letter

Reporting from Washington — Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi sent an unusual personal letter to President Obama, complaining about the West’s “unjust war” against his embattled regime but also endorsing Obama for a second term in the White House.

In a three-page letter Wednesday addressed to “Our son, Excellency, President Obama,” Kadafi praised the president as a man “who has enough courage to annul a wrong and mistaken action.”

The Libyan strongman said his country had suffered economic embargos and sanctions in the past, as well as airstrikes against his regime during Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Now, Kadafi said, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is “waging an unjust war against a small people of a developing country.”

Despite the conflict, Kadafi assured Obama in somewhat garbled English, “You will always remain our son whatever happened. We still pray that you continue to be president of the U.S.A. We Endeavour and hope that you will gain victory in the new election campaigne.”

He signed the letter with his preferred title: Leader of the Revolution.

White House officials didn’t release the text of the letter, saying they don’t want to help the Libyan with his “messaging.” But they didn’t challenge the text provided by the Associated Press wire service.

Asked about the letter, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said only that Kadafi “knows what he must do”: begin a ceasefire, withdraw his forces and leave Libya.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reminded reporters that the letter was “not the first” from Kadafi. On March 19, just before U.S. and British ships launched the first cruise missiles against Libyan forces, Kadafi assured Obama that “even if Libya and the United States enter into war, God forbid, you will always remain my son.”

Also Wednesday, Libya said a British airstrike had hit its major Sarir oil field and damaged a pipeline connecting the deposit to the Mediterranean port of Hariga.

“British warplanes have … carried out an airstrike against the Sarir oil field, which killed three oil field guards, and other employees at the field were also injured,” Reuters news service quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim as saying.

There was no immediate official comment from Britain’s Defense Ministry.

[email protected]

President Trump has dropped his demand that Rupert Murdoch immediately testify in the president’s libel lawsuit over a Jeffrey Epstein story in the Wall Street Journal, but the 94-year-old media mogul has agreed to provide his health information.

Trump initially demanded Murdoch sit for a deposition within 15 days to answer questions about the Epstein story, citing Murdoch’s advanced age and various health complications.

But the warring sides reached a truce, agreeing that Murdoch instead would provide “a sworn declaration describing his current health condition,” according to a joint stipulation filed in U.S. District Court in Miami late Monday.

“Defendant Murdoch has further agreed to provide regularly scheduled updates to the plaintiff regarding his health, including a mechanism for him to alert [Trump] if there is a material change in his health,” according to the stipulation.

Late last month, the president sued Murdoch, News Corp. and Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co. after the paper published a story describing a raunchy birthday greeting that Trump allegedly sent Epstein in 2003 to mark the convicted child sex offender’s 50th birthday. The article said the letter included a sketch of a naked woman, featuring breasts and a squiggly “Donald” signature.

Trump has denied sending the letter, which he said was “fake.” The Journal said the letter was one of dozens of birthday greetings from Epstein friends, which his former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell had made into a book.

Trump has said that his friendship with Epstein ended about 20 years ago and that he did not know about Epstein’s crimes.

Trump was furious over the article. His lawsuit recounted a chronology of events, saying the White House became aware of the story after a Journal reporter emailed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt to disclose the paper was preparing to publish the story. The White House and Trump’s attorney’s immediately pushed back, saying the allegations were false.

Trump also reached out to Murdoch, according to court filings.

“Murdoch advised President Trump that ‘he would take care of it,’” Trump wrote in a July 17 post on Truth Social, the day the story published. “Obviously, he didn’t have the power to do so,” Trump wrote.

Trump sued Murdoch, the reporters, Dow Jones, its parent News Corp., and News Corp. Chief Executive Robert Thomson for libel the next day.

“We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit,” according to a Dow Jones spokeswoman.

Last week, Trump’s attorneys launched a startling bid to force Murdoch to promptly appear for a deposition.

In that motion, Trump’s lawyers cited the mogul’s age and health complications. They said that includes a recent fainting episode, and over the last five years, a broken back, a torn Achilles tendon and atrial fibrillation which could make Murdoch “unavailable for in-person testimony at trial.”

