing less than a full investigation is required.”

“This administration has embarrassed our country as no administration has before, going so far as to fund Islamic terror through cash payments to Iran,” he said in a statement.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) raised concerns that the report confirmed suspicions that the money was paid as ransom for the release of several U.S. citizens, including journalist Jason Rezaian, held by Iran.

Iran said it was owed the money from an unfulfilled contract for U.S. fighter jets that the previous, U.S.-backed government had paid to the Pentagon. The aircraft were never delivered after the shah of Iran was deposed in the 1979 revolution.

Ryan said if it were a ransom payment, it would “mark another chapter in the ongoing saga of misleading the American people” to sell the international agreement with Iran to limit its nuclear development program.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest denied that the money was paid as ransom.

“The United States does not pay ransoms,” he said. “The only people who are making that suggestion are right-wingers in Iran who don’t like the deal, and Republicans in the United States that don’t like the deal.”

Clinton, who stepped down as secretary of State several years before the payment was made, bluntly described it as “old news” in an interview with a Colorado television station.

“So far as I know, it had nothing to do with any kind of hostage swap or any other tit for tat,” she said.

Republicans were only reviving the issue “because they want to continue to criticize the [nuclear] agreement, and I think they are wrong about that.”

“I have said the agreement has made the world safer, but it has to be enforced. And I’ve spoken out very strongly about how I will enforce this agreement,” she added. “I will hold the Iranians to account for even the smallest violation, and that’s exactly what I think needs to happen.”

[email protected]

For more White House coverage, follow @mikememoli on Twitter.

ALSO

Trump’s latest flare-up stirs an already sizzling Northern California congressional race

How deferments protected Donald Trump from serving in Vietnam

Napster co-founder Sean Parker once vowed to shake up Washington — so how’s that working out?

UPDATES:

3:40 p.m.: This story was updated with comments by President Obama and Donald Trump.

The first version of this post was published at 11 a.m.

RICHMOND, Va. — Democrats in Virginia have built up a hefty fundraising advantage for their effort to reclaim the governor’s mansion in a November election that is seen as a bellwether for the party in power in Washington ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former CIA case manager turned congresswoman, has a more than 2-to-1 fundraising advantage over her GOP opponent for governor, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, who has struggled to draw support from her fellow Republicans. Both were unopposed for their party’s nominations and were able to focus on the fall general election without having to overcome a challenge in this week’s primaries. The match-up means Virginia is all but certain to elect the state’s first female governor.

Spanberger has amassed $6.5 million toward her campaign for governor over the last two months after raising $6.7 million between January and March, according to the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project. Combined with the money Spanberger raised in 2024, she has gathered $22.8 million and still has $14.3 million in her coffers.

Earle-Sears, meanwhile, spent more than she earned between April and June, bringing in $3.5 million and spending $4.6 million. Between January and March, she also raised a little over $3.1 million. In total, she has raked in nearly $9.2 million since launching her campaign last September. Now, she has a little under $3 million in the bank, according to Virginia Public Access Project data.

In a statement, Earle-Sears’ campaign said the candidate is putting forward a message for Virginians that money can’t buy.

“Clearly the Spanberger campaign needs a lot of help attempting to erase Abigail’s bad voting record on issues that actually matter to Virginians,” press secretary Peyton Vogel said in an email. “This race isn’t being bought — it’s being built on a message that matters.”

Virginia is one of two states, along with New Jersey, that host statewide elections this year. The contests will be closely watched as a measure of whether voters in the shadow of Washington will embrace President Trump’s aggressive effort to overhaul the federal government, or be repelled by it.

Democrats’ outsized fundraising lead ahead of the primaries may reflect local Democratic enthusiasm and the party’s ability to push people to the polls in light of Trump being in office. Mark J. Rozell, dean of George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, also referenced the noticeable frostiness among leading state Republicans. The party’s statewide nominees have yet to campaign together, despite securing their nominations at the end of April.

“Enthusiasm drives fundraising and in Virginia right now the Democrats’ voting base has much greater enthusiasm“ than Republicans, Rozell said. ”It is reminiscent of Trump’s first term in office when Democratic fundraising and ultimately voting overwhelmed the Republicans in Virginia.”

Money does not guarantee success, however. In the last Virginia governor’s race, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe outspent Republican Glenn Youngkin, who had invested $20 million of his own money in the race. Youngkin still clinched the election by nearly two points.

Youngkin, who is term-limited from seeking reelection, has offered more than $21,000 in support to Earle-Sears through his political action committee.

When asked whether he would donate more, his PAC responded, “Governor Youngkin is working to elect the entire GOP ticket and is urging all Virginians to support the commonsense team this November to keep Virginia winning.”

The Democrats’ fundraising advantage isn’t confined to the governor’s race.

State Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, who eked out a primary win in a close three-way contest for lieutenant governor, raised nearly $1.8 million in her primary race and has $462,000 remaining.

The Republican nominee, conservative talk-radio host John Reid, raised nearly $312,000 since launching his campaign and has $116,000 remaining.

The only statewide GOP candidate with a fundraising lead, incumbent Attorney General Jason Miyares, has $2.3 million in the bank after raising a total of $4.6 million. His Democratic opponent, Jay Jones, has raised $2.7 million. He had about $493,000 left at the beginning of June, reports show.

This year, all three Democratic statewide candidates are backed by Clean Virginia, a political group that pushes for clean energy and often takes on legislative challenges against Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility.

The two groups are some of the most influential entities lobbying on state politics and policy. With energy demand likely to be a key issue in November, their influence could be significant.

According to the nonpartisan public-access group, Spanberger has taken in $465,000 from the environmental organization. On Tuesday, Clean Virginia endorsed Hashmi’s candidacy for lieutenant governor, following its previous donations to her state Senate campaign committee.

During his campaign, Jones also received $1.5 million from Clean Virginia, while his primary opponent, Democrat Shannon Taylor, accepted $800,000 from Dominion Energy between 2024 and 2025. Clean Virginia released attack ads targeting Taylor for accepting Dominion money.

The energy utility has become entangled in other statewide battles. On the Republican ticket, Earle-Sears accepted $50,000 from Dominion in March. Miyares also gained $450,000 from the utility so far this year.

