investigation

Ukrainian Member of Parliament Lisa Yasko discusses the investigation of President Zelenskyy’s chief of staff Andriy Yermak over corruption accusations following his resignation.

Nov. 29 (UPI) — The federal government is ending its anti-Semitism investigation at Northwestern University in exchange for a $75 million fine in an agreement that restores $790 million in federal funding for research.

The Chicago-area private university must abide by federal anti-discrimination laws regarding admissions and hiring and initiate mandatory anti-Semitism training for students, staff and faculty as part of the deal, the Chicago Sun Times reported.

University officials also must enact and maintain policies that clearly regulate protests and other “expressive activities,” review its policies regarding international admissions and end its Deering Meadow agreement that enabled “peaceful” protests at the university’s 2-acre park.

“This is not an agreement the university enters into lightly, but one that was made based on institutional values,” interim President Henry Bienen said, as reported by the Chicago Tribune.

Attorney General Pam Bondi called the settlement a win for civil rights.

“Today’s settlement marks another victory for the Trump administration’s fight to ensure that American educational institutions protect Jewish students and put merit first,” Bondi said in a statement.

“Institutions that accept federal funds are obligated to follow civil rights law,” Bondi added. “We are grateful to Northwestern for negotiating this historic deal.”

Bienen said university officials had several “hard lines” that they refused to cross when negotiating the settlement.

“We would not relinquish any control over whom we hire, whom we admit as students, what our faculty would teach or how our faculty would teach,” he said.

University officials said they will review their international admissions criteria and develop training to better socialize international students so that they understand the campus norms regarding open debate and inquiry.

Northwestern’s board of trustees also will create a committee to ensure the university complies with the agreement with the federal government.

The university must pay its $75 million fine in increments over the next three years, which is the second-highest amount being paid by a college or university to settle accusations of discrimination and anti-Semitism amid pro-Palestinian campus protests.

Columbia University in New York City earlier agreed to pay a $200 million fine to settle claims made against it by federal investigators.

The $790 million in federal research funding that had been suspended should be restored by the end of December, according to Bienen.

Northwestern University has agreed to pay $75 million to the U.S. government in a deal with the Trump administration to end a series of investigations and restore hundreds of millions of dollars in federal research funding.

President Trump’s administration had cut off $790 million in grants in a standoff that contributed to university layoffs and the resignation in September of Northwestern President Michael Schill. The administration said the school had not done enough to fight antisemitism.

Under the agreement announced Friday night, Northwestern will make the payment to the U.S. Treasury over the next three years. Among other commitments it also requires the university to revoke the so-called Deering Meadow agreement, which it signed in April 2024 in exchange for pro-Palestinian protesters ending their tent encampment on campus.

During negotiations with the Trump administration, interim university President Henry Bienen said Northwestern refused to cede control over hiring, admissions or its curriculum. “I would not have signed this agreement without provisions ensuring that is the case,” he said.

The agreement also calls for Northwestern to continue compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws, develop training materials to “socialize international students” with the norms of a campus dedicated to open debate, and uphold a commitment to Title IX by “providing safe and fair opportunities for women, including single-sex housing for any woman, defined on the basis of sex, who requests such accommodations and all-female sports, locker rooms, and showering facilities.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the deal cements policy changes that will protect people on campus from harassment and discrimination.

“The reforms reflect bold leadership at Northwestern and they are a road map for institutional leaders around the country that will help rebuild public trust in our colleges and universities,” McMahon said.

Trump has leveraged government control of federal research money to push for ideological changes at elite colleges he claims are overrun by “woke” ideology.

The fine agreed to by Northwestern is the second-largest behind Columbia, which agreed in July to pay the government $200 million to resolve a series of investigations and restore its funding. Brown and Cornell also reached agreements with the government to restore funding after antisemitism investigations.

Harvard, the administration’s primary target, remains in negotiations with the federal government over its demands for changes to campus policies and governance. The Ivy League school sued over the administration’s cuts to its grant money and won a court victory in September when a federal judge ordered the government to restore federal funding, saying the Trump administration “used antisemitism as a smokescreen.”

This fall, the White House tried a different approach on higher education, offering preferential treatment for federal funds to several institutions in exchange for adopting policies in line with Trump’s agenda. The administration received a wave of initial rejections from some universities’ leadership, including USC’s, citing concerns that Trump’s higher education compact would suffocate academic freedom.

A Virginia high school football coach who went missing last week as his team prepared for a playoff game is now considered a fugitive.

Virginia State Police has issued 10 warrants for the arrest of Appalachia resident Travis Lee Turner, head football coach at Union High School in Big Stone Gap, Va. Turner, 46, is wanted on five counts of possession of child pornography and five counts of using a computer to solicit a minor.

The investigation is ongoing, police said in a statement, and additional charges are pending.

“Police are actively searching for Turner,” the department also said. “Since his disappearance, VSP has utilized a number of assets, including search and rescue teams, drones and k9s, to assist in the search. VSP’s main priority is locating Turner safely; he is now considered a fugitive.”

On Nov. 20, special agents from the Bureau of Criminal Investigation Wytheville Field Office were sent to Turner’s home “as part of the early stages of an investigation,” Virginia State Police said in its statement.

“This was part of the investigation, and not to arrest him,” the department added. “While in transit, the agents were informed that Turner was no longer at the location.”

Turner was last seen wearing a gray sweatshirt, sweatpants and glasses. He has coached Union since 2011. Two days after Turner’s disappearance, the Bears improved to 12-0 with a victory in a regional semifinal game.

“Wise County Public Schools is aware that law enforcement has filed charges against a staff member who has been on administrative leave,” Mike Goforth, division superintendent for Wise County Public Schools, said in a statement emailed to The Times.

“The individual remains on leave and is not permitted on school property or to have contact with students. The division will continue to cooperate with law enforcement as this process moves forward. Because this is an active legal matter involving personnel, the division cannot comment further.”

CHICAGO — Chicago has entered what many consider a new uneasy phase of a Trump administration immigration crackdown that has already led to thousands of arrests.

While a U.S. Border Patrol commander known for leading intense and controversial surges moved on to North Carolina, federal agents are still arresting immigrants across the nation’s third-largest city and suburbs.

A growing number of lawsuits stemming from the crackdown are winding through the courts. Authorities are investigating agents’ actions, including a fatal shooting. Activists say they are not letting their guard down in case things ramp up again, while many residents in the Democratic stronghold remain anxious.

“I feel a sense of paranoia over when they might be back,” said Santani Silva, an employee at a vintage store in the predominantly Mexican American neighborhood of Pilsen. “People are still afraid.”

Intensity slows, but arrests continue

For more than two months, the Chicago area was the focus of an aggressive operation led by Gregory Bovino, a Border Patrol commander behind similar efforts in Los Angeles and soon Louisiana.

Armed and masked agents used unmarked SUVs and helicopters throughout the city of 2.7 million and its suburbs to target suspected criminals and immigration violators. Arrests often led to intense standoffs with bystanders, from wealthy neighborhoods to working-class suburbs.

While the intensity has died down in the week since Bovino left, reports of arrests still pop up. Activists tracking immigration agents said they confirmed 142 daily sightings at the height of the operation last month. The number is now roughly six a day.

“It’s not over,” said Brandon Lee with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. “I don’t think it will be over.”

Suburb under siege

Bearing the brunt of the operation has been Broadview, a Chicago suburb of roughly 8,000 people that has housed a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing center for years.

Protests outside the facility have grown increasingly tense as federal agents used chemical agents that area neighbors felt. Broadview police also launched three criminal investigations into federal agents’ tactics.

Community leaders took the unusual step of declaring a civil emergency last week and moving public meetings online.

Broadview Mayor Katrina Thompson said the community has faced bomb threats, death threats and violent protests because of the crackdown.

“I will not allow threats of violence or intimidation to disrupt the essential functions of our government,” Thompson said.

Questionable arrests and detentions

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has touted more than 3,000 arrests, but the agency has provided details on only a few cases in which immigrants without legal permission to live in the country also had a criminal history.

The Trump administration posts photos on social media of supposed violent criminals apprehended in immigration operations, but the federal government’s own data paint a different picture.

Of 614 immigrants arrested and detained in recent months around Chicago, only 16, less than 3%, had criminal records representing a “high public safety risk,” according to federal government data submitted to the court as part of a 2022 consent decree about ICE arrests. Those records included domestic battery and drunk driving.

A judge in the cases said hundreds of immigrant detainees qualify to be released on bond, though an appeals court has paused their release. Attorneys say many more cases will follow as they get details from the government about arrests.

“None of this has quite added up,” said Ed Yohnka with the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, which has been involved in several lawsuits. “What was this all about? What did this serve? What did any of this do?”

Investigations and lawsuits

The number of lawsuits triggered by the crackdown is growing, including on agents’ use of force and conditions at the Broadview center. In recent days, clergy members filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging they were being blocked from ministering inside a facility.

