charge

L.A. County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman did something last week few prosecutors ever do — changed his mind in public, swapping out felony charges for misdemeanors in the case of an LAPD officer accused of secretly taping homophobic, racist and misogynistic remarks made by colleagues.

Since then, Hochman has been slammed for playing politics, embarrassing his office and even backing down for no reason other than the pressure was too intense.

Not a stellar look for a politician relatively new to elected office.

After speaking with Hochman about the reversal, I have a more optimistic take on it — drawn from a Talmudic quote that Hochman keeps on his desk, and which his father — a tax lawyer who represented at least one mobster — kept on his desk before him.

It’s Deuteronomy 16:20, “Tzedek, tzedek, tirdof” — Justice, justice you shall pursue.

It’s that double justice that holds weight in this situation, because, as Hochman explains it, his god rarely repeats himself without reason. Hochman said he reads that echo as referring to two parts of delivering justice — the process and the result.

“We try to get the right result. We try to get it in the right way,” Hochman told me.

When things go wrong, like they did in this case, he’ll reevaluate, he said, even if it leaves him with egg on his face.

“If that means that I have to publicly come out at a press conference and say that our initial decision-making, and what went into it, turns out not to have been perfect, and it is not set in stone, and we think there’s a better way of doing something, I’m going to stand up in a press conference and say exactly that,” he said.

A prosecutor who is willing to change his or her mind is critical to delivering real justice, because people get things wrong. Hochman holds incredible power over the thousands of lives entangled in the matters his office handles. Leaving that power of process in the hands of someone who can’t admit they made a mistake (as is the case with more D.A.’s than not) puts justice on a greased slide into a cesspool of hubris.

The distinction between the two forms of justice may seem like splitting hairs, but to anyone who has ever been involved with our justice system — as a victim or defendant, innocent or guilty — being dragged into a prosecution can often feel like an avalanche of misfortune.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think every person charged with a crime is a victim. There are plenty of predators out there, committing violations big and small, that require accountability.

But the process of administering justice is far more subjective and messy than we often admit. Sometimes, even when the prosecutor involved almost certainly knows something other than justice is in the works, there is a momentum of ego and bureaucracy that is hard to reverse.

And it doesn’t take a guilty verdict to derail a life. Simply having charges filed can mean a job loss, losing custody of kids, incarceration for months or years waiting for a trial, financial hardship and stigma.

We like to think of an innocent verdict as a great vindication, but by the time one arrives, if it does, a lifetime of damage may already have been done — that is the unseen power of process.

Just ask Daniel Flores, the LAPD officer whose case we’re talking about. Though he likely will eventually see all criminal charges dismissed, Flores told my colleagues Libor Jany and Richard Winton that this incident has “ruined” his life.

Hochman for weeks has faced intense public anger over his initial decision to charge Flores with 16 felonies. Folks from the lofty heights of the mayor to this lowly columnist objected, pointing out that punishing whistleblowers, even ones who may have technically broken the law as Hochman said Flores likely did (though Flores’ lawyer disputes that), would chill other officers from coming forward.

Hochman at first defended the charges, pointing out that as a sworn officer, Flores had an even higher duty to adhere to the letter and spirit of the law.

But, he said, he was unprepared for how strongly the public would react to the whistleblower part of the case. Though he contends he never meant to send a message silencing those who would expose wrongdoing, he concedes that did happen.

“People interpreted it that we’re trying to discourage all whistleblowers by the way we went about this prosecution,” Hochman said.

He also acknowledges that he is still learning what it means to be in this elected office. Though he has been both a federal prosecutor and a defense attorney, this is by far the most publicly accountable and visible role he has held, and he’s still figuring out that part of the job. It’s easy to be the candidate lobbing criticisms, or even the defense lawyer arguing the facts. It is much harder to be the person answerable to the nearly 10 million people of Los Angeles County when it comes to ensuring they feel both protected and respected by the law.

In his first year in office, more than one civil liberties advocate has taken issue with his approach.

“It is a continuous learning experience. In fact, anyone who takes this job and doesn’t view this as a daily learning experience cannot possibly do the job well,” he said. “If you don’t adapt to what’s out there, you don’t listen to what’s going on … you will fail, and by failure, I mean that you won’t achieve a society where people trust that the district attorney’s office is doing its job and doing it as best as it possibly could,” he said.

He blames the media in part for distracting from his accountability message in favor of the whistleblower-chilling angle in the Flores case — likely including headlines such as the one I wrote, “Protecting the blue wall of silence is not justice in LAPD whistleblower case.”

I’m willing to stand by the process that got me to that opinion, and also to give Hochman credit for being willing to change direction on his process when it was leading our city down the wrong path.

There are plenty of places where I hope Hochman will apply that rigor in the future — issues such as the death penalty, which he has brought back to Los Angeles, or in other difficult cases such as the killing of Keith Porter Jr. by an off-duty ICE agent. Porter’s family recently asked Hochman to convene a grand jury to hear the facts.

But that Hochman thinks about process, and the power that it holds, speaks well for justice in Los Angeles — even, maybe especially, when things go awry.

A Los Angeles police officer who faced multiple felonies for recording his colleagues making racist, sexist and homophobic comments will now likely avoid jail time under a new agreement with prosecutors, Los Angeles County’s district attorney said Wednesday.

Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman announced he would reduce 16 felony eavesdropping counts against Officer Daniel Flores to misdemeanors, and that the case would likely resolve in court through a diversion agreement.

The announcement came after Hochman faced backlash for the decision to prosecute Flores, with L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and even some of his own prosecutors criticizing the filing as “insane” and a deterrent for police looking to expose corruption and misconduct within their ranks.

The district attorney acknowledged the public reaction to the case as he spoke downtown Wednesday morning, and said he wanted to make “crystal clear” his intentions were to blunt illegal investigative practices by police, rather than discourage cops who want to report bad behavior.

“The message was not being clearly interpreted about us being protective of whistleblowers,” he said.

Flores’ attorney, ex-L.A. County prosecutor Alan Jackson, said he expected to request a diversion agreement for Flores in a downtown courtroom on Thursday.

“Following this disposition, 16 felonies will be dismissed with no plea, no punishment, and no record, because Daniel Flores told the troubling truth about what he heard inside his own department. As the investigators themselves concluded, there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in this open-plan LAPD office,” he said. “That isn’t eavesdropping, it’s being a witness. Mr. Flores has committed no crime.”

If a judge accepts a diversion agreement, Flores would have to satisfy certain terms and conditions for about a year. If he does so, the case would be dismissed.

An LAPD spokesman referred all questions to the district attorney’s office. While misdemeanor prosecutions in Los Angeles are normally handled by the city attorney’s office, the D.A. can keep possession of the case because it was initially filed as a felony, according to a district attorney’s office spokesman.

Flores made more than 100 recordings of his colleagues in the Los Angeles Police Department’s recruitment division last year,capturing other officers making an array of racist, homophobic and sexist remarks. Comments included a joke about a legendary L.A. Dodgers pitcher who was Latino dying because he “ate too many tacos,” and referring to stereotypes about Black people enjoying eating watermelon and playing basketball. One officer was recorded calling a young LAPD recruit “rapeable,” according to court records.

If convicted of the original charges, Flores could have faced up to 13 years in prison.

California is a “two-party consent” state, meaning it is a crime for someone to record a conversation without the permission of other participants, unless there is a court order granting authority to do so. Flores’ attorneys have argued that his actions were allowed under the California Invasion of Privacy Act because he was acting in the course of his duties as a police officer.

Flores lodged a complaint with the LAPD’s inspector general’s office and has said he hoped the officers he taped making inappropriate remarks would face discipline.

The decision to charge Flores drew relentless criticism from a number of groups. Bass said she worried about the potential chilling effect on other police whistleblowers.

Last week, City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez introduced a resolution condemning Hochman for bringing “felony charges against a City employee who reported workplace discrimination through official channels” and urging him to drop the charges.

Hochman told reporters that his office assessed the case with the same rigor as it would any other. In bringing the charges, he said he wanted to thread the needle between punishing the illegal recording and not dissuading whistleblowers from coming forward.

He suggested that he could have technically charged Flores with 122 felony counts, one for each recording that he made. Hochman also reiterated Wednesday that he felt it was important to file the case at a time when new products like Meta Glasses make it even easier to surreptitiously record people.

“If you go ahead and illegally eavesdrop in our community, you will face criminal prosecution for doing it, so don’t take out your cellphones and or your smart glasses or anything else,” he said, while encouraging whistleblowers to work with the D.A.’s office to gather evidence in the future.

Flores had pleaded not guilty at his arraignment in a downtown courtroom last week, with a team of high-powered lawyers in tow. His next court date was set for Sept. 9.

The second-guessing of Hochman’s decision ramped up earlier this month after the D.A., in an unusual move, filed a 27-page motion asking for a lengthy preliminary hearing in the case. The filing alleged Flores deceptively edited the recordings to hide his own insensitive remarks and suggested he was motivated by a desire to win a large legal settlement in court.

Hochman’s motion referred to the officers’ remarks as “locker room talk” — a characterization that was seized on by Flores’ legal team.

Jackson, a former L.A. County prosecutor, accused Hochman of contradicting himself, questioning the D.A.’s efforts to justify the officers’ coarse language.

