dismisses

Petro, however, did acknowledge that a disruption in the two countries’ military cooperation could have serious consequences.

Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro has indicated that a suspension of aid from the United States would mean little to his country, but that changes to military funding could have an effect.

“What happens if they take away aid? In my opinion, nothing,” Petro told journalists on Thursday, adding that aid funding often moved through US agencies and employed Americans.

But a cut to military cooperation would matter, he added.

“Now, in military aid, we would have some problems,” Petro said, adding that the loss of US helicopters would have the gravest impact.

US President Donald Trump had threatened over the weekend to raise tariffs on Colombia and said on Wednesday that all funding to the country has been halted.

Colombia was once among the largest recipients of US aid in the Western Hemisphere, but the flow of money was suddenly curtailed this year by the shuttering of USAID, the government’s humanitarian assistance arm. Military cooperation has continued.

The Trump administration has already “decertified” Colombia’s efforts to fight drug trafficking, paving the way for potential further cuts, but some US military personnel remain in Colombia, and the two countries continue to share intelligence.

Petro has objected to the US military’s strikes against vessels in the Caribbean, which have killed dozens of people and inflamed tensions in the region. Many legal experts and human rights activists have also condemned the actions.

Trump has responded by calling Petro an “illegal drug leader” and a “bad guy” – language Petro’s government says is offensive.

Petro has recalled his government’s ambassador from Washington, DC, but he nevertheless met with the US’s charge d’affaires in Bogota late on Sunday.

Although Trump has not announced any additional tariffs on top of the 10-percent rate already assessed on Colombian goods, he said on Wednesday he may take serious action against the country.

Petro said Trump is unlikely to put tariffs on oil and coal exports, which represent 60 percent of Colombia’s exports to the US, while the effect of tariffs on other industries could be mitigated by seeking alternative markets.

An increase in tariffs would flip a long-established US policy stance that free trade can make legitimate exports more attractive than drug trafficking, and analysts say more duties could eventually bolster drug trafficking.

Although his government has struggled to take control of major hubs for rebel and criminal activity, Petro said it has made record seizures of 2,800 metric tonnes of cocaine in three years, partly through increased efforts at Pacific ports where container ships are used for smuggling.

He also repeated an accusation that Trump’s actions are intended to boost the far right in Colombia in next year’s legislative and presidential elections.

The public release of a Young Republican group chat that included racist language, jokes about rape and flippant commentary on gas chambers prompted bipartisan calls for those involved to be removed from or resign their positions.

The Young Republican National Federation, the GOP’s political organization for Republicans between 18 and 40, called for those involved to step down from the organization. The group described the exchanges, first reported by Politico, as “unbecoming of any Republican.”

Republican Vice President JD Vance, however, has weighed in several times to speak out against what he characterized as “pearl clutching” over the leaked messages.

Politico obtained months of exchanges from a Telegram conversation between leaders and members of the Young Republican National Federation and some of its affiliates in New York, Kansas, Arizona and Vermont.

Here’s a rundown of reaction to the inflammatory group chat, in which the operatives and officials involved openly worried that their comments might be leaked, even as they continued their conversation:

Vance

After Politico’s initial report Tuesday, Vance posted on X a screen grab from 2022 text messages in which Jay Jones, the Democratic candidate in Virginia’s attorney general race, suggested that a prominent Republican get “two bullets to the head.”

“This is far worse than anything said in a college group chat, and the guy who said it could become the AG of Virginia,” Vance wrote Tuesday. “I refuse to join the pearl clutching when powerful people call for political violence.”

Jones has taken “full responsibility” for his comments and offered a public apology to Todd Gilbert, who then was speaker of Virginia’s House of Delegates.

Vance reiterated his initial sentiment Wednesday on “ The Charlie Kirk Show ” podcast, saying when asked about the reporting that a “person seriously wishing for political violence and political assassination is 1,000 times worse than what a bunch of young people, a bunch of kids say in a group chat, however offensive it might be.”