Federal prosecutors have also repeatedly dropped charges against protesters and other bystanders, including dismissing charges against a woman who was shot several times by a Border Patrol agent last month.

Meanwhile, federal agents are also under investigation in connection with the death of a suburban man fatally shot by ICE agents during a traffic stop. Mexico’s president has called for a thorough investigation, while ICE has said it did not use excessive force.

An autopsy report, obtained by the Associated Press last week, showed Silverio Villegas González died from a gunshot fired at “close range” to his neck. The death was declared a homicide.

In October, the body of the 38-year-old father who spent two decades in the U.S. was buried in the western Mexico state of Michoacan.

A chilling effect

Many of the once bustling business corridors in the Chicago area’s largely immigrant communities that had quieted down were seeing a buzz again with some street vendors slowly returning to their usual posts.

Andrea Melendez, the owner of Pink Flores Bakery and Cafe, said she has seen an increase in sales after struggling for months.

“As a new business, I was a bit scared when we saw sales drop,” she said. “But this week I’m feeling a bit more hope that things may get better.”

Eleanor Lara, 52, has spent months avoiding unnecessary trips outside her Chicago home, fearful that an encounter with immigration agents could have dire consequences.

Even as a U.S. citizen, she is afraid and carries her birth certificate. She is married to a Venezuelan man whose legal status is in limbo.

“We’re still sticking home,” she said.

Tareen and Fernando write for the Associated Press.

Canadian officials are investigating the death of actor Spencer Lofranco, who died Monday.

The British Columbia Coroners Service confirmed its investigation on Friday, days after the “Gotti” and “Unbroken” actor’s brother announced his death on social media. Lofranco died Tuesday at age 33.

“My brother. You lived a life only some could dream of. You changed people[‘s] lives, and now you are with God,” Santino Lofranco wrote in a Facebook statement shared Thursday morning. “I will always love you and miss you BEAR. RIP.”

The statement did not include a cause of death. A spokesperson for the British Columbia Coroners Service did not share additional details, pending the ongoing investigation.

Spencer Lofranco most notably shared the screen with John Travolta in the critically-panned John Gotti biopic “Gotti” and appeared in Angelina Jolie’s Oscar-nominated World War II-set drama “Unbroken.” His credits also include films “At Middleton,” “Jamesy Boy,” “Dixieland” and “King Cobra” and the 2015 short film “Home,” according to IMDb.

In his “Jamesy Boy” review for The Times, critic Martin Tsai wrote, “newcomer Lofranco deserves credit for carrying the film.” Starring as ex-convict-turned-filmmaker James Burns, Lofranco “holds his own against vets” Ving Rhames, Mary-Louise Parker and James Woods, Tsai added.

Lofranco, born Oct. 18, 1992, told Interview in 2014 that he became interested in acting at age 17 despite his father’s wishes for him to be a hockey player or lawyer. His mother was a dancer, musician and actor and would often take him along to auditions, he said.

Amid his brief acting career, Lofranco faced legal trouble for running over a cyclist with his SUV in Hollywood in 2013. The cyclist suffered severe injuries, including a broken hip and several fractures, according to CBS News. Officials said Lofranco got out of his vehicle after the accident to apologize to his victim before leaving the scene.

A judge, after his victim’s urging for a harsher sentence, sentenced Lofranco in 2015 to 50 days of community service, two years of probation and $161,000 in restitution.

Over the last year, Lofranco often posted to Instagram, sharing photos of his outfits, tattoos and graffiti art. In his final Instagram post, a black-and-white selfie, Lofranco seemingly wrote about starting a new chapter of his life.

“Period the best is yet to come,” he said, after encouraging fans to follow his OnlyFans account. “The hair is on it way it’s got held up customs. Crazy.”

When he spoke to Interview more than a decade ago, Lofranco said his future path included doing “real-life, candid films.”

“I don’t want to be thrown into anything that could jeopardize my career. I want to be wise about what I choose,” he said. “Actors whose choices I’ve liked are Sean Penn, Leonardo DiCaprio, River Phoenix.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Wednesday night signed into law legislation demanding that the Justice Department release all documents related to its investigation into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

With little fanfare, the president announced the action in a lengthy social media post that attacked Democrats who have been linked to the late financier, a line of attack that he has often deployed while ignoring his and other Republicans’ ties to the scandal.

“Perhaps the truth about these Democrats and their associations with Jeffrey Epstein, will soon be revealed, but I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

Now the focus turns to Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, whom the legislation compels to make available “all unclassified records, documents, communications and investigative materials” in the Department of Justice’s possession no later than 30 days after the legislation becoming law.

The action on the bill marks a dramatic shift for Trump, who worked for months to thwart release of the Epstein files — until Sunday, when he reversed course under pressure from his party and called on Republican lawmakers to back the measure. Within days, the Senate and House overwhelmingly voted for the bill and sent it to Trump’s desk.

Although Trump has now signed the bill into law, his resistance to releasing the files has led to skepticism among some lawmakers on Capitol Hill who question whether the Justice Department may try to conceal information.

“The real test will be, will the Department of Justice release the files or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said at a news conference Tuesday before the House and Senate passed the bill. Greene was among a small group of GOP defectors who joined Democrats in forcing the legislation to the floor over Trump’s objections.

The legislation prohibits the attorney general from withholding, delaying or redacting the publication of “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

Carve-outs in the bill could allow Trump and Bondi to withhold documents that include identifying information of victims or depictions of child sexual abuse materials.

The law also would allow them to conceal information that would “jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.”

Trump directed the Justice Department last week to investigate Epstein’s links with major banks and several prominent Democrats, including former President Clinton.

Bondi abided, and appointed a top federal prosecutor to pursue the investigation with “urgency and integrity.” In July, the Justice Department determined after an extensive review that there was not enough evidence that “could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties” in the Epstein case.

At a news conference Wednesday, Bondi said the department had opened another case into Epstein after “new information” emerged.

Bondi did not say how the new investigation could affect the release of the files.

Asked if the Epstein documents would be released within 30 days, as the law states, Bondi said her department would “follow the law.”

“We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims,” Bondi said.

Los Angeles County’s district attorney has opened an investigation into claims of fraud within the largest sex abuse settlement in U.S. history.

Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman said Wednesday his office has started a wide-ranging probe into claims that plaintiffs made up stories of abuse in order to sue the county, which agreed to the historic $4-billion sex abuse settlement this spring.

The announcement follows Times investigations that found nine people who said they were paid small amounts of cash by recruiters to sue the county for sex abuse in juvenile halls. Four of them said they fabricated the claims.

“They looked at this opportunity to compensate these true victims of sex abuse as an opportunity to personally profit and engage in some of the most greedy and heinous conduct,” Hochman said at a news conference Wednesday morning in the Hall of Justice downtown. “We are going to aggressively go after them.”

All nine plaintiffs had their cases filed by Downtown LA Law Group, a personal injury firm that represents roughly 2,700 people in the county settlement. The firm has denied wrongdoing. The Times could not reach the recruiters who made the alleged payments to plaintiffs for comment.

Hochman indicated his investigation, still in its early stages, showed this was just a small fraction of the “significant number of fraudsters involved in these settlement claims.”

Hochman emphasized the inquiry would focus on those higher up the chain — lawyers, recruiters and medical practitioners who may have submitted fraudulent forms — and not the plaintiffs.

Many of the people The Times spoke with who filed false claims were poor and in unstable housing. They said they desperately needed the cash promised by recruiters, which ranged from $20 to $200. All were flagged down outside county social services offices, where many were on their way to get food assistance and cash aid.

Hochman said any person who contacted his office about filing a fraudulent claim would not have the statements haunt them in a criminal prosecution.

“If you provide us truthful information, complete information, any of the words that you use will not be used against you,” said Hochman, adding the offer did not extend to attorneys or medical professionals. “It’s not something that we offer lightly to anyone.”

Hochman said Downtown LA Law Group was one of the law firms they were focused on, but the probe was not limited to them. He said the investigation would touch anyone who helped fraudulent cases get filed.

“I’m happy to label that entire group as a group of fraudsters conspiring to defraud a settlement where the money should be going to legitimate sex abuse survivors and victims,” he said.

The law group has denied paying plaintiffs and said it only wants “justice for real victims” of sexual abuse. The firm declined to comment further Wednesday.

Shortly after The Times’ investigation, the county supervisors voted to launch their own inquiry into possible misconduct by “legal representatives” involved in the lawsuits. The county set up a hotline for tips from the public, and moved to ban “predatory solicitation” outside county social services offices.

The supervisors also joined a chorus of voices — including California lawmakers, labor leaders and a powerful attorney trade group — calling for the State Bar to investigate. The State Bar does not comment on potential investigations, but has previously said California law generally prohibits making payments to procure clients, a practice known as capping.

Downtown LA Law Group represents roughly 2,700 people suing the county. Hochman said the firm is one of several he’s focused on.

(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

A flood of sex abuse claims followed the passage of AB 218, a state law that gave victims of childhood sexual abuse a new window to sue that stretched far beyond the previous statute of limitations. The law, which went into effect in 2020, has led to thousands of lawsuits filed against California school districts, governments and religious institutions.

This spring, the county agreed to pay $4 billion to resolve thousands of claims from victims who said they were abused decades ago in county-run juvenile detention centers and foster homes. In October, the county agreed to a second settlement worth $828 million over another set of similar claims.

Hochman noted the first settlement would have massive financial ramifications for decades for the county, which acts as a social safety net for the region. The county will pay the settlement out over the next five years and has asked most departments to trim their budgets to help pay for it. The district attorney’s budget, Hochman said, had been slashed by $24 million, in part, to help pay for the cases.

“Every penny that a fraudster gets is a penny taken away from a sex abuse victim that validly and legitimately suffered that abuse at the hands of someone [in] Los Angeles County,” said Hochman. “It is not free money.”

Nov. 18 (UPI) — The National Transportation Safety Board announced Tuesday that an incorrectly labeled wire caused a containership to collide with the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore last year.

The federal agency released the key finding of its investigation into the catastrophic collision that killed six highway maintenance workers, destroyed a major regional transportation artery and upended trade at one of the country’s busiest ports.

Jennifer Homendy, the board’s chair, said, “This tragedy should’ve never occurred” in her opening remarks at a public meeting.

“As with all accidents we investigate, this was preventable,” she said.

Federal investigators determined that the Dali containership crashed into the bridge after losing electricity. The cause of the blackout was a loose signal wire connection to a terminal block that investigators traced back to improperly installed wire-label banding.

The Dali lost its propulsion and steering, and the crew had little time to recover before the ship struck a southern pier that was supporting the bridge’s central span, investigators concluded. As a result, a “substantial portion” of the bridge collapsed into the Patapsco River.

Additionally, the investigation also faulted Maryland officials for not assessing the bridge earlier for potential vulnerabilities to collisions with ships. The “lack of effective and immediate communications” also contributed to the deaths of the highway workers, investigators found.

The Francis Scott Key Bridge was constructed before 1994, when bridges were mandated to meet safety criteria to reduce the risk of a collapse. State officials have since announced plans for a replacement bridge over the Patapsco River, which is estimated to cost at least $1.7 billion and be twice as high as the Francis Scott Key Bridge.

The city of Baltimore filed a lawsuit against Grace Ocean Private and Synergy Marine, the owners of the Dali, arguing that the 985-foot container ship was “a clearly unseaworthy vessel” and the companies “were grossly and potentially criminally negligent.”

WASHINGTON — In political exile at his mansion in Florida, under investigation for possessing highly classified documents, Donald Trump summoned his lawyer in 2022 for a fateful conversation. A folder had been compiled with 38 documents that should have been returned to the federal government. But Trump had other ideas.

Making a plucking motion, Trump suggested his attorney, Evan Corcoran, remove the most incriminating material. “Why don’t you take them with you to your hotel room, and if there’s anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out,” Corcoran memorialized in a series of notes that surfaced during criminal proceedings.

Trump’s purported willingness to conceal evidence from law enforcement as a private citizen is now fueling concern on Capitol Hill that his efforts to thwart the release of Justice Department files in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation could lead to similar obstructive efforts — this time wielding the powers of the presidency.

Since resuming office in January, Trump has opposed releasing files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker who is believed to have abused more than 200 women and girls. But bipartisan fervor has only grown over the case, with House lawmakers across party lines expected to unite behind a bill on Tuesday that would compel the release of the documents.

Last week, facing intensifying public pressure, the House Oversight Committee released over 20,000 files from Epstein’s estate that referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

Those files, which included emails from Epstein himself, showed the notorious financier believed that Trump had intimate knowledge of his criminal conduct. “He knew about the girls,” Epstein wrote, referring to Trump as the “dog that hasn’t barked.”

Rep. Dave Min (D-Irvine), a member of the oversight committee, noted Trump could order the release of the Justice Department files without any action from Congress.

“The fact that he has not done so, coupled with his long and well documented history of lying and obstructing justice, raises serious concerns that he is still trying to stop this investigation,” Min said in an interview, “either by trying to persuade Senate Republicans to vote against the release or through other mechanisms.”

A spokesperson for Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said that altering or destroying portions of the Epstein files “would violate a wide range of federal laws.”

“The senator is certainly concerned that Donald Trump, who was investigated and indicted for obstruction, will persist in trying to stonewall and otherwise prevent the full release of all the documents and information in the U.S. government’s possession,” the spokesperson said, “even if the law is passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.”

After the House votes on the bill, titled the Epstein Files Transparency Act, bipartisan support in the Senate would be required to pass the measure. Trump would then have to sign it into law.

Trump encouraged Republican House members to support it over the weekend after enough GOP lawmakers broke ranks last week to compel a vote, overriding opposition from the speaker of the House. Still, it is unclear whether the president will support the measure as it proceeds to his desk.

On Monday, Trump said he would sign the bill if it ultimately passes. “Let the Senate look at it,” he told reporters.

The bill prohibits the attorney general, Pam Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting the publication of “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

But caveats in the bill could provide Trump and Bondi with loopholes to keep records related to the president concealed.

“Because DOJ possesses and controls these files, it is far from certain that a vote to disclose ‘the Epstein files’ will include documents pertaining to Donald Trump,” said Barbara McQuade, who served as the United States attorney for the eastern district of Michigan from 2010 until 2017, when Trump requested a slew of resignations from U.S. attorneys.

Already, this past spring, FBI Director Kash Patel directed a Freedom of Information Act team to work with hundreds of agents to comb through the entire trove of files from the investigation, and directed them to redact references to Trump, citing his status as a private citizen with privacy protections when the probe first launched in 2006, Bloomberg reported at the time.

“It would be improper for Trump to order the documents destroyed, but Bondi could redact or remove some in the name of grand jury secrecy or privacy laws,” McQuade added. “As long as there’s a pending criminal investigation, I think she can either block disclosure of the entire file or block disclosure of individuals who are not being charged, including Trump.”

Destroying the documents would be a taller task, and “would need a loyal secretary or equivalent,” said Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, a professor emeritus and FBI historian at the University of Edinburgh.

Jeffreys-Jones recalled J. Edgar Hoover’s assistant, Helen Gandy, spending weeks at his home destroying the famed FBI director’s personal file on the dirty secrets of America’s rich and powerful.

It would also be illegal, scholars say, pointing to the Federal Records Act that prohibits anyone — including presidents — from destroying government documents.

After President Nixon attempted to assert executive authority over a collection of incriminating tapes that would ultimately end his presidency, Congress passed the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act, asserting that government documents and presidential records are federal property. Courts have repeatedly upheld the law.

While presidents are immune from prosecution over their official conduct, ordering the destruction of documents from a criminal investigation would not fall under presidential duties, legal scholars said, exposing Trump to charges of obstructing justice if he were to do so.

“Multiple federal laws bar anyone, including the president or those around him, from destroying or altering material contained in the Epstein files, including various federal record-keeping laws and criminal statutes. But that doesn’t mean that Trump or his cronies won’t consider trying,” said Norm Eisen, who served as chief ethics lawyer for President Obama and counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment trial.

The Democracy Defenders Fund, a nonprofit organization co-founded by Eisen, has sued the Trump administration for all records in the Epstein investigation related to Trump, warning that “court supervision is needed” to ensure Trump doesn’t attempt to subvert a lawful directive to release them.

“Perhaps the greatest danger is not altering documents but wrongly withholding them or producing and redacting them,” Eisen added. “Those are both issues that we can get at in our litigation, and where court supervision can be valuable.”

Jeffreys-Jones also said that Trump may attempt to order redactions based on claims of national security. But “this might be unconvincing for two reasons,” he said.

“Trump was not yet president at the time,” he said, and “it would raise ancillary questions if redactions did not operate in the case of President Clinton.”

Last week, Trump directed the Justice Department to investigate Epstein’s ties to Democratic figures, including Clinton, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn’s co-founder and a major Democratic donor.

He made no request for the department to similarly investigate Republicans.

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department engaged in a “disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps” in the process of securing an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey, a federal judge ruled Monday in directing prosecutors to provide defense lawyers with all grand jury materials from the case.

Those problems, wrote Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, include “fundamental misstatements of the law” by a prosecutor to the grand jury that indicted Comey in September, the use of potentially privileged communications during the investigation and unexplained irregularities in the transcript of the grand jury proceedings.

“The Court recognizes that the relief sought by the defense is rarely granted,” Fitzpatrick wrote “However, the record points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps, missteps that led an FBI agent and a prosecutor to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding.”

The 24-page opinion is the most blistering assessment yet by a judge of the Justice Department’s actions leading up to the Comey indictment. It underscores how procedural missteps and prosecutorial inexperience have combined to imperil the prosecution pushed by President Trump for reasons separate and apart from the substance of the disputed allegations against Comey.