According to the agreement, Trump’s request that Murdoch give a deposition will be put on hold until after the newspaper owners make its case that Trump’s lawsuit should be dismissed.

“Until defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is adjudicated, the parties agree not to engage in discovery,” the stipulation said.

The Trump administration has frozen hundreds of science, medical and other federal grants to UCLA worth nearly $200 million, citing the university’s alleged “discrimination” in admissions and failure to “promote a research environment free of antisemitism.”

The decision to pull funding comes after Atty. Gen.Pam Bondi and the Justice Department said this week that UCLA would pay a “heavy price” for acting with “deliberate indifference” to the civil rights of Jewish and Israeli students who complained of antisemitic incidents since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, Israel’s ensuing war in Gaza and campus protests the events spurred last year.

The cancellation of grants is the first large-scale targeted funding claw-back against UCLA under the Trump administration. Until now, the White House has largely focused its attempts to remake higher education on elite East Coast schools such as Columbia, Brown and the University of Pennsylvania. Each has reached deals with the government in recent weeks over issues including admissions, Jewish student life, student discipline, antisemitism training and gender identity in sports.

In a letter to UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk dated Wednesday, the National Science Foundation wrote that it was terminating grants because “the University of California – Los Angeles continues to engage in race discrimination including in its admissions process, and in other areas of student life.”

An estimated 300 NSF grants totaling $180 million have been canceled. About half of the funds were already distributed. Before the letter was released Thursday, researchers were expecting the other half to follow.

In a letter to the university community Thursday, Frenk wrote that the canceled grants are from NSF, NIH and other federal agencies, but he did not give a dollar amount or list the other agencies. A partial list of terminated grants reviewed by The Times added up to roughly $200 million. The list was provided by a source who was not authorized to share the information.

Frenk called the government’s decision “deeply disappointing” and “a loss for Americans across the nation whose work, health, and future depend on the groundbreaking work we do.”

“In its notice to us, the federal government claims antisemitism and bias as the reasons,” Frenk wrote. “This far-reaching penalty of defunding life-saving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination.”

Spokespersons for the NSF and NIH did not immediately reply to requests for comment Thursday.

The federal government’s decision to cut UCLA off from significant federal funds follows a similar playbook to its dealings with Ivy League institutions.

The Trump administration this spring canceled billions of dollars in federal grants to Harvard, which has sued in federal court to reverse the terminations and stop a Trump move to rescind its ability to host international students. Harvard is separately in negotiations with the White House to end the legal fight.

Columbia University this month agreed to pay more than $200 million to the federal government to resolve investigations over alleged antisemitism amid its response to 2024 pro-Palestinian protests. On Wednesday, Brown University also came to a $50-million agreement with the White House. The Brown payment will go toward Rhode Island workforce development programs.

The Department of Justice said this week that it had found UCLA guilty of violating the civil rights of Jewish and Israeli students. The department also indicated that it wanted to the university to enter into negotiations to avoid a federal lawsuit.

The department gave UCLA a Tuesday deadline to communicate its desire to negotiate. If not, the DOJ said, it was ready to sue by Sept. 2.

The University of California, in a statement, was unclear on whether it would settle or go to court.

“UCLA has addressed and will continue to address the issues raised in [the] Department of Justice notice,” Stett Holbrook, associate director of Strategic and Critical Communications, wrote in a statement Wednesday. He cited a $6.45-million settlement the university reached with Jewish students who had sued over claims that the 2024 encampment had discriminated against them.

“We have cooperated fully with the Department of Justice’s investigation and are reviewing its findings closely,” Holbrook wrote.

In his Thursday letter, Frenk shot back against the cuts.

“Let me be clear: Federal research grants are not handouts. Our researchers compete fiercely for these grants, proposing work that the government itself deems vital to the country’s health, safety and economic future,” he wrote.

“Grants lead to medical breakthroughs, economic advancement, improved national security and global competitiveness — these are national priorities,” Frenk wrote, adding that “we are actively evaluating our best course of action. We will be in constant communication as decisions move forward.”

It was just past 12:30 a.m. on June 9 when Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies responded to a burglary in progress at a home in Lynwood.

Upon arrival, according to the department’s incident summary, they saw Federico Rodriguez, 45, through a window, holding what appeared to be a pair of scissors.

Hearing screams inside, deputies forced a door open and entered the home, where they found Rodriguez repeatedly stabbing a woman. Sgt. Marcos Esquivel immediately drew his handgun, footage from his body-worn camera showed, and fired multiple shots that killed Rodriguez.

The incident was the fifth of six fatal shootings by deputies that the sheriff’s department has reported so far this year.

The woman Rodriguez was stabbing survived. But despite the apparently life-saving actions of the deputies, two days later the case became a point of controversy in a broader dispute between the department and L.A. County’s Office of Inspector General, which investigates misconduct and the use of deadly force by law enforcement.

The inspector general’s office sent a letter on June 11 to the County Board of Supervisors raising concerns that officials have been blocked from scenes of shootings by deputies and deaths in county jails.

Inspector General Max Huntsman said his office interprets the state law that led to its creation over a decade ago as giving him and his staff the authority to conduct meaningful on-site investigations, with state legislation approved in 2020 strengthening that power.

Inspector General Max Huntsman listens to testimony in the Robinson Courtroom at Loyola Law School in 2024.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Huntsman said allowing his staff to tour scenes of shootings and receive information directly from homicide detectives and other sheriff’s department personnel while the dead bodies have yet to be removed is essential for proper oversight.

But the sheriff’s department has repeatedly denied or limited access, Huntsman said. The June 11 letter announced the “indefinite suspension of Office of Inspector General regular rollouts to deputy-involved shootings and in-custody deaths.”

Huntsman said the decision to halt the rollouts was a response to a persistent lack of transparency by the sheriff’s department.

“The purpose of going there is to conduct an independent investigation. If all we’re doing is standing around being fed what they want us to know, that is not an independent investigation,” he told The Times. “We’re not going to pretend to be doing it when we only get to peek under the curtain.”

At the Civilian Oversight Commission meeting on July 17, Sheriff Robert Luna said his department “will now have a process in place” to allow officials responding to shooting scenes to contact an assistant sheriff to ensure “a little more oversight” over the process.

An interior view of the Altadena Sheriff Station in January.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Luna called Huntsman’s June 11 letter “alarming,” but disputed how many times officials had been turned away, saying he was only aware of it happening “once — at least in the last five years.”

Commissioner Jamon Hicks inquired further, asking whether the department could be incorrect about the number of times access has been restricted or denied, given that the inspector general’s office alleges it has been a recurring issue.

“It could be, and I’d love to see the information,” Luna said. “I’ve been provided none of that to date.”

Huntsman told The Times that officials from his office were “prohibited from entering” Rodriguez’s home on July 9, as were members of the district attorney’s office and the sheriff’s department’s Internal Affairs Bureau. It was at least the seventh time the sheriff’s department had improperly limited access since 2020, he said.

In a statement, the sheriff’s department said the “claim that the OIG was denied access on June 9 at a [deputy-involved shooting] scene in Lynwood is inaccurate.”

“An OIG representative was on scene and was given the same briefing, along with the concerned Division Chief, Internal Affairs Bureau, Civil Litigation Bureau, Training Bureau, and the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office,” the statement said.

An exterior view of the hiring banner outside the Altadena Sheriff Station in January.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

The statement went on to say that the department is “only aware of one incident on February 27, 2025,” in which the OIG was denied access to a deputy-involved shooting scene.

“The Sheriff’s Department remains firmly committed to transparency in law enforcement and continues to work closely and cooperatively with all oversight bodies,” the statement said.

During the July 17 meeting, Dara Williams, chief deputy of the Office of Inspector General, said the office’s personnel often arrive at shooting scenes hours after deputies have pulled the trigger because of the logistical challenges of traveling across the county. Sheriff’s department homicide detectives typically present preliminary findings and offer tours of the scenes.

But on several occasions, the watchdogs have been denied access entirely, leaving them to rely solely on whatever information the sheriff’s department chooses to release, Williams said.

Hans Johnson, the Civil Oversight Commission’s newly elected chair, said investigators can’t do their jobs properly without being able to scