Donald

US Department of Homeland Security is expected to buy up to $20m in gloves amid criticism of the president’s immigration crackdown.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump is planning to spend tens of millions of dollars to equip federal immigration agents with gloves capable of delivering electric shocks.

According to a notice posted on Monday, the Department of Homeland Security has estimated it will invest between $10m and $20m in such gloves by the end of March 2027.

The devices are known as the CT-G5 G.L.O.V.E., an acronym that stands for “Generate Low Output Voltage Emitter”. They are currently used by some jails and police departments.

Their manufacturer, Compliant Technologies, says the gloves are used to “quickly distract with small uncomfortable electrical pulses” when applied to a person’s skin. The Department of Homeland Security indicated they would be used for “distraction and de-escalation”.

A user manual states the gloves can deliver a maximum of 380 volts, which “inhibits/distracts the subject from performing coordinated muscle movement”.

The planned purchase has already sparked a backlash among rights advocates, who fear the gloves will be used to harm protesters and immigrants in the department’s custody.

The Department of Homeland Security oversees an array of agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has led Trump’s campaign of mass deportation.

Monday’s announcement specified that ICE has a requirement to make the purchase and distribute the gloves to agents within Enforcement and Removal Operations, one of its subsidiaries, and Homeland Security Investigations.

But ICE has faced increasing criticism for its tactics, including accusations of racial profiling and excessive force.

At least four people have been shot dead during encounters with ICE agents since the start of this year. Dozens more have died in ICE custody.

On Wednesday, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) issued a statement criticising the anticipated glove purchase, calling it a path to further violence against vulnerable communities.

It also noted that, in June, the Republican-led Congress passed tens of billions of dollars in ICE spending as part of the Secure America Act.

“This is a rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities,” NILC President Kica Mantos said in the statement. “Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric.”

The Department of Homeland Security offered no immediate response to The Associated Press news agency, one of the first news outlets to report on the story.

The founder and CEO of Compliant, Jeff Niklaus, told the publication in an email, “Unfortunately, we are unable to speak on this subject.”

Compliant has argued in the past that its devices are “humane” and do not cause injury.

“The technology is safe as it does not penetrate the subject’s body, while also allowing other officers to grab the individual being stimulated with no fear of feedback into their bodies,” the manufacturer says on its website.

However, Compliant recommends avoiding use of the device on “higher risk” individuals, including the elderly, small children, pregnant people and those with severe disabilities. Officers must also complete a course to use the gloves and be recertified every two years, according to the company.

The notice, listed as a no-bid contract, could be published by Friday.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

Leavitt is departing her role to spend more time with family after giving birth to her second child, according to Trump.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt will be departing her role at the end of the month to prioritise her family, United States President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social.

“Karoline has been a real leader in the White House, and has done a phenomenal job fighting for Justice, Liberty, and Freedom, since 2018,” Trump wrote in a post on Wednesday, revealing the staffing shake-up.

He noted that Leavitt would remain one of his “top outside advisors” and an “influential voice within the Republican Party”.

Leavitt is the latest in a series of senior Trump officials to step down from his second administration.

Since the start of this year, high-level figures like former Attorney General Pam Bondi and ex-Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem have been fired.

Other officials — including former Secretary of Labour Lori Michelle Chavez-DeRemer and Todd Lyon, acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — have resigned amid scrutiny over their leadership.

Leavitt’s departure, however, comes on the heels of her maternity leave. She and her spouse Nicholas Riccio gave birth to their second child, a baby girl named Viviana, in early May.

The 27-year-old stepped away from her duties as White House press secretary in late April. She returned to the White House podium for her first formal press briefing in mid-July.

“Karoline has been one of the best White House Press Secretaries in the History of the Office”, Trump said in his post.

He added that Leavitt would continue to serve his administration as the Republican Party seeks to “conclusively win the Midterm Elections” in November.

This is a developing story. More details to come.

Qatar says negotiations between Oman and Iran over the future of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz are making major progress.

WASHINGTON — Calling Donald H. Rumsfeld energetic was like calling the Pacific wide. When others would rest, he would run. While others sat, he stood. But try as he might, at the pinnacle of his career as Defense secretary, he could not outmaneuver the ruinous politics of the Iraq war.

Regarded by former colleagues as equally smart and combative, patriotic and politically cunning, Rumsfeld had a storied career in government under four presidents as well as nearly a quarter century in corporate America. After retiring in 2008 he headed the Rumsfeld Foundation to promote public service and to work with charities that provide services and support for military families and wounded veterans.

The two-time Defense secretary and one-time presidential candidate died Tuesday, surrounded by his family in Taos, N.M. He was 88.

“Rummy,” as he was often called, was ambitious, witty, engaging and capable of great personal warmth. But he irritated many with his confrontational style. An accomplished wrestler in college, Rumsfeld relished verbal sparring and elevated it to an art form; biting humor was a favorite weapon.

Still, he built a network of loyalists who admired his work ethic, intelligence and impatience with all who failed to share his sense of urgency.

From his earliest years in Washington, he was seen by friend and foe alike as a formidable political force. Bryce Harlow, an associate of President Nixon who helped persuade Rumsfeld to resign from Congress and join Nixon’s Cabinet as director of the Office of Economic Opportunity in 1969, called him “rough and ready, willing to tangle” and “the kind of guy who would walk on a blue flame to get a job done.”

Rumsfeld is the only person to serve twice as Pentagon chief. The first time, from 1975 to 1977, he was the youngest ever. The next time, from 2001 to 2006, he was the oldest.

He made a brief run for the 1988 Republican presidential nomination, a spectacular flop that he once described as humbling after being used to success at the highest levels of the government, including stints as White House chief of staff, a U.S. ambassador and a member of Congress.

For all Rumsfeld’s achievements, it was the setbacks in Iraq in the twilight of his career that will likely etch the most vivid features of his legacy.

::

By the time he arrived at the Pentagon in January 2001 for his second stint as Defense secretary, the military that Rumsfeld inherited was in a slow-motion transition from the Cold War era to a period dominated by ethnic conflicts in the Balkans, humanitarian crises in the Horn of Africa and spasms of terrorism around the globe. Among the other prominent worries: China’s military buildup and the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea.

But nine months into his tenure, on Sept. 11, Rumsfeld found himself facing a threat that would consume the remaining years of his tenure. When a hijacked American Airlines jetliner slammed into the Pentagon, he was in his third-floor office, meeting with nine House members. He later recalled that at the instant of impact, the small wood table at which they were working trembled.

Rumsfeld was among the first to reach the smoldering crash site, and he helped carry the wounded in stretchers before returning to his duties inside the building.