Vance, 41, said he grew up in a different era where “most of what I, the stupid things that I did as a teenager and as a young adult, they’re not on the internet.”

The father of three said he would caution his own children, “especially my boys, don’t put things on the internet, like, be careful with what you post. If you put something in a group chat, assume that some scumbag is going to leak it in an effort to try to cause you harm or cause your family harm.”

“I really don’t want to us to grow up in a country where a kid telling a stupid joke, telling a very offensive, stupid joke is cause to ruin their lives,” Vance said.

Republicans

Other Republicans demanded more immediate intervention. Republican legislative leaders in Vermont, along with Gov. Phil Scott — also a Republican — called for the resignation of state Sen. Sam Douglass, revealed to be a participant in the chat. A joint statement from the GOP lawmakers termed the comments “unacceptable and deeply disturbing.”

Saying she was “absolutely appalled to learn about the alleged comments made by leaders of the New York State Young Republicans,” Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York called for those involved to step down from their positions. Danedri Herbert, chair of the Kansas GOP, said the remarks “do not reflect the beliefs of Republicans and certainly not of Kansas Republicans at large.”

In a statement posted to X on Tuesday, the Young Republican National Federation said it was “appalled” by the reported messages and calling for those involved to resign from their positions within the organization. Young Republican leaders said the behavior was “disgraceful, unbecoming of any Republican, and stands in direct opposition to the values our movement represents.”

Democrats

Democrats have been more uniform in their condemnation. On Wednesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer asking for an investigation into the “vile and offensive text messages,” which he called “the definition of conduct that can create a hostile and discriminatory environment that violates civil rights laws.”

Speaking on the Senate floor, Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer of New York on Tuesday described the chat as “revolting,” calling for Republicans including President Trump and Vance to “condemn these comments swiftly and unequivocally.”

Asked about the reporting, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called the exchanges “vile” and called for consequences for those involved.

“Kick them out of the party. Take away their official roles. Stop using them as campaign advisers,” Hochul said. “There needs to be consequences. This bulls—- has to stop.”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

A US judge has dismissed a lawsuit accusing the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) of providing funding that enabled Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023 cross-border raid on Israel, The New York Times reported, Anadolu reports.

Judge Analisa Torres of the Federal District Court in Manhattan ruled that the UN agency is protected by immunity as part of the United Nations, the Times said on Thursday.

According to the report, the suit, filed on behalf of roughly 100 Israeli plaintiffs, including survivors of the attack, the estates of those killed, and at least one hostage, alleged that the UNRWA allowed Palestinian resistance group Hamas to divert funds for its own use.

The Trump administration argued in April that the UN agency and certain officials named in the suit, including Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini, should not enjoy immunity. In a letter to the court, the Justice Department claimed the agency and its officers “must answer these allegations in American courts.”

Last year, the previous Joe Biden administration maintained in court papers that the agency is immune from lawsuits. The judge’s ruling sided with that view.

The plaintiffs claimed UNRWA paid local employees in cash and required them to convert it through Hamas-affiliated money changers, generating millions of dollars in additional revenue for the group.

A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday, nor did a spokeswoman for the agency, the report said.

READ: Over 417,000 displaced from northern Gaza since August: UN

Pushing back on unsubstantiated allegations

The agency has faced repeated allegations by Israel of links between its staff and “militant groups,” claims it has consistently denied, citing a lack of evidence.

Citing the allegations, though they were not substantiated, some Western politicians and countries called for defunding the UNRWA, despite the vital work it has done for decades for Palestinian refugees.

For the claims, Israel provided a list of 100 alleged “militants” but gave no substantiation despite the UNRWA’s repeated requests.

“Agency has requested on numerous occasions for cooperation from the Government of Israel by providing information and evidence to substantiate the accusations made against UNRWA,” the agency said in a document responding to Israel’s allegations.

“To date, UNRWA has not received any response, nor has the Government of Israel shared any evidence.”

Last year, at the request of the UN secretary-general, an independent investigation was launched by the highest investigative body in the United Nations, the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS).