The Comey case and a separate prosecution of New York Atty, Gen. Letitia James have heightened concerns that the Justice Department is being weaponized in pursuit of Trump’s political opponents. Both defendants have filed multiple motions to dismiss the cases against them before trial, arguing that the prosecutions are improperly vindictive and that the prosecutor who filed the charges, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed.

A different judge is set to decide by Thanksgiving on the challenges by Comey and James to Halligan’s appointment.

Though grand jury proceedings are presumptively secret, Comey’s lawyers had sought records from the process out of concern that irregularities may have tainted the case. The sole prosecutor who defense lawyers say presented the case to the grand jury was Halligan, a former White House aide with no prior prosecutorial experience who was appointed just days before the indictment to the job of interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

In his order Monday, Fitzpatrick said that after reviewing the grand jury transcript himself, he had come away deeply concerned about the integrity of the case.

“Here, the procedural and substantive irregularities that occurred before the grand jury, and the manner in which evidence presented to the grand jury was collected and used, may rise to the level of government misconduct resulting in prejudice to Mr. Comey,” Fitzpatrick said.

The Justice Department responded to the ruling by asking that it be put on hold to give prosecutors time to file objections. The government said it believed Fitzpatrick “may have misinterpreted” some facts in issuing his ruling.

Fitzpatrick listed, among nearly a dozen irregularities in his ruling, two comments that a prosecutor — presumably, Halligan — made to the grand jury that he said represented “fundamental misstatements of the law.”

The actual statements are blacked out, but Fitzpatrick said the prosecutor seems to have ignored the fact that a grand jury may not draw a negative inference about a person who exercises his right not to testify in front of it. He said she also appeared to suggest to grand jurors that they did not need to rely only on what was presented to them and could instead be assured that there was additional evidence that would be presented at trial.

The judge also drew attention to the jumbled manner in which the indictment was obtained and indicated that a transcript and recording of the proceedings do not provide a full account of what occurred. Halligan initially sought a three-count indictment of Comey, but after the grand jury rejected one of the three proposed counts and found probable cause to indict on the other two counts, a second two-count indictment was prepared and signed.

But Fitzpatrick said it was not clear to him in reviewing the record that the indictment that Halligan presented in court at the conclusion of the process had been presented to the grand jury for its deliberation.

“Either way, this unusual series of events, still not fully explained by the prosecutor’s declaration, calls into question the presumption of regularity generally associated with grand jury proceedings, and provides another genuine issue the defense may raise to challenge the manner in which the government obtained the indictment,” he wrote.

The two-count indictment charges Comey with lying to Congress in September 2020 when he suggested under questioning that he had not authorized FBI leaks of information to the news media. His lawyers say the question he was responding to was vague and confusing but the answer he gave to the Senate Judiciary Committee was true.

The line of questioning from Sen. Ted Cruz appeared to focus on whether Comey had authorized his former deputy director, Andrew McCabe, to speak with the news media. But since the indictment, prosecutors have made clear that their indictment centers on allegations that Comey permitted a separate person — a close friend and Columbia University law professor, Dan Richman — to serve as an anonymous source in interactions with reporters.

The FBI executed search warrants in 2019 and 2020 to access messages between Richman and Comey as part of a media leaks investigation that did not result in charges. But Fitzpatrick said he was concerned that communications between the men that might have been protected by attorney-client privilege — Richman was at one point functioning as a lawyer for Comey — were exposed to the grand jury without Comey having had an opportunity to object.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

An indictment unveiled this week charging Gov. Gavin Newsom’s former chief of staff with political corruption threw California’s top political circles into chaos — and stirred speculation in the state capital about what triggered the federal investigation.

Authorities have not revealed any targets beyond Dana Williamson and two other influential political operatives associated with the state’s most powerful Democrats, all of whom are accused of fraud and siphoning campaign funds for personal use.

But details contained in the indictment and other public records indicate that the FBI and U.S. Department of Justice had a keen interest in Williamson and other operatives’ involvement in the handling of a legal case involving “Corporation 1.” The facts revealed about “Corporation 1” match details of a controversial sex discrimination investigation that the state of California led into one of the world’s largest video game companies, Santa-Monica based Activision Blizzard Inc.

Williamson — an influential deal-maker and one of the state’s premier Democratic political consultants before and after she ran Newsom’s office — was arrested on corruption charges Wednesday. Two longtime associates, lobbyist Greg Campbell, a former high-level staffer in the California Assembly, and Sean McCluskie, a longtime aide to former state Atty. Gen. and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, have agreed to plead guilty to related charges.

After Williamson pleaded not guilty in a tearful court appearance Wednesday, her attorney, McGregor Scott, said that federal authorities had charged his client only after first approaching her to seek help with a probe they were conducting into Newsom, the nature of which remains unclear. Williamson declined to cooperate.

The governor has not been accused of any wrongdoing. Still, Republicans already are using the indictments to attack Newsom, who has openly said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Williamson’s attorney did not offer any specifics on what federal officials may have been investigating.

But numerous threads in the indictment echo details in the Activision saga.

Williamson and Campbell both worked as advisors to Activision Blizzard, according to financial disclosures on file with the state. Williamson reported receiving income from the company prior to her appointment in Newsom’s office, state records show. According to records first filed earlier this year, Campbell disclosed that his lobbying firm started being paid by Activision around the time Williamson joined the governor’s office. Activision reported paying $240,000 to his firm in 2023 and 2024. The amount Williamson was paid from Activision was not disclosed.

Activision officials did not respond to emails requesting comment. Lawyers for Williamson, Campbell and McCluskie also did not respond or declined to comment.

The state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing in 2021 sued Activision Blizzard, which distributes video games such as “Call of Duty” and “Candy Crush,” alleging that company officials discriminated against women, paid them less than men and ignored reports of egregious sexual harassment.

The complaint alleged that the company: “fostered a pervasive “frat boy” workplace culture that continues to thrive. In the office, women are subjected to “cube crawls” in which male employees drink copious amounts of alcohol as they “crawl” their way through various cubicles in the office and often engage in inappropriate behavior toward female employees. Male employees proudly come into work hungover, play video games for long periods of time during work while delegating their responsibilities to female employees, engage in banter about their sexual encounters, talk openly about female bodies, and joke about rape.”

Activision officials denied the allegations.

The allegations also were investigated by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Activision Blizzard agreed to a consent decree, approved in March 2022, with the agency that required the company to set up an $18-million fund for employees who experienced sexual harassment or discrimination, pregnancy discrimination or retaliation.

Just weeks later, the case drew national attention again when the lawyer overseeing the case for the state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing, Janet Wipper, was fired by the Newsom administration, and her chief deputy resigned and alleged that she was doing so to protest interference of Newsom’s office in the investigation.

“The Office of the Governor repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation,” the deputy, Melanie Proctor, wrote to her colleagues. “As we continued to win in state court, this interference increased, mimicking the interests of Activision’s counsel.”

A member of Activision’s board of directors contributed $40,200 for Newsom’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign, and an additional $100,000 to a committee opposing the 2021 recall campaign against Newsom — an effort that failed.

Newsom’s office denied it was meddling. “Claims of interference by our office are categorically false,” Erin Mellon, Newsom’s then-communications director said at the time.

As case continued to grind through Los Angeles Superior Court, the company stepped up its lobbying presence in Sacramento, according to disclosures filed with the state. Documents show Activision began paying Campbell starting in late 2022 to lobby on its behalf.

Around this time, Newsom announced that he was hiring Williamson to be his chief of staff.

In December 2023 the state announced it had reached a settlement agreement with Activision for $54 million, with the bulk of the funds going to compensate women who had been underpaid. The company did not admit any wrongdoing.

The FBI has made inquires about the Activision settlement, though the focus of the inquiry is unclear. When reached last week, Calabasas attorney Alan Goldstein, who handled a sexual harassment suit against Activision, said he received call from an FBI agent looking to probe California’s settlement — but that he couldn’t recall a “substantive conversation.”

Federal investigators were also looking at how Campbell, Williamson and another Sacramento political consultant, Alexis Podesta, conducted their affairs. In unveiling their charges this week, the U.S. Attorney’s office said the investigation began more than three years ago. All three consultants were members of the Sacramento-based Collaborative, a cooperative of top Democratic political operatives.

Podesta from 2017 to 2020 served as secretary of the California Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, which included the state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing — the agency that launched the investigation of Activision in 2018.

Williamson received a federal subpoena for information about her handling of a government loan her business had received during the pandemic, according to details in the indictment. The indictment accused Williamson of spending vast sums on luxury items — including a Gucci bag, Chanel earrings and a $150,000 Mexican birthday vacation and party, plus yacht rental and private jet travel — and then claimed them as business expenses on her taxes.

She and Campbell had also allegedly conspired with McCluskie to siphon money from Becerra’s dormant campaign account to pay McCuskie’s wife for a fake, “no-show” job working for Williamson. When Williamson went to work for Newsom, the indictment alleges, Podesta took over handling the pass through payments.