The nation suddenly was at war. U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan on Oct. 7, and with Rumsfeld at the Pentagon helm, the Taliban government in Kabul was toppled within weeks. Frequently presiding at televised briefings on the war, Rumsfeld became something of a TV star, known for his plainspokenness.

Within months of that success, President George W. Bush’s attention shifted to Iraq, which had played no role in the Sept. 11 attacks. Rumsfeld and others in the administration asserted that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was armed with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, and that the U.S. could not afford the risk of Hussein one day providing some of those arms to Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups.

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was launched in March 2003 with a go-ahead from Congress but no authorization from the United Nations Security Council. Baghdad fell quickly, but U.S. and allied forces soon became consumed with a violent Iraqi insurgency. Critics faulted Rumsfeld for dismissing the public assessment of the Army’s top general, Eric K. Shinseki, that several hundred thousand allied troops would be needed to stabilize Iraq.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld arrives in Baghdad in April 2006 to meet with U.S. and new Iraqi government officials.

(Jim Watson / AFP/Getty Images)

Square-jawed with an acid tongue, Rumsfeld grew combative in defense of the war effort, and became a lightning rod for Democrats’ criticism. Years afterward, the degree of blame that should be shared among the White House, Rumsfeld and the U.S. military for the disasters in Iraq remained in debate.

In “By His Own Rules,” a 2009 biography of Rumsfeld, author Bradley Graham wrote that it was “both incorrect and unfair to heap singular blame” for Iraq on Rumsfeld.

“But much of what befell Rumsfeld resulted from his own behavior,” Graham wrote. “He is apt to be remembered as much for how he did things as for what he did. And here, too, he was an internal contradiction. Capable of genuine charm, kindness and grace, he all too frequently came across as brusque and domineering, often alienating others and making enemies where he needed friends.”

In his 2011 memoir, “Known and Unknown,” Rumsfeld offered no hint of regret about Iraq, but acknowledged that its future remained in doubt.

“While the road not traveled always looks smoother, the cold reality of a Hussein regime in Baghdad most likely would mean a Middle East far more perilous than it is today,” he wrote.

He seemed unconvinced that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq poked a hole in the justification for invading, writing: “Our failure to confront Iraq would have sent a message to other nations that neither America nor any other nation was willing to stand in the way of their support for terrorism and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.”

Rumsfeld twice offered his resignation to Bush in 2004 amid disclosures that U.S. troops had abused detainees at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison — an episode he later referred to as his darkest hour as Defense secretary.

Not until November 2006, after Democrats gained control of Congress by riding a wave of antiwar sentiment, did Bush finally decide he had to go. Rumsfeld left office in December and was replaced by another Republican, Robert M. Gates.

Defiant to the end, Rumsfeld expressed no regrets in his farewell ceremony, at which point the U.S. military’s death toll in Iraq had surpassed 2,900. The number would eventually exceed 4,400.

“It may well be comforting to some to consider graceful exits from the agonies and, indeed, the ugliness of combat,” he told his colleagues. “But the enemy thinks differently.”

::

Born in Chicago in 1932 as the second child of George and Jeannette Rumsfeld, Donald Rumsfeld wrote in his memoir that he and his father shared a favorite sports team: the Chicago Bears. He recalled that while listening to a Bears game on the radio at home one Sunday in 1941, the announcer interrupted the broadcast to announce that Japanese airplanes had launched a surprise attack on Hawaii.

Rumsfeld was 9.

“I could feel that something terrible had happened,” he wrote. “I saw it in my parents’ faces and heard it in the tense voices reporting the news of the attack.”

After Pearl Harbor, Rumsfeld’s father joined the Navy at age 38, and the family moved frequently to be near him on the West Coast.

In high school Rumsfeld met his future wife, Joyce Pierson. He attended Princeton on a partial scholarship and joined the campus Navy ROTC program to cover his other expenses. In June 1954, Rumsfeld graduated and was commissioned an ensign in the Navy. Six months later he married Joyce.

Rumsfeld launched his Washington career in 1957 as an assistant to Rep. David Dennison (R-Ohio). Soon he was serving as a congressman himself, first elected to represent Illinois in 1962. He served four terms.

One of his early acts as a member of the Nixon White House was to hire a young Dick Cheney, starting a lifelong friendship.

Rumsfeld was working as U.S. ambassador to NATO in Brussels when he was recalled to Washington to lead President Ford’s transition team after Nixon resigned in August 1974. He became the new president’s chief of staff, and in November 1975, his Defense secretary.

After leaving the Pentagon in 1977, Rumsfeld embarked on a successful business career, including as chief executive officer, president and then chairman of G.D. Searle & Co., a major prescription drug manufacturer.

He still dabbled in government service, including serving as a special envoy to the Middle East for President Reagan from 1983 to 1984. It was in that capacity that he met with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad in December 1983, while Iraq was at war with Iran.

“None of us in the Reagan administration bore any illusions about Saddam,” Rumsfeld wrote in his memoir. “Like most despots, his career was forged in conflict and hardened by bloodshed. He had used chemical toxins in the war he initiated with Iran three years earlier. But given the reality of the Middle East, then as now, America often had to deal with rulers who were deemed ‘less bad’ than the others.”

Two decades later, he was again dealing with Hussein, this time overseeing a U.S. invasion that toppled the Iraqi leader — and led to Rumsfeld’s own downfall.

He is survived by his wife, Joyce; three children; and his grandchildren.

Trump labels US Democratic nominees ‘jihadists’ in inflammatory remarks made in the Oval Office.

United States President Donald Trump has described Democratic candidates in the midterm US elections as “jihadists” in an apparent reference to Muslim Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed securing his party’s nomination for the Michigan primary elections last week.

The pronouncements fuel a proliferating wave of Islamophobic discourse among Republican lawmakers and elected officials in the sprint to lock down ballots ahead of November’s midterm elections.

“We have jihadists being elected all over the place, whether it’s communism [or] jihadism,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday. “A friend of mine called up, he said, ‘You know […] you should use the word jihadist’, that’s what’s happening. If you take a look at what’s happening in other countries, I’m not really sure that’s the way we want to live.”

Trump also hurled another tirade against people of Somali descent, of which there are upwards of 260,000 across the US. He called them “not smart”, and said they have “no aptitude” and “nothing going” for them to “tell us how to run our country”.

Edward Ahmed Mitchell, the national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights and advocacy organisation in the US, said that Trump’s hateful anti-Muslim rhetoric “is putting a target on the back of Muslim elected officials across our nation” and that “this type of dangerous rhetoric is fueling the surge in complaints of anti-Muslim bigotry that our civil rights organization has documented over the past three years”.