Clean Virginia has donated to both Democrats and Republicans, including to candidates running for the House of Delegates, where all 100 members are up for reelection in November.

Democrats who control the legislature are hoping to keep or expand their thin majority and amend the state’s Constitution to protect rights to voting, marriage equality and abortion.

Democratic candidates have raised about $16.9 million in those races, with $3.2 million stemming from House Speaker Don Scott.

Meanwhile, Republicans have raised $8.8 million, with former Minority Leader Todd Gilbert earning over $643,000, and newly tapped Minority Leader Terry Kilgore raising nearly $470,000.

Diaz writes for the Associated Press.

June 17 (UPI) — Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson is warning President Donald Trump to “respect the Constitution” after the president ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to ramp up deportation efforts in Democratic-led sanctuary cities, including Chicago and Los Angeles.

In response, Johnson and city officials announced Tuesday they will relaunch a “Know Your Rights” ad campaign to educate Chicago residents.

“Even if the federal government doesn’t know or care about the Constitution, Chicagoans deserve to know their constitutional rights,” Johnson told reporters at a City Hall news conference.

The ads, which will educate residents about their rights if they are stopped or detained by ICE agents, will be displayed on more than 400 screens across the Chicago Transit Authority system.

The ads direct transit riders to the campaign website with a more in-depth resource guide, which is translated in multiple languages. The guide instructs residents how to react if stopped, but warned the information “should not be construed as legal advice.”

“We can’t tell people not to be afraid,” said Beatriz Ponce de León, Chicago’s deputy mayor of immigrant, migrant and refugee rights. “Folks are seeing what is happening here and in other cities. But what we can do is give people information. The best that people can do is be prepared.”

Earlier this month, Trump deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles to help protect ICE agents and federal buildings after protests in the downtown area turned violent. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Gov. Gavin Newsom objected to the president’s actions, calling the deployment unjustified.

Other sanctuary cities, including Chicago, are now bracing for a similar crackdown. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has joined Johnson in opposing the president’s actions, while Trump denounced state leadership.

“I look at Chicago. You’ve got a really bad governor and a bad mayor. But the governor is probably the worst in history,” Trump said.

Pritzker responded by saying, “I think you can see that this has not gone well for him politically, and he’s all about the politics.”

Acting director of ICE, Tom Homan, told CNN in January that Chicago’s efforts to educated undocumented immigrants have made deportation efforts “very difficult.”

“For instance, Chicago is very well educated,” Homan said. “They call it ‘know your rights.’ I call it how to escape arrest … how to hide from ICE.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday ruled out calling Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz after the targeted shootings of two state lawmakers, saying that to do so would “waste time.”

One lawmaker and her husband were killed, and the second legislator and his wife sustained serious injuries in the shootings early Saturday. A suspect surrendered to police on Sunday.

The Republican president spoke to reporters early Tuesday aboard Air Force One as he flew back to Washington after abruptly leaving an international summit in Canada because of rising tensions in the Middle East between Israel and Iran. Asked if he had called Walz yet, Trump said the Democratic governor is “slick” and “whacked out” and, “I’m not calling him.”

Presidents often reach out to other elected officials, including governors and mayors, at times of tragedy, such as after mass killings or natural disasters, to offer condolences and, if needed, federal assistance.

On the plane, Trump sounded uninterested in reaching out to Walz, who was the vice presidential running mate for 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, who lost to Trump. During the campaign, Walz often branded Trump and other Republican politicians as “just weird.”

“I don’t really call him. He’s slick — he appointed this guy to a position,” Trump said. “I think the governor of Minnesota is so whacked out. I’m not calling him. Why would I call him?

“I could call him and say, ‘Hi, how you doing?’” Trump continued. “The guy doesn’t have a clue. He’s a, he’s a mess. So, you know, I could be nice and call him but why waste time?”

Trump’s mention of “this guy” being appointed to a position appeared to be a reference to Vance Boelter, the suspect who surrendered to police after a nearly two-day manhunt in Minnesota.

Boelter is a former political appointee who served on the same state workforce development board as Democratic state Sen. John Hoffman, records show, though it was unclear if or how well they knew each other.

Authorities say Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, were seriously wounded in a shooting a few miles away from the home of former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman, who was fatally shot along with her husband, Mark, in their home early Saturday in the northern Minneapolis suburbs.

Friends and former colleagues interviewed by the Associated Press described Boelter as a devout Christian who attended an evangelical church and went to campaign rallies for Trump.

Federal prosecutors charged Boelter with murder and stalking, which could result in a death sentence if convicted. His lead attorney has declined to comment.

On Monday, Walz posted a message of thanks on social media to Ontario Premier Doug Ford for his call expressing condolences to Hortman’s family and the people of Minnesota.

“In times of tragedy, I’m heartened when people of different views and even different nations can rally together around our shared humanity,” Walz wrote.

In an interview Monday with Minnesota Public Radio, Walz said he wasn’t surprised by the lack of outreach from Trump, saying, “I think I understand where that’s at.”

Walz said he has spoken with Vice President JD Vance and was “grateful” for the call and had talked with former President Biden, Harris and Ford.

“I’m always open to, you know, people expressing gratitude. Vice President Vance assured us, and he delivered, that the FBI would be there as partners with us to get it done,” Walz said. “That was what needed to be done.”

Superville writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Sarah Brumfield in Cockeysville, Md., contributed to this report.

Chelsea kicked off their Fifa Club World Cup campaign against Los Angeles FC to tens of thousands of empty seats in Atlanta.

The game started at 3pm local time on a working Monday at Mercedes-Benz Stadium.

The ground can hold 75,000 spectators, but the entire top tier was closed for this match.

Sources told the BBC that Fifa was expecting a crowd of about 26,000, but it did not appear that busy at kick-off.

A small middle tier seemed to be mostly full, but a larger bottom tier was more than half empty.

The cheapest ticket was about £37 before kick-off. During the game tickets were still on sale online for £26 – with many available in nearly every section.

Los Angeles is more than 2,000 miles away from Atlanta, across the southern United States.

Their 1,500 ultras dominated the atmosphere.

The newly expanded Club World Cup is being treated as a dress rehearsal for the international World Cup next summer, which will be held in the USA, Canada and Mexico.

The CWC is just being played in the US.

A TOP doctor campaigning for pay rises and strike action has a sideline running two start-up companies, we can reveal.

Cardiologist Dr U Bhalraam is deputy co-chairman of the British Medical Association’s resident doctors committee — which is backing six more months of walkouts.

It is urging members to strike, claiming they are paid 23 per cent less in real terms than in 2008.

This is despite resident doctors — formerly known as junior doctors — getting an almost 30 per cent pay rise over the past three years.

On his website, Dr Bhalraam says he’s “focused on full pay restoration”.

But The Sun on Sunday has found that Dr Bhalraam has also set up two firms of which he is sole director and owner.

He launched Datamed Solutions Ltd, a data processing company, last June and just a few days later UBR Property Holdings Limited, which is described as a letting company.

They are both registered to his smart £330,000 house in Norwich, where he works at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

Resident docs have taken industrial action 11 times since 2022, causing about 1.5million appointments to be cancelled.

A YouGov poll of 4,100 adults found almost half oppose the strikes.

1

It’s all (Taylor’s Version) now.

Taylor Swift announced Friday that she had reacquired the rights to her early recordings, six years after music executive Scooter Braun bought her old record label (and with it, control of Swift’s first six studio albums).

Braun’s 2019 purchase of the Nashville-based Big Machine company — whose Swift holdings he later sold for a reported $300 million — inspired Swift’s massively successful “(Taylor’s Version)” campaign, in which the 35-year-old pop megastar has been meticulously re-recording each of those LPs in an effort to replace the originals in the marketplace.

“All I’ve ever wanted was the opportunity to work hard enough to be able to one day purchase my music outright with no strings attached, no partnership, with full autonomy,” Swift wrote Friday on her website after posting a photo on social media of herself surrounded by those early albums.

“I will be forever grateful to everyone at Shamrock Capital for being the first people to ever offer this to me,” she continued. “The way they’ve handled every interaction has been honest, fair, and respectful. This was a business deal to them, but I really felt like they saw it for what it was to me: My memories and my sweat and my handwriting and my decades of dreams. I am endlessly thankful.”

Last week, the New York Post’s Page Six reported that Braun — who once managed Swift’s nemesis Kanye West and whom Swift has accused of bullying her — was “encouraging” the new deal between the singer and Shamrock Capital, the L.A.-based investment firm that bought the rights to Swift’s early music from Braun in 2020. Yet a source close to the contract negotiations, who requested anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic, rebutted that claim.

“All rightful credit for this opportunity should go to the partners at Shamrock Capital and Taylor’s Nashville-based management team only,” the source told The Times. “Taylor now owns all of her music, and this moment finally happened in spite of Scooter Braun, not because of him.”

Shamrock was founded in 1978 by the late Roy E. Disney, a nephew of Walt Disney; Swift has struck several deals with the Disney company in recent years, including her decision to make a 2023 concert movie available to stream on Disney+.

The New York Post reported that Swift paid Shamrock between $600 million and $1 billion for the rights to her albums, a price range The Times’ source described as “highly inaccurate.”

Through a representative, Braun said on Friday: “I am happy for her.”

The pop star also provided an update on “Reputation (Taylor’s Version)” in her Friday note.

“[I]t’s the one album in those first 6 that I thought couldn’t be improved upon by redoing it. Not the music, or the photos or videos. So I kept putting it off,” she said of the anticipated redo, which will follow earlier “(Taylor’s Version)” updates of her albums “Fearless,” “Red,” “Speak Now” and “1989.” “There will be a time (if you’re into the idea) for the unreleased Vault tracks from that album to hatch,” she added.

Swift said she had “already completely re-recorded” her self-titled debut album, which she released in 2006 at age 16, and “really love[s] how it sounds now.”

The original “Reputation” followed a public feud with West and his then-wife, Kim Kardashian, that reshaped Swift’s established image as the girl next door: “My reputation’s never been worse,” she told a new love interest in the song “Delicate,” “So you must like me for me.” The LP found the singer — who had described 2014’s “1989” as her first “official pop album” — dabbling in sounds and textures borrowed from hip-hop and R&B; the song “End Game” even featured a guest verse from the rapper Future.

“Reputation” earned a Grammy nomination for pop vocal album, though it famously missed a nod for album of the year after Swift had scored three earlier nominations in that category. In 2024, the singer became the first artist to win album of the year four times when “Midnights” took the prize; Swift’s latest project, “The Tortured Poets Department,” was nominated for album of the year at February’s ceremony, but Beyoncé’s “Cowboy Carter” won.

Friday’s announcement came around six months after the finale of Swift’s blockbuster Eras tour, which launched in March 2023 and ran for 149 shows across five continents. The tour is said to be the highest-grossing of all time, with ticket sales in the neighborhood of $2 billion.

And in case anyone was unclear about how much this deal with Shamrock Capital means to Swift, she laid it out pretty clearly in her note.

“My first tattoo,” she wrote, “might just be a huge shamrock in the middle of my forehead.”

Rotating and resting players in secondary cups is not a new phenomenon – but Chelsea took it to a new level in the Conference League this season.

They averaged 8.5 changes per European game, based on their previous Premier League line-up.

In the league stage there was a recognised Premier League team and a Conference League XI – with very little overlap. They were much changed in the domestic cups too, although fell at the second hurdle in both.

England forward Palmer, their star player, was not even registered in Europe until the knockout games.

As the Blues started playing in knockout games they started using more first-team players, like Palmer, Caicedo and Marc Cucurella.

But even through that they never made fewer than five changes from their last league game, including the final.

As the season ends, well, until next month’s Fifa Club World Cup, 18 Chelsea players featured in more Conference League than Premier League games this season.

That includes five players who left the club in January.

Midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall, who played all 15 European games, featured 13 times in the league.

Marc Guiu, whose six goals were two shy of the Conference League Golden Boot, has yet to start a league game.

However, the final saw a stronger XI, with only four outfield changes from the side that beat Nottingham Forest last Sunday to clinch a Champions League spot.

“Chelsea have got so much more money than anyone else competing in this competition,” said ex-Blues winger Pat Nevin on BBC Radio 5 Live.