By June 2024, someone in the circle was cooperating with federal investigators and wearing a wire, recording Williamson’s private conversations, according to transcripts included in the indictment.

On Nov.14, 2024, according to the indictment, FBI agents interviewed Williamson, questioning her about the Becerra campaign funds and about the pandemic funds.

Investigators also asked her about her actions “while serving in public office to influence the litigation involving the State of California and a former client –Corporation 1,” according to the indictment. The indictment doesn’t identify Corporation 1., but details match the Activision litigation. The indictment notes that Corporation 1 was Williamson’s former client and that it was involved in settlement discussions over a lawsuit with the state in 2023. It also references a state lawyer who had been fired in connection with the litigation.

Williamson, according to the indictment, told the FBI she did not pass any inside information to Campbell or other associates outside the government. But based on their recorded conversations, the indictment said, investigators believed that was not true.

They alleged that in January 2023, Williamson, shortly after starting as Newsom’s chief of staff, revealed to Podesta that she had “told a high level government attorney to … get [the case] settled.”

The indictment notes that “Corporation 1” was not only Williamson’s former client, but also now Podesta’s current client.

In June 2024, Williamson complained to Podesta that someone had submitted a California Public Records Act request seeking information about meetings and communications between Newsom officials and the company, according to the indictment.

Proctor, the state attorney who resigned in 2022 and had alleged that the Newsom administration was meddling in the Activision case, posted on her Bluesky social media account in July that she had submitted a public records request on May 29, 2024. She also posted the response from Newsom’s office, showing a meeting in January 2024 in the governor’s office between Williamson, Podesta, and Robert Kotick, the former Chief Executive of Activision.

In their June conversation, according to the indictment, Williamson told Podesta “I just wanted to alert you to the PRAS that we’re starting to get,” the indictment stated. (PRAs refer to public records requests.)

“Yeah. Ugh. F— her. They really don’t know who they are messing with,” Podesta responded.

“They really don’t,” Williamson said.

Podesta, who is identified in the indictment as “Co-Conspirator 2” was not charged. On Thursday she sent a message to numerous associates offering her take on the situation.

“While I cannot discuss the details of the ongoing investigation, I want to state plainly that I have always conducted myself –and my business–with integrity.” She also said that she continued to “cooperate fully with federal authorities.”

On Friday afternoon, McCluskie and Campbell appeared in federal court in Sacramento to be arraigned on conspiracy charges in back-to-back proceedings.

Both men had previously reached plea agreements with prosecutors, and will be back in court to enter those pleas, Mcluskie in late November and Campbell in early December.

Prosecutors did not seek detention for either man, but they were ordered to surrender their passports and avoid associating with other co-conspirators.

In brief remarks to reporters, Campbell’s attorney, Todd Pickles, said that his client “takes full accountability for his actions” and would “in appropriate time further discuss the charges.” But, Pickles noted, those charges “do not include Mr. Campbell engaging in advocacy or lobbying on behalf of any client.”

Times staff writers Katie King and Melody Gutierrez contributed to this report.

Suzanne Ellen Kaye was convicted for threatening to shoot FBI agents, and Daniel Edwin Wilson for conspiring to impede or injure police offers and illegal firearm possession.

United States President Donald Trump has issued two new pardons related to the investigation into the January 6, 2021 US Capitol insurrection.

White House officials said on Saturday that one pardon was given to a woman convicted of threatening to shoot FBI agents who were investigating a tip that she may have been at the US Capitol. Trump issued the second pardon for a defendant who had remained behind bars despite the sweeping grant of clemency for Capitol rioters because of a separate conviction for illegally possessing firearms.

These pardons are the latest example of Trump’s willingness to use his constitutional authority to help supporters who were scrutinised as part of the massive January 6 investigation that was conducted by the administration of former US President Joe Biden and that led to charges against more than 1,500 defendants.

With a stroke of his pen and within hours of being sworn in for his second term in January of this year, Trump upended the largest prosecution in the history of the US Department of Justice.

He freed from prison people caught on camera viciously attacking police as well as leaders of far-right groups convicted of orchestrating violent plots to stop the peaceful transfer of power after Trump’s 2020 election loss.

Suzanne Ellen Kaye, of Florida, was released last year after serving an 18-month sentence. After the FBI contacted her in 2021 about a tip indicating she may have been at the Capitol on January 6, she posted a video on social media citing her right under the US Constitution’s Second Amendment to carry a gun, and threatened to shoot agents if they came to her house.

Kaye testified at trial that she didn’t own any guns and didn’t intend to threaten the FBI, according to court papers. She told authorities she was not at the Capitol on January 6 and wasn’t charged with any Capitol riot-related crimes.

Trump also pardoned Daniel Edwin Wilson of Kentucky, who was under investigation for his role in the riot when authorities found six guns and roughly 4,800 rounds of ammunition in his home.

Wilson, who had been scheduled to remain in prison until 2028, was released Friday evening following the pardon, his lawyer said on Saturday.

A White House official said on Saturday that “because the search of Mr. Wilson’s home was due to the events of January 6, and they should have never been there in the first place, President Trump is pardoning Mr. Wilson for the firearm issues”.

Wilson had been sentenced in 2024 to five years in prison after pleading guilty to conspiring to impede or injure police officers and illegally possessing firearms at his home.

Trump has said he would likely sue the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) next week for as much as $5bn after the British media company admitted it wrongly edited a video of a January 6, 2021 speech he gave, but insisted there was no legal basis for his claim.

The controversy centres on the BBC’s edit of Trump’s remarks on the day his supporters stormed the US Capitol.

There hasn’t been a “substantiated” allegation of sexual abuse by staff against an inmate in the nation’s largest jail system since 2021.

At first glance, the statistic — based on Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department data — might appear to indicate that a federal law called the Prison Rape Elimination Act has finally accomplished its mission more than two decades after it was enacted by Congress.

But a broad array of local oversight officials and advocacy groups are raising eyebrows over the claim, and bringing new scrutiny to how the Sheriff’s Department investigates allegations of sexual abuse made by inmates against their jailers.

L.A. County incarcerates about 13,000 people — including roughly 1,500 women — throughout its network of jails watched over by sheriff’s deputies.

Sheriff’s Department records show that between January 2022 and September 2025, inmates filed 592 allegations of abuse and harassment against staff. None were deemed “substantiated,” which the Sheriff’s Department defines on its website as “an allegation that was investigated and determined to have occurred.”

The suggestion that there has not been enough evidence to support even one alleged incident by staff against an inmate in nearly four years has struck some tasked with monitoring the Sheriff’s Department as absurd.

“When you have this many complaints and you have zero that are founded, there is something wrong with the process,” said George B. Newhouse, a member of the L.A. Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission.

L.A. County’s Office of Inspector General and advocacy groups, including the Anti-Recidivism Coalition and Peace Over Violence, also shared concerns about the lack of substantiated allegations during a Nov. 4 virtual discussion of the federal Prison Rape Elimination Act, or PREA. The law was enacted in 2003 in an effort to reduce widespread sexual abuse behind bars.

In 2012, the federal government instituted a set of rules known as PREA standards, which laid out steps that jail and prison operators are required to take to prevent and reduce sexual abuse and harassment between inmates and staff.

L.A. County Sheriff’s Department Sgt. Ryan Vaccaro said the department “has zero tolerance for sexual abuse and sexual harassment.” He added that monthly town hall meetings are held in jails to educate inmates about PREA and record any questions and complaints they have about the federal standards.

“Our team is dedicated to ensuring our residents know we have a zero-tolerance policy and know how to get help when they need it,” he said. “All PREA allegations are documented and processed promptly, thoroughly and objectively.”

During a public meeting last month, Hans Johnson, the chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, pressed John Barkley, assistant director and PREA coordinator at the Sheriff’s Department, to explain the lack of substantiated reports, and how long it typically takes for allegations to be investigated.

Dozens of the harassment and abuse claims identified in the sheriff’s department records are listed as “pending,” which the department defines on its website as an “allegation still under investigation.”

“It kind of beggars credulity that that number of complaints could be raised and that none could be substantiated,” Johnson said. “It’s just a red flag.”

Barkley said “every case is investigated” and found to be either “substantiated, unsubstantiated or unfounded.” He said “every situation is different. The thing that we’re mandated to do is to do the investigation promptly and to do it thoroughly.”

In a statement a colleague read aloud at the Nov. 4 forum, Portland, Ore., resident Frank Mendoza said that while he was incarcerated at L.A.’s Twin Towers Correctional Facility in 2006, “officers at the jail repeatedly harassed me because I was openly gay” and one beat and raped him in his cell.

“I was then left in the cell naked, bloodied, and completely humiliated,” Mendoza said in his statement. “I tried to report what happened. First, I told the officer on the next shift who found me on the floor of my cell, and all he did was order me to get dressed. That was the norm. Officers didn’t tell on one another.”

Mendoza alleged he wasn’t provided medical treatment or examined for injuries caused by the assault. When he reported the rape, he found that “without a forensic exam, it was impossible to build a criminal case.”