In the document, titled “Facts Versus Claims,” the UNRWA said the OIOS probe found no evidence in one case and insufficient evidence in nine others.

In the remaining nine cases, “the evidence obtained by OIOS – if authenticated and corroborated – might indicate that the staff members may have been involved, and their employment was terminated in the interest of UNRWA,” the document said.

READ: UN says Israel attack on Sumud Flotilla deepens Gaza blockade

NEW YORK — President Trump on Friday dismissed Curtis Sliwa — his own party’s New York City mayoral candidate — as “not exactly prime time” and even disparaged his affinity for cats, as pressure mounts for Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani ‘s rivals to drop out of the race.

Trump has warned that Mamdani, a 33-year-old state lawmaker and democratic socialist, will likely cruise to victory over Sliwa, Mayor Eric Adams and former Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Nov. 4 unless two of those candidates dropped out. The New York-born Republican thinks Cuomo could have a chance in a one-on-one race.

On a Friday appearance on “Fox & Friends”, he threw cold water on Sliwa’s mayoral hopes, even taking a shot at the red beret-wearing candidate’s vow to fill the official residence of the New York City mayor with rescue cats if he does win.

“I’m a Republican, but Curtis is not exactly prime time,” Trump said bluntly.

“He wants cats to be in Gracie Mansion,” the president added. “We don’t need thousands of cats.”

Mamdani became the presumed favorite in the race after winning the Democratic primary over Cuomo, who is now running as an independent in the general election. Adams, a Democrat, skipped the primary due to his campaign being sidelined by a now-dismissed federal bribery case.

Two polls conducted in early September, one by the New York Times and Siena University, the other by Quinnipiac University, each showed likely voters favoring Mamdani over Cuomo, with Adams and Sliwa behind Cuomo.

The Quinnipiac poll suggested the gap between Mamdani and Cuomo could narrow if Adams dropped out. The Times/Siena poll suggested that if both Adams and Sliwa withdrew, Mamdani’s advantage over Cuomo could shrink even further.

A campaign spokesperson on Friday stressed that Adams has no intention of stepping down from office or abandoning his reelection bid — though confirmed he is commissioning a poll to gauge his support.

“He just wants to look at all factors,” said Todd Shapiro said. “There’s nothing on the table right now. He’s looking at polls just like he’s doing everything else.”

The mayor, he added, would have more to say on the polling itself next week.

“He’s still very popular,” Shapiro said. “He’s running on a record of success.”

Adams in recent weeks has sought to rebuff questions of whether he might accept an alternate job offer amid reports that he had been approached about potentially taking a role with the federal government.

In a radio interview Friday, Sliwa — the founder of New York’s Guardian Angels anti-crime patrol group — said Trump seems to be responding “to what people are telling him about me without really knowing much about me of late.”

“I would hope the president would revisit my history, not only with him but in this city,” Sliwa said on 710 WOR.

The outspoken New Yorkers both rose to prominence in the late 1970s, but Sliwa has said they haven’t spoken in years, possibly because he’d been critical of Trump at times, both on his long-running radio show and as a candidate.

In a follow up email, Sliwa also defended his love of cats, adding that “animal welfare” is among the issues “New Yorkers care about” that he hopes to focus on, if elected.

“New Yorkers care for people and for animals, and so do I,” he said. “I am proud of my wife, Nancy, who has devoted her life to fostering, caring for, and saving animals, and fighting for them when no one else would.”

Sliwa has sheltered a large collection of rescue cats in his Manhattan apartment and has noted that Gracie Mansion is far more spacious.

“We’ll be able to house unwanted cats and dogs right in the lawn, the great lawn they have,” he said recently on his radio show.

Marcelo writes for the Associated Press.

Will Jacks takes a brilliant leaping one-handed catch to remove Ollie Pope off the bowling of Sam Curran as London Spirit face Oval Invincibles in the men’s Hundred at the Oval.

FOLLOW LIVE: The Hundred – Oval Invincibles v London Spirit

Available to UK users only.