Although the president refrained from explicitly naming any individual candidate, hours later, he focused his attention on El-Sayed, who is a son of Egyptian immigrants. The president shared a photo on Truth Social showing the Democratic contender positioned before a gathering that featured two women in headscarves, accompanied by the caption: “They are coming for your home and your belongings.”

Trump also targeted El-Sayed’s victory directly last week, calling him a “hater of Jews” and “hater of Israel” who will bring “filth, crime, death, destruction, embarrassment”.

Several other Republicans also beefed up their anti-Muslim rhetoric, following El-Sayed’s win, parroting remarks that Muslims do not belong in American society. Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina claimed on social media that “every single Muslim holding public office in America is a Trojan horse, and a threat to both national security and our republic”.

Meanwhile, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville labelled El-Sayed a “TERRORIST” and wrote on social media that “Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is a RADICAL ISLAMIST.”

This outburst occurred just two days after Trump shared a social media post comparing a photo of himself and First Lady Melania Trump with one of El-Sayed and his wife Dr Sarah Jukaku, who is a psychiatrist. The image was captioned: “Two VERY DIFFERENT America’s.”

Speaking on CNN’s State of the Union with host Jake Tapper on Sunday night, the Democratic Senate candidate hit back, saying, “Sarah and I actually like each other”, adding “I don’t know about the first lady and the president, but from what I’ve heard, it’s a bit of a rocky road”.

With less than 90 days to go until the highly anticipated midterm elections come to a head, and with all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 34 Senate seats up for grabs, Democrats are confronting an ideological schism between moderate leaders and triumphing democratic progressives, some of whom are increasingly being characterised as an endangerment to Washington’s national security establishment altogether.

“People don’t want to have radical lunatics involved in running our country,” said Trump on Monday, “and that’s what we have.”

The former Trump lawyer, who worked on the presidential immunity case and oversaw approval of the president’s disputed White House ballroom project, will replace David Warrington on September 1.

United States President Donald Trump has named White House Staff Secretary Will Scharf as his next White House counsel, elevating a longtime legal ally to one of the administration’s most important legal positions months before November’s midterm elections.

The former Trump lawyer, who worked on the presidential immunity case and later oversaw approval of the president’s disputed White House ballroom project, will replace David Warrington on September 1, with Warrington leaving the administration for the private sector. Scharf will also hold the title of assistant to the president, moving from a role overseeing the administrative work of the Oval Office to serving as the White House’s top lawyer.

Trump praised Scharf on Truth Social as “Tough, Strong, and Smart” and pointed to his background as a federal prosecutor and his work representing Trump in several legal cases.

From Trump’s legal team to the White House

Scharf joined Trump’s legal team in 2023 and worked on the federal election interference case brought by former Special Counsel Jack Smith. He was part of the team when the case reached the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in 2024 that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.

Scharf’s ties to Trump stretch further back. During the president’s first term, Scharf worked on the confirmation of federal judges, including Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, according to The Associated Press news agency.

After Trump returned to office in January 2025, Scharf became White House staff secretary, managing documents reaching the president and regularly appearing alongside him during executive-order signings. The role has placed Scharf close to the process through which many of Trump’s major policy decisions have been implemented.

Scharf’s role in the ballroom controversy

Scharf has also been closely involved in one of the Trump administration’s most controversial projects.

Trump appointed Scharf chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission in July 2025. The commission later approved Trump’s $400m White House ballroom, planned on the site of the demolished East Wing.

The project has become part of a wider legal argument over the limits of presidential authority. The AFP news agency reported on Saturday that a federal appeals court upheld an order stopping aboveground construction, ruling that such a major alteration to the White House requires explicit congressional approval. Trump said he would take the case to the Supreme Court.

Scharf had previously maintained that the planning commission had authority over construction but not the demolition that preceded it.

A sensitive moment for the White House

The White House counsel advises the presidency on legal and constitutional issues, reviews legislation and executive actions, and helps coordinate the administration’s response to lawsuits and congressional investigations.

Scharf takes over at a particularly sensitive time. Democrats have pledged to investigate Trump and his administration if they gain control of Congress in November’s midterm elections, according to AP.

His appointment also continues a pattern of Trump elevating lawyers who previously represented him. Todd Blanche, who defended Trump in his criminal cases, was confirmed as attorney general on Saturday. D John Sauer, who argued Trump’s presidential immunity case before the Supreme Court, was appointed solicitor general, while former Trump lawyer Emil Bove was initially given a senior Justice Department post before being confirmed to a federal appeals court.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) says F-16 fighter jets intercepted two civilian aircraft that entered restricted airspace over Bedminster, New Jersey, where US President Donald Trump was watching a tournament at his golf course.

The US president has clashed with Federal Reserve members over his bid to rapidly slash interest rates despite inflation.

The White House has revived its efforts to remove Lisa Cook, the first Black woman to serve as a governor at the Federal Reserve, the United States’ central bank.

On Friday, media reports emerged that the administration of President Donald Trump had sent Cook a letter threatening her position at the Federal Reserve.

“You are hereby provided notice that the President is considering removing you from your position,” the letter read.

Signed by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, the letter gave Cook a deadline of three weeks to respond to unproven allegations that she had committed mortgage fraud.

It also warned that the crime she was accused of was punishable by up to 30 years in prison. Her conduct, the letter added, constituted negligence that calls into question her trustworthiness as a Federal Reserve governor.

Trump first unveiled the claims against Cook in August 2025, in a push to fire her from her role.

No other president since the central bank’s founding in 1913 has sought to oust a Federal Reserve governor.

The central bank has historically been insulated from political pressure, and under the law, Federal Reserve governors can only be removed by the president “for cause”. A full term runs 14 years.

Such laws aim is to shield the central bank from making economic decisions based on political pressures.

But Trump has undertaken an aggressive campaign to slash interest rates, which are elevated as a means of combatting inflation.

He has also sought to rid the federal government of appointees aligned with his Democratic predecessors. Cook was nominated in 2022 under President Democrat Joe Biden, Trump’s two-time election rival.

Trump’s claims against Cook centre on the idea that she listed two homes as her primary residence: one in Georgia and the other in Michigan. That could have made her eligible for favourable mortgage rates.

But there is no conclusive evidence so far that Cook sought to deceive lenders, making a successful fraud prosecution unlikely.

In June, a US Supreme Court ruling also blocked Trump’s attempt to fire her, though it did clear the way for the president to fire the heads of other independent agencies.

The letter sent to Cook this week was dated August 5. That same day, Cook spoke at an economic luncheon in Alaska, saying inflation is “too high” and indicating that she is “prepared to act” by raising interest rates, a position shared by others at the Federal Reserve.

Trump has long sparred with the Federal Reserve over interest rates, repeatedly threatening to fire former Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell for refusing to bow to his demands.

Kevin Warsh, a Trump appointee, took over Powell’s position as chair in May. He has yet to deliver Trump’s wished-for rate cuts, amid stubborn inflation.

“We should have the lowest interest rate in the world,” Trump said after last week’s decision by the Federal Reserve to hold interest rates steady for the fifth consecutive time.

In a statement, Cook’s legal team said “there is no valid cause” for removing her from her position.

“As we did before, we will challenge this latest pretext and preserve her position and the historic role of the Fed,” lawyer Abbe D Lowell said.

US President Donald Trump expects the conflict with Iran to end “pretty soon”, while Tehran reports that an agreement with Oman to reopen the Strait of Hormuz is “on the verge of being finalised” following a route agreement between both nations.

Trump’s latest effort to limit birthright citizenship comes after Supreme Court ruled against his initial push to reinterpret the constitutional right.

United States President Donald Trump has signed two executive orders seeking to limit birthright citizenship, weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the practice as protected under the Constitution.

The orders signed on Thursday were far more narrow than Trump’s previous attempt to restrict the practice, which confers citizenship to nearly all children born on US soil.

One of the orders seeks to expand a narrow exception to birthright citizenship, which bars US citizenship from being conferred to the babies of foreign diplomats or invading forces.

The second order calls on the secretary of state and the secretary of homeland security to halt so-called “birth tourism”, the practice of mothers travelling to the US for the sole purpose of giving birth.

Like Trump’s earlier attempt, the new executive orders are expected to face legal challenges.

Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump denounced the Supreme Court for making a “very unfortunate decision” in striking down his initial effort to limit birthright citizenship.

“They’ve taken birthright citizenship and they’ve made a joke out of it,” said Trump, adding that his administration is “making adjustments” to its approach.

On January 20, 2025 — the first day of his second term — Trump had signed an executive order seeking to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, to tighten the category of people who qualified for birthright citizenship.

That order argued that the children born to immigrants on temporary visas or without documentation were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US — and therefore could not  be automatically granted citizenship.

But in June, the US Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s “attempts to narrow” birthright citizenship were unlawful, citing the Constitution’s Citizenship Clause.

“If Congress intended to limit American citizenship to the children of those domiciled in the United States, nothing in the succinct language of the Citizenship Clause conveyed that design,” the majority opinion said.

Trump has made a hardline approach to immigration a centre-piece of his political career. However, the Supreme Court ruling represented one of the largest legal setbacks of his second term.

Despite a conservative supermajority on the nine-judge panel, six justices voted against Trump’s effort to transform who is eligible for birthright citizenship.

The crux of the administration’s argument was that the 14th Amendment was meant to apply only to the children born to newly freed slaves and had been misinterpreted since its ratification in 1868.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative, wrote that there was “scant evidence for this dramatically revisionist view”.

“The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,” he wrote. “We keep that promise today.”

US President Donald Trump attacked Michigan’s Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, repeatedly calling him a ‘hater of Jews’ and ‘a hater of Israel.’ El-Sayed won the Democratic nomination on Tuesday, overcoming millions in campaign spending from pro-Israel lobbying groups.

The administration of President Donald Trump has cancelled the visa for Brazil’s ambassador in the United States, the latest sign of a deepening diplomatic rift between the two countries.

An anonymous US State Department official briefed reporters on Tuesday that Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti’s visa had been temporarily revoked.

But Ribeiro Viotti was not being expelled from the country, the official added.

“The action was that the visa of a senior diplomat here was revoked or cancelled. That is not the same thing as kicking the person out of the country,” the official said.

The decision to revoke the visa was framed as backlash to Brazil’s decision to withhold approval for Trump’s ambassador to the South American country.

Should that approval be granted, the US official explained, Ribeiro Viotti’s visa would be returned. Until then, the official suggested she could remain in the US.

“It means that they are here but without a visa, and would have their visa restored if the balance is restored by giving agreement to our chosen ambassadorial nominee,” the official said.

The move comes after Washington expressed anger over Brazil’s failure to approve Trump’s choice for ambassador to Brazil, Danny Perez.

Perez is a Florida state representative and a Republican ally of Trump’s hawkish Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. He was nominated to the ambassadorship in June, but has yet to be confirmed by the full US Senate.

Media reports indicate that Trump publicly nominated Perez before reaching out to Brazil.

Sources inside the Brazilian government said this was considered a breach of protocol, and they intend to probe Perez’s nomination before issuing formal approval.

Without such approval, though, Perez will be unable to take up his post in the capital, Brasilia.

The tit-for-tat over the ambassadors is likely to ratchet up long-simmering tensions between Washington and Brazil, the US’s largest South American trading partner.

Last month, Brazil denied visas to officials from the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, after voicing concerns that the delegation intended to undermine the country’s election system. Brazil is set to elect its president in October.

Trump is considered a close ally of the Bolsonaro family, a powerful political dynasty on Brazil’s far right.

The US president’s first term overlapped with the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro, who was nicknamed the “Trump of the Tropics”.

His son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, is on the ballot this election season.

Both Trump and the elder Bolsonaro have used false claims of election fraud to dispute unfavourable election results.

Trump has also sought to boost the prospects of right-wing candidates across Latin America since the start of his second term, even threatening to withhold US funds depending on election outcomes.

With Latin America experiencing a shift rightwards, Brazil remains the largest country to be governed by a left-wing leader: President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. He has emerged as a vocal critic of Trump’s attempts to increase US influence in Latin America.

Lula defeated the elder Bolsonaro in the 2022 presidential elections, and he is seeking a fourth, non-consecutive term this October. Flavio Bolsonaro is his top rival.

Since being voted out of office, Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison for his role in an alleged plot to overthrow the 2022 election results.

Trump vocally rejected Jair Bolsonaro’s prosecution, which was recommended by Brazil’s Federal Police. Last year, the US president placed steep tariffs on Brazil, demanding that prosecutors end their case.

Though the tariffs were lifted, the US announced in July that it would impose 25 percent tariffs, this time accusing Brazil of unfair trade practices.

Brazilian authorities remain wary that the US might seek to influence the outcome of October’s presidential election in favour of Flavio Bolsonaro.

Lula formally launched his campaign bid on Sunday, framing the race as a question of national sovereignty – and the “future of Latin America”.