“But they have respected the competition by saying, ‘we’re not going to put out the softest of teams but we’ll put out enough to make sure we’ll get through’.

“I have to say, looking back on it all now, Enzo Maresca has done a great job.”

A visit to Los Angeles by Vice President George Bush has pulled in more than $500,000 for his 1988 presidential campaign. But perhaps even more important to Bush, the visit finally gave him a chance to hit his stride as a campaigner.

Many of the 600 people who heard Bush speak Wednesday night at a dinner in Century City are supporting him, so they were not expected to be critical of his performance. But even they were surprised at the power of Bush’s speech and with how he took on criticism of his candidacy.

“He was dynamic,” said Rod Rood, former head of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency and a longtime player in Republican politics. “It was one of the best political speeches I have ever heard.”

Los Angeles attorney Charles G. Bakaly III said the speech had reassured some of the powerful people in the room who have been watching Bush attempt to remain loyal to President Reagan while establishing his own identity.

“He sounded very confident,” said Bakaly. He was the most energetic I have heard him in a long time. That was a tough crowd in the sense that they have been called upon (to give money) many times. But I think the vice president reassured the people there that he knows what he has to do.”

Among those in the crowd were such prominent California businessmen as Donald Bren, president of the Irvine Co., and entertainment magnate Jerry Weintraub. Also attending the $1,000-a-plate dinner were such longtime backers of President Reagan as Margaret Brock, Holmes Tuttle and Armand Deutsch. Gov. George Deukmejian gave the introduction.

“It was the real George Bush that I know. I think he has made up his mind that he has to come out fighting,” said Tuttle, one of the wealthy Southern California Republicans who helped build Reagan’s political career.

Bush noted in his remarks that some have said his resume was in fact a liability, not an asset, because it looked like he was merely running on his resume.

“I don’t think it is ‘resume’ to have had a broad amount of experience and to try to bring experience to the presidency,” Bush told his audience. “I happen to think it is a plus, not a minus.”

Past Recounted

Noting that he has “never been much about talking about” himself, Bush then recounted his past, from being shot down as a Navy pilot in World War II to serving in the House, starting a business, being ambassador to China and running the CIA.

In a speech interrupted numerous times by applause, he got an especially strong response when he defended the CIA, which he ran in 1976-77, toward the end of the Ford Administration.

“I ran the Central Intelligence Agency and people say that is a liability. They say ‘You ought to tiptoe on that one.’ But I led something at a very difficult time, went in there when it had been demoralized by the attacks of a bunch of little untutored squirts from Capitol Hill (who were) going out there looking at these confidential documents without one single iota of concern about the legitimate security of this country.

“I stood up for the CIA then and I will stand up for it now,” shouted Bush.

Loyalty to Reagan

Bush also defended his reluctance to speak out against Reagan over the last six years, which some critics say has created an identity problem that must be overcome if Bush is to win the GOP nomination.

“When I became vice president I said I would sublimate my own passions to a certain degree and support this President and I’ve taken some flak for it. But that doesn’t bother me. As I (have said), ‘In the Bush family we don’t consider loyalty a character flaw, we consider it a strength.’

“And I am going to stand with this President until the end of our term, without turning my back on him when the going gets tough,” Bush said, in an apparent allusion to the Iran- contra scandal, the worst crisis of the Reagan presidency.

“I will stand shoulder to shoulder with this President and say, ‘Here is what we have accomplished.’ And there is going to be plenty of good things–and you give me half the credit for the good things and I’ll take all the credit for the flak and the static and I’ll come out a great big winner.”

Promising to make education, energy, low taxes and arms control his top goals as President, Bush ridiculed pundits who note that the last sitting vice president to be elected President was Martin Van Buren in 1836.

“You take what we have done and build on it. So I am not worried about the Martin Van Buren syndrome. Nor am I worried that I can create my own ideas and my own path to the future of this country.”

WASHINGTON — When President Trump directed his attorney general last month to investigate online fundraising, he cited concerns that foreigners and fraudsters were using elaborate “schemes“ and “dummy accounts” to funnel illegal contributions to politicians and causes.

Instead of calling for an expansive probe, however, the president identified just one potential target: ActBlue, the Democrats’ online fundraising juggernaut, which has acknowledged receiving over 200 potentially illicit contributions last year from foreign internet addresses.

Trump’s announcement contained a glaring omission — his political committees also received scores of potentially problematic contributions.

An Associated Press review of donations to Trump over the past five years found 1,600 contributions from donors who live abroad, have close ties to foreign interests or failed to disclose basic information, often making it difficult, if not impossible, to identify them and verify the legality of their donations Among those was $5,000 linked to a derelict building, and $5,000 from a Chinese businessman who listed a La Quinta Inn as his address. Another sizable donation — $1 million — was made by the wife of an African oil and mining magnate.

It’s against the law for U.S. candidates and political committees to accept contributions from foreign nationals. Laws also place strict limits on donation amounts and prohibit the laundering of contributions to get around legal caps. For the most part, such donations have been policed by campaigns and the Federal Election Commission, with only the most egregious examples being targeted by federal law enforcement.

But after reclaiming the White House, Trump embarked on a campaign of retribution against his perceived enemies, launching broadsides against universities, law firms and his own former officials. If the Justice Department were to investigate ActBlue, it could imperil a key fundraising tool for Trump’s political rivals before the 2026 midterm elections, when Republicans’ threadbare House majority — and the president’s ability to pass an agenda through Congress — will be on the line.

“This is him taking direct aim at the center of Democratic and progressive fundraising to hamstring his political opponents,” said Ezra Reese, an attorney who leads the political law division at the Elias Law Group, a leading Democratic firm that does not represent ActBlue. “I don’t think there’s any question that they picked their target first. He’s not even pretending.”

Trump’s committees collected scores of donations from people living overseas

The White House did not respond to questions about Trump’s fundraising, including what sort of fraud prevention measures his committees have in place. Instead, a senior administration official pointed to the findings of a recent House Republican investigation of ActBlue that the White House alleges “uncovered specific evidence of potentially unlawful conduct.”

“The memorandum directs the attorney general to investigate this matter broadly, and she will follow the evidence and take appropriate action as warranted,” said the official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the matter.