MIAMI — A federal judge in Miami dismissed part of a lawsuit that claimed detainees were denied access to the legal system at the immigration detention center in the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz” and moved the remaining counts of the case to another court.

Claims that the detainees were denied hearings in immigration court were rendered moot when the Trump administration last weekend designated the Krome North Processing Center near Miami as a site for their cases to be heard, U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz said in a 47-page ruling Monday night dismissing a 5th Amendment count.

The judge granted the state defendants a change of venue motion to the Middle District of Florida, where the remaining claims of 1st Amendment violations will be addressed. Those include allegations of delays in scheduling meetings between detainees and their attorneys and an inability for the detainees to talk privately with their attorneys by phone or videoconference at the facility whose official name is the South Detention Facility.

ACLU lawyer Eunice Cho, the lead attorney for the detainees, said the federal government reversed course only last weekend and allowed the detainees to petition an immigration court because of the lawsuit.

“It should not take a lawsuit to force the government to abide by the law and the Constitution,” Cho said. “We look forward to continuing the fight.”

The judge heard arguments from both sides in a hearing earlier Monday in Miami. Civil rights attorneys were seeking a preliminary injunction to ensure detainees at the facility had access to their lawyers and could get a hearing.

Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration raced to build the facility on an isolated airstrip surrounded by swampland two months ago in order to aid President Trump’s efforts to deport people who are in the U.S. illegally. The governor has said the location in the rugged and remote Everglades was meant as a deterrent against escape, much like the island prison in California that Republicans named it after. The detention center has an estimated annual cost of $450 million.

The state and federal government had argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility is located is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida’s Southern District was the wrong venue since the detention center is located in neighboring Collier County, which is in the state’s Middle District.

Judge Ruiz had hinted during a hearing last week that he had some concerns over which jurisdiction was appropriate. Attorneys for the detainees had argued that Ruiz’s court was appropriate since the detainees were under the oversight of federal officials in the Miami regional office. Any transfer to another venue would cause a delay in a court decision.

Ruiz noted the facts in the case changed Saturday when the Trump administration designated the Krome facility as the immigration court with jurisdiction over all detainees at the detention center.

The judge wrote that the case has “a tortured procedural history” since it was filed July 16, weeks after the first group of detainees arrived at the facility.

“Nearly every aspect of the Plaintiffs’ civil action — their causes of action, their facts in support, their theories of venue, their arguments on the merits and their requests for relief — have changed with each filing,” the judge wrote.

The state and federal government defendants made an identical argument last week about jurisdiction for a second lawsuit in which environmental groups and the Miccosukee Tribe sued to stop further construction and operations at the Everglades detention center until it’s in compliance with federal environmental laws.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Miami on Aug. 7 ordered a 14-day halt to additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week. She had yet to rule on the venue question.

Detainees at the facility have said worms turn up in the food, toilets don’t flush, flooding floors with fecal waste, and mosquitoes and other insects are everywhere.

Civil rights attorneys also said officers were going cell to cell to pressure detainees into signing voluntary removal orders before they’re allowed to consult their attorneys, and some detainees had been deported even though they didn’t have final removal orders. Along with the spread of a respiratory infection and rainwater flooding in tents, the circumstances had fueled a feeling of desperation among detainees, the attorneys wrote in a court filing.

Fischer, Schneider and Frisaro write for the Associated Press. Frisaro reported from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Schneider reported from Orlando, Fla.

CHICAGO — A judge in Illinois dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit Friday that sought to disrupt limits Chicago imposes on cooperation between federal immigration agents and local police.

The lawsuit, filed in February, alleged that so-called sanctuary laws in the nation’s third-largest city “thwart” federal efforts to enforce immigration laws.

It argued that local laws run counter to federal laws by restricting “local governments from sharing immigration information with federal law enforcement officials” and preventing immigration agents from identifying “individuals who may be subject to removal.”

Judge Lindsay Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants’ motion for dismissal.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said that he was pleased with the decision and that the city is safer when police focus on the needs of Chicagoans.

