charge

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.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Iran will not be permitted to charge tolls or fees for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz under any final agreement with Washington, exposing one of the biggest points of friction in negotiations aimed at ending months of conflict across the Middle East.

The dispute comes after Iran announced it would waive planned transit fees through the strait that crosses through its territorial waters for 60 days while talks with the United States continue in Switzerland, suggesting charges could be introduced once the negotiating period expires.

Washington and Tehran signed a preliminary agreement in Switzerland this week to halt hostilities and launched a 60-day diplomatic process focused on sanctions relief, Iran’s nuclear programme and the future administration of the Strait of Hormuz.

Pakistan, which helped mediate the talks alongside Qatar, has said negotiations to end the four-month US-Israel war on Iran are expected to resume early next week, likely on Tuesday.

The future of Hormuz has already emerged as a key sticking point after Iran effectively closed the waterway during the war, severely disrupting maritime traffic through one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints and causing the price of oil to soar.

In peacetime, one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas supplies are shipped for export by Gulf producers through the waterway.

In April, the US imposed a corresponding naval blockade on Iranian naval ports in a bid to stem Iranian oil exports.

While a number of ships have crossed through the strait since the US-Iran agreement was signed last week, uncertainty remains over whether Tehran intends to impose permanent fees or service charges on shipping operators using the route. Here’s what we know – and what else is happening in the Strait of Hormuz this week.

What are the US and Iran saying?

On Friday, Iran’s Persian Gulf Strait Authority (PGSA) said planned fees for ships using the waterway would be suspended during the 60-day negotiation period established under the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed with the US.

Earlier this week, Iran and Oman said in a joint statement that they would study the future administration of the trade route as well as possible charges for services provided there, while maintaining their sovereignty claims over territorial waters bordering the strait.

Speaking at the start of a regional tour in the United Arab Emirates, Rubio rejected the idea of transit fees. “It’s an international waterway. No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway,” he said, adding that he believed “all the countries in this region would agree”.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, has signalled that Tehran views the post-war arrangement as fundamentally different from the status quo that existed before the conflict, however. Experts also say that Iran will not give up control of the strait, which has proved to be its greatest point of leverage in the conflict with the US.

“Hormuz will never return” to its prewar status, Ghalibaf said, despite both sides agreeing on Monday to establish “communication mechanisms” aimed at keeping the waterway open.

What does international law say?

International law protects the right of transit through strategic waterways such as the Strait of Hormuz, preventing coastal states from imposing explicit tolls simply for passage through international shipping lanes, even when they are passing solely through territorial waters.

However, countries can charge for specific services, including inspections, navigation assistance, security measures and certain insurance-related requirements, insurance experts say.

Examples include fees associated with transit through the Suez Canal and Panama Canal, as well as some services provided in Turkiye’s Bosporus and Dardanelles straits.

Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, an economist at Germany’s Philipps-Universitat Marburg, told Al Jazeera last month that Iran, like Turkiye, could justify a negotiated mechanism for transit fees or service-based contributions through natural straits as payment for maintaining a safe passageway, reducing environmental risks and providing predictability in a waterway that supports global energy, food and technology supply chains.

A key difference, however, is that while those waterways pass through the territory of a single state in each case, the Strait of Hormuz passes through the territorial waters of both Iran and Oman, while also connecting to waters used by the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf states.

“This sort of arrangement is unprecedented, and there would not be such an outcome, unless there is a complete coordination between the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] countries and Iran, with the approval of major international powers, such as China and the United States,” Nader Habibi, an Iranian American economist, told Al Jazeera.

How many ships are getting through the strait now?

Ship movements through the Strait of Hormuz remain well below prewar levels, when between 120 and 140 ships transited the passage each day, including tankers carrying about 20 million barrels of oil from the Gulf.

As the strait begins to open up, Oman says it is working with the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization (IMO) on temporary arrangements to facilitate safe transit through the strait, launching an operation to evacuate more than 11,000 sailors stranded in the area after the conflict left hundreds of vessels trapped for months.

Traffic through the strait has also been held back by ongoing concerns about the possible presence of sea mines in the central shipping channels used by international vessels before the war.

The Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC), which includes representatives from the US and other maritime partners, has warned ships to avoid the area “due to the existence of mines”.

Other countries, including Japan, are currently weighing up whether to send ships to help with efforts to remove mines from the strait.

While Iran has never confirmed the presence of mines in the strait, when it first issued a map of the waterway for vessels it had approved for transit while the conflict was ongoing, it ordered ships to pass close to its coast to avoid possible mines. Ships had previously passed much closer to the coast of Oman.

The graphic below illustrates how much shipping through the strait dropped off as a result of the US-Israel war on Iran.

Could the dispute over strait fees derail a peace deal?

Mostafa Khoshcheshm, a professor at the University of Applied Sciences in Tehran, told Al Jazeera that Iran is unlikely to abandon plans to introduce long-term service fees in the strait.

“According to the MoU, Iran is not going to charge service fees for 60 days, but afterwards, Iran is definitely going to do that,” Khoshcheshm told Al Jazeera.

He said many Iranians were already unhappy that Tehran had agreed to suspend fees for the duration of the negotiating period.