Several county prosecutors, who spoke to The Times on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal, called Hochman’s decision to file his own motion in the case bizarre and unprecedented. While they privately lauded him for backing down on Wednesday, some said Hochman’s turn from zealously defending the filing to public capitulation in the span of two weeks was embarrassing for the office.

“From charging to doubling down to reducing to misdemeanors, this just makes it worse,” one prosecutor said. “The filing was inappropriate but then to bend to public pressure isn’t appropriate either.”

The motion, Jackson noted, relied heavily on the observations of the officers against whom Flores had leveled claims — and who were under internal investigation by the LAPD.

Flores filed a lawsuit in June accusing the LAPD of retaliating against him after he reported misconduct.

When reached for comment on Flores’ lawsuit, a spokesperson for the LAPD’s inspector general’s office said it was barred by state law from disclosing information about individual cases, but added that its practice is to refer all “complaints of employee misconduct” to Internal Affairs.

When the general in charge of protecting American skies found out that drones had been swarming over Langley Air Force Base, he was hardly shocked. It was the kind of threat now retired Air Force Gen. Glen VanHerck said that he and his predecessors had been warning about for years. TWZ was the first to report the December 2023 incursions over Langley, one of a select few bases hosting F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, and a particularly important installation for supporting the United States Northern Command (NORTHCOM) and North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) missions to defend the U.S. homeland, including protecting the nation’s capital in Washington, D.C. For nearly a decade, we have been documenting drone incursions over sensitive U.S. military and civilian sites, warships and more.

VanHerck was in charge of both commands when drones of a still-mysterious origin began flying over the Virginian installation. He offered some lessons learned from that experience on Wednesday, during a panel at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium (SMD) in Huntsville, Alabama, attended by TWZ. VanHerck provided no new details about who was operating the drones. However, he did describe the frustration of knowing something like this could happen and the helplessness U.S. military installation commanders at the time were feeling about their inability to defend against such incursions.

“The first lesson I would tell you is there were no surprises, at least for myself and the team at NORAD/NORTHCOM and others,” VanHerck said of learning about the Langley incursions, which began on the evening of Dec. 6, 2023. “We’ve been articulating — my predecessors had been articulating — that this threat was here, it was real, it was now, and we weren’t ready for it.”

VanHerck said that two years before the Langley incursion, he expressed his frustrations to Lloyd Austin, defense secretary at the time.

“I actually had told the Secretary of Defense on the 16th of December 2021 that I lacked the domain awareness to really do my mission,” the retired general explained. “That we lack access to capabilities and capacity, timely access in the homeland to do the mission, not only for a drone threat but more broadly all threats.”

“Maybe the most important one,” he said he told Austin, “is that we’re not set up to fight in and from our own land. We make an assumption that we’re going to take the fight somewhere else, and it’s going to occur on somebody else’s land. And the fact is, it’s ready to happen here right now.”

The lack of domain awareness over the homeland is a topic TWZ has frequently raised over the years, but that U.S. officials would not admit to it or address until after the Chinese spy balloon floated over much of the country in 2023 before being shot down off the Carolinas.

As we described in our original story, a base official at the time told us that Langley “first observed UAS [uncrewed aerial systems] activities the evening of December 6 [2023] and experienced multiple incursions throughout the month of December. The number of UASs fluctuated and they ranged in size/configuration. None of the incursions appeared to exhibit hostile intent but anything flying in our restricted airspace can pose a threat to flight safety. The FAA was made aware of the UAS incursions.”

Beyond not having the means to detect and defeat incursions like the ones over Langley, VanHerck said he didn’t even have the authority to do so. It was not NORAD/NORTHCOM’s mission, VanHerck proffered. It was up to the individual services.

“But their responsibility and authority stopped at the fence line at the base, and immediately thereafter, it was really unclear to everybody whose responsibility and authority was it just outside the base,” the retired general noted.

“Our installation commanders didn’t feel empowered,” VanHerck remembered. “They really felt a lack of trust. That ‘hey, if I take action, am I going to be covered for taking action and shooting something down that might be a civilian drone, but it might be a hostile drone?’ And so there was a lot of work to be done in that aspect, on the policy side and the authority side.”

VanHerck said that the pressure to act mounted after the so-called Jersey Drone incidents, which we were also the first to report. For a few months beginning in November 2024, thousands of people began reporting mystery drones in the skies.

“After New Jersey, there were calls for ‘just shoot them down,’” the general recalled. “Well, you know, in your homeland, that’s pretty hard to do, especially when you don’t have domain awareness. But shooting missiles that accelerate to four times the speed of sound or more, that have exploding warheads with fragmentation devices that explode titanium rods at thousands of feet per second over Langley or New Jersey is probably not where we needed to be, and for me that was really the only option I had as the NORAD/NORTHCOM commander.” 

Besides, as we frequently noted, the vast majority of these so-called drones were reported by civilians and turned out to be misidentified manned aircraft and even stars and planets. In fact, we saw no visual evidence of any mass drone incursions or strange objects over New Jersey during this prolonged series of events.

You can see video of one of the Jersey Drone situations below:

VanHerck was bringing up issues we pointed out in our own coverage about the murky authorities and prohibitions on the use of directed energy weapons, like lasers and high-power microwave systems, let alone kinetic capabilities, to bring down drones over military bases. 

Frustrations over that lack of authority and ability to act are issues that VanHerck’s successor, Gen. Gregory Guillot, has also raised and in many ways successfully pushed to change. You can read more about his efforts to give commanders greater authority to act against drones in our coverage here.

As we previously reported, in the wake of drone incursions like those over Langley, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Picatinny Arsenal, and others, NORTHCOM was given the role of synchronizing the U.S. military response during Guillot’s tenure. U.S. INDOPACOM was given a similar role for the Pacific. 

In addition, as VanHerck noted on Wednesday, there have been additional much-needed changes under current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, “who has cleared up a lot of the responsibility [and] authority [issues] with some of his actions.”

Among them, the military has been using directed energy lasers against cartel drones flying across the border and is working to expand that capability.

Moreover, the federal Safer Skies Act, which gives the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice (DOJ) as well as certain state, local and tribal agencies, limited authority to mitigate drone threats domestically, “really helps clarify things,” VanHerck stated.

Still, there is a long way to go, however, before the U.S. can fully protect its skies, the retired general suggested.

“We still have gaps and seams, and we need an integrated, layered approach driven by specific policy on what you must defend,” VanHerck posited. “These are the key lessons that I took away and put in memos years ago that we still have to fix today, and we’re seeing some of this play out not only in our homeland. We’re seeing some of it play out forward as well. So that’s a long answer, but there are a lot of lessons here.”

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

St Jude Championship – round three leaderboard

-13 S Scheffler (US); -11 S Burns (US), Im (Kor); -8 J Knapp (US), T Fleetwood (Eng)

Selected others: -7 B Harman (US); -6 V Hovland (Nor); -5 W Clark (US); -4 M Fitzpatrick (Eng), J Spieth (US); -3 L Aberg (Swe); -2 H Hall (Eng); -1 A Rai (Eng); +6 J Rose (Eng), R McIlroy (NI)

Full leaderboard

World number one Scottie Scheffler will take a two-stroke lead into the final round of the St Jude Championship as he chases his first victory since January.

Scheffler, 30, carded a two-under 68 on Saturday to sit at 13 under overall, with his American compatriot Sam Burns at 11 under alongside South Korea’s Im Sung-jae.

Burns produced a superb bogey-free 62 to move into contention in the FedEx Cup play-off opener at TPC Southwind in Memphis.

England’s Tommy Fleetwood, who is the defending FedEx Cup champion, is a further three strokes adrift at eight under with Jake Knapp.

And it ensures an intriguing fourth round, with close friends Scheffler and Burns in the final pairing.

“Strategy is still the same, just go out there and execute,” said Scheffler, who last led an event after 54 holes at the 2025 Open Championship.

“This is a golf course where that’s really all it comes down to. It’s always a little weird just because I want him to have success so much and I think he wants the same for me.

“It will be a competition like normal. It will be fun being out there with your friend but it’s also a bit weird.”

Sweden’s Alex Noren and Norway’s Viktor Hovland are well placed for strong finishes at seven and six under respectively.

However, six-time major winner Rory McIlroy and 2013 US Open champion Justin Rose both faltered badly on the 18th hole to sit well off the pace at six over.

Northern Ireland’s McIlroy carded a double-bogey six after driving into the water off the tee, while Rose fared even worse finding the same hazard twice on his way to a triple-bogey seven.

The top 50 players in the FedEx standings at the end of the weekend will advance into next week’s BMW Championship, with the top 30 after that advancing to the Tour Championship.

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A former Southern Poverty Law Center official has been charged in the Department of Justice’s broader criminal case against the Alabama-based civil rights group, a frequent target of conservative critics who claim the nonprofit is politically biased.

Heidi Beirich, a political extremism expert who left the law center about six years ago, was named in an indictment unsealed Wednesday.

Beirich, 59, of Palm Springs, is charged with wire fraud conspiracy, conspiracy to submit false statements to a federally insured bank and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering. She was charged in the government’s existing case against the SPLC in Montgomery, Ala.

In ankle cuffs and wearing a red T-shirt, Beirich made her initial court appearance for a bond hearing in Riverside, Calif., on Wednesday afternoon. She did not enter a plea and U.S. Magistrate Judge David T. Bristow ordered her to surrender her passport and appear in court in Alabama within two weeks.