Neither the Justice Department nor Trump’s 2024 campaign co-manager Chris LaCivita responded to requests for comment.

U.S. citizens living abroad are free to donate to politicians back home. But it can be difficult even for campaigns to discern who is allowed to give and whether a person may be serving as a “straw” donor for someone else seeking to influence U.S. elections.

The AP identified only two Trump donors out of more than 200 living abroad whose U.S. citizenship was listed as “verified” in the president’s campaign finance reports. He received over 1,000 contributions from 150 donors who omitted key identifying details such as their city, state, address or country. Trump also received at least 90 contributions from people who did not give a full name, are listed as “anonymous” or whose donations include the notation “name not provided.”

Many of these Trump donors contributed through WinRed, the Republicans’ online fundraising platform that is the GOP’s answer to ActBlue. Only about three dozen of these contributions were rejected, most of which came from an unknown source and were paid in cryptocurrency, campaign finance disclosures show.

WinRed officials did not respond to a request for comment.

“Foreign money in our elections is a legitimate concern,” said Dan Weiner, a former Federal Election Commission attorney who is now director of the Brennan Center’s elections and government program. “What’s not legitimate is to single out one political opponent and pretend the problem is limited to them.”

Donating from a La Quinta Inn

Jiajun “Jack” Zhang, for example, is a jet-setting Chinese businessman whose Qingdao Scaffolding Co. boasts of being one of the “biggest manufacturers and suppliers in China” of scaffolding. In October, he used WinRed to donate $5,000 to Trump, campaign finance disclosures show.

Zhang lives in China’s Shandong province, according to his LinkedIn account, and is described in French business filings as a Chinese national. But his contribution to Trump lists a La Quinta Inn in Hawaiian Gardens, California, as his address, records show. The donation was made around the time that Zhang posted a photo on social media of his family visiting Disneyland, which is near the hotel.

Zhang did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Other potentially troublesome donations include four from unnamed donors listing an address of “999 Anonymous Dr.”

There is also a series of contributions made through WinRed that listed the donor’s address as a vacant building in Washington that was formerly a funeral home. The donor, identified only as “Alex, A” on Trump’s campaign finance report, gave nearly $5,000, spread across more than 40 separate transactions last year. Those types of donations tend to draw scrutiny from campaigns and regulators.

Regulators and watchdogs have also long been concerned about donations from individuals with ties to foreign interests. Trump has received many such contributions, including one in December from Nnenna Peters, the wife of Benedict Peters, a Nigerian billionaire who is the founder and CEO of oil and mining businesses.

Nnenna Peters, who goes by Ella, gave $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee. A naturalized citizen, Nnenna Peters — who lives in Potomac, Maryland, a tony suburb of the capital — is allowed to make campaign donations.

Federal law, however, bars U.S. citizens from making contributions on behalf of a noncitizen spouse if the money is not a shared asset. For example, experts said, a husband could be prohibited from making a campaign donation using funds from a checking account solely in his wife’s name.

In practice, such a prohibition is hard to enforce because it is difficult to assess whether spouses are acting on their own accord or on behalf of significant others. Government watchdogs say donations like these raise the risk of an attempt to influence U.S. policy on behalf of a foreign interest.

That was precisely the kind of problem Trump cited in his executive order that singled out ActBlue.

Benedict Peters, as it turns out, has a lot to offer that could be of interest to Trump, who has made the extraction of natural resources a focus on his second administration. In particular, the Trump administration has sought to secure access to critical minerals that help power modern technology. Peters’ Aiteo Group markets itself as one of the largest energy conglomerates in Nigeria, while his company, Bravura Holdings, purports to hold the rights to vast critical mineral deposits across Africa.

His wife’s donation stands out in light of her past giving: She donated exclusively to Democrats, records show, including a $66,800 contribution to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

“This clearly could have come from her husband,” said Craig Holman, a registered lobbyist for Public Citizen, a Washington-based government watchdog group. “This is something the FEC should take a very, very close look at.”

Benedict and Ella Peters did not respond to requests for comment.

Indifference towards campaign finance rules

The questionable donations fit a pattern for Trump, who has in the past exhibited indifference toward campaign finance rules and used his presidential powers to assist those facing legal trouble in such matters.

In January, Trump’s Justice Department dropped its case against former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican accused of accepting a $30,000 contribution from a Nigerian billionaire. During his first term, Trump pardoned conservative commentator Dinesh D’Souza and Republican donor Michael Liberty, who were both convicted of using straw donors to evade contribution limits. He also pardoned former California Rep. Duncan Hunter, who was convicted in 2020 of stealing $250,000 from his campaign fund.

Trump’s political efforts have also drawn contributions from straw donors and foreigners who have been subjected to legal scrutiny.

Among them is Barry Zekelman, a Canadian steel industry billionaire, who was fined $975,000 in 2022 by the Federal Election Commission for funneling $1.75 million to America First Action, Trump’s official super PAC, in 2018. The contribution helped Zekelman secure a dinner with Trump at which steel tariffs were discussed.

Two Soviet-born U.S. citizens, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, were convicted in a straw donor scheme that funneled $325,000 to the same super PAC in the runup to Trump’s losing 2020 reelection campaign.

Jesse Benton, a Republican political operative, was convicted in 2022 of serving as a straw donor for a Russian businessman who contributed $25,000 to Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Democrats say Trump’s focus on ActBlue is a lot to stomach in light of Trump’s acceptance of questionable donations and his seeming lack of interest in enforcing campaign finance laws more generally. They noted that Trump in February fired a commissioner at the Federal Election Commission. The firing, followed by the resignation of a Republican commissioner, has denied the agency the quorum necessary to enforce campaign finance laws and regulations.

“It’s telling that while Trump and his allies attack grassroots-funded platforms like ours, their own campaigns have welcomed money from questionable sources,” ActBlue spokesperson Megan Hughes said.

Republicans counter that there is well-founded reason to investigate the Democratic platform, which eased some fraud detection protocols in 2024 before the presidential election.

Democrats are concerned about ActBlue’s future

There is, however, a political upside to investigating ActBlue. The platform has proved more successful than WinRed, the Republican platform designed to imitate it, which took in less than half of the $3.8 billion that ActBlue raised during the 2024 election cycle.