“The money is not the real core of the issue,” he said. “The point here is how to impose your new protocols in the region. This is highly important for the Iranians.”

Cyrus Schayegh, professor of international history and politics at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told Al Jazeera the success of any new administrative arrangement would depend heavily on regional support.

“I think this is a very big question, and the biggest question is whether they will be able to sell it to the Emirates,” Schayegh told Al Jazeera.

“I think the Emirates will need to be involved in a really substantive way for any sort of new authority to actually work.”

More broadly, he said, the future of Hormuz forms part of a wider debate over Gulf security architecture following the war.

“It is only one piece of a much larger puzzle,” Schayegh said, adding that several regional states now accept that Iran has strengthened its deterrence capabilities following the conflict.

What other issues remain unresolved?

Hormuz is far from the only serious obstacle to a peace deal.

Questions also remain over the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, with Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, saying that access for international inspectors to nuclear facilities damaged during the war would only be addressed as part of a final agreement with Washington.

His comments came after US President Donald Trump claimed Iran had agreed to “the highest level” of nuclear inspections.

Iranian officials insist no commitments were made in Switzerland regarding Tehran’s nuclear programme and say they did not meet representatives of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), including Director-General Rafael Grossi.

Regional security remains another major source of disagreement, with Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz insisting Israeli forces will not withdraw from southern Lebanon “even if there is an American demand” to do so.

Meanwhile, Ghalibaf has identified the withdrawal of foreign military forces from the Middle East as one of Tehran’s strategic objectives in the negotiations.

The future of Iran’s frozen assets also remains a sticking point, with Trump indicating Washington is reluctant to release large sums of Iranian funds directly, arguing that money could ultimately benefit the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Instead, he has suggested a mechanism under which some funds would be used to purchase US goods.

“Food is desperately needed in Iran, and we will be purchasing it for them exclusively from the United States,” Trump said. Iran has not confirmed plans to do this.

United States President Donald Trump has pledged there will be no tolls for passage through the Strait of Hormuz, unless they are collected by his own country.

Trump’s statement, made in a Saturday afternoon post on Truth Social, is the latest sign that a recently signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) may be unravelling.

“There will be NO TOLLS in the Hormuz Strait for 60 days during the Cease Fire Period, and there will be NO TOLLS after the 60 day period has expired,” Trump wrote, “unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America.”

Since the US and Israel launched a war against Iran on February 28, Iran has successfully used the Strait of Hormuz as a pressure point, closing the strategic waterway to traffic.

But under the terms of Wednesday’s ceasefire memorandum, the strait is supposed to reopen for an interim period of 60 days. During that time, Iran is barred from charging vessels for passage.

On Saturday, however, Iran’s joint military command said it had closed the Strait of Hormuz, citing a “clear breach” of the memorandum’s commitments.

US Central Command (CENTCOM), the agency that oversees military operations in the region, denied that report and maintained that the traffic continues to flow through the waterway.

The Strait of Hormuz has long been a flashpoint in the conflict between the US and Iran. Nearly 20 percent of the world’s oil and natural gas is transported through the strait, as well as about 30 percent of the global fertiliser trade.

Closure of the strait has caused global fuel costs to soar and has tested agricultural sectors across the world.

Trump had responded to Iran’s chokehold over the strait by imposing a US naval blockade on Iran’s ports in the region.

But that naval blockade was lifted under the terms of Wednesday’s memorandum. The deal also paused fighting on all fronts in the regional conflict, including in Lebanon.

The memorandum, though, was not intended as a long-term deal. It serves as a launching point for negotiations on key issues, including the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.

Several points of divergence also went unaddressed in the memorandum. Nowhere does the memo say that future tolls cannot be collected from the strait after the 60-day period expires.

Before the war, there was no charge for passage through the strait. Trump himself said in an interview with The New York Times that the waterway should remain “permanently toll-free”.

But he appeared to reverse course in Saturday’s post, once again floating the possibility that the US could extract tolls in the strait, while barring Iran from doing so.

No fees should be levied, Trump wrote, “unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America, should the deal not be completed”.

He explained that such a charge would compensate the US “for services rendered as the Guardian Angel to the countries of the Middle East for purposes of both past, present, and future reimbursement of costs”.

Trump used similar language in his New York Times interview earlier this week, floating the US becoming “the guardian of the Middle East” in exchange for 20 percent of its revenue.

Saturday’s post is not the first time Trump has mused about the US imposing tolls in the strait, either.

In April, for instance, he discussed the idea with reporters, saying, “What about us charging tolls? I’d rather do that than let them have them. Why shouldn’t we? We’re the winner. We won.”

There has been no indication that Trump’s plans have been officially presented to countries in the region, many of whom have struck a careful balance in their dealings with both the US and Iran during the war.

Iranian officials, meanwhile, have repeatedly said they will not rule out imposing tolls in the strait, framing the issue as a matter of sovereignty and regional negotiation. The strait sits between Iran and Oman.

Further discussions are expected on the matter in the coming weeks.

But such negotiations have been thrown into jeopardy amid ongoing Israeli military operations in Lebanon, which threaten to violate Wednesday’s ceasefire memorandum.

Iran claimed that Saturday’s closure of the strait was a result of new Israeli attacks in southern Lebanon, which killed dozens of people after the ceasefire was announced.