The judge released Beirich on her own recognizance after prosecutors declined to file a request for detention. Her lawyer, Michael Proctor, said in court that Beirich is a “highly, highly responsible, pro-social and trustworthy” member of society with no criminal history.

Earlier in the day, Proctor said his client is innocent of the charges and described the case as politically motivated. He accused prosecutors of trying to punish his client for her “decadeslong record of success dismantling hate groups.”

“A free and fair society does not use the justice system to silence its political opponents,” Proctor said in a statement.

Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche announced the new charges at a news briefing in Washington, but did not name Beirich. CNN was first to report on the charges against Beirich.

“This is exactly what we said would happen in a case like this,” Blanche said. “Our investigators and the U.S. Attorneys and the agents working the case will keep on working it even after the initial indictment.”

An SPLC spokesperson said the case against it and Beirich “will not shake our resolve.”

“Taking on violent hate and extremist groups is among the most dangerous work there is, and we believe it is also among the most important work we do,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “We are confident in our position and look forward to presenting the evidence and making our case in court.”

Beirich led the SPLC’s Intelligence Project, which incurred the anger of conservatives with its annual report on organizations that it classified as hate groups. Critics accused the law center of unfairly tarnishing right-wing groups with the same label that it applied to white supremacists.

Beirich co-founded the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism in 2020 after leaving the SPLC. She has testified before Congress about far-right extremism and is frequently interviewed about the subject by news outlets. Her current organization did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment Wednesday.

A superseding indictment filed in June appears to refer to Beirich as “Employee-2” and by her former title as director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project.

The indictment alleges that between 2007 and 2023, more than $4 million in donated funds were secretly funneled to people who infiltrated or were associated with violent extremist groups. Prosecutors said some of the money was used for recruiting new members and purchasing Ku Klux Klan robes and materials for cross-burning ceremonies.

The indictment says “Employee-2” oversaw the payment of donor money to SPLC informants or “field sources,” including KKK members and white nationalists who initially approached the SPLC for help leaving the extremist organizations. The SPLC employee was in a romantic relationship with a source who infiltrated a neo-Nazi group at the direction of the law center, the indictment alleges

Proctor said Beirich “won’t be silenced or intimidated by the government’s false and politicized allegations.”

Kunzelman, Chandler and Ding write for the Associated Press. Kunzelman reported from Washington and Chandler from Montgomery, Ala. AP writers Eric Tucker, Alanna Durkin Richer and Collin Binkley in Washington and Christopher Weber in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

Aug. 11 (Asia Today) — A South Korean special counsel team indicted former Korea Policy Broadcasting Service chief Lee Eun-woo without detention Tuesday on a charge of promoting insurrection in connection with former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s December 2024 martial law declaration.

The second integrated special counsel team led by Kwon Chang-young said Lee was indicted under the Criminal Act on a charge of insurrection propaganda.

Lee is accused of repeatedly and intensively disseminating information between Dec. 3 and Dec. 13, 2024, asserting the legitimacy of the emergency martial law declaration and related proclamation.

Investigators also allege he selectively blocked or deleted information criticizing or opposing the martial law action.

The special counsel treated the broadcasting activity through Dec. 13, one day before the National Assembly approved Yoon’s impeachment, as a single alleged offense of promoting insurrection.

An official with the special counsel said investigators concluded that an insurrection ends when those responsible abandon their objective or become objectively unable to achieve it.

Under that interpretation, investigators determined that the alleged insurrection did not end simply when emergency martial law was formally lifted.

They instead concluded it continued until Dec. 14, when the National Assembly passed the impeachment motion against Yoon and suspended him from his presidential duties.

Lee is already on trial in a separate case involving allegations related to the deletion of broadcast captions concerning the martial law declaration.

A court in June sentenced him in that case to one year in prison, suspended for two years.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260811010003702

SACRAMENTO — Say you want a new pair of running shoes, but you just can’t make up your mind. So you spend a solid week checking them out online, coming back to one pair on a particular site again and again.

When you’re finally ready to check out, you notice something upsetting — the price you saw on day one is now 20% higher. What the heck?

Welcome to the brave new world of surveillance pricing, where some companies are not just tracking your every move online but also purchasing deep-dive data into your life for a single purpose — to figure out the maximum you will pay for an item and jack up the price accordingly to squeeze every possible dollar out of every unwitting consumer.

It’s legal, and whether it’s good or bad “depends on which side of the transaction you’re on,” said Roger White, an economics professor at Whittier College.

For those of you who are really terrible at economics, we, the little people, are on the bad end of that deal.

“It is using your own personal data and your characteristics, your demographics, information about you, to set a different price based on the perceived willingness to pay, and that is causing Californians a potential chance of being gouged,” said state Assemblymember Christopher M. Ward (D-San Diego).

Ward is trying to outlaw surveillance pricing in California with his AB 2564, which seems like a no-brainer if you actually care about affordability and your constituents. But he’s having a hard time getting his bill through the Legislature. In fact, he tried last year and failed.

This year, the bill still has a chance, but the clock is ticking, the lobbyists representing big retailers and data brokers are spending, and our state elected officials seem lukewarm on the issue.

A bad problem gets worse

But if surveillance pricing seems corrupt or unethical, get ready. Because retailers are getting ready — for artificial intelligence.

Right now, most surveillance pricing is relying on established data collection. That is about to get super-charged as AI goes further and further into sweeping up bits of information on every aspect of our lives, on and offline.

Did your car break down and you have to shop at home? Are you injured or have a medical condition that makes you desperate for comfy shoes? Did you just get a raise and maybe are in the mood to spend?

The amount of data that can be definitively known about your life is huge. The amount that can be inferred is even bigger. Imagine if artificial intelligence in real time, using every bit of information it can find, is basically working to squeeze every dime out of you, every day on every purchase — groceries, clothes, plane tickets, maybe even medicines.

“AI gives them powerful tools to do that, and they can basically use information almost instantaneously to set prices,” said Darrell M. West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public policy think tank.

Which makes regulating surveillance pricing now all the more important.

The big bad picture

White, the Whittier professor, sees an even bigger threat looming with surveillance pricing. He points out that income inequality in the United States has been increasing since the 1970s, and it is mostly rich people who control and own large retail endeavors.

If surveillance pricing is allowed to blossom unfettered, he’s concerned the rich will get richer by selling at higher prices, and everyone else will be paying so much to survive that the poor and middle class will suffer even further.

“This could lead to an acceleration of income inequality,” White said. “This could be a way for, sort of, the rich to benefit more,” leaving “the middle class and the poor potentially being even worse off.”

Immediate gouging, and long-term erosion of the already tenuous ability of the middle class and poorer people to survive. You’d think our state Legislature would be all over fixing this.

Other states have. In fact, about 20 states have some sort of law about “dynamic pricing,” a broader term for how retailers use data to set prices.

Just a few days ago, New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed A4085 (the Fair Price Protection Act), which prohibits surveillance pricing for groceries.

New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Maryland also have laws on the issue, though some won’t take effect until next year.

And this isn’t some sort of blue-state push. MAGA Republican Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) suggested last week that he might be considering federal legislation on the issue, the same week the democratic socialist mayor of Seattle proposed curbs on it.

“There are both Republicans and Democrats who are worried about these issues because they’re getting complaints from their own constituents,” West said.

But in California, the winds are blowing in favor of the big guys. While Ward is working through one colleague at a time trying to pass the measure, the lobbying pressure against it has been significant.

Retailers and others argue it could have unintended consequences, like preventing them from offering discounts to certain customers, or having loyalty programs.

C’mon. No one is coming for your coupons.

White, the economist, points out that companies are spending millions to implement surveillance pricing, and they aren’t doing it so they can slash prices and lose money.

“They won’t say this, but you know, the reality is that millions, if not billions, of dollars in inflated profit is on the line,” said Ward. “Unfortunately, that is coming at the expense of everyday Californians who are having that ripped out of their pocketbooks without them even knowing it.”

White put it even more bluntly.

“If you’re opposed to the Assembly bill, it seems that you are siding with the businesses, and if you’re in favor of it, then it seems that you’re siding with consumer protections.”

Ward is fighting an uphill battle, but he isn’t giving up. It’s about trying to “right the universe when it comes to fair pricing for consumers,” he told me.

“We need to go back to a place of a fair marketplace where you have an honest relationship between the consumer and the business and everybody is being treated the same,” he said.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: ‘Pervert glasses’: Backlash against Meta’s smart glasses grows
The California angle: L.A. shelter provider has paid CEO who lives in Hawaii $1.6 million in salary, vacation over two years
The L.A. Times Special: D.A. faces backlash after charging LAPD officer who recorded colleagues’ racist remarks

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

In the days since he charged a Los Angeles police officer with a crime for capturing evidence of his co-workers’ racist remarks, Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman has been the subject of withering criticism from Mayor Karen Bass, former cops and even some of his own prosecutors.

The chorus of voices decrying the filing of 16 counts of felony eavesdropping against Officer Daniel Flores — who caught fellow officers on tape using slurs and making derogatory remarks about Asians, Mexicans, Black people and women in the LAPD’s Training Division in 2024 — say the charges will dissuade other officers from reporting corruption and raise questions about Hochman’s commitment to police accountability.