Loaded pistol and rifle among items found in suspect’s pocket, car and home following arrest, police say.

A man carrying a loaded handgun and hollow-point ammunition has been arrested at Donald Trump’s Los Angeles-area golf club, days before a scheduled visit by the US president, local authorities said.

The man, arrested on Sunday at the Trump National Golf Club in Rancho Palos Verdes, was identified by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department as 38-year-old Jeanine John Taele. The department said he had been seen photographing and filming the grounds while appearing to monitor security preparations ahead of Trump’s scheduled appearance at a Republican Party fundraising dinner on Tuesday.

Deputies said they found a 16-round magazine loaded with ammunition in his pocket, and later recovered a loaded pistol with a round chambered, along with a second loaded magazine, from his vehicle in the golf course car park.

Officials said Taele had already been under investigation by the El Segundo Police Department over a separate robbery case.

On Monday, detectives working with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force searched Taele’s Downey home, where they said they recovered an illegally modified rifle, a second pistol, body armour, high-capacity magazines, bulk ammunition and other radio signal devices and notebooks containing what officials described only as “concerning statements”.

The sheriff’s department said it had not identified any credible threat to the public and that Taele is being held without bail while prosecutors weigh charges.

Trump’s visit is part of a broader campaign swing through California and Nevada ahead of the November midterm elections.

US President Donald Trump has threatened to fire US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, after she said the government would not press ahead with criminal charges of vandalism of Washington’s Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool against former Olympic athlete David Hearn.

The reflecting pool project is one of several changes to the landscape of Washington, DC that Trump has pursued during his second term in office.

But following a multimillion-dollar refurbishment ahead of the 250th anniversary of US independence this year, parts of the lining of the pool were seen floating on the surface, and algae turned the water from blue to green, which Trump claimed was caused by vandalism.

Hearn, 67, was among a number of people arrested for suspected criminal damage to the “American flag blue” lining of the pool.

Pirro, however, acknowledged last week that the pool’s peeling sealant appeared to be the result of a “botched installation”, putting her at odds with the US president.

On Monday, Trump sharply criticised Pirro, who he had appointed as attorney for the District of Columbia in May last year, saying she had “choked” under pressure from a judge and “folded like an umbrella”.

Pirro met the president on Monday as he pondered firing her, but sources familiar with the matter told US broadcaster CNN late on Monday that Trump held back from firing his long-term ally.

Who is Pirro, and why has the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool become a flashpoint in her relations with Trump?

Here’s what we know:

Why was Hearn arrested for vandalism?

David Hearn, who said he only visited the reflecting pool to find out what the fuss was about, was among at least seven people arrested or cited over alleged damage to the pool.

He says he had put his hand into the water to examine a piece of lining which had started peeling away on June 19. But he was accused of pulling the lining away, causing more than $1,000 in damage. He was charged with destruction of government property, an offence that carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.

His indictment was announced at a news conference held by Pirro on July 2. The prosecutor accused Hearn, an Olympic canoeist, of “forcefully and violently” ripping the newly installed liner of the reflecting pool, part of a renovation project Trump had championed.

She described his actions as “an affront to the dignity of our shared history” and warned that Hearn could face up to 10 years in prison for the destruction of government property.

Then, this week, the charges were dropped when Pirro announced the damage had most likely been caused by faulty installation of the lining.

The pool has since been drained.

Who is Pirro?

Born to Lebanese-American parents in June 1951 in Elmira, New York, Pirro is currently the US attorney for the District of Columbia. She was hand-picked by Trump in May last year for an interim period, and her position in the Senate was confirmed in August 2025.

According to the US government, Pirro has worked in the legal field for several decades, having started as an assistant district attorney for Westchester County, New York, in 1975 and later working as the first female judge in the Westchester County Court from 1990 to 1993.

She also became the first woman elected to serve as Westchester County district attorney for three consecutive terms from 1994 to 2005 and was the first female president of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York.

Pirro also played a key role in starting the first domestic violence unit in a prosecutor’s office in the US and has authored eight books.

Besides politics, Pirro has also appeared on television in the US true crime series The Jinx, which aired in 2015, as well as hosting the reality show You the Jury, which aired in 2017.

What has Trump said about Pirro?

When Trump hand-picked Pirro as the attorney for the District of Columbia, he said he was confident she would improve Washington, DC.

“Jeanine Pirro, I have no doubt will be an exceptional US attorney for the District of Columbia, one of the truly most important positions in our country of any position, where she will restore public safety in our nation’s capital, break up vicious street gangs and criminal networks, and ensure equal justice under the law. You’ll see very, very big improvements in the DC area, that I can promise you,” Trump said when he appointed her on May 8, 2025.

Pirro, a Trump ally, vowed to tackle violence in the city and said DC would “again become a shining city on the hill in an America that President Trump has promised to make great again and will make safe again”.

But now, relations with Trump have frayed after Pirro refused to support the US president’s claim that the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool had been vandalised.

In a motion filed on Friday afternoon, Pirro acknowledged that the accusations levelled against Hearn did not appear to be substantiated.

“The damage was the result of a botched installation and not vandalism, as initially represented by [the Department of the Interior],” Pirro wrote.

Pirro emphasised she had not received the “new information” until after the criminal indictment against Hearn had been returned. She blamed, in part, the “barebones police reports” her office had received.

“It was not until after the return of the indictment, that the DOI [US Department of the Interior] provided additional documents to the [US Attorney’s Office for Washington, DC] indicating that damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in June 2026 was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” Pirro wrote.

She added that the pressure to finish the reflecting pool renovation project before the Independence Day holiday – marking the 250th anniversary of the US – contributed to the renovation’s failure. Trump had planned several events for the occasion.

“The rush to complete the project led to hasty and botched work that was not remediated before the project was finished and the fencing removed,” Pirro explained, citing delayed installation work, inclement weather and repeated testing failures.

Why is Trump so angry with Pirro?

Trump has aggressively pushed claims that the algae and tears to the lining in the reflecting pool are the result of vandalism.

“We caught some people vandalising our beautiful reflecting pool,” Trump said at a news conference in June. “They took a cutter, a box cutter, or something very sharp. Can you imagine? Where do these people come up with this? And they threw a little fertiliser in the water.”

Separately, he suggested those responsible should face “years in jail” for their alleged crimes.

After Pirro’s announcement, Trump said she should have continued pursuing the case.

“Pirro made a mistake. It was vandalism,” Trump said, adding he was “really disappointed” in Pirro and that “she folded like an umbrella”.

According to US media reports, he has also considered firing Pirro over the reflecting pool saga.