Iranian officials have also said that any upcoming talks should focus on proper implementation of the initial memorandum, and that the 60-day negotiating period stipulated in Wednesday’s deal would begin after that was settled.

Pakistan, a top mediator between the US and Iran, has said that follow-up talks are set to begin in Switzerland on Sunday.

Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs has confirmed that an Iranian delegation, led by parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, has already arrived for the negotiations.

On the US side, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, special envoy Steve Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance are expected to attend.

Vance departed for Switzerland late Saturday.

Federal prosecutors announced charges Tuesday against 15 people who are accused of impeding federal agents during the Trump administration’s massive immigration surge in Minnesota earlier this year.

The investigation targeted two “Minneapolis-based antifa groups” whose members were trained in “surveillance, operational planning and rapid mobilization against law enforcement,” Minnesota U.S. Atty. Daniel N. Rosen said at a press conference.

The charges come as the Trump administration has escalated its attacks on “antifa,” an umbrella term for a diffuse movement of militant left-wing activists, which President Trump has described as a domestic terror group.

Rosen said some of those arrested identified as “antifa” while deploying a range of tactics to disrupt the immigration crackdown, such as “stalking” federal agents and using blocks of ice to slow their convoys. He declined to say whether any federal agents were injured as a result of their actions.

“Whether or not they actually, at the end of the day, cause bodily harm is not the measure of whether or not they committed a serious federal crime,” Rosen told reporters.

Twelve people were arrested Tuesday, two remain at large and one is already in custody, Rosen added. The names and specific charges of those arrested were not immediately available.

The charges come months after the administration’s “Operation Metro Surge” brought thousands of federal agents to the Twin Cities, setting off mass protests and leading to the fatal shooting of two U.S. citizens.

During the surge, convoys of agents in unmarked SUVs traveled through neighborhoods, at times banging down doors, waiting outside schools and demanding residents produce proof of citizenship.

Primarily organized through anonymous neighborhood messaging threads, a sprawling network of outraged Minnesotans quickly formed, with ordinary citizens and activists using whistles and car horns to call attention to the masked, heavily armed agents.

At the time, border czar Tom Homan indicated that federal authorities were probing “the organization and funding of the attacks on ICE.”

“They’ll be held accountable,” Homan said. “Justice is coming.”

Last September, Trump signed an order classifying antifa as a domestic terror organization and directing federal agencies to “investigate, disrupt, and dismantle” its affiliates and funders.

Democrats and several First Amendment groups have raised issue with the designation. While the federal government may designate foreign terror groups, there is no formal mechanism to apply the same label to domestic groups.

Trump has long invoked the term against a range of political opponents, including peaceful protesters without anarchist leanings.

Offenhartz writes for The Associated Press.

Grammy-nominated rapper Mystikal has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for third-degree rape.

The “Danger” rapper was arrested in the summer of 2022 and booked into the Ascension Parish Jail in Louisiana and charged with first-degree rape, simple robbery, domestic abuse battery–strangulation, false imprisonment and simple criminal damage to property after the victim identified the rapper as the suspect from the hospital where she was being treated for injuries.

According to Baton Rouge-based ABC affiliate WBRZ, the victim told a Louisiana courtroom on Tuesday that Mystikal, real name Michael Tyler, punched and choked her, pulled braids out of her hair and forcibly raped her during the 2022 incident. The victim requested the maximum sentence for the rapper.

“If I did that to you, I deserve the max sentence,” Tyler told the courtroom before he was sentenced to 20 years for third-degree rape, which carries a maximum sentence of 25 years with no chance for early release or probation.

In March, Tyler entered a guilty plea, which knocked his first-degree rape charge down to third-degree. In Louisiana, first-degree rape carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. According to WBRZ, the rapper’s attorney filed a motion to withdraw the guilty plea days before Tyler was sentenced, but the motion was tossed.

The New Orleans-born artist was convicted more than two decades ago of sexual battery after pleading guilty to charges in 2003. He served six years in prison and was released in 2010.

The rapper was previously indicted in 2017 on rape and kidnapping charges stemming from allegations in 2016. He spent 18 months in jail before being released in 2019 on a $3-million bond, the Associated Press reported. The Caddo Parish district attorney in Louisiana ultimately dropped those charges in 2020 after a second grand jury declined to bring an indictment.

With his raspy vocal intensity and scream-like musical delivery, Mystikal shot to the top of the charts with Master P’s No Limit Records in the late 1990s. In 2004, the embattled rapper’s original label, Jive Records, released two compilations of his music, “Prince of the South … The Hits” and “Chopped & Screwed.”

Former Times staff writer Nardine Saad contributed to this report.

Travel operator has spoken out on its family rules as Ryanair is facing an investigation over allegations it charges parents to sit alongside their children on flights

Holiday firm and airline TUI has outlined a crucial rule surrounding seat bookings – as the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) opened an investigation into competitor Ryanair. Ryanair is facing scrutiny over its practice of charging parents to sit alongside their children on flights.

The competition watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), confirmed it will assess whether the approach is “in line with consumer law”. The airline branded the investigation as “bogus” and a “failed effort by the Starmer Government to pretend it cares about consumers”.