“This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago’s Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration’s reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,” he said in a statement.

Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, welcomed the ruling, saying in a social media post, “Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.”

The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security and did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

The administration has filed a series of lawsuits targeting state or city policies it sees as interfering with immigration enforcement, including those in Los Angeles, New York City, Denver and Rochester, N.Y. It sued four New Jersey cities in May.

Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades and has beefed up its laws several times, including during President Trump’s first term in 2017.

That same year, then-Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed more statewide sanctuary protections into law, putting him at odds with his party.

There is no official definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities. The terms generally describe limits on local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces U.S. immigration laws nationwide but sometimes seeks state and local help.

A shorter ball from India’s Prasidh Krishna is nicked behind and caught to end Ollie Pope’s “wonderful” innings, leaving England on 225-4 on day three of the first Test at Headingley.

FOLLOW LIVE: England v India first Test – day three

Available to UK users only.

South Africa’s Marco Jansen juggles the ball before successfully completing the catch at slip to dismiss Australia’s Steve Smith for 66 runs on day one of the ICC Test Championship final at Lord’s.

FOLLOW MORE: South Africa v Australia – day one

Available to UK users only.

SARINA WIEGMAN rejected suggestions of England being in crisis after naming her squad for this year’s Euros.

The Lioness chief backed her group to ignore outside noise following player retirements and a surprise withdrawal.

5

5

5

5

Wiegman was speaking yesterday, a day after England vice captain Millie Bright, 31, announced her decision to withdraw from being selected for the contest. 

This follows goalkeeper Mary Earps, 32, and playmaker Fran Kirby, 31, both calling time on their Lioness careers three years after helping the team become Euros champions.

On the Daly Brightness podcast yesterday, Bright opened up on the reasons behind her choice and including wanting to get back to her very best physically and mentally.

The 88-capped centre-back, and Chelsea captain, played an influential role in her club treble trophy win this season  with the Blues going unbeaten in 22 top-flight games

Bright’s withdrawal and Kirby’s and Earps’ retirements before the July 2 start of the Euros in Switzerland, prompted questions on whether all is well behind the scenes with England. 

When asked if England are in crisis, Wiegman said: “For me, it doesn’t feel like a crisis at all.

“That is not the case. We know what is happening in the team and there is competition going on in the team. 

“My experience (as England head coach) is that there is always noise. 

“We expect noise until we go into the tournament. 

“The difference between the 2015 (World Cup) and 2017 (Euros) to now is that the visibility of the women’s game has increased so it seems like there is more noise. 

“What we say all the time is that the level of the game has increased so much so the demands on the players have increased a lot. 

“The demands in the WSL and also internationally and also with the Nations League. 

The level and demands have increased there too. 

Then the attention around – the players are household names now – that is lifechanging. 

When asked about Bright’s withdrawal Wiegman revealed she was saddened by it.

And she hopes the Lioness heroine will be back to her best soon.

The Englad boss added: “It was sad and disappointing.

“It’s not nice when you don’t feel well physically and mentally and I just hope she feels better soon.

“Players are not robots. We try to support them as well as possible. Hopefully many players stay fit and healthy.

“They (Bright, Earps and Kirby) have done so much for us and for English football. 

“They have been playing in the tournaments since I have been here so that’s hard to replace. 

“But there are also other players who have done really well.

“They get the opportunities now to step up and show [what they can do].”

Wiegman’s squad selection involved the head coach looking to the future with seven players appearing in their first major tournament.  

Six of whom are aged from 19 to 23. 

Among them is Arsenal’s Michelle Agyemang whose call-up followed her stunning international debut goal during England’s 3-2 Nations League loss to Belgium in April 

Her cameo performance after coming on in the 80th minute of that game is her only senior England appearance to date.  

And Wiegman backed the striker to add a new dimension to England’s attack 

The Lioness chief said:  “We will see what she can bring. 

“I have seen her in training sessions and what she did in Belgium – she can bring something different. I hope she can show that.”