In a post on his Truth Social Platform on Saturday, Trump said: “I disagree 100% with Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, on the reflecting pool. I don’t know what she was thinking? To me, it was a pure case of VANDALISM.”

Trump and Pirro spoke by phone on Saturday, according to CNN. Sources familiar with the call said their conversation “wasn’t pretty”.

Following an in-person meeting with Pirro on Monday, sources told CNN that Trump had held back from firing her.

Neither the White House nor Pirro’s office has commented.

What happened to the reflecting pool?

The 618-metre (2,028-foot) Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool has served as the backdrop for many iconic moments in US history, including the 1963 March on Washington, when civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech.

It sits between the Washington Monument, a large obelisk, and the Lincoln Memorial, two popular tourist sites mere blocks from the White House. But the pool had long struggled with leaks along its granite edge and concrete bottom.

In April, Trump abruptly announced he would address the problem by relining the reflecting pool with swimming pool coating in the colour of the “American Flag Blue”.

The Trump administration granted a $13.1m contract to Atlantic Industrial Coatings, a company the president claimed to have worked with as a real estate developer, and which is led by one of his donors. The deal was struck without taking competitive bids, as is standard, on the basis that the renovation was necessary immediately.

By early June, Trump had announced the project was complete. But within days, a thick layer of green algae had appeared on the surface of the pool, and the blue coating appeared cracked, with sheets of paint flapping in the water.

On June 11, a National Park Service engineer observed that the reflecting pool’s new lining had begun to peel, Pirro said in her announcement.

Citing the engineer’s report, Pirro wrote that the damage to the pool appeared to have been caused by “over spraying and delamination”.

United States President Donald Trump has criticised his own Department of Justice after it decided to drop criminal charges against a former Olympic athlete for the alleged vandalism of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, DC.

Trump voiced his opposition to the decision on Saturday, a day after US Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced she was dismissing the charges against 67-year-old competitive canoeist David Hearn.

Pirro said the damage was the result of “a botched installation and not vandalism”, contradicting both her own previous statements and claims made following Hearn’s June 19 arrest.

On Saturday, Trump wrote on his Truth Social page that he disagreed “100 percent” with Pirro, although he did not directly reference Hearn. Instead, he maintained that vandalism had been committed at the Reflecting Pool.

“To me, it was a pure case of VANDALISM,” Trump wrote. “There may have been some contractor difficulty, but the major damage was caused by VANDALS!”

He followed his statement by posting a video showing an individual, though not Hearn, sticking a hand into the Reflecting Pool.

He also shared a photo of the numbers “86 47” etched into the lawn of the nearby National Mall, which has been interpreted as a call to “86” — or “nix” — the 47th president by removing him from his office.

There is no evidence that the numbers on the lawn are related to the Reflecting Pool, which has become a major political flashpoint for Trump.

Through a series of controversial renovation projects, Trump has sought to physically transform Washington, DC, including by resurfacing the pool.

He initially used the pool’s condition and previous renovation projects to criticise past presidents.

But his own attempt to fix the Reflecting Pool instantly attracted scrutiny, particularly after Trump hand-picked a company he had previously used in a private capacity.

It had never before received a government contract, and the multimillion-dollar deal was awarded without a competitive bidding process, as is standard.

Upon the renovation’s completion, problems soon emerged. The Reflecting Pool’s new lining quickly appeared to peel, and algae blooms sprouted in early June.

Trump repeatedly blamed the situation on “vandals”. The announcement of at least seven arrests connected to the pool sparked accusations of political scapegoating.

Hearn, who represented the US three times at the Olympics, emerged as the most high-profile case.

The athlete said he was bicycling past the Reflecting Pool when he stopped, reached in and felt the peeling sealant. He has denied committing any vandalism, with his lawyers calling his arrest an attempt to distract from the shoddy renovation work.

Pirro, a former Fox News host and Trump loyalist, had initially accused Hearn of “forcefully and violently” ripping the pool’s liner, decrying his actions as “an affront to the dignity of our shared history”.

In their court filings, federal prosecutors alleged that the damage Hearn caused exceeded $1,000, justifying federal charges.

They further claimed that all of the damage done to the Reflecting Pool had been caused by vandals.

Pirro struck a far different tone in her filing on Friday. She claimed she had received new information, leading her to dramatically pivot.

“It was not until after the return of the indictment, that the [Department of Interior] provided additional documents to the [US Attorney’s Office for Washington, DC] indicating that damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in June 2026 was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” Pirro wrote.

The Department of the Interior’s documents, she continued, showed “that the damage was the result of a botched installation and not vandalism”.

Pirro further blamed the damage on pressure to finish the project by July 4, a date that coincides with US Independence Day and the country’s 250th anniversary.

“The rush to complete the project led to hasty and botched work that was not remediated before the project was finished and the fencing removed,” Pirro wrote.

The US Department of Justice has moved to dismiss its case against Olympian David Hearn over damage to the Reflecting Pool in Washington DC. The DOJ says new evidence points to flawed installation by the contractor, not vandalism.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump has moved to drop a criminal charge against former Olympic athlete David Hearn, in a remarkable about-face.

In a motion filed on Friday afternoon, US Attorney Jeanine Pirro acknowledged that the accusations levelled against Hearn — blaming him for vandalising the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool — did not appear to be substantiated.

“The damage was the result of a botched installation and not vandalism, as initially represented by [the Department of the Interior],” Pirro wrote.

Earlier this month, the prosecutor had accused Hearn, an Olympic canoeist, of “forcefully and violently” ripping the newly installed liner of the Reflecting Pool, part of a renovation project Trump had championed.

She described his actions as “an affront to the dignity of our shared history” and warned that Hearn could face up to 10 years in prison for the destruction of government property.

But in Friday’s court filings, a different narrative emerged.

Pirro repeatedly emphasised she did not receive the new information until after the criminal indictment against Hearn had been returned. She blamed, in part, the “barebones police reports” her office had received.

“It was not until after the return of the indictment, that the DOI provided additional documents to the [US Attorney’s Office for Washington, DC] indicating that damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in June 2026 was the result of flawed installation by the contractor,” Pirro wrote.

She added that the pressure to finish the Reflecting Pool renovation project before the Independence Day holiday — marking the 250th anniversary of the US — contributed to the renovation’s failure. Trump had planned several events for the occasion.

“The rush to complete the project led to hasty and botched work that was not remediated before the project was finished and the fencing removed,” Pirro explained, citing delayed installation work, inclement weather and repeated testing failures.

Reshaping Washington, DC

The Reflecting Pool project is one of several changes to the landscape of Washington, DC, that Trump has pursued during his second term in office.