Ryanair mandates that parents flying with children aged between two and 11 must pay to reserve what it calls a mandatory family seat. Their children are subsequently assigned seats next to or close to them at no additional cost.

The charge for a mandatory family seat typically stands at around £8 each way, according to the CMA. As the story emerged, one TUI customer turned to X to question how it was possible that his wife was being charged to reserve a particular seat – and that their son might end up seated separately from her.

The person said: “@TUIUK tried to charge my wife 25 pound and said it may be the case that my five year old is sat on his own.”

TUI replied: “If your wife needs any assistance with her booking, please ask her to send us a direct message with the booking details so we can take a look for her.”

The individual then stated: “Don’t need assistance as it is booked, just frustrating she felt pressured to pay that when it isn’t the case that a five year old will be sat on his own.”

The TUI operative then clarified that they cannot guarantee the child will be seated directly beside the parent, explaining: “Please be reassured that children under 12 will always be seated with at least one adult from your booking, this may be directly next to them, across the aisle, or directly in front / behind, depending on the aircraft configuration and availability at check-in. Katy”.

The father responded: “So you would leave a 3 year old sat behind their parent?”.

According to TUI’s terms and conditions: “If you’re flying with TUI Airways and there’s a child under the age of 12 on your booking, we’ll make sure they’re seated with at least one adult in your party. If you’d like to make sure everyone sits together, we recommend reserving seats when you book, or adding them later in Manage My Booking.

“If you don’t use our Select Your Seat service, your seats will be automatically allocated when you check in online.”

Booking a TUI seat costs anywhere from £12 to over £90 per passenger, each way, depending on the destination, flight duration, and seat category. Standard seats are priced between £12 and £45, while upgrades such as Extra Legroom or Premium Seating carry higher charges.

Without paying, seats are assigned automatically at no cost during check-in. Following the previous query, TUI clarified: “Hi there, its lovely to hear from you. As katy explained a child can be seated row directly in front, behind, or across the aisle if under 12 years old and hasn’t purchased select your seats but the team on the flight will be on flight to assist fully. Laura.”

Ryanair is facing an investigation over allegations it charges parents to sit alongside their children on flights.

Children under two are required to sit on their parent’s lap on Ryanair flights. For other passengers, paying to reserve a seat remains optional.

The CMA confirmed it is examining whether Ryanair’s policy means “parents are being charged for the airline to meet its child safety and disability-related obligations as set out under aviation rules”.

Ryanair is “the only major airline flying out of the UK to impose this charge”, the watchdog stated.

Other airlines allow children to be seated next to a parent without requiring a paid adult reservation, or automatically assign seats together during the booking process, the CMA noted.

The probe will also look at whether Ryanair’s compulsory family seat charge is dripped during the booking process — when a company fails to show customers all unavoidable costs upfront.

The CMA stressed it is at the early stages of its investigation and has “reached no conclusions about whether Ryanair has broken the law”. Hayley Fletcher, senior director of consumer protection at the CMA, said: “Lots of families save up to afford a summer holiday and we know that extra charges can quickly bump up the price.

“Our investigation will consider Ryanair’s approach to family seat reservations and how the cost is presented to consumers, to determine whether they comply with consumer law.

“For the past year, we’ve told businesses to ensure their customers are shown the total price upfront – those who don’t face the very real possibility of action from the CMA.”

Rory Boland, editor of consumer magazine Which? Travel, said: “Ryanair doesn’t have to wait for the outcome of the CMA’s investigation. It could stop charging these unreasonable fees today and we would encourage them to do that.”

Ryanair issued a statement saying: “Ryanair’s family seating policy fully complies with all relevant laws and regulations, and saves families money when travelling on the UK’s lowest fare airline.”

The airline insisted it “does not charge any fee for children to sit beside their parent”, and “parents travelling with children pay for only one (adult) reserved seat”.

It went on to say: “This bogus CMA investigation is a failed effort by the Starmer Government to pretend it cares about consumers when it has failed to abolish APD (air passenger duty) which would immediately deliver lower fares for all consumers and growth for the UK aviation, tourism and wider economy.

“Ryanair looks forward to disproving these false CMA claims.”

The CMA is an independent non-ministerial Government department, funded by the Treasury.

Staff at Molineux have been stunned by the decision which also blindsided Rob Edwards and his coaching team.

Technical director Matt Jackson was given the job of dismissing Edwards just weeks after saying they were united.

His “if there isn’t alignment here, we’re dead in the water before we start” comment at the fans’ Q&A last month could come back to haunt the club.

Edwards called Wolves a mess and had been working to change the culture of the club and squad but that blueprint will now be ripped up.

There was no flashpoint but it is a ruthless decision taken by the club, one which was made above Jackson, with executive chairman Nathan Shi and owners Fosun unconvinced by Edwards.

Yet midfielder Andre signed a new deal while Kieran Trippier and Raul Jimenez have joined on free transfers. A large part of the three committing their future to Wolves was because of Edwards.

He left Middlesbrough to join Wolves in November when they were second in the Championship and five points behind leaders Coventry.

He was planning another promotion assault and this time had a better squad and would have been backed financially, so why sack him now?