Now, Mendoza gives voice to other people who have been victims of sexual abuse and harassment while incarcerated through his advocacy work as a member of Just Detention International’s Survivor Council.

“It’s clear the county still has a lot of work to do to ensure the safety of people in detention,” he said. “At the same time, the fact that such a hearing is happening is evidence to me of a culture shift and that people are listening.”

The Sheriff’s Department also tracks inmate-on-inmate allegations, which accounted for 296 reports of sexual abuse or harassment between January 2022 and June 2025. Of those, 28 were classified as “substantiated.”

The numbers have spiked since then, with 82 inmate-on-inmate allegations between July and September 2025. Of those claims, the department deemed five involving sexual abuse to be “substantiated,” along with another five claims of sexual harassment.

During that three-month period, inmates made 121 sexual abuse and harassment claims against staff, none of which have been identified as “substantiated” by the Sheriff’s Department.

Arthur Calloway, co-vice-chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, asked at the October meeting whether the sheriff’s department could be trusted to investigate inmate claims against its own employees.

He added that, “if it was all objective, there would be some substantiated ones actually to trickle out” from claims filed since January 2022.

Barkley responded that “many of those” unsubstantiated outcomes are “dictated on whether the D.A. takes the case.” He added that “if the D.A. decides that they’re not going to prosecute the case with inmate-on-inmate, then it is going to be an unsubstantiated.”

The L.A. County district attorney’s office said in a statement that the Sheriff’s Department first conducts internal investigations of allegations of criminal activity. Then, the department “may present their investigation to our Justice System Integrity Division (JSID) to determine whether criminal charges should be filed,” the statement said.

The Sheriff’s Department can also opt “to discipline their employee administratively in addition to, or in lieu of, seeking criminal charges,” the statement said.

The prosecutor’s office noted that substantiated and unsubstantiated are terms used by the Sheriff’s Department for “administrative purposes,” not legal outcomes.

“JSID reviews all cases presented to them by law enforcement using the standard of whether charges can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt,” the D.A.’s office said.

The Sheriff’s Department said in a statement that sexual abuse cases are investigated internally and that when they are “determined to meet the elements of a crime,” they “are submitted to the District Attorney’s Office.”

The department said that since January 2022, four such cases “resulted in administrative investigations and five were/are being investigated by” the department’s Internal Criminal Investigations Bureau. None of those have been deemed “substantiated.”

“Substantiated allegations, often require cooperation and some sort of evidence, which can make them more challenging,” the Sheriff’s Department said. “However, unsubstantiated allegations are more common because it has a lower threshold.”

Dara Williams, assistant inspector general, said it “would be much better if all complaints were investigated by people who were outside the chain of command.”

Otherwise, she said, when sheriff’s department employees are the ones determining “what triggers an investigation, there is some bias.”

Inspector General Max Huntsman told The Times that he believes the Sheriff’s Department is “not in compliance with PREA in many senses,” such as its internal policies and the physical state of its aging correctional facilities.

At the public meeting last month, Barkley, the PREA coordinator at the Sheriff’s Department, explained that a sergeant must record every sexual abuse and harassment allegation in a dedicated database by the end of the shift when it is received. After that, he said, the allegation is automatically sent to sheriff’s leaders and the inspector general’s office.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Johnson, the chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, called on the Sheriff’s Department to take steps to ensure it is conducting fair and thorough reviews of all inmate allegations.

“It is unacceptable to have no substantiated cases reported,” he said.

Nov. 14 (UPI) — President Donald Trump posted on social media Friday that he wants an investigation into former President Bill Clinton and others mentioned in the Jeffrey Epstein emails released this week.

On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released a cache of emails between convicted sex traffickers Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and others that talked about Trump repeatedly. The emails were released by Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the committee.

“Now that the Democrats are using the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats, not Republicans, to try and deflect from their disastrous SHUTDOWN, and all of their other failures, I will be asking [Attorney General] Pam Bondi, and the Department of Justice, together with our great patriots at the FBI, to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “This is another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats. Records show that these men, and many others, spent large portions of their life with Epstein, and on his ‘Island.’ Stay tuned!!!”

Summers was Clinton’s treasury secretary and an economic adviser to former President Barack Obama. Hoffman co-founded LinkedIn and donates to Democrats.

JP Morgan Chase issued a statement in response. Spokeswoman Patricia Wexler said in a statement it “ended our relationship with him years before his arrest on sex trafficking charges.”

“The government had damning information about his crimes and failed to share it with us or other banks,” Wexler said. “We regret any association we had with the man, but did not help him commit his heinous acts.”

The White House continued to defend the president.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday, “These stories are nothing more than bad-faith efforts to distract from President Trump’s historic accomplishments, and any American with common sense sees right through this hoax and clear distraction from the government opening back up again.”

The House of Representatives is expected to pass legislation that demands the government release all files related to Epstein, who died by suicide in a jail cell. The discharge petition has enough signatures now that Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., was sworn in. Though it should pass the House, it’s not certain to pass the Senate.

As Gov. Gavin Newsom flew around the country last year campaigning for President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, his chief of staff Dana Williamson — known as one of California’s toughest political insiders — was not only helping to helm the ship in Sacramento, but under criminal investigation by federal law enforcement.

The resulting criminal case, which splashed into public view with Williamson’s arrest Wednesday, does not implicate Newsom in any wrongdoing. Williamson’s alleged misdeeds occurred in private work prior to her joining his staff, and his office said it placed her on leave in November 2024 after she informed him she was under investigation.

Nonetheless, the bombshell allegations struck at the center of the political power circle surrounding Newsom, rattling one of the nation’s most prominent and important hubs of Democratic state power at a time when President Trump and his Republican administration wield power in Washington.

Williamson was charged with bank and tax fraud for allegedly siphoning campaign and COVID-19 recovery funds into her and an associate’s pockets and claiming personal luxuries as business expenses on tax forms. According to the indictment, the campaign funds were drawn from a dormant state account of another top California Democrat: gubernatorial candidate and former U.S. Health and Human Services secretary Xavier Becerra.

Two other well-connected aides in state politics were also charged — and struck plea deals confirming the scheme — while a third, with deep ties to one of the most well-connected circles of political and business consultants in the country, appeared in charging documents as an uncharged co-conspirator.

Williamson’s attorney McGregor Scott, a former U.S. attorney in Sacramento, told The Times on Wednesday that federal authorities had approached Williamson more than a year ago, seeking help with some kind of probe of the governor himself.

“She told them she had no information to provide them, and then we wind up today with these charges,” Scott said. The nature of that alleged probe is unclear.

Newsom’s office on Thursday said it was “not aware of any federal investigation involving the governor.”

Lauren Horwood, a spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office in Sacramento, said she could not confirm or deny the existence of any investigation involving Newsom, in accordance with Justice Department policy. None of the charging documents released in the cases against the three aides mention Newsom.

A loquacious liberal foil to Trump and likely 2028 presidential contender, Newsom has been in Brazil since Sunday and on Wednesday left for a planned trip into the Amazon with a small delegation after attending the United Nations climate summit known as COP30. He left the conference before news of Williamson’s arrest, and could not be reached directly by The Times for comment.

In his absence, Newsom’s representatives have tried to draw a connection between the federal case and the contentious relationship between California and the Trump administration, though offered no evidence that the investigation was influenced by the White House.

“At a time when the president is openly calling for his attorney general to investigate his political enemies, it is especially important to honor the American principle of being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of one’s peers,” a Newsom spokesperson said Wednesday.

“Under the Trump administration, the DOJ routinely targets the state, which has resulted in us suing the federal administration 46 times,” a Newsom spokesperson said Thursday.

Trump and his administration have been accused of using their power — and control over the Justice Department — to go after his political enemies. Charges reportedly deemed weak and unfounded by career prosecutors have been brought forward anyway against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, while Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is being investigated for years-old occupancy claims in mortgage documents. All have denied wrongdoing.

The case against Williamson and the other California aides, however, is something different — originating years ago under the Biden administration.

“Today’s charges are the result of three years of relentless investigative work, in partnership with IRS Criminal Investigation and the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” FBI Sacramento Special Agent in Charge Sid Patel said Wednesday.

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, rejected the notion that the case was in any way driven by the Trump administration or politically motivated.

“What an absurd claim to make when public reporting has already noted that this investigation began under the Biden DOJ,” Jackson said. “The Trump administration is restoring integrity and accountability to the Justice Department.”

Prosecutors also have plea deals with two of the primary suspects in the case, in which they corroborate some of the allegations.

According to the 23-count indictment, unsealed Wednesday morning, Williamson conspired with Sean McCluskie — a former top aid to Becerra — and lobbyist Greg Campbell to bill Becerra’s dormant state campaign account for bogus consulting services. The three allegedly used shell companies to funnel money out of the campaign fund starting in 2022.

Federal authorities alleged the bulk of the payments were made to McCluskie’s wife, who did not actually provide consulting services, and deposited into an account accessed by McCluskie. Becerra, who has not been accused of wrongdoing, said Wednesday’s charges alleging “impropriety by a long-serving trusted advisor are a gut punch,” and that he was cooperating with authorities.

In addition, Williamson was charged with falsifying documents for a COVID-era small business loan, and with claiming luxury goods and services — including a $15,353 Chanel purse, $21,000 in private jet travel and a $150,000 birthday trip to Mexico, complete with an $11,000 yacht trip — as business expenses on her tax returns, federal prosecutors said.

Williamson appeared in federal court in Sacramento on Wednesday afternoon, and pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Williamson’s attorney said he has been in “regular communication” with federal prosecutors about the case for some time, and had asked to meet with prosecutors to “present our side” before any charges were brought, but that request “was not honored.”

Instead, officials “chose grandstanding instead of the normal process” and arrested Williamson at home Wednesday, despite her being seriously ill and in need of a liver transplant, Scott said. Williamson could not be reached for comment directly.

Williamson previously worked as a Cabinet secretary to former Gov. Jerry Brown, who also could not be reached for comment Thursday.

The case against Williamson is bolstered by acknowledgments of guilt from at least two others.

McCluskie — a former chief deputy attorney general of California when Becerra was attorney general — pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud and is cooperating with authorities, court filings show. He could not be reached for comment.

Campbell pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud and conspiracy to defraud and commit offenses against the U.S. government. Campbell’s attorney Todd Pickles said his client “takes full accountability for his actions and is cooperating fully with the legal process.”

The case also involves another longtime California political insider: Alexis Podesta, a former secretary of the California Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency who Newsom appointed to the State Compensation Insurance Fund board of directors in January 2020. A spokesperson for the board confirmed Podesta remained a member as of Thursday morning.

Bill Portanova, Podesta’s attorney, confirmed to The Times that Podesta is the person identified as “Co-Conspirator 2” in charging documents — including McCluskie’s plea agreement, which alleges she funneled the campaign funds to him.

Portanova said Podesta inherited responsibilities for handling the Becerra account from Williamson when Williamson left to become Newsom’s chief of staff. Podesta did not perceive anything “unusual about the accounts, how they were set up or who had set them up,” so continued making payments as previously arranged, Portanova said.

However, “when confronted with the information that it was improper payments,” Portanova said, she immediately stopped the payments, and “has been fully cooperative with the federal authorities at every stage of these proceedings.”

He said she is not charged, and “should not be charged” moving forward. He otherwise declined to comment, as “investigations are ongoing.”

Podesta had close ties to some of the most influential Democratic political consultants in California, adding to the intrigue surrounding the case.

In September 2020 — about eight months after Newsom had appointed Podesta to the insurance board for workers’ compensation — Politico reported on a new “influence superteam” of Democratic political consultants forming in California.

The project, it said, would be called the Collaborative. Among its “architects” were Williamson and Campbell, as well as Jim DeBoo, another former Newsom chief of staff. Its managing director, the outlet reported, would be Podesta.

Among its enlisted consultants, it said, would be Sean Clegg of Bearstar Strategies, another senior advisor to Newsom, and Shannon Murphy, of M Strategic Communications, who has ties to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

DeBoo, Clegg and Murphy have not been accused of any wrongdoing.

“Bearstar participated in a joint marketing press release with the Collaborative and worked on one campaign with the Collaborative’s members in 2022. Bearstar and its partners had no interest, stake or other involvement with this entity,” David Beltran, a representative of Bearstar, said in a statement Thursday.

Murphy also released a statement about the enterprise: “Five years ago, our firm participated in a joint-marketing effort. We had zero ownership or role in the business entity that was created and had no knowledge of its finances or operations until yesterday’s news stories.”

DeBoo did not respond to requests for comment Thursday.

Members of the Collaborative advise some of the largest companies in not just the country, but the world.

The Collaborative’s website was recently scaled down to a simple landing page, but it previously touted itself there as “the hub for the most talented public affairs, campaign, crisis management, communications and lobbying firms in California,” providing clients “the ability to choose one or several firms that work together — rather than compete — to provide their clients with the best possible outcomes.”

The website led with what it called a proverb: “If you call one wolf, you invite the pack.”

WASHINGTON — For more than a year, detainees at a California immigrant detention center said, they were summoned from their dorms to a lieutenant’s office late at night. Hours frequently passed, they said, before they were sent back to their dorms.

What they allege happened in the office became the subject of federal complaints, which accuse Lt. Quin, then an administrative manager, of harassing, threatening and coercing immigrants into sexual acts at the Golden State Annex in McFarland. A person with that nameworked in a higher-ranking post, as chief of security, at the Alexandria Staging Facility in Louisiana until August — the same month The Times sent questions to the company that operates the facilities.

The Department of Homeland Security said it could not substantiate the allegations. According to an attorney for one of the detainees, the California Attorney General’s office opened an investigation into the matter.

Immigrant advocates point to the case as one of many allegations of abuse in U.S. immigration facilities, within a system which they say fails to properly investigate.

In three complaints reviewed by The Times that were filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), to a watchdog agency and with DHS, detainees accused Quin of sexual assault, harassment and other misconduct. The complainants initially knew the lieutenant only as “Lt. Quinn,” and he is referred to as such in the federal complaints, though the correct spelling is “Quin.”

The complaints also allege other facility staff knew about and facilitated abuse, perpetuating a culture of impunity.

The Golden State Annex, a U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement detention facility, in McFarland last year.

(Larry Valenzuela / CalMatters / CatchLight Local)

The California and Louisiana facilities are both operated by the Florida-based private prison giant, the GEO Group.

A Dec. 10, 2024, post on Instagram Threads appears to allude to issues Quin faced in California. The post pictures him standing in front of a GEO Group flag and states: “Permit me to reintroduce myself … You will respect my authority. They tried to hinder me, but God intervened.”

Asked about the accusations, Tricia McLaughlin, the assistant Homeland Security public affairs secretary, said in a statement that allegations of misconduct by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees or contractors are treated seriously and investigated thoroughly.

“These complaints were filed in 2024 — well before current DHS leadership and the necessary reforms they implemented,” McLaughlin wrote. “The investigation into this matter has concluded, and ICE — through its own investigation reviewed by [the DHS office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties] — could not substantiate any complaint of sexual assault or rape.”

The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.

Advocates for the detainees say they are undeterred and will continue to seek justice for people they say have been wronged.

Advocates also say the potential for abuse at detention facilities will grow as the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown brings such facilities to record population levels. The population of detained immigrants surpassed a high of 61,000 in August, according to TRAC, a nonpartisan research organization.

The allegations against Quin by a 28-year-old detainee are detailed in his FTCA complaint, a precursor to a lawsuit, filed in January with DHS. The complaint seeks $10 million for physical and emotional damages.

The Times generally does not identify alleged victims of sexual abuse and is referring to him by his middle initial, E.

McLaughlin’s response did not address the FTCA complaint that details E’s sexual assault allegations.

Reached by phone, Quin told The Times, “I don’t speak with the media,” and referred a reporter to the Golden State Annex. After being read the allegations against him and asked to respond, he hung up.

E alleged abuse in interviews with The Times, and in a recorded interview with an attorney, which formed the basis for the FTCA complaint.

In the complaint, he said that beginning in May 2023, Quin would call him into a room, where no cameras or staff were present, to say he had been given a citation or that guards had complained about him.

One day, the complaint alleges, Quin rubbed his own genitals over his pants and began making sexual comments. E told Quin he felt uncomfortable and wanted to go back to his dorm. But Quin smirked, dragged his chair closer and grabbed E in the crotch, the complaint says.

After E pushed Quin away and threatened to defend himself physically, the complaint alleges, Quin made his own threat: to call a “code black” — an emergency — that would summon guards and leave E facing charges of assaulting a federal officer.

Instead, E said, Quin called for an escort to take him back to his dorm.

After that, the late-night summons — sometimes at midnight or 2 a.m. — increased, E said in his complaint. Each time, Quin continued to rub his genitals over his clothes, according to the complaint.

The complaint alleges Quin repeatedly offered to help with E’s immigration case in exchange for sexual favors. Then Quin found out E is bisexual and E alleged Quin threatened to tell his family during a visit. Afraid of his family finding out about his sexuality, E said in the complaint, he finally acquiesced to letting Quin touch his genitals and perform oral sex on him.

“I just, I ended up doing it,” E said in a recorded interview with his attorney.

Afterward, the complaint says, Quin told E that he would make sure to help him, and that no one would find out.

The complaint alleges that Quin brought E contraband gifts, including a phone, and, around Christmas, a water bottle full of alcohol.

“I feel dirty,” E said in the recorded interview. “I feel ashamed of myself, you know? I feel like my dignity was just nowhere.”

E said in his complaint that a staff member told him in December 2023 that a guard had reported Quin to the warden after noticing E had been out of his dorm for a long time; the guard had reviewed security cameras showing Quin giving E the bottle of alcohol.