England took the unexpected route of revealing their Lionesses Euros squad via a video 

Three Lions stars Harry Kane and Bukayo were among the celebs naming selected players. 

Among the players who made the cut is Chelsea’s Lauren James with the forward battling to be fit in time for the tournament.  

On July 5 England will begin their fight to remain Euros champions with a Group D clash with France. 

Wiegman said: “I hope Lauren will be available for the first game of the tournament. 

5

“I don’t know for how many minutes yet, we need to see that. 

“We still have one friendly against Jamaica, I hope that she’ll make that one too.”

England’s squad includes six Arsenal stars with Leah Williamson, Lotte Wubben-Moy and forwards Beth Mead, Alessia Russo and Chloe Kelly all selected. 

With Earps retiring there were also call-ups for goalkeepers Anna Moorhouse and Khiara Keating as back-up options to England’s new No1 Hannah Hampton.

The magistrate ruled that apprehended migrants may not have been aware they were crossing into a military zone.

A United States judge in the southwestern state of New Mexico has dismissed trespassing charges against dozens of migrants apprehended in a military zone recently created under President Donald Trump.

The military zone is one of two so far that the Trump administration has created along the US-Mexico border, in order to deter undocumented migration into the country.

Entering a military zone can result in heightened criminal penalties. As many as 400 cases have since been filed in Las Cruces, New Mexico, alleging security violations and crimes like trespassing on restricted military property.

But starting late on Wednesday and continuing into Thursday, Chief US Magistrate Judge Gregory Wormuth began issuing dismissals at the request of the federal public defender’s office in Las Cruces.

Wormuth ruled that the government had failed to demonstrate that the migrants knew they were entering a military zone.

“The criminal complaint fails to establish probable cause to believe the defendant knew he/she was entering” the military zone, Wormuth wrote in his orders dismissing charges.

The ruling is the latest legal setback for the Trump administration, as it seeks to impose stricter restrictions and penalties for undocumented immigration. But the president’s broad use of executive power has drawn the ire of civil liberties groups, who argue that Trump is trampling constitutional safeguards.

Establishing new military zones has been part of Trump’s strategy to reduce the flow of migration into the US.

Normally, the crime of “improper entry by an alien” carries fines or a prison sentence of up to six months. But trespassing on a military zone comes with steeper penalties than a typical border crossing, and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has warned of a possible combined sentence of up to 10 years.

“You can be detained. You will be detained,” Hegseth warned migrants. “You will be interdicted by US troops and border patrol working together.”

On April 18, the first military zone was unveiled, called the  “New Mexico National Defence Area”. It covered a stretch of about 274 kilometres — or 180 miles — along the border with Mexico, extending into land formerly held by the Department of the Interior.

Hegseth has said he would like to see more military zones set up along the border, and in early May, a second one was announced near El Paso, Texas. That strip was approximately 101km or 63 miles.

“Let me be clear: if you cross into the National Defense Area, you will be charged to the FULLEST extent of the law,” Hegseth wrote in a social media post.

Hegseth has previously stated that the military will continue to expand such zones until they have achieved “100 percent operational control” of the border.

Trump and his allies have frequently compared undocumented immigration to an “invasion”, and they have used that justification to invoke wartime laws like the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

In a court brief on behalf of the Trump administration, US Attorney Ryan Ellison argued that the new military zones were a vital bulwark for national security. He also rejected the idea that innocent people might be caught in those areas.

“The New Mexico National Defense Area is a crucial installation necessary to strengthen the authority of servicemembers to help secure our borders and safeguard the country,” Ellison said.

He noted that the government had put up “restricted area” signs along the border. But the public defender’s office in New Mexico argued that the government had not done enough to make it sufficiently clear to migrants in the area that they were entering a military zone.

In the US, the public defenders noted that trespassing requires that the migrants were aware of the restriction and acted “in defiance of that regulation for some nefarious or bad purpose”.

Despite this week’s dismissals, the migrants involved still face less severe charges of crossing the border illegally.