“The bottom line is that the alleged racist, sexist, and homophobic comments made are outrageous and unacceptable,” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said in a statement to The Times on Tuesday. “While I understand that it is inappropriate and a crime to record colleagues without their consent, those charges certainly send the wrong message that calling out egregious behavior could land you in prison.”

Six L.A. County prosecutors — all speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the case candidly — also said in recent days they were shocked by Hochman’s decision to charge Flores.

One referred to the filing as “insane,” while another suggested Flores’ case should have been dismissed in the interest of justice.

On Friday, the district attorney’s office made public a 27-page motion asking for a lengthy preliminary hearing in the case. The filing alleged Flores deceptively edited the recordings to hide his own insensitive remarks. Several of the officers whom Flores taped said he often talked about wanting to win the “LAPD lottery,” meaning he intended to sue the department and retire on his winnings, according to the motion.

“[Flores] often starts the recordings in mid-conversation,” the district attorney said in an interview Friday. “Many people talk about the fact that he initiated some of these discussions, that he participated in some of these discussions. You’ll hear references to comments he made. Usually he has edited out his comments.”

The motion — which relies heavily on representations made by the officers whose comments Flores exposed — alleges Flores “manipulated conversations by initiating or participating in discussions about a particular topic before activating the recording device, then ceasing his own participation.”

Hochman said the recordings contain evidence that Flores made sexist remarks and referred to a group of people as “f—ing Crips.” It was not clear how referencing the infamous L.A. gang was, on its own, racist.

Flores’ attorney, Alan Jackson, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Flores is due in court for an arraignment on Monday.

Some of Hochman’s own prosecutors said the charges look bad considering the district attorney’s suspect record in police accountability cases.

“Optics are terrible,” one prosecutor said, questioning whether Hochman was pressured to act by police unions, which made heavy contributions to his 2024 campaign.

Since taking office, Hochman has moved to dismiss a number of violent use-of-force cases against police and resolved others with lenient plea deals. He also either dismissed charges or offered no-jail plea deals to four former Torrance police officers who had been accused of crimes after they were implicated in the department’s infamous racist text scandal.

One prosecutor also said the Flores case is unwinnable and will certainly fail before a jury.

“Just because a law is broken doesn’t necessarily mean you are going to get 12 jurors in L.A. to convict,” the prosecutor said.

Flores turned over 122 recordings of his colleagues’ commentary to the LAPD Office of the Inspector General early last year, according to the motion filed Friday. An amended criminal complaint submitted in late July suggested the recordings were then used as evidence against Flores by LAPD officials who sought to punish him.

Flores has said he heard co-workers refer to Black people as “monkeys” who like grape soda and eat watermelon between basketball games, according to a retaliation lawsuit he filed last year. The suit claims Flores also heard colleagues call female officers “bitches” who couldn’t be trusted and alleged a supervisor said Mexican L.A. Dodgers legend Fernando Valenzuela died of septic shock because he “ate too many” tacos.

In the motion made public Friday, Hochman argued that Flores made the recordings, in part, to support his civil suit. Several of the officers quoted in the motion said Flores said he had anxiety about wearing a police uniform or going on patrol and wanted to retire to become a “stay at home Dad,” according to the motion.

The motion also provided more information about the alleged insensitive discussions than has been previously reported. One of the officers recorded by Flores admitted to describing a potential LAPD recruit as “rapeable” because they were “someone who could be taken advantage of,” according to the motion.

“The use of the phrase ‘rape’ was not in a sexual context,” the motion read.

The officers also suggested in the D.A.’s motion Flores was a habitual liar. He became embarrassed after he was caught fabricating or embellishing stories about playing college baseball, responding to protest scenes and an award he won in the police academy, according to the motion.

The motion said that an internal affairs sergeant found many of the allegations Flores made concerning officers in the recruitment unit improperly disqualifying candidates based on appearance and falsifying time sheets were not supported by evidence.

When he announced the charges last week, Hochman said that while the comments captured by Flores were deplorable, he couldn’t turn a blind eye to a blatant violation of the state’s two-party consent recording statute. With few exceptions, it is a crime in California to record a conversation without the consent of all parties involved.

Hochman said Friday that Flores is not protected by whistleblower laws because, although the recordings exposed bigoted speech, they did not prove evidence of a crime by any of the other officers. He also said the comments were not hateful in nature. At multiple points, the motion refers to the comments as “locker room” talk.

Many of the officers told investigators they made the crude comments “in a sort of joking, sort of locker room banter context. In hindsight these things are insensitive … but you’ll have for instance a Black individual making comments about Blacks,” Hochman said. “You’ll have an Asian individual making insensitive stereotypical comments about Asians.”

Hochman said the prosecution was meant to deter rogue police actions rather than silence whistleblowers. He likened what Flores did to a detective using illegal means to record a drug dealer or gang member.

Hochman said Flores should have reported his colleagues’ misconduct to internal affairs or the LAPD’s inspector general. But California Department of Justice records show there were 4,878 allegations of racial bias made against LAPD officers in the last decade, and the department upheld only three of those complaints.

Presented with those statistics at a news conference Thursday, LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell did not respond directly to a question about how Flores could possibly have faith in an internal probe. McDonnell said Flores’ complaint triggered an investigation into 18 other officers, all but one of whom faced sustained disciplinary complaints.

He declined to say what sanctions the officers faced. An LAPD spokesperson declined to elaborate.

The district attorney’s office has been less aggressive in prosecuting those who made surreptitious recordings in the past.

When asked to pursue charges against those who secretly recorded several City Council members making racist remarks during a meeting at the L.A. County Federation of Labor’s headquarters, the district attorney’s office found a crime had been committed but referred the case to the L.A. city attorney’s office for misdemeanor filing in 2024. Ultimately, no charges were filed.

Last year, the D.A.’s office opted not to bring charges in a different case involving an LAPD officer in possession of a secret recording.

In that case, the ex-girlfriend of Brandon Tilford provided the department with an audio recording he had texted her in January 2024, according to a rejection memo by prosecutors. In the recording, an unidentified police officer is heard saying, “Officer walks through processing and goes, man, this is f— Planet of the Apes in here” in an apparent reference to Black inmates. Tilford texted his former girlfriend, “That’s my sgt btw lol.”

But prosecutors said there was insufficient evidence to bring charges because the girlfriend couldn’t identify the officers in the recording or say who made it. Thus, prosecutors reasoned that they could not prove Tilford created the recording and did so without the others’ knowledge.

Retired LAPD Cmdr. Lillian Carranza said she understood why Flores “might feel compelled to gather evidence to substantiate serious allegations,” given how the department has handled past whistleblower cases.

“For me, the difficult question is not whether evidence should be gathered, but where the line should be drawn,” said Carranza, a 36-year department veteran who successfully sued the city several times for misogyny and sexual harassment. “Gathering evidence over days or even weeks to document ongoing misconduct is one thing. Doing so over many months raises different legal and ethical questions.”

Hochman said the sheer volume of recordings, and the fact that Flores is a sworn law enforcement officer, played a role in the decision to file felony charges.

The union that represents front-line public defenders also seized on the controversy, saying in a statement that Hochman’s decision sent a clear message to others who may want to report wrongdoing: “keep quiet, or you will be the one facing trial.”

The department has long had a policy that forbids retaliation against officers who report misconduct.

But in practice, LAPD insiders say, those who come forward with compromising information get little support. The department is facing scores of lawsuits by officers who claim they faced retaliation after speaking out in the form of poor job evaluations, harassment, demotions and even termination.

Mérida, August 4, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez announced a series of immediate measures during a conference call on Sunday with governors and cabinet members to safeguard Venezuela’s National Electrical System (SEN) amid climate risks and disruptions from the recent earthquake.

Rodríguez outlined an action plan to prepare for the severe drought and high temperatures associated with the “Super El Niño” phenomenon. Venezuelan authorities will launch a national energy and water conservation plan and steps to secure electricity generation.

“We must be prepared for the ‘Super El Niño’ climate phenomenon, and I have requested the activation of an Electricity and Water Savings Plan to promote awareness and the commitment of every Venezuelan in the responsible use of these resources,” she stated during the broadcast.

The acting president also addressed the impact of the recent double earthquake that struck central-northern Venezuela, which severely affected high-voltage transmission lines and damaged electricity generation facilities. 

The most significant damage occurred at the Termocarabobo plant, which temporarily lost 600 megawatts (MW) of generation capacity. Rodríguez stated that technical crews have already restored 300 MW and expect a full recovery in the coming weeks.

“The fluctuations we have experienced in recent days are directly linked to the significant loss of those 600 MW, and today I am pleased to say that we have already recovered 50 percent,” Rodríguez noted. She added that the government aims to incorporate an additional 480 MW of thermal generation before the end of the year to cushion the grid against climate-induced strain.

The emergency measures respond to renewed instability in the power grid across several regions of the country. While localized rationing and temporary outages have been common in most of the country, they have worsened following the June 24 double earthquake. Residents have reported hours-long blackouts, sometimes twice a day. 

To address structural generation deficits, the Venezuelan government has sought to open the electricity sector to private corporations.

On June 15, Acting President Rodríguez signed a memorandum of understanding with US-based GE Vernova, formerly General Electric, aimed at adding 1,000 MW to the electrical grid within 24 months and up to 5,000 MW over four years.