ActBlue representatives declined to say whether they have been contacted by the Justice Department.

ActBlue is expected to battle any investigation. It took a different approach when a Republican-led congressional committee launched an investigation in 2023. That committee’s findings turned out to be the basis for some of the allegations cited by Trump in his executive order.

Democrats, meanwhile, are preparing for the worst.

“There is a pervasive fear that ActBlue could cease to exist,” said Matt Hodges, a veteran Democratic operative who served as the director of engineering for Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign. “That’s the worst fear people have — that this will escalate or drain legal resources that hinder their ability to operate.”

He predicted that the Democrats could lose more than $10 million in the short term if ActBlue were forced to shut down. That has led some Democrats to begin thinking about alternatives, but they acknowledged it might be too late to create something as successful as ActBlue with the midterms around the corner.

Slodysko and Peoples write for the Associated Press. Peoples reported from New York.

Israel is applying many of the tactics used in its war on Gaza to seize and control territory across the occupied West Bank during its Operation Iron Wall campaign, a new report says.

Israel launched the operation in January. Defending what the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) termed “by far the longest and most destructive operation in the occupied West Bank since the second intifada in the 2000s”, the Israeli military claimed its intention was to preserve its “freedom of action” within the Palestinian territory as it continued to rip up roads and destroy buildings, infrastructure, and water and electricity lines.

The report by the British research group Forensic Architecture suggested Israel has imposed what researchers call a system of “spatial control”, essentially a series of mechanisms that allow it to deploy military units across Palestinian territory at will.

The report focused on Israeli action in the refugee camps of Jenin and Far’a in the northern West Bank and Nur Shams and Tulkarem in the northwestern West Bank. Researchers interviewed and analysed witness statements, satellite imagery and hundreds of videos to demonstrate a systematic plan of coordinated Israeli action intended to impose a network of military control in refugee camps across the West Bank similar to that imposed upon Gaza.

In the process, existing roads have been widened while homes, private gardens and adjacent properties have been demolished to allow for the rapid deployment of Israeli military vehicles.

“This network of military routes is clearly visible in the Jenin refugee camp and evidence indicates that the same tactic is, at the time of publication, being repeated in the Nur Shams and Tulkarm refugee camps,” the report’s authors noted.

Israeli ministers have previously stated that they planned to use the same methods in the West Bank that have destroyed the Gaza Strip, leading to more than 54,000 Palestinians killed and the majority of buildings damaged or destroyed.

In January, Defence Minister Israel Katz said Israel would apply the “lesson” of “repeated raids in Gaza” to the Jenin refugee camp. The following month, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has control over much of the administration of the West Bank, boasted that “Tulkarem and Jenin will look like Jabalia and Shujayea. Nablus and Ramallah will resemble Rafah and Khan Younis,” comparing refugee camps in the West Bank to areas in Gaza that have been devastated by Israeli bombing and ground offensives.

“They will also be turned into uninhabitable ruins, and their residents will be forced to migrate and seek a new life in other countries,” Smotrich said.

Hamze Attar, a Luxembourg-based defence analyst, told Al Jazeera these tactics are not new in Palestinian territory, having first been deployed by the British during their mandate over historic Palestine, which preceded Israel’s foundation in 1948.

“It’s part of the “counterinsurgency” strategy,” he said. “Bigger roads [mean] easy access to forces – bigger roads, less congested battle management; bigger roads, less ability for fighters to escape from house to house.”

Displacing the displaced

About 75,000 Palestinians live in the Jenin, Nur Shams, Far’a and Tulkarem refugee camps. They were either displaced themselves or descended from those displaced during the Nakba (which means “catastrophe”) when roughly 750,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes by Zionist forces from 1947 to 1949 as part of the creation of Israel.

Now, at least 40,000 of those living in the West Bank refugee camps have been displaced as a result of Operation Iron Wall, according to the United Nations.

As in Gaza, many of these people were forced from their homes on orders from the Israeli military, which researchers said have been “weaponised” against the local population.

Once an area had been cleared of its buildings and roads, it becomes a kill zone and the Israeli military is free to reshape and build whatever it likes without interference from residents, the report said.

“Such engineered mass displacement has allowed the Israeli military to reshape these built environments unobstructed,” the report noted, adding that when Palestinian residents did try to return to their homes after Israeli military action, they were often obstructed by the continued presence of troops.

Destroying infrastructure

Forensic Architecture researchers said Israeli attacks on medical facilities in Gaza have also spilled over into the West Bank.

“Israeli attacks on medical infrastructure in the West Bank have included placing hospitals under siege, obstructing ambulance access to areas with injured civilians, targeting medical personnel, and using at least one medical facility as a detention and interrogation centre,” the report said.

During Israel’s initial attacks on the Jenin refugee camp on January 21, multiple hospitals were surrounded by the Israeli military, including Jenin Government Hospital, al-Amal Hospital and al-Razi Hospital, researchers noted.

The following day, civilians and hospital staff reported that the main road leading to Jenin Government Hospital was destroyed by Israeli military bulldozers and access to the hospital was blocked by newly constructed berms, or land barriers,

On February 4, reports from Jenin said the Israeli military was obstructing ambulances carrying injured people from reaching the hospital.

Also carrying unmistakable echoes of Gaza was an UNRWA report in early February saying the Israeli military had forcibly co-opted one of the health centres at the UNRWA-run Arroub camp near Jerusalem as an interrogation and detention site.

The attacks on healthcare facilities were part of a wider campaign to damage civilian infrastructure in the West Bank, the Forensic Architecture report said, using armoured bulldozers, controlled demolitions and air attacks.

Researchers said they verified more than 200 examples of Israeli soldiers deliberately destroying buildings and street networks in all four of the refugee camps with armoured bulldozers reducing civilian roads to barely passable piles of exposed earth and rubble.

Civilian property, including parked vehicles, food carts and agricultural buildings, such as greenhouses, were also destroyed during Israeli military operations, they said.

PALM DESERT — They came to the baking desert to honor one of their own, a political professional, a legend and a throwback to a time when gatherings like this one — a companionable assembly of Republicans, Democrats and the odd newspaper columnist — weren’t such a rare and noteworthy thing.

They came to bid a last farewell to Stuart Spencer, who died in January at age 97.

They came to Palm Desert on a 98-degree spring day to do the things that political pros do when they gather: drink and laugh and swap stories of campaigns and elections past.

And they showed, with their affection and goodwill and mutual regard, how much the world, and the world of politics, have changed.

“This is how politics used to be,” Democrat Harvey Englander said after sidling up to Republican Joel Fox. The two met through their work with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., a spawn of the Proposition 13 taxpayer revolt, circa 1978.

“We had different views of how government should work,” Englander said as Fox nodded his assent. “But we agreed government should work.”

Spencer was a campaign strategist and master tactician who helped usher into office generations of GOP leaders, foremost among them Ronald Reagan. The former president and California governor was a Hollywood has-been until Spencer came along and turned him into something compelling and new, something they called a “citizen-politician.”

Hanging, inevitably, over the weekend’s celebration was the current occupant of the Oval Office, a boiling black cloud compared to the radiant and sunshiny Reagan. Spencer was no fan of Donald Trump, and he let it be known.

“A demagogue and opportunist,” he called him, chafing, in particular, at Trump’s comparisons of himself to Reagan.

“He would be sick,” Spencer said, guessing the recoil the nation’s 40th president would have had if he’d witnessed the crass and corrupt behavior of the 45th and 47th one.

Many of those at the weekend event are similarly out of step with today’s Republican Party and, especially, Trump’s bomb-the-opposition-to-rubble approach to politics. But most preferred not to express those sentiments for the record.

George Steffes, who served as Reagan’s legislative director in Sacramento, allowed as how the loudly and proudly uncouth Trump was “180 degrees” from the politely mannered Reagan. In five years, Steffes said, he never once heard the governor raise his voice, belittle a person or “treat a human being with anything but respect.”

Fox, with a seeming touch of wounded pride, suggested Trump could use “some pushback from some of the ‘old thinking’ of the Stu Spencer/Ronald Reagan era.”

A flag flown over the U.S. Capitol in Spencer’s honor was displayed at his memorial celebration, along with White House schedules from the 1984 campaign.

(H.D. Palmer)

Behind them, playing on a big-screen TV, were images from Spencer’s filled-to-the-bursting life.

Old black-and-white snapshots — an apple-cheeked Navy sailor, a little boy — alternated with photographs of Spencer smiling alongside Reagan and President Ford, standing with Dick Cheney and George H.W. Bush, appearing next to Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Wilson, a spry 91, was among the 150 or so who turned out to remember Spencer. He was given a place of honor, seated with his wife, Gayle, directly in front of the podium.)

In a brief presentation, Spencer’s son, Steve, remembered his father as someone who emphasized caring and compassion, as well as hard work and the importance of holding fast to one’s principles. “Pop’s word,” he said, “was gold.”

Spencer’s grandson, Sam, a Republican political consultant in Washington, choked up as he recounted how “Papa Stu” not only helped make history but never stinted on his family, driving four hours to attend Sam’s 45-minute soccer games and staying up well past bedtime to get after-action reports on his grandson’s campaigns.

Stu Spencer, he said, was a voracious reader and owned “one of the greatest political minds in history.”

Outside the golf resort, a stiff wind kicked up, ruffling the palm trees and sending small waves across a water hazard on the 18th green — an obvious metaphor for these blustery and unsettled times.

Fred Karger first met Spencer in 1976 when his partner, Bill Roberts, hired Karger to work on an unsuccessful U.S. Senate campaign. (In 2012, Karger made history as the first out gay major-party candidate to run for president.)

He no longer recognizes the political party he dedicated his life to. “It’s the Trump-publican Party,” Karger said. “It’s no longer the Republican Party.”

But politics are cyclical, he went on, and surely Trump and his MAGA movement will run their course and the GOP will return to the days when Reagan’s optimism and Spencer’s less-hateful campaign style return to fashion.

His gripped his white wine like a potion, delivering hope. “Don’t you think?”

Israel launched a campaign against former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger after he blamed the Israelis for the breakdown of his mission to achieve an interim agreement with Egypt following the 1973 war, according to declassified British documents

The documents, unearthed by MEMO in the British National Archives,  showed that the Israeli government lobbied US Congressmen to turn American opinion against Kissinger, accusing him of “delivering” Israel to Egypt and “humiliating” Israeli ministers.

In late March 1975, Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy between Israel and Egypt collapsed. Although he initially avoided publicly assigning blame, he privately told his UK counterpart, James Callaghan, that Israeli leaders were primarily responsible. Kissinger argued that the Israelis had “locked themselves into an inflexible position on non-belligerency,” that “wouldn’t allow them to escape”. He also informed his British counterpart that he “warned the Israelis once the step-by-step process had broken down the situation might change rapidly to their disadvantage”.

Egypt publicly declared that Kissinger’s approach had failed due to Israeli intransigence, specifically their insistence on non-belligerency, which Egypt rejected before a comprehensive settlement involving all aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the Palestinian issue, is reached.

READ: Saddam ‘used’ Jordan’s King Hussein against Egypt ahead of Kuwait invasion, UK documents show

Following the breakdown, the administration of President Gerald Ford began a comprehensive reassessment of its Middle East policy. The US National Security Council (NSC) informed the British embassy that the review “will be far reaching and will include an examination of military and economic assistance to Israel” and focusing on “principles underlying US policy rather than on tactical considerations”.

Although the Ford Administration avoided publicly blaming either party, US media reports suggested that Kissinger viewed Israel as primarily responsible for the failure. This impression was reinforced when it was revealed that President Ford had sent a strongly worded letter to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, criticising Israel’s inflexibility before the breakdown of the negotiations.

British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) files show that the US NSC told British Ambassador Peter Ramsbotham “in confidence” that Ford’s message to Rabin had been “very tough” and had referred critically to Israeli stubbornness during the negotiations.

Ramsbotham reported that while the Israeli embassy denied “in the strongest possible terms” any responsibility for the failed talks, support for Israel in the US “will come under increasing critical scrutiny.”

Relations between Kissinger and Israel deteriorated further. British Ambassador to Israel William B. J. Ledwidge observed increasing distrust toward Kissinger in the Israeli press, a sentiment he believed was encouraged by Israeli leaders. Ledwidge reported the relations were “in the process of becoming distinctly worse than the relations between Israel and the United States administration”. He assessed that this was “clearly inspired by briefing from Israel’s leaders”.