In seeking to leave his mark on the US capital, the Republican leader has torn down the East Wing of the White House, gilded statues with a fresh coat of gold leaf, and proposed to build a large triumphal arch on the road to the Arlington National Cemetery.

Just this week, he unveiled a $22.5bn project to revamp the Dulles international airport, the main air terminal for the capital region.

Several of his public works projects have been challenged in court, including an attempt to affix his name to the John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

The Reflecting Pool renovation was among Trump’s most controversial.

The 618-metre (2,028-foot) pool has served as the backdrop for many iconic moments in US history, including the 1963 March on Washington, when civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech.

It sits between the Washington Monument, a large obelisk, and the Lincoln Memorial, two popular tourist sites mere blocks from the White House. But the pool had long struggled with leaks along its granite edge and concrete bottom.

In April, Trump abruptly announced he would address the problem by resurfacing the Reflecting Pool’s bottom with swimming pool coating in a shade of “American Flag Blue”.

The project, he added, would be finished “long before July 4” and at relatively little cost to the government.

By early June, Trump had announced the project was complete. But within days, a thick layer of green algae appeared on the surface of the pool, and the blue coating appeared cracked, with sheets of paint flapping in the water.

The project also attracted criticism for how the government contract for the renovations was awarded.

The Trump administration granted a $13.1m contract to Atlantic Industrial Coatings, a company he claimed to have worked with as a real estate developer, led by one of his donors. The deal was struck without taking competitive bids, as is standard, on the basis that the renovation was necessary immediately.

Within two days of the site’s final inspection, on June 11, a National Park Service engineer observed that the Reflecting Pool’s new lining had begun to peel, according to Pirro.

Citing the engineer’s report, Pirro wrote that the damage to the pool appeared to have been caused by “over spraying and delamination”.

Accusations of vandalism

But Trump had aggressively pushed accusations that the algae and tears in the Reflecting Pool’s new bottom had been the result of vandalism.

“We caught some people vandalising our beautiful Reflecting Pool,” Trump said at a news conference in June. “They took a cutter, a box cutter, or something very sharp. Can you imagine? Where do these people come up with this? And they threw a little fertiliser in the water.”

Separately, he suggested those responsible should face “years in jail” for their alleged crimes.

Hearn, a three-time Olympian representing the US, has said he was among the members of the public drawn to the hullabaloo surrounding the Reflecting Pool’s controversial renovation.

In media interviews, he admitted he bicycled past the pool, reached in and felt the peeling sealant, out of curiosity. He has adamantly denied, however, damaging any property.

Hearn was among at least seven people arrested or cited over alleged damage to the Reflecting Pool. His indictment was announced at a news conference held by Pirro on July 2.

Friday’s motion to dismiss arrived just four weeks later. In it, Pirro acknowledged the peeling was not caused by vandalism.

She wrote that the revelation came around July 17, when her office inspected the Reflecting Pool site, which had once again been drained for repairs.

“It was at that time that [the US Attorney’s Office] first became aware of the significant damage throughout the pool and accordingly requested all documents from [the Department of the Interior] concerning how the pool was lined,” Pirro said.

Her office received “695 megabytes of additional documents” in return, revealing “a rushed and flawed installation process”.

Since indicting Hearn, Pirro’s office has faced questions about whether it was pursuing justice — or simply doing Trump’s political bidding, as he seeks to save face after the botched renovation.

The withdrawn indictment also comes as courts have repeatedly pressed the Department of Justice about prosecutions that appear to be hastily submitted and lacking in evidence.

“ Did you ultimately decide to charge this so harshly at the president’s direction?” one reporter asked Pirro at the outset of Hearn’s case.

“I didn’t charge anything harshly. I charge according to the evidence,” she replied at the time.

In a statement, Hearn’s legal team called the case an “abuse of government power”. They added that the Trump administration owes their client an apology.

Washington, DC – A Senate committee hearing this week has once again shone a spotlight on the political divisions over the United States government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Wednesday’s hearing, held by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, continued years of criticism, mainly from Republicans, against immunologist Anthony Fauci, who led the government’s response to the pandemic.

Spearheaded by committee chair Rand Paul, several Republicans rehashed claims that the virus that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, emerged from an infectious disease lab in Wuhan, China, and did not naturally transfer from animals to humans.

Stephen Morrison, the director of the Global Health Policy Center at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the hearing was a reflection of the deep, enduring partisan divides over the issue.

But he added that the meeting with Fauci did little to shed new light on the pandemic after years of investigation, hearings and political posturing.

“There’s no space for any civil discussion around any of these issues. There’s no desire really,” Morrison told Al Jazeera.

“So, what’s the lasting impact of this? I mean, it continues to impose unconscionable pain and suffering on [Fauci] and his family. It doesn’t advance the debate one inch on the whole question of COVID origins and what was past US policy and what should US policy be going forward.”

Wuhan lab leak theory

Wednesday’s hearing was based largely on a previous 520-page report from 2024, created by the Republican-led Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

That report claimed it was likely that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a Chinese research facility. Senator Paul has embraced this viewpoint, as has President Donald Trump.

In April of last year, shortly after Trump took office for his second term, the White House launched a webpage purporting to reveal “the true origins of COVID-19”, largely based on the report.

The site highlighted several claims that experts say pave over the nuanced scientific debate about the origins of the virus.

Drawing on the 2024 report, the White House asserts that SARS-CoV-2 “possesses a biological characteristic that is not found in nature” and that “data shows that all COVID-19 cases stem from a single introduction into humans”, setting it apart from previous natural pandemics.

Joel Wertheim, a professor of medicine at the University of California San Diego, told Factcheck.org that both claims were false.

While COVID does contain a characteristic to enter cells that is not found in its closest coronavirus relatives, that quality does exist in other coronaviruses more broadly. As Wertheim put it, “It is most certainly found in nature.”

Meanwhile, a pair of studies released in 2022 found at least two unique paths through which initial human infection occurred, contradicting the White House’s claim that the pandemic arose from a “single introduction into humans”.

The White House webpage also focuses on Fauci, who led the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) until 2022 and served as the chief medical adviser to former US President Joe Biden, Trump’s election rival.

Biden pre-emptively pardoned him in January 2025, fearing the physician might be arrested under the second Trump administration.

Ahead of Wednesday’s hearing, Trump took the opportunity to renew his derision of Fauci, writing on Truth Social that the medical expert’s “ideas were CRAZY”.

Trump also accused Fauci, without evidence, of orchestrating a cover-up for China, where COVID was first documented. The Republican leader was serving his first term as president when the pandemic began.