Wolves had been planning for the Championship since January, a strategy was in place and there appeared to be clear thinking.

Edwards did only win three Premier League games and there were doubts from the fans but it did at least feel the club was finally on the same page.

It cost Wolves close to £4m to bring him and Watling to Molineux from Boro and it will not be cheap to pay them off.

Reported replacement Cesar Peixoto, currently manager of Gil Vicente in Portugal, will also cost money.

He is a client of Jorge Mendes’ Gestifute agency – who have a close relationship with Wolves owners Fosun.

Peixoto has never managed outside of the country and would come into one of the toughest leagues in Europe.

That does not mean he cannot be a success but it is a gamble Wolves desperately need to pay off.

Additional reporting by Dan Wheeler, BBC Sport, West Midlands

A major airline is cutting complimentary meals offered to passengers on flights with the introduction of a chef curated menu that has to be pre ordered ahead of takeoff

A major airline has announced a new in flight charge that will impact passengers from July, with meals no longer being complimentary.

Hawaiian Airlines services included the free perk of meals when flying between Hawaii and the US mainland.

However, in a recent announcement the airline stated that passengers will not longer automatically receive complimentary meals.

Travellers will now have to purchase pre-ordered dishes from a new menu, between two weeks before departure and 20 hours ahead of takeoff.

Prices are expected to range from about $10 (£7.45) to $17 (approx £12.66) per meal.

However, according to the airline, flights between Honolulu and New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, will continue to include a complimentary meal for Main Cabin passengers.

The menu has been curated by Maui-based chef Sheldon Simeon, who developed a menu featuring elevated local favourites including crispy mochiko chicken with garlic noodles, barbecue teriyaki chicken bento, and corned beef hash with eggs.

Passengers will also be able to try signature dishes inspired by Simeon’s restaurants including his popular K mayo, teriyaki sauce, and banana bread syrup.

“At the heart of this transformation is what has always defined Hawaiian Airlines: authentic Hawaiian hospitality,” Alisa Onishi, the Managing Director of Hawai‘i Marketing at Hawaiian Airlines, said in a statement.

“We’re still going to keep the authentic parts of our hospitality, free beverages, free local snacks, (and) the sweet treat at the end of the flight. We’re really proud to offer this new option in our main cabin for our guests to explore and enjoy a little more from our island home.”

The airline added: “By moving to a pre-order model, we’re expanding beyond a single standard meal to offer a broader menu that reflects how our guests want to dine today.”

Business Class and First Class menus are also being revamped, with complimentary snacks remaining available on flights.

MINNEAPOLIS — A federal immigration officer wanted for shooting a Venezuelan man during the Trump administration’s Minnesota crackdown was arrested Friday in Texas, authorities said.

Christian Castro, of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, was taken into custody 11 days after Minneapolis prosecutors charged him with assault and falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 nonfatal shooting of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis.

Hennepin County, Minnesota prosecutors said the state’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension located Castro, 52, in Texas and worked with agents from the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General’s Office and the Texas Rangers to arrest him.

“Today’s arrest is a critical step forward in our prosecution of Mr. Castro,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said.

Online court records do not list an attorney for Castro and it wasn’t immediately clear if he has one. Messages seeking comment were left with ICE, the Homeland Security Inspector General’s Office and the Texas Rangers.

Castro is the second federal agent to be charged over their conduct during the Minnesota crackdown, which was known as Operation Metro Surge. He is one of two agents that ICE Director Todd Lyons said lied about the circumstances of the incident.

Hennepin County attorney Mary Moriarty holds up a document containing charges against ICE agent Christian Castro during a news conference at the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis, on Monday, May 18, 2026.

(Renée Jones Schneider/Minnesota Star Tribune Via Associated Press)

According to prosecutors, Castro fired through a home’s front door and shot Sosa-Celis in the thigh after Castro and another officer chased a different man, Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna, to the Minneapolis apartment duplex where he and Sosa-Celis lived. Sosa-Celis and Aljorna were legally in the U.S., Moriarty said.

Federal authorities initially accused Sosa-Celis and Aljorna of beating an officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel. A federal judge later dismissed the charges, and ICE and the Justice Department opened an investigation into whether officers lied about what happened.

In a statement after the charges were announced, ICE said the U.S. attorney’s office was investigating statements made by officers, who could face disciplinary action including being fired and prosecuted. ICE called the Hennepin County attorney’s action “unlawful and nothing more than a political stunt.” DHS’s Inspector General’s Office, which Moriarty credited with assisting in the arrest, is separate from ICE and is meant to serve as a watchdog for DHS agencies, including ICE.

Minneapolis last month released video showing the moments before Sosa-Celis’s shooting, captured from a distance by a city-owned security camera.

The video appears to show a person standing with a snow shovel outside the house, near the street, then retreating toward the house and tossing the shovel into the yard. This happens as a person being chased by another person runs up from the street, falls on the sidewalk, gets up, and keeps heading toward the house.

The three appear to scuffle near the front steps for about 10 seconds. The exact moment when Sosa-Celis is shot isn’t clear. A car with flashing lights pulls up, and another person walks up.

The Trump administration sent thousands of officers to the Minneapolis and St. Paul area as part of President Trump’s national deportation campaign and considered Operation Metro Surge a success.