In a highly secret report, Ledwidge noted that the Israelis were “making no secret of the fact that Kissinger is angry with them for their stubbornness in the recent negotiations and President Ford agrees with him”.

After talking to “enough of well-informed” Israelis, Ledwidge concluded that Israel’s leaders were “worried by the strength of the disapproval which is being expressed by Washington”. “In the present situation the fact of Kissinger’s anger with Israel is perhaps more important than the justice of accusations against them”, the ambassador added.

Leon Dulzin, then treasurer of the Jewish Agency and a Likud leader, also complained to the ambassador that there as “very little negotiation” during Kissinger’s shuttle accusing the top US diplomat of aiming at “persuading the Israelis to give Sadat what he wanted”. Dulzin, a former Israeli cabinet minister and trusted by leading Zionists overseas, added that Kissinger “had never really accepted the proposition that Israel was entitled to any price in return beyond a continuation of American economic and military aid and general goodwill”.

A satirical drawing showing Israel pandering to Henry Kissinger of the United States while Egypt’s President Sadat gets away with the oil rich Sinai desert. [David Rubinger/CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images]

An Israeli source close to Rabin told the ambassador that the Israeli prime minister believed that Kissinger “had tried to deliver the Israelis to Sadat” and he (Kissinger) “had become angry when he found that it would not work”. Rabin came to the conclusion that “he only wished he could talk directly to the Egyptians” without Kissinger’s go-between.

At a dinner with visiting US Congressmen, Shimon Peres, then Israel’s defense minister, accused Kissinger of “humiliating” him, complaining that he played role in delaying his important visit to the US. Peres asked the Congressmen to “say as much (about Kissinger claimed behaviour) when they returned to Washington”.

Another player was Yehoshua Rabinowitz, then Israeli minister of finance who was also informed by Washington that he must postpone his visit to discuss economic aid yet once more. Sources told the UK ambassador that Rabinowitz understood that he will not be received until the re-assessment of American Middle East policy was completed. Rabinowitz detected the “hand of Kissinger in the repeated delays of his mission”, the sources said.

The dispatches from the British embassy in Tell Aviv indicated that the Israelis were talking “as if they were convinced that Kissinger himself is the chief organiser of the present wave of American displeasure which has reached such heights”.

Senior official in Israeli Foreign Ministry Yeshayahu Anug strongly criticised Kissinger in a conversation with the UK ambassador. He said “for the first time we saw him (Kissinger) behaving like a Jew”. Anug argued that when the shuttle went wrong, Kissinger “behaved as if he had been personally betrayed by the Israelis and lost his cool completely”.

In his assessment, the ambassador concluded that many Israelis “feel that the Zionist State does indeed irritate Kissinger”.

The documents also reveal that some Israeli figures questioned Kissinger’s personal attitude toward their country. According to Ledwidge, the Israelis who knew Kissinger believed when Israel was founded in 1948, he regarded it as “an aberration that could not be last”. They acknowledged that he changed his mind later. But Kissinger had been criticised because since the 1967 war, he has always been convinced that Israel “would be obliged to evacuate all the territories she had occupied as a result of the pressure of international opinion”.

READ: Sheikh Zayed lacked faith in US protection of allied Arab leaders during difficult times, British documents reveal

An account of a secret briefing Kissinger gave to Jewish leaders in December 1973 showed him making harsh comments about Israel’s military performance during the Yom Kippur War and emphasising the limits of US support.

According to this account, shown to the British ambassador by an Israeli diplomatic official “in strict confidence”, Kissinger “was brutally unsympathetic to Israel throughout his briefing”.  He was quoted as saying “Israel had lost the Yom Kippur war strategically and that even if she had surrounded and defeated the Third Egyptian Army, she would not have reversed the verdict”.

“If there were another war, the US might not be able, even if she were willing; to mount an airlift and Israel might fare worse than she had in 1973”. He even accused Israelis of “misleading the Americans about their military plans during the latter part of the war”.

In a separate dispatch, the British embassy in Washington reported that Kissinger “has suspected for months that the Israelis were casting him for the role of “fall guy”. The British ambassador to Tel Aviv commented that “no doubt the Israelis have had for a long time past a contingency plan for doing precisely this’ and perhaps they “have now reached the point of putting it into effect”.

British diplomats in London concluded that while the Israelis had reasons to criticise Kissinger, they were mistaken to view his actions as motivated by personal animosity. Instead, they believed that Kissinger’s pressure aimed to avoid another conflict that “would ultimately damage Israel and the West more than the Arabs”. As seen by Michel S Weir, Assistant Under-Secretary and director of Middle East and North Africa, Israel considered the pursuit of this major objective and any final settlement, which would involve it giving up most of the foreign territory she is occupying, as “personal spite”. This was considered as a “measure of the chasm that separates Israeli thinking from that of the outside world”.  In as much as the Israelis had accepted the idea of withdrawal, Kissinger was “surely entitled to feel betrayed, Weir concluded.

READ: Kissinger, Ford outraged by Israel humiliating the US in the eyes of Arabs, British documents reveal

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

World number one Aryna Sabalenka dropped only one game as she beat Kamilla Rakhimova to get her French Open campaign under way in emphatic style.

Sabalenka needed just one hour to beat Russian opponent Rakhimova 6-1 6-0 in Paris.

The Belarusian ramped up her performance as the match went on, winning nine games in a row to close out the match.

Opening up the first day’s play on Court Philippe Chatrier, Sabalenka served up five aces, hit 30 winners and broke her opponent’s serve five times on her way to a comfortable victory under the roof.

A three-time Grand Slam singles champion, Sabalenka has never reached the final of the French Open before – her best performance a semi-final run in 2023.

But on this evidence, the 27-year-old is justifying her tag as one of the tournament favourites.

She could face Chinese eighth seed Zheng Qinwen – who she beat in the 2024 Australian Open final – in the quarters and three-time defending champion Iga Swiatek in the semis.

Before that, Sabalenka will play Switzerland’s Jil Teichmann or Italian qualifier Lucrezia Stefanini for a spot in the last 32.