Ongoing debate

To be sure, there has been criticism from within the international scientific community that the lab leak theory was discounted too swiftly in the early days of the pandemic, as it became seen as political.

Trump and other world leaders had been quick to use anti-China rhetoric when discussing the virus.

There currently remains no conclusive evidence proving either the lab leak theory or that the virus had a natural origin. The vast majority of infectious disease scientists, including Fauci, have said neither possibility can be ruled out.

Still, a preponderance of experts say evidence indicates that the virus was most likely transferred from an animal, likely a bat, to humans, in a process called zoonotic spillover.

A 2024 survey of virologists and other scientists, conducted by the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute (GCRI), found most respondents believed natural transmission was considerably more likely than a lab leak, although most acknowledged it was impossible to definitively dismiss the theory.

Following three years of research, a World Health Organization (WHO) advisory board released a report in 2025 that also concluded “the weight of available evidence … suggests zoonotic spillover”.

Still, WHO director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus cautioned, “As things stand, all hypotheses must remain on the table, including zoonotic spillover and lab leak.”

Inside Fauci’s diary

Fauci has long argued the scientific evidence indicates that the virus emerged from natural animal transmission, but he has repeatedly rejected the notion that he has outright dismissed the lab leak theory.

In a 2024 letter to the House Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, his lawyers maintained (PDF) it was “completely wrong” to say that Fauci had ever called the possibility a “conspiracy theory”.

Instead, they said Fauci and his allies rejected an array of conspiracy theories that have been tied to the lab leak theory, including the idea that he had “sneaked unnoticed into the CIA headquarters to try to convince CIA officials to debunk the lab leak theory”.

Wednesday’s hearing was preceded by the release of entries from Fauci’s private diary, stored on a government computer drive.

They were obtained through Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, a vaccine sceptic and Fauci critic, who passed them along to Senator Paul.

In one entry, Fauci described a claim that he “deliberately” worked with the Chinese to create the virus as a “way-out conspiracy theory”.

He and his legal team have also repeatedly rejected Republican claims that he leveraged millions in grant money to compel scientists to change their views about COVID’s origins.

The White House website, for instance, asserts that Fauci “prompted” an early study on COVID origins to downplay the lab leak theory. No evidence has been presented to support those claims, which have also been rejected by the scientists involved.

Did Fauci mislead?

On Wednesday, several Senate Republicans charged that Fauci’s diary entries showed he had intentionally misled the public by downplaying the possibility the virus had emerged from the Wuhan lab.

Fauci’s supporters, however, have said the diary fails to prove any deliberate attempt to mislead. They argue his public and private statements were consistent in the early days of the pandemic, when scientists’ understanding of the virus was shifting daily.

Fauci’s diary entries indicated he met with a group of experts in February 2020, noting “there was not total agreement” on the likelihood the virus had been created via human manipulation. Senator Paul and others said Fauci did not adequately reflect that view in his public statements.

Republicans also seized on a January 26, 2020, entry in which Fauci wrote that initial data suggests “the first infection was in early December and was not connected” to the wet market in Wuhan.

“Now we know the market was not the source but the amplifier,” he wrote.

During the hearing, Senator Paul said the diary revealed that Fauci was “repeatedly saying in public something different than what he believes in private”.

Fauci’s defenders have pointed to a USA Today interview he gave shortly after the diary entry, floating the idea that the market could have been an “amplifier”. Others have argued the diary entries do not contradict the view that the virus was of natural origins.

Public restrictions

Republicans on Wednesday also focused heavily on Fauci’s role in issuing public guidance about how to slow the spread of the COVID virus.

Several states saw schools close and businesses shutter amid social-distancing recommendations.

But those closures became a political lightning rod and featured prominently in the 2020 presidential elections and 2022 midterm races.

Indeed, new studies have cast doubt on the effectiveness of social distancing rules. Others indicate mask mandates may have been less effective than previously presented, although research still generally supports that masks may slow the spread of the disease.

As NIAID director, Fauci had no direct authority to impose public health mandates, which were typically introduced by state and local officials. While he had a role in issuing federal guidance, his work was part of a wider government effort involving other agencies and officials.

Speaking on Wednesday, Gary Peters, the top Democrat on the Senate panel, accused Republicans of “relitigating history” and seeking to “turn one person into a scapegoat for a crisis that hundreds of officials across the Biden and Trump administrations were responsible for handling”.

Still, Fauci’s diary does contain uncomfortable revelations about how he wielded his high-profile position. In one instance, he recounted how he offered then-New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio encouragement to close city schools. He did the same with an aide to California Governor Gavin Newsom.

“I advised De Blasio to go ahead and do it,” he recounted. “I went on to tell him he should close the bars and restaurants in NYC… He said that he would base this on my recommendation.”

Why now?

During the Wednesday hearing, Fauci invoked his constitutional right to remain silent roughly 100 times, drawing significant public scrutiny.

The 85-year-old Fauci, who enjoyed bipartisan support as NIAID director throughout much of his 38 years in the role, decried the hearing as an attempt to entrap him with perjury.

Critics, including several Democrats on the committee, have also questioned the timing of Wednesday’s hearing, which comes just three months before November’s midterm elections.

Republicans are expected to face an uphill battle in maintaining control of the House of Representatives, and they also risk losing their slim control of the Senate in the vote. A defeat in either chamber would serve as a major setback to Trump in his final two years in office.

The party has struggled to find a defining issue to campaign on, amid affordability woes fuelled by the ongoing US-Israeli war with Iran.

The hearing also comes at a time when polls have shown public trust in federal health agencies has plummeted since Trump took office.

For instance, a June poll conducted by the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health and the de Beaumont Foundation’s Public Health Listening Lab suggests that just 50 percent of respondents said they trusted recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

That marks a decline from 77 percent in the spring of 2025.

About 69 percent also felt that federal health agencies’ recommendations were too influenced by their leaders’ public opinions.

But Morrison, the health policy expert, saw the hearing as a personal attack on Fauci, with Senator Paul and Secretary Kennedy pursuing an ideological “vendetta”.

Fauci, he said, has come to represent for some Republicans the “iconic embodiment of everything that they have come to believe is craven and corrupt in the US government response” to COVID.

He warned that their approach, though, could chill any desire for top scientists to wade into government.

“People will say Tony Fauci could have done things a little differently, he made a few mistakes, and he could have admitted those,” Morrison said.

“But the ‘big but’ is certainly none of that warrants what’s happening here.”

Hamas has agreed to gradually disarm in Gaza as part of Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan. The US president called the deal ‘historic’. Here’s what we know.