But tensions mounted during the weekslong campaign, and the shooting deaths of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers sparked mass unrest and raised questions about officers’ conduct.

Minnesota leaders and the Trump administration have clashed over who has the authority to investigate and prosecute federal officers for on-duty conduct.

Moriarty’s office last month charged immigration agent Gregory Donnell Morgan Jr. with assault for allegedly pointing his gun at people in a car on a highway. He turned himself in last week and his lawyer disputes the charges.

The county is also investigating Good’s and Pretti’s killings and sued the Trump administration in March to gain access to evidence in those cases and the Sosa-Celis shooting.

Green Bay Packers running back Josh Jacobs has been released from a Wisconsin jail a day after being arrested in relation to an alleged incident over the weekend. He still faces the possibility of being charged with several crimes, including some related to domestic abuse, pending further investigation.

“After reviewing the available evidence in this case, the Brown County District Attorney’s Office is not yet prepared to make a formal charging decision,” Dist. Atty. David Lasee said Wednesday in a news release. “Our office has requested additional investigation, as there is reason to believe that additional evidence may exist that would impact whether criminal charges are appropriate, and what charges would be issued.

“Mr. Jacobs will be released from custody at this time, and a final charging decision will be made by our office at a later date.”

Jail records show that Jacobs, 28, was released at 12:20 p.m.

Jacobs’ lawyers — David Chesnoff, Richard Schonfeld, and Clarence Duchac — said in a joint statement Wednesday that they remain confident their client ultimately will not be charged in the matter.

“We are extremely pleased that Josh has been released from custody and that no criminal charges have been filed against him,” they said. “As we previously stated, we encourage everyone to keep an open mind while the matter is fully reviewed. We remain confident that, once all of the evidence is gathered and evaluated, it will confirm that no charges should be brought against Josh in the future.”

According to the Hobart/Lawrence Police Department, officers were dispatched to a complaint involving Jacobs on Saturday at 8:37 a.m. He was arrested Tuesday on allegations that included strangulation and suffocation, battery-domestic abuse, criminal damage to property-domestic abuse, disorderly conduct-domestic abuse and intimidation of a victim.

Jacobs’ lawyers said in a statement Tuesday that he “vehemently denies the allegations.”

A three-time Pro Bowl selection, Jacobs spent the first five years of his NFL career with the Raiders, leading the league with 1,653 rushing yards in 2022, and the previous two seasons with the Packers.

“We are aware of the matter involving Josh Jacobs,” a Packers spokesman said Tuesday. “As it is an ongoing legal situation, we will withhold further comment.”

Speaking to reporters Wednesday at the team’s voluntary workouts, Coach Matt LaFleur said, “I know there’s going to be a lot of questions about Josh. I’m going to stick with the statement that we put out as an organization and just let the process play out.”

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said Tuesday that the league is “aware of the report and have been in contact with the club.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A Justice Department indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center is part of a “top-down” campaign of retribution against President Trump’s perceived political enemies and constitutes a vindictive prosecution that must be dismissed, lawyers for the nonprofit argued Tuesday in urging a judge to toss out the case.

The Alabama-based nonprofit was indicted in April on fraud and money laundering charges that accuse it of misleading donors by paying informants inside white supremacist and other extremist organizations to obtain inside information about their activities.

Lawyers for the SPLC already argued that law enforcement agencies have long known that the nonprofit paid informants to report on the movements of hate groups. They also said acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche made a false statement at a news conference and in interviews when he said the organization had not shared with law enforcement information it learned from informants. Blanche later appeared to walk back that claim in a television interview, saying it was true that the SPLC “selectively” shared information with law enforcement over the years.

The attorneys for the center expanded on those arguments Tuesday, saying in a motion to dismiss the case that the prosecution was the “culmination of a top-down, retributive campaign” in which Trump pushed the Justice Department “to go after those individuals and groups he deemed his political enemies, including the SPLC.”

Defense says indictment fits broader retaliation campaign

The motion was filed against the backdrop of other politically charged prosecutions that have raised concerns that the Justice Department is operating as a weapon to target Trump’s opponents. It aims to draw a parallel between the SPLC indictment and the human smuggling prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, which was dismissed Friday on similar vindictive prosecution grounds by a judge who called the case an “abuse of prosecuting power.”

The SPLC has said its now-defunct program of paying informants to infiltrate hate groups was developed to glean key insights into their activities so that potential victims could be protected. An earlier federal investigation into the practice was closed without charges, but the motion paints the current Justice Department as pursuing the case with renewed — and rushed — vigor.

The department decided to pursue the indictment without interviewing any current SPLC employees and did not seek any documents from the group until after it told defense lawyers that criminal charges were coming, the defense motion states. During a meeting requested by defense lawyers who hoped to avert to indictment, Justice Department officials informed them that the decision already had been made to pursue charges, according to the motion.

“These procedural irregularities show that the charges against the SPLC were a foregone conclusion based on prosecutorial vindictiveness — driven by the White House and FBI leadership’s retribution campaign — rather than the result of a good faith examination of the evidence,” the motion states, saying the indictment was “premised on conclusory accusations but devoid of provable facts or a proper statement of the law.”