Days before the GE agreement, Venezuelan authorities established a deal with Argentina-based IMPSA, presently owned by a US consortium, to rehabilitate the Manuel Piar (Tocoma) and Antonio José de Sucre (Macagua) hydroelectric dams in Bolívar state. The IMPSA agreement targets an initial restoration of 672 MW at Tocoma within 19 months, with potential expansion up to 2,640 MW over five years.

In parallel, the National Assembly preliminarily approved a reform to the Organic Law of the National Electrical System in early June. The reform departs from the 2007 framework that defined electricity as a strategic sector under state control, opening generation, transmission, distribution, and commercialization to private sector concessions lasting up to 25 years.

The opening of the electric grid to foreign interests saw US Chargé d’Affaires in Venezuela John Barrett visit the Simón Bolívar Hydroelectric Plant, known as the Guri Dam, in Bolívar State on Sunday, August 2.

Barrett reported that he accompanied a “specialized technical team” from the US Department of Energy, which inspected the facility in coordination with Venezuela’s state electricity company CORPOELEC. The US official claimed the assessment seeks to establish “a roadmap to modernize the electric system.”

The Guri Dam presently produces over 10,000 MW of the roughly 13,000 MW supplied to the grid. Venezuela’s National Electrical System currently operates significantly below its installed capacity of around 30,000 MW.

The electric sector has been severely strained over the past decade as a result of lack of maintenance, brain drain, and the impact of US economic sanctions. The coercive measures severely restricted CORPOELEC’s ability to import spare parts, secure credit, or maintain contracts with original equipment manufacturers. A recent rise in oil production has added to the electric generation gap and contributed to increased blackouts.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Monday that U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro “choked” and “folded like an umbrella” in moving to drop charges against a former Olympian accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

Speaking at an unrelated Oval Office event, Trump ducked questions about whether he’d fire Pirro, a former Fox News host and longtime ally he handpicked as top federal prosecutor in the nation’s capital.

But the president kept up his drumbeat of sharp criticism, saying he remained disappointed by her assessment that damage to the Reflecting Pool was the result of shoddy construction, not vandalism.

“Frankly, I think she choked because the judge was really vicious. Instead of going after the people that did it, the judge went after her and went after her department, and I guess she choked,” Trump said in response to a reporter’s question after he signed an executive order for military spouses. “I don’t know what the hell happened.”

The move to dismiss charges against David Hearn was an embarrassing setback for the Justice Department and marked a rare moment during Trump’s second term of an aide or political appointee openly defying him.

After initially posting on social media over the weekend, “I disagree 100% with Jeanine Pirro,” Trump was still fuming two days later, insisting for several minutes that vandalism had marred the troubled project.

“I was disappointed with Jeanine Pirro, really disappointed,” the president said Monday. “She folded like an umbrella.”

Pirro has not commented publicly since Trump’s initial social media post criticizing her.

Hearn has said he was on a bike ride June 19 when he reached in to examine the pool’s newly peeled coating and briefly touched a chunk attached to the side of the pool. But he said he obeyed a park worker who told him to let go of it.

The president also used the opportunity Monday to distance himself from the troubled project, which he had touted as part of his overarching efforts to spruce up the nation’s capital.

Trump said in April that he had consulted with a trio of firms that had worked on swimming pools at his properties and that the one he picked for the Reflecting Pool project had done work at his golf course in Northern Virginia. That firm was Virginia-based Atlantic Industrial Coatings, which was awarded a $14.7 million no-bid contract to repaint and waterproof its concrete floor.

“I have a guy who’s unbelievable at doing swimming pools,” Trump said then. “He looked at it. He called me up. He said, ‘Sir, we can do something on it.’”

But Trump insisted Monday that “I didn’t know the contractor” and for the first time hinted that he wasn’t pleased by the work that was done to get the Reflecting Pool ready in time for Independence Day celebrations.

“I’m not saying I was 100% thrilled with the contractor, but the contractor was rushing. We wanted to get it open for July 4th,” he said.

Crews drained the Reflecting Pool weeks ago to launch a new round of repairs. The White House hasn’t said when those might be finished or how much more they will cost, but the Trump administration did not seek new bids from other companies on the new round of repair work.

Trump also said Monday that the Reflecting Pool would be “fixed” and reopened in the next week and a half to two weeks — without providing further details.

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

Houthis say Red Sea route remains free to use, pushing back on report of new shipping fees.

Yemen’s Houthi rebels have denied planning to charge ships for passing through the Red Sea, saying passage through the waterway remains free.

The denial came in a statement issued Saturday by the Houthi-run Humanitarian Operations Coordination Center (HOCC), which oversees vessel movement through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. It said its “safe transit service” was voluntary and free of charge, adding that anyone demanding payment for passage did not represent Yemen or the HOCC. It urged shipping companies not to make payments or share information with unauthorised parties.

The statement follows a Reuters news agency report on Wednesday, citing regional sources, that the Iran-aligned Houthis were considering imposing fees on ships transiting the strait – a week after the group declared a maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia. Those sources said the idea was raised with Iranian officials during a Houthi visit to Tehran earlier in July, with Iranian advisers reportedly helping set up an authority to regulate the fees.

The Bab al-Mandeb Strait is a vital chokepoint linking the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden, used by ships carrying oil and other cargo between Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Any fee on passage would echo Iran’s own efforts to charge ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, which has been largely shut since the US-Israel war on Iran began earlier this year.

Yemen’s foreign minister-designate, Afrah al-Zouba, said on Tuesday that the Houthis were seeking to “copy the Iranian model”.

A toll on Bab al-Mandeb would hit Saudi Arabia especially hard, since the kingdom has increasingly relied on the strait as an alternative export route while Hormuz remains disrupted.

The Houthis have waged a long campaign against Red Sea shipping, beginning in 2023 after the start of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, and only pausing attacks after a ceasefire last October. A United Nations expert report found that the group may have collected significant informal fees from shipping agents in 2024, though this was never independently verified. Traffic through the strait has still not recovered to pre-2023 levels.

In response to the renewed threat, Saudi Arabia this week announced a 14-nation maritime coalition aimed at protecting freedom of navigation through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden.

This important question can easily cost holidaymakers extra cash

People going on holiday this summer should know this simple money mistake to avoid as it could needlessly cost you more without realising. The ‘rule’ to remember is very simple, according to money and travel experts.

Travel specialist Kate Donnelly (@Thedonelleyedit) claims that all British people heading abroad this summer should remember one important thing that could result in hidden fees when on holiday. She said that we all have the option to avoid these, even if the choice seems clear and convenient.

She said: “When you are abroad, you should always pay in the local currency. Whether that’s euros or dollars, depending on where you are, and you should never select the option of paying in Great British Pound (GBP).”

Why does it matter what you choose?

Whether you’re buying a meal or using a cash machine, you should always have the option to pay in local currency instead of DCC. Nobody should choose on your behalf.

Kate confirmed: “When you’re abroad, and you choose to pay in pounds, you are allowing the ATM or the shop to do the exchange. Within this, there will also be a conversion charge, which is notoriously a really poor rate, meaning you will end up paying significantly more if you pay in the local currency.

“It’s your bank or the card provider that does the exchange. Even if they add on a transaction fee, you are still going to be getting a better rate if you choose to pay in pounds.”

Choosing dynamic currency conversion (DCC) means the amount is converted from the local currency to pounds at the point of sale. But, “DCC usually costs you more”, according to HSBC.

The bank said: “You might choose DCC and pay in pounds because it’s a currency you’re more familiar with. It could give you a better understanding of how much you’re spending. But there are extra fees, and the exchange rate is usually higher.”

Kate added: “The best thing to do when going on holiday is to invest in a fee-free card, such as a Monzo or a Starling. They add no transaction fees, and they also offer the best exchange rate.”

Martin Lewis previously appeared on ITV’s This Morning to talk about this exact issue. He said that the best thing to do, wherever you are in the world, is to pay in local currency to avoid inflated fees.

Need to know

Ryanair is targeting passengers who use large rucksacks or wheelie bags that exceed their free under-seat allowance. If you do not purchase ‘Priority Boarding’, your bag must fit under the seat in front of you (max 40x 30 x 20 cm)

All you need to know about Ryanair’s £79.99 hand luggage charge update

1. The £79.99 hand luggage charge, which has been causing a stir online, is a new baggage enforcement crackdown by Ryanair directly colliding with landmark new EU flight rules that aim to ban carry-on fees entirely.
2. Ryanair is targeting passengers who use large rucksacks or wheelie bags that exceed their free under-seat allowance. If you do not purchase ‘Priority Boarding’, your bag must fit under the seat in front of you (max 40 x 30 x20 cm). If it does not fit in the sizing gate, you will face an airport gate bag fee.
3. While standard pre-booked cabin bags cost between £6 and £36, being caught at the gate triggers a post-booking penalty that can reach up to £75 to £80.99 to put the bag in the aircraft hold.
4. Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary has doubled down on checking oversized bags. Ground handling crew bonuses for finding non-compliant bags are increasing, and the monthly bonus cap has been entirely removed to catch passengers “scamming the system”.
5. This enforcement push comes right as the European Parliament passed an air passenger rights update. New EU legislation will make it mandatory to include one overhead cabin bag and one personal item in the basic advertised airfare, eliminating hidden luggage fees. Airlines, search portals, and travel agents must display the full ticket price inclusive of hand luggage from the very beginning of the booking process.
6. O’Leary has furiously criticised the European Union‘s move. O’Leary claims the EU has “miss-sold” the regulations and that bundling overhead bags will make European airlines look less competitive globally. Ryanair warns that banning separate cabin bag fees will simply force base ticket prices up across the board, making travel more expensive for people who prefer to fly light.
7. The current cabin bag rules and gate fees remain fully in force. The new EU rules are a confirmed proposal expected to transition into law next year. Until the official transition period concludes, you will still be charged at the gate if your luggage exceeds the strict sizer dimensions.