E said the staffer told him that Quin was temporarily suspended from interacting with detainees, and the late-night summons stopped for a while.

Lee Ann Felder-Heim, staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus, which filed a complaint with the federal government alleging mistreatment of detainees at the Golden State Annex in McFarland.

(Maria del Rio / For The Times)

A second, earlier complaint alleging mistreatment at the McFarland facility was filed on E’s behalf in August 2024 by the Asian Law Caucus with the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL).

That complaint alleges that other GEO Group staff targeted him with sexually harassing and degrading comments. It does not address E’s sexual assault allegations, because E said he was initially too afraid to talk about them.

Once, when E was lying on his stomach in his cell, a guard commented loudly to other staff that he was waiting for a visit from Quin; the guard made a motion of putting her finger through a hole, insinuating that E sought to engage in sexual intercourse, the complaint states.

The broader issue isn’t one person, “but rather a system of impunity and abuse,” said Lee Ann Felder-Heim, a staff attorney at the Asian Law Caucus. “The reports make it clear that other staff were aware of what was going on and actually were assisting in making it happen.”

In addition to detailing E’s own experiences, the complaint also details abuse and harassment of five other detainees. One detainee is transgender, a fact that would play a role in how federal officials investigated the complaint.

In February and March, CRCL sent Felder-Heim letters saying it had closed the investigation into the alleged sexual abuse and harassment, citing, as justification, Trump’s First-Day executive order concerning “gender ideology extremism.” The order prohibits using federal funds to “promote gender ideology,” so Felder-Heim said it appears the investigation was shut down because one of the complainants is transgender.

She called the investigation process flawed and “wholly inadequate.”

E filed a third complaint with another oversight body, the Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman. To his knowledge, no investigation was initiated.

In March, the Trump administration shut down three internal oversight bodies: CRCL, OIDO and the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Ombudsman. Civil rights groups sued the following month, prompting the agency to resurrect the offices.

But staffing at the offices was decimated, according to sworn court declarations by DHS officials. CRCL has gone from having 147 positions to 22; OIDO from about 118 to about 10; and the CIS Ombudsman from 46 to about 10.

“All legally required functions of CRCL continue to be performed, but in an efficient and cost-effective manner and without hindering the Department’s mission of securing the homeland,” said McLaughlin, the DHS spokeswoman.

Michelle Brané, who was the immigrant detention ombudsman under the Biden administration, said the civil rights office generally had first dibs on complaints about sexual assault. She recalled the complaint about Quin but said her office didn’t investigate it because the civil rights office already was.

Brané said the decrease in oversight amid increased detention will inevitably exacerbate issues such as allegations of sexual assault. Worse conditions also make it harder to hire quality staff, she said.

Around the same time that E was held at Golden State Annex, a gay couple from Colombia reported in April 2024 to the OIDO that Quin had sexually harassed them.

D.T., 26, and C.B., 25, were separated upon arrival at Golden State Annex. D.T. began to experience severe anxiety attacks, they said in the Asian Law Caucus complaint and in an interview with The Times. The couple asked to be placed in the same dormitory.

Before granting their request, Quin asked what they would give him in return, the couple recounted in the complaint. Afterward, the complaint alleges, he frequently invited them to his office, saying they owed him.

“We never accepted going to his office, because we knew what it was for,” C.B. told the Times.

In their complaint, they allege that Quin asked D.T. if he wanted to have sex and told C.B., “You belong to me.”

The couple became aware that Quin had also harassed other detainees and gave preferential treatment to those who they believed accepted his requests for sexual favors, according to the complaint; one detainee told them that he had grabbed Quin’s hand and placed it on his penis to avoid being taken to solitary confinement for starting a fight.

D.T. said in an interview with The Times that he believes “below him are many people who never said anything.”

In a Dec. 2, 2024, internal facility grievance from Golden State Annex reviewed by The Times, another detainee alleges that Quin retaliated against him for speaking out against misconduct.

In the grievance and in an interview with The Times, the detainee said he spoke up after, on several occasions, watching another man walk to Quin’s office late at night and come back to the dorm hours later. He also said in the grievance that Quin brought in marijuana, cellphones and other contraband.

Another witness, Gustavo Flores, 33, said Quin recognized him as a former Golden State Annex detainee when he was briefly transferred to the Alexandria facility, just before his deportation to El Salvador in May.

Quin pulled Flores aside and offered to uncuff him and get him lunch in exchange for cleaning the lobby; after he finished, Quin brought him into his office, where he peppered Flores with questions about Golden State Annex, Flores said.

Flores said he asked about certain staffers and detainees. He told Flores people wanted to sue him, calling them “crybabies.”

“He’s telling me everything, like, ‘Oh yeah, I know what goes on over there,’” Flores said.

When E tried to end the sexual encounters, his complaint says, Quin threatened to have him sent to a detention facility in Texas or have his deportation expedited.

In October 2024, E was transferred to the Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center in Bakersfield.

Heliodoro Moreno, E’s attorney, said the California Attorney General’s Office confirmed to him in February that it was investigating. An investigator interviewed E in April and again in May, he said, and the investigation remains open.

California Department of Justice spokesperson Nina Sheridan declined to comment on a potential investigation. But in a statement she said the office remains vigilant of “ongoing, troubling conditions” at detention facilities throughout California.

“We are especially concerned that conditions at these facilities are only set to worsen as the Trump Administration continues to ramp up its inhumane campaign of mass deportation,” she wrote.

E, who had a pending claim for a special status known as withholding of removal, dropped his case in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Moreno said his client wished to no longer be detained.

“It’s very unfortunate that he’s in these circumstances,” Moreno said. His client was forced to forgo his appellate rights and leave “without really getting a conclusion to receiving justice for what happened to him.”

He was deported late last month.

At least 13 people were killed and 20 injured when a car exploded near the Red Fort metro station in India’s capital New Delhi on Monday evening. Police say the blast, believed to have originated from a Hyundai i20 car, is being investigated under anti-terrorism laws.

Ukranian president promises accountability after anticorruption bureau announces probe into alleged Energoatom scheme.

Ukraine’s anticorruption agency has launched an investigation into an alleged $100m kickback scheme involving Energoatom, the state-run nuclear power company that supplies more than half of the country’s electricity.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), which operates independently of the government, announced the probe on Monday as the country faces another harsh winter under daily Russian bombardment.

In a statement posted on social media, NABU said that a “high-level criminal organisation” orchestrated the alleged scheme, led by a businessman and involving a former adviser to the energy minister, Energoatom’s head of security, and four other employees.

“In total, approximately 100 million USD passed through this so-called laundromat,” NABU said, without naming the suspects.

“The minister’s adviser and the director of security at Energoatom took control of all the company’s purchases and created conditions under which all contractors had to pay illegal benefits,” according to NABU chief detective Oleksandr Abakumov.

He said the group discussed increasing the kickback rate during work on protective structures at the Khmelnytskyi nuclear plant last October.

Investigators said Energoatom’s contractors were forced to pay bribes of 10 to 15 percent to avoid losing contracts or facing payment delays.

“A strategic enterprise with annual income exceeding 200 billion hryvnias [$4.7bn] was managed not by authorised officials but by individuals with no formal authority,” NABU said.

Zelenskyy calls for ‘criminal verdicts’

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, addressing the nation on Monday evening, urged full cooperation with the investigation. “Everyone who has been involved in corruption schemes must receive a clear legal response. There must be criminal verdicts,” he said.

Zelenskyy’s comments come just months after he was forced to reverse plans to curb the agency’s independence following widespread protests. Eradicating corruption remains a crucial condition for Ukraine’s European Union membership bid, a goal Kyiv views as central to its post-war future.

Energoatom confirmed on social media that its offices were being searched and said it was cooperating with investigators.

Deputy Minister of Energy of Ukraine Svitlana Grynchuk told reporters she was not yet familiar with the case details, but promised a “transparent process” and accountability for anyone found guilty. “I hope that the transparency of the investigation will reassure our international partners,” she said.

Ukraine’s power infrastructure has suffered extensive damage from Russia’s air strikes this autumn, leaving large parts of the country without electricity. Although Moscow has not targeted nuclear reactors directly, Ukrainian authorities say substations linked to them have been repeatedly hit.

NABU released photographs showing stacks of cash, Ukrainian hryvnias, US dollars and euros, stuffed into bags and piled on tables. The agency did not disclose the owners of the seized money.

The agency conducted 70 searches, reviewed more than 1,000 hours of audio recordings, and deployed its entire detective staff over 15 months.

Opposition lawmaker Yaroslav Zheleznyak, a strong supporter of anticorruption reform, said he would introduce a parliamentary motion to dismiss Grynchuk and her predecessor, German Galushchenko, now serving as justice minister. Hrynchuk declined to comment on the proposal, while Galushchenko did not respond to requests for comment.

As Ukraine continues to battle both corruption and Russia’s war, Kyiv’s ability to convince its international partners of reform may prove as critical to its future as the fighting on the front lines.