The motion also cites whistleblower accounts that accused top Justice Department officials of rushing forward with an indictment despite internal concerns about the merits of the case and the strength of the evidence.

“For weeks, we have been arguing against these false allegations levied against the SPLC — an organization that for 55 years has stood as a beacon of hope fighting white supremacy and various forms of injustice to create a multiracial democracy where we can all live and thrive,” Bryan Fair, the interim president and chief executive officer of SPLC, said in a statement. “The government can’t prosecute the SPLC as payback for its protected speech — it violates basic constitutional rights.”

The administration has painted SPLC as partisan

Founded in 1971 as a civil rights organization, the SPLC over the decades has used litigation to fight white supremacist groups. It also tracks the activities and locations of domestic extremists. But its work has made it a popular target among Republicans who see it as overly leftist and partisan.

The center, for instance, received fresh attention last year after the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk because the SPLC had included a section on the group that Kirk founded and led, Turning Point USA, in a report titled “The Year in Hate and Extremism 2024.”

FBI Director Kash Patel announced in October that the bureau would be severing its relationship with the SPLC, saying it had turned into a “partisan smear machine,” and he accused it of defaming “mainstream Americans” with its “hate map” that documents alleged antigovernment and hate groups inside the United States.

The defense motion says “animus” from senior levels of the administration helped shape the indictment.

It cites, among other comments, a statement from Trump deriding the SPLC as “a total scam run by the Democrats,” as well as a news media interview in which Harmeet Dhillon, the Justice Department’s top civil rights official, said the indictment was “personal” to her because she had “a lot of journalist friends … and groups that I’ve represented who have been targeted by the Southern Poverty Law Center.”

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

Pop crooner and “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” star Erika Girardi quietly put an end to a long and splashy legal battle over her ex-husband’s now-defunct law firm on Thursday, settling a $25-million bankruptcy lawsuit in Los Angeles federal court.

The suit alleged the singer should have known she was profiting off embezzled funds linked to the sprawling case against her ex-husband, former L.A. legal heavyweight Tom Girardi, and his firm Girardi Keese. The couple was accused of funneling millions from the law firm to prop up Erika’s music career.

Performing as Erika Jayne, she topped the charts in the 2010s with a series of raunchy dance club hits. But court records show she spent millions more than she made as a musician.

Larry W. Gabriel, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, wrote in a pretrial filing Monday that Erika and a company associated with her “received the benefit of [Tom] Girardi’s massive fraudulent scheme.”

Tom Girardi is currently serving a seven-year sentence in federal prison after he was convicted of wire fraud for bilking his personal-injury clients in 2024. The disgraced former attorney was found to have stolen tens of millions from his firm.

His wife’s pop hits mixed boasts about luxury brands and explicit sex acts with pulsing dance beats and a bratty falsetto, a tone actress Lake Bell famously dubbed “sexy baby voice.”

In depositions taken as part of the suit, Erika said she had no knowledge of her husband’s crimes. She claimed to be ignorant about where the millions she spent on recording, merchandise, tours and “fun, playful, and sparkly outfits” were drawn from.

“I did not know how much I spent per month or per year,” she said in one exchange. “Girardi Keese paid my Amex credit card bill every month.”

Monday’s filings show Girardi Keese paid at least $14 million in charges to her American Express account between 2008 and 2020.

The payouts began in the late 2000s when Erika, then a stay-at-home mom, sought to relaunch herself as a performer. In 2016, near the height of her pop fame, her husband began to complain she was charging too much on the credit card account. After repeated entreaties to tamp down her spending, Girardi tried for the first time to look at her balance.

Soon after, Girardi grew suspicious of charges being made to her card by a Hollywood costumer — worries she reported to one of Girardi Keese’s clients, an agent in the Secret Service, records show.

On the advice of the agent’s Secret Service colleagues, she said she disputed the AMEX charges and was ultimately refunded more than half a million dollars to her personal account, despite the original payments having come from the law firm.

Erika Girardi’s attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.

Netflix is dropping a three-part docuseries that revisits Michael Jackson’s 2005 trial in which he was acquitted on charges of child molestation.

“Michael Jackson: The Verdict” drops June 3 and features archival footage and interviews with key players involved in the trial including jurors, figures from both the defense and the prosecution, journalists who were inside the courtroom and other eyewitnesses who saw the events unfold firsthand.

“It has been 20 years since the trial of Michael Jackson in which he was found not guilty. Yet, to this day, controversy still rages,” the filmmakers said. “No cameras were allowed in court, and so the public’s view of the facts at the time were filtered by commentators and presented piecemeal. It was time to take a forensic look at the trial as a whole.

“Anyone interested in the Michael Jackson story should feel this documentary gives them a window into what was largely a closed event and a chance to feel closer to what happened.”

The Santa Barbara Superior Court trial lasted 14 weeks, and the jury, which included eight women and four men, deliberated for more than 30 hours across seven days.

Jackson was acquitted on 10 felony charges: four counts of child molestation, four counts of plying a minor with alcohol in order to molest him, one count of attempted child molestation and one count of conspiracy to hold the boy and his family captive at the Neverland Ranch. He faced more than 20 years in prison.