READ MORE: Ryanair CEO says airports shouldn’t serve booze until 12pm to stop ‘misbehaviour’

On June 24, the collision of the South American tectonic plate with the Caribbean one caused a major release of energy from the depths of the Earth, leaving a trail of destruction in Venezuela. The 7.2- and 7.5-magnitude earthquakes that rocked the country caused thousands of deaths and the collapse of hundreds of structures.

While we try to process the trauma and return to something that resembles “normalcy,” Venezuela, already battered by years of sanctions and the recent US military attack, now faces the challenge of rebuilding itself in the broadest sense of the word and in an ever more complicated context. With that in mind, we have to start by asking: who is in charge of the country and its future?

Using the natural disaster as the perfect excuse, US forces have taken over operations at La Guaira port and the Simón Bolívar International Airport. US servicemen have set up shop in the air traffic control tower, surveillance drones fly over Caracas, and US helicopters patrol the disaster areas on their own.

This dangerous trend did not start on June 24. In recent months, in unapologetic fashion, the US has been setting the Venezuelan political agenda, notwithstanding the subtle or absurd efforts to conceal it.

For instance, at the end of May, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that Acting President Delcy Rodríguez would visit India to negotiate oil deals. Rubio openly offered Venezuelan crude to India as part of its campaign against Russian exports. The Venezuelan Foreign Ministry pretended not to have heard anything and confirmed the trip two weeks later.

Back in February, the Venezuelan government denied rumors that businessman and recent minister Alex Saab had been detained, only to surrender him to US agencies months later. And despite having all that time to come up with a proper explanation, the official line was that authorities supposedly “found out” that Saab is Colombian and had a fake Venezuelan ID. In Venezuela, sometimes the chutzpah reaches such extremes that people prefer to just move on. Many officials promised we would soon know more details about the Saab case, including his collaboration with US agencies, but we’re still waiting.

Later, in June, the government’s quick-response “Miraflores al Momento” social media account put a “fake news” label on a news story about the alleged presence of US military forces in southeast Bolívar state. Then, days later, Trump himself broke the news that the Southern Command in coordination with the CIA had killed alleged Tren de Aragua leader Héctor “Niño” Guerrero in Bolívar state. The extrajudicial killing spree that began last year in the Caribbean, always sadistically bragged about by Trump and his goons, had reached Venezuelan soil.

In response, the Venezuelan government had no alternative but to put out its own statement, reporting a “joint operation” and praising its success. After years of preaching about the danger represented by the CIA, it is now welcome to operate freely in Venezuela as if it’s the most natural thing in the world.

Niño Guerrero was not executed for our safety, but rather to clear the way for Western mining corporations. No one has said this explicitly but it’s not hard to connect the dots. What’s next? Private security contractors like in Iraq? What’s certain is that we won’t be the ones enjoying those gold profits. It’s substituting one mafia for another, except this one is white-collared.

Another example of a political agenda decided far away from Caracas is a new “dialogue” process with an opposition faction headed by Dinorah Figuera, president of a way-beyond-expired opposition-majority National Assembly, elected in 2015. Through an avalanche of communiqués, we were told that this process will set up “an agenda with concrete milestones and schedules” to “strengthen democracy.”

Figuera means nothing to 99 percent of Venezuelans and she confessed she came to meet National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez on the instructions of the US State Department. She is the perfect example of the rottenness spawning from Washington, heading a “parliament” years after its term ended because the US still recognized it as Venezuela’s “sole legitimate authority” and there were still hundreds of millions of dollars in Venezuelan assets abroad to manage, or pilfer… She didn’t clarify much about the upcoming negotiations, beyond platitudes about “coexistence” and “democracy”.

Once more it was up to Washington to offer details. In its own statement, the State Department announced the talks aimed to rebuild “democratic institutions,” appoint a new electoral council, establish “guarantees” for political participation and the “protection” of civil liberties for open political debate.

Of course, no tale of US influence over Venezuelan politics could be complete without María Corina Machado. The far-right leader is getting antsy while on the sidelines, with no moves to play except trying to get Trump’s attention. For example, after the killing of Niño Guerrero, she wrote that “all these achievements were unthinkable six months ago. Therefore, we recognize and thank President Trump.”

Having been left out of the recent dialogue initiative, notwithstanding the repeated coronation ceremonies from her acolytes, Machado saw a golden opportunity to recoup political capital with the natural disaster in Venezuela. She has a comms apparatus standing at the ready for photo ops and video testimony, showing how she is somewhere and the government is not. But the Trump administration showed little appetite for this kind of circus, and despite Machado being airborne to Curaçao en route to Venezuela, ordered her to turn around.

The explanation is simple: the White House is not done in terms of tying down with shamefully anti-sovereign energy deals and burying us in debt until the second coming of Christ. As such, it is not the time for turmoil.

And though certain Machado aides announced that she would defy Trump, the truth is that she has stood pat, at least for now, while waiting for Washington winds to change.

At the end of the day, Rodríguez, Figuera, Machado, and many others are fighting for their place in the spotlight. But the Trump administration is the one writing the script, and even more so after the earthquakes. Though the tale may seem farcical at times, it is ultimately a tragedy for the Venezuelan people.

Jessica Dos Santos is a Venezuelan university professor, journalist and writer whose work has appeared in outlets such as RT, Épale CCS magazine and Investig’Action. She is the author of the book “Caracas en Alpargatas” (2018). She’s won the Aníbal Nazoa Journalism Prize in 2014 and received honorable mentions in the Simón Bolívar National Journalism prize in 2016 and 2018.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

July 4 (UPI) — Paul Pelosi, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi‘s husband, is expected to face charges after he hit a parked car in Napa County, Calif., on Saturday.

Pelosi allegedly hit an unoccupied, parked car, with Napa County Sheriff’s Office deputies later finding his brown convertible parked behind a California Highway Patrol Vehicle and partially blocking a road, KCRA and NBC News reported.

Pelosi has previously been found guilty for driving under the influence, but the sheriff’s office said that an alcohol test did not find alcohol in his system.

“The witness provided deputies with the direction the suspect vehicle was last seen traveling,” police said.

“A short time later, deputies observed a vehicle parked behind a brown convertible car,” which had “significant damage” and was “consistent with the recent crash,” police said.

Because DUI is not suspected, Pelosi, 86, was not arrested after the crash, which the sheriff’s office said is common for a misdemeanor accident.

“Pelosi admitted to hitting something, but said he did not know what he had hit, so he kept driving,” police said.

“He drove until his car became disabled and was no longer able to continue driving,” they said.

Pelosi apologized to the owner of the parked car and said that he would take responsibility for the damage to the vehicle, a family spokesperson said.

New Jersey is launching a new fee on companies whose workers have Medicaid health coverage instead of being covered by their employers. Other states are considering it, too.

Democratic lawmakers and governors see it as a way to help pay for the joint federal and state insurance program that covers low-income residents as federal policy changes are expected to make the program more expensive for states and may lead to a reduction in the number of people with coverage.

Proponents also say it’s about fairness because employers benefit from having some lower-income workers with taxpayer-funded health coverage.

Business groups object. So do some liberal policy organizations.

New Jersey is putting the fee in place

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed a measure Tuesday night to charge employers that have at least 50 workers covered by Medicaid, and the state budget she approved earlier in the week counts on raising $145 million this year from the program.

Under the plan, companies will be billed for each employee and employees’ dependent receiving Medicaid, the joint state-federal insurance program.

The fees per person would start at $325 a year for companies with 50 to 249 Medicaid beneficiaries and top out at $725 annually for employers with at least 500 recipients.

A bill passed this week in California doesn’t impose a charge now, but it does direct the state administration to present lawmakers options for doing so next year.

Finishing the job would fall to the successor of Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is leaving office in January. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra has made an employer charge part of his election platform.

State Sen. John Laird, a Democrat who sponsored the California proposal, said the big tax and policy law President Trump signed a year ago was a major factor in the need for action because it could prompt the state to spend more on Medicaid to plug holes left by federal changes.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office expects more than 10 million people will be uninsured because of the law by 2034. It requires some beneficiaries to work, be in school or volunteer — and requires even more to document whether they meet the requirements.

Most employees at the bigger companies would not be at risk of losing Medicaid coverage as long as they’re working at least 20 hours a week.

Laird also said there’s an equity issue involved.

“If you’re a small business person in California, you are quite likely paying for health insurance for your employees. And through your taxes, you’re paying for health insurance for some of the biggest employers in California,” he said. “And that’s not fair.”

Legislation with similar intents passed one legislative chamber in both Colorado and Oregon this year, but neither made it to law. A measure was also introduced in Washington.

Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat who is seeking a third term in November’s election, has called for the same move there with the idea of making it a part of the state budget that would kick in two years from now.

Opposition comes from business and some liberal groups

It’s no surprise that business organizations have criticized the approach, which would add to their expenses.

“The fact remains that many job-creators are still going to be penalized for something they have no control over,” Christopher Emigholz, the chief government affairs officer at the New Jersey Business and Industry Assn., said in a statement. “If an employee declines an employer-provided health plan because they’d rather be on Medicaid, it is unfair to penalize the employer for that employee’s decision.”

Some left-leaning policy organizations also oppose the charges.

Gideon Lukens, who analyzes health policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that while the idea may be well-intentioned, it could lead companies to employ fewer people from low-income household or single parents. He said companies could also consider the policy in decisions about whom to hire or lay off — and also on where to locate or how many workers to employ.

And, he said, it could make employees — or potential employees — less likely to enroll in Medicaid knowing it would make them less attractive to employers.

“Usually, when I see a tax on something it’s going to discourage whatever being taxed,” he said in an interview.

New Jersey’s legislation tries to address some of the concerns. It would exempt temporary, seasonal and part-time employees. It would also bar employment decisions based on a workers’ Medicaid status.

Charging companies whose workers are covered by Medicaid isn’t a new idea. At least two states have previously enacted it, and it’s been proposed in Congress.

Massachusetts lawmakers in 2017 adopted a charge on employers up to $750 per nondisabled worker who was covered through Medicaid or a state-subsidized health exchange plan. The program began in 2018 was not renewed when it expired the next year.

An even earlier policy in Maryland, in 2006, immediately affected only Walmart. An industry group challenged it in court and won, stopping the fees.

The latest generation of proposals may avoid that legal pitfall by not referencing those health plans in the legislation.

Mulvihill writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A former Olympian was indicted Thursday on a felony charge in what President Trump has called vandalism of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, where a renovation project he launched has been riddled with problems.

David Hearn, a former Olympic canoe racer, was indicted on a single count of property destruction in a Washington, D.C. court.

District of Columbia U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro said Hearn ripped up recently installed sealant on the pool in “a deliberate act” that caused more than $1,000 in damage. She accused him of “forcefully and violently” pulling up the bottom liner “with both hands” and acting belligerently toward an employee who told him to stop.

“This is a case with tremendous evidence,” she said, adding that authorities have made about six other misdemeanor arrests.

In a statement, Democracy Defenders Fund co-founder Norm Eisen and Mary Dohrmann, senior counsel at Washington Litigation Group, said that they represented Hearn and that the charges were “outrageous and should be alarming to every American.” Eisen and Dohrmann construed the case as representative of “the misuse of government power against an ordinary citizen based on a concocted narrative.”

Hearn didn’t immediately return a phone call seeking comment. He previously told the Associated Press that he reached into the pool on June 19 to examine the newly peeled coating. He said he briefly touched a chunk that was still attached to the side of the pool, then let go shortly after a park worker told him to.

“I’m a curious citizen,” Hearn said in a telephone interview last month. “I reached down to see what it felt like. It was very rubbery.”

Hearn, 67, of Bethesda, Md., owned a company that made composite materials used to build watercraft.

Saying that he stopped by the pool during a 64-mile bike ride, Hearn said he was detained by National Guard troops and U.S. Park Police for five hours before being released.

Trump said last month that federal authorities made “multiple arrests” of people he accused of vandalizing the Reflecting Pool as he struggled to explain why the $16-million rehabilitation project he launched for the nation’s 250th anniversary seemingly backfired. Without providing any substantiation, he also said vandals dumped fertilizer into the pool and slashed the coating with a box cutter.

In subsequent days, National Guard members and the park police patrolled the deck around the Reflecting Pool as Trump’s administration faced a self-imposed deadline to fix a botched renovation before the nation’s 250th anniversary celebration. Contractors and federal workers used chemicals and ozone nanobubbles to combat an algae bloom, and Trump has said that the problems probably require draining the pool again for liner repairs.

Whitehurst and Kinnard write for the Associated Press. Kinnard reported from Columbia, S.C.

Prosecutors allege a yacht was used in the sabotage of pipelines, with the suspect leading the operation.

German federal prosecutors ⁠have filed charges ⁠against a 50-year-old Ukrainian national over a series of explosions that destroyed two Nord Stream underwater gas pipelines linking Russia to Europe in 2022.

The federal prosecutor’s office declined to comment on the specifics of the indictment on Wednesday against the accused, who is identified only as Serhii K in court documents under German privacy rules.

Serhii K is accused of attacking civilian energy infrastructure, causing an explosion, and destroying structures, according to the German public broadcaster ARD.

The underwater explosions damaged both the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines so severely that no gas could be transported through them, knocking out the key routes for Russian gas ⁠to Europe for months after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

In a December 2025 detention filing by the Federal Court of Justice, prosecutors allege that Serhii K helped coordinate a team that used a sailing yacht, the Andromeda, to place explosive devices on the pipelines near Denmark’s ⁠Bornholm Island in September 2022.

According to those documents, Serhii K is suspected of acting as the on-board coordinator and team leader, not as a diver or bomb expert.

The Berlin law firm Menaker, which is representing the accused Ukrainian, has not provided any details on the indictment.

Federal prosecutors confirmed to the AFP news agency that Serhii K was the same suspect who was arrested in August 2025 in Italy and extradited to Germany the following November, and who was named at the time as Serhii Kuznietsov.

At the time of his arrest, German prosecutors said Kuznietsov had used forged identity documents to charter a yacht, which departed from the German city of Rostock to carry out the attacks.

Kuznietsov has denied being part of the sabotage operation. He said he was a member of the Ukrainian armed forces and in Ukraine at the time of the incident, a claim his defence team has said would give him “functional immunity” under international law.

Answering a question from Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine during a news conference in Dublin on Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said it was too soon to comment on the charges against Serhii K in detail.

“We have not officially received any details; at least I have not seen them”, Zelenskyy said. “It is too early to say yet,” he added.

Ukraine’s government has previously denied any involvement in the sabotage or knowledge of the plot to bomb the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines.

Catia la Mar, Venezuela – Andreina Velasquez looks up at her multistorey apartment block overlooking Catia la Mar, a coastal city in the Venezuelan state of La Guaira. The concrete slabs that once separated each floor are now stacked on top of each other.

“They fell like a pack of cards,” she said, pointing to where she used to live on the sixth floor.

Velasquez feels lucky. She left her apartment a couple of hours before a pair of deadly earthquakes shook Venezuela on June 24, reaching magnitudes of 7.2 and 7.5, respectively.

She had gone to get a new key cut and was at the beach when the first quake struck.

Her neighbours did not make it. She remembers one as a gentle, retired man, another as a woman with a young daughter who had just moved in. They had been overjoyed with their view of the sea.

Velasquez is still struggling to process what she has lost. Her state was among the hardest hit by the earthquakes.

But despite her grief, she has started to hand out face masks to passersby, hoping to shield them from the gusts of dust drifting from the collapsed buildings and the stench rising from the rubble.

“I’ve been here every day. Other people came to help, but they don’t have helmets, they don’t have gloves, they don’t have masks. That’s why I’m helping,” she said.

More than 2,295 people have been killed and 11,000 injured in the twin earthquakes, according to Venezuela’s National Assembly. The United Nations has warned the death toll could rise to 10,000.

As Venezuela continues to confront the destruction, experts say recovery efforts have been driven largely by volunteers and neighbours like Velasquez.

Hospitals are overwhelmed, and government aid has been slow to reach some of the worst-affected areas.

Carolina Jimenez, the president of the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), a research and advocacy group, told Al Jazeera that the result has been growing anger towards the state.

“In a government in any other country, the first responder should be the state,” she said. “In the case of Venezuela, the state has been the last responder.”

In places like Catia la Mar, north of Caracas, authorities still haven’t arrived or are lacking.

Velasquez and other locals say that help from the federal government only arrived on Sunday — three days after the earthquakes hit the country. In some parts of La Guaira, such assistance has yet to arrive at all.

“[The] response has come from citizens, from civil society, from humanitarian workers, from volunteers — but not from the government,” Jimenez said.

America 250” is no “Spirit of ‘76.”

For those of us who remember the bicentennial, the semiquincentennial is a complete and utter dud. Many fine festivities will take place on and around July 4, but compared with the years-long nationwide celebration that marked this country’s 200th anniversary, 250 feels like a nonevent.

Perhaps it was inevitable. Semiquincentennial (meaning half of a 500-year anniversary) certainly doesn’t roll off the tongue as easily as bicentennial and our current president isn’t making it any catchier. Mostly because he seems to think 250 is the new 80 (the birthday President Trump recently marked with his UFC Freedom 250 cage match on the White House lawn).

As many have noted, Trump’s method of honoring this country’s birthday involves making it all about him by demolishing parts of the White House (to install a new bunker-like ballroom), attempting to set up a $1.8-billion slush fund for pardoned Jan. 6 rioters, seeking to build a triumphal arch that a majority of Americans oppose and trying to slap his name and/or image on any surface he can think of (including a proposed $250 bill). No wonder so many artists have dropped out of the concert series planned for the Great American State Fair in Washington, D.C.

To be fair, the federal government’s involvement in bicentennial planning also got bogged down with political and personal hubris. The national commission, originally created by President Lyndon B. Johnson, was reformed under President Richard Nixon. Plagued by criticism and scandal, it was eventually dissolved by Congress and replaced by a new commission that decided to mostly fund community celebrations.

There was much hand-wringing over missed opportunities at the time, but for more than a year, state and local governments staged reenactments, parades and patriotic events all over the country while the commercial sector star-spangled the crap out of everything: T-shirts, bell-bottoms and bathing suits; curtains, bedspreads and throw rugs; dishware, glassware and Tupperware.

The Declaration of Independence appeared on highball glasses, tea towels and collectible plates. Beginning in 1974, CBS ran mini-history lessons called “Bicentennial Minutes,” which were then sent up on shows as diverse as “Hee Haw” and “Maude.” George Washington and other Founding Fathers graced Pez dispensers, coasters and the cover of Mad Magazine. There was a bicentennial Barbie and a colonial Campbell’s Soup doll. McDonald’s sold red, white and blue milkshakes, Burger King offered a flag-bedecked series of glass tumblers, Disney characters wore tricorn hats for a line of park merchandise.

Some called it the “buy-centennial” but for a kid who daily rocked Stars and Stripes sneakers, and, thanks to a year’s worth of American-history-themed “Schoolhouse Rock!,” could, and would, sing the preamble to the Constitution or the anthem “No More Kings” at the drop of a hat, it was great fun.

Now, of course, “No More Kings” is an anti-Trump protest theme, and the right has so co-opted patriotism that wearing a flag-emblazoned T-shirt can feel somehow partisan. American history itself has become a bone of contention, with the left accusing the right of whitewashing this country’s inarguable sins — Native American displacement, slavery, gender inequality and racist policies — while the right insists that the left is obsessed with undermining our nation’s power and legacy by “woke”-shaming it.

The only thing each end of our divided political spectrum can agree on is that democracy is under mortal threat from the other.

That’s one good reason to feel less than festive, and there are plenty of others, including increased political violence, the war in Iran, tariffs, surging gas prices, civil rights rollbacks, Immigration and Customs Enforcement tactics, artificial intelligence’s threat to jobs, the resurgence of measles, the rising cost of just about everything and the fact that some critics are claiming that Steven Spielberg’s “Disclosure Day” is less full of wonder than “Close Encounters of the Third Kind.”

But things weren’t so great heading into the bicentennial either. I was 12 at the time, born nine months after Alabama Gov. George Wallace gave his infamous “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” speech and less than two months before President Kennedy was assassinated. I hadn’t been alive a year when civil rights activists James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were murdered in Mississippi by members of the Ku Klux Klan and hadn’t turned 5 when the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and then-Sen. Robert F. Kennedy were also assassinated.

Sure, it was that now-wistfully remembered time when kids went out in the morning and played, mostly unmonitored, until nightfall (with the inevitable trips to the doctor for stitches and tetanus shots for those wounds too obvious to hide from parents). But by the time the bicentennial rolled around, my life had played out against the backdrop of civil unrest and the Vietnam War, both spilling from our black-and-white television almost nightly.

I was 9 when Wallace, then a presidential candidate, was shot and 10 when I learned what OPEC and gas siphoning meant as my family spent hours in an un-air-conditioned car, inching toward the gas pump after the 1973 “Yom Kippur” Arab-Israeli War resulted in oil shortages.

That same year, Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned from office, pleading “no contest” to charges of tax evasion but avoiding prosecution for charges of bribery and criminal conspiracy, and Nixon appointed House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R-Mich.) to Agnew’s place. In 1974, Nixon, faced with impeachment for his part in the Watergate scandal, became the first president in U.S. history to resign.

The bicentennial’s tall ships festivals, fife and drum parades and Old Glory consumer fest occurred in a country reeling from more than a decade of history-changing assassinations, civil unrest, economic anxiety and high-level political corruption (not to mention a collective fear of the ocean brought on by the 1975 release of Spielberg’s “Jaws”). Democracy was celebrated under Ford, the first, and thus far only, president to come to office through the provisions of the 25th Amendment rather than a national election.

A president who, after being regularly and ruthlessly lampooned by comedian Chevy Chase on the nascent “Saturday Night Live,” reacted by becoming friends with Chase instead of, you know, forcing the network to fire him.

If the bicentennial roiled with some of the same tensions Americans feel today, it did benefit from a cultural cohesion that no longer exists. The year 1976 saw the founding of Apple and the introduction of VHS tapes, but the national audience was still very much a reality. Back then, you couldn’t escape the songs of the summer — “Silly Love Songs” (Wings), “Don’t Go Breaking My Heart” (Elton John and Kiki Dee) and “Afternoon Delight” (Starland Vocal Band) — any more than you could miss those “Bicentennial Minutes.” We all listened to the radio, watched TV, went to the movies and bought books, and our preferences revealed the country’s desire for both comfort and change.

On the bestseller lists, Agatha Christie’s final Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple books marked the end of an era, toggling in the No. 1 spot with the political turbulence of Gore Vidal’s “1876” and Leon Uris’ “Trinity.” “Rocky” beat “All the President’s Men,” “Taxi Driver,” “Network,” “Marathon Man” and “The Omen” at the box office and, later, in the best picture Oscar race.

On television, Americans sought the nostalgic comfort food of “Happy Days,” “The Waltons” and “Little House on the Prairie” amid the more pointed social comedies of “All in the Family,” “The Jeffersons” and “MASH,” all of which had nightly averages of 20 million or more viewers.

In today’s cultural landscape, defined by social media bubbles, streaming services and Spotify libraries, the gap between mass audience and cultural significance is much wider than it was 50 years ago (“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” may be the highest-grossing movie of the year, but it’s hard to imagine it winning best picture) and mass audience has become a relative term for pretty much everything that is not the Super Bowl.

Even so, we too find ourselves rooting for the little guy (“Project Hail Mary”) and reaching into the past for inspiration (a new “Little House on the Prairie” debuts next week on Netflix) even as we contemplate the future of tech (“The Six Billion Dollar Man” has become every computer genius who can leap a firewall).

I don’t know what it was like to be an adult in 1976, but I remember my parents fretting over the grocery budget, nixing travel plans because of the price of gas and worrying about the future of a country that seemed so irreparably divided. To paraphrase the Diana Ross hit of the time, did we know where we were going to? Not at all. The bicentennial occurred during an election year, with all the partisan denunciations that entails (though when Jimmy Carter narrowly beat Ford, no one thought of contesting the results).

Even so, most Americans were still ready to party, to celebrate the 200th anniversary of a long-shot revolution that resulted in the United States of America.

So does it stink that the semiquincentennial has been such a flop? Yes, it does. But, as is written in its very singable preamble, the Constitution was written “in order to form a more perfect union.” Not “perfect,” but “more perfect.” As in better.

Even in the most troubled times, the cornerstone of our democracy is the understanding that we will always need to do better and there is a living document that allows us to do so.

And 250 years’ worth of that is definitely worth celebrating.

T20 World Cup, Group 2, The Oval

New Zealand 163-6 (20 overs): M Kerr 42 (34); Gibson 2-30

England 164-1 (17.2 overs): Wyatt-Hodge 89* (53), Dunkley 49* (38)

Scorecard. Tables

England’s winning run at the T20 World Cup continued with a rampant nine-wicket victory over New Zealand in their final group game at The Oval.

Already assured of top spot in Group 2 and with it a place in next week’s semi-finals, England built on the momentum of their four previous wins by cruising a chase of 164 with 16 balls to spare.

Danni Wyatt-Hodge, now the tournament’s leading run-scorer, kept up her superb form by crashing 89 not out. She was supported by Sophia Dunkley, who made 49 not out in their partnership of 128.

Defending champions New Zealand are a shadow of the side that won this title in 2024 but the dominant nature of England’s win only added to the sense of momentum around this side.

After limiting New Zealand early on, they took three wickets in four balls without conceding a run in limiting the White Ferns to 163-6.

Sophie Devine hit three sixes in a 14-ball 30 on her final international appearance but otherwise England were always in control.

Their semi-final opponents will be confirmed on Sunday, with India or South Africa appearing the most likely.

That match will take place on Tuesday afternoon or Thursday evening back at The Oval, where England’s women’s side have never lost any of their 11 matches.

Win that and they will return to Lord’s for the final on Sunday for a chance to win their first World Cup title since 2017.

June 25 (UPI) — New York prosecutors will not retry disgraced film producer and convicted sex offender Harvey Weinstein on an unresolved rape charge related to actress Jessica Mann.

Prosecutors dropped the charges Thursday, more than six years after Mann, 40, first testified that Weinstein, 74, raped her in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013. Weinstein’s initial conviction for the charge was overturned in 2024, followed by two mistrials.

The D.A.’s office said Mann did not wish to go through a fourth trial.

“To be clear, we believe Ms. Mann’s account and her credibility as a witness,” Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg said in a statement. “This has been an extraordinarily taxing ordeal for her, and she has never wavered while testifying in front of two grand juries and three trial juries over the course of eight years. We thank her for her honesty and her tremendous bravery.”

In a statement to the court, Mann said it became clear to her during the latest trial, held this spring, that she “could no longer endure going through this any longer.”

“In my fight to see justice, it has nearly stolen a decade of my life and put me through more harm than good,” she added. “Justice now has moved away from the courts, solely into the hands of God.”

Weinstein is still awaiting sentencing after being convicted in 2025 of sexually assaulting former Project Runway production assistant Miriam Haley.

He has served less than half of his 16-year sentence in California for separate charges of rape and sexual assault. More than 100 women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct since 2017.