Produced by Candle True Stories, the production company behind Netflix’s “Untold: The Liver King,” and directed by Nick Green, “Michael Jackson: The Verdict,” comes at a time of renewed interest in the “King of Pop.”

The Jackson-estate-approved biopic “Michael” hit theaters last month, and depicts the origin story of the hitmaker from childhood through his upward trajectory to superstar status in the 1980s. Notably, the movie omitted the slew of allegations that followed Jackson from the ’90s until his death in 2009.

MIAMI — Federal prosecutors on Wednesday announced charges against former Cuban President Raúl Castro in the 1996 downing of civilian planes operated by Miami-based exiles as the Trump administration escalated pressure on the socialist government.

The indictment was related to Castro’s alleged role in the shootdown of two small planes operated by the exile group Brothers to the Rescue. Castro, now 94, was Cuba’s defense minister at the time. The charges included murder and destruction of an airplane.

Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche and other top Justice Department officials made the announcement in Miami at a ceremony to honor those killed in the shootdown.

President Trump has been threatening military action in Cuba ever since U.S. forces captured the Cuban government’s longtime patron, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. After ousting Maduro, the White House ordered a blockade that choked off fuel shipments to Cuba, leading to severe blackouts, food shortages and an economic collapse across the island.

Since Maduro’s capture, Trump has ratcheted up talk of regime change in Cuba after pledging earlier this year to conduct a “friendly takeover” of the country if its leadership did not open its economy to American investment and kick out U.S. adversaries.

Trump’s first administration indicted Maduro on drug-trafficking charges and used that to justify removing him from power during a surprise military raid in January that whisked the Venezuelan leader to New York to face trial.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday urged the Cuban people to demand a free-market economy with new leadership that he said will chart a new course in relations with the U.S.

“In the U.S., we are ready to open a new chapter in the relationship between our people,” Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, said in a Spanish-language video message. “Currently, the only thing standing in the way of a better future are those who control your country.”

Cuba’s deputy foreign minister, Carlos F. de Cossío lashed out at Rubio on X, saying he “lies so repeatedly and unscrupulously about Cuba and tries to justify the aggression he inflicts on the Cuban people.” Rubio “knows full well that there is no excuse for such cruel and ruthless aggression.”

Raúl Castro believed to wield power behind the scenes

There’s no indication Castro will be taken into U.S. custody anytime soon.

He took over as president from his ailing older brother Fidel Castro in 2006 before handing power to a trusted loyalist, Díaz-Canel, in 2018.

While he retired in 2021 as head of the Cuban Communist Party, he is widely believed to wield power behind the scenes, underscored by the prominence of his grandson, Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, who previously met secretly with Rubio.

Last week, CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Havana for meetings with Cuban officials, including Castro’s grandson. Two other senior State Department officials met with the grandson in April.

“The symbolic nature is absolutely crucial,” said Lindsey Lazopoulos Friedman, a former prosecutor at the U.S. attorney’s office in Miami who handled national security cases and crimes involving Cubans.

“Even though Raúl Castro will likely stay and die in Cuba, you can use the indictment as a pressure point, a tactical advantage, to extract other concessions like the release of prisoners or to keep Russia out,” she added.

The investigation into Castro stretches back to the 1990s

Starting in 1995, planes flown by members of Brothers to the Rescue, a group founded by Cuban exiles, buzzed over Havana dropping leaflets urging Cubans to rise up against the Castro government.

The Cubans protested to the U.S. government, warning that they would defend their airspace. Federal Aviation Administration officials also opened an investigation and met with the group’s leaders to urge them to ground the flights, according to declassified government records obtained by George Washington University’s National Security Archive.

“This latest overflight can only be seen as further taunting of the Cuban Government,” an FAA official wrote in an email to her superiors after one intrusion in January 1996. “Worst case scenario is that one of these days the Cubans will shoot down one of these planes.”

But those calls went unheeded and on Feb. 24, 1996, missiles fired by Russian-made MiG-29 fighter jets downed two unarmed civilian Cessna planes a short distance north of Havana just beyond Cuba’s airspace. All four men aboard were killed.

Raúl Castro faced earlier indictment

Guy Lewis, who was a federal prosecutor, uncovered evidence linking senior Cuban military officials to cocaine trafficking by Colombia’s Medellin cartel. Following the shootdown, the investigation expanded, and prosecutors pursued charges against Raúl Castro for leading a vast racketeering conspiracy by Cuba’s armed forces.

“The evidence was strong,” Lewis said in an interview.

In the end, the Clinton administration indicted four individuals, including the MiG pilots, the head of the Cuban air force and the head of a Cuban spy network in Miami — the only one to see the inside of a U.S. prison — for providing valuable intelligence about the flights.

The incident led the U.S. to harden its position against Cuba, even though the Cold War had ended and the Castros’ support for revolution across Latin America was a fading memory.

But Castro himself was spared as the Clinton administration — which had quietly sought to expand relations with Cuba prior to the incident — raised foreign policy concerns about such a high-profile indictment.

“Raúl was definitely one who slipped through the noose,” Lewis said. “The crime is notorious. Three U.S. citizens and one legal permanent resident were killed in a premeditated orchestrated murder. That should never be forgotten.”

Goodman and Richer write for the Associated Press. Richer reported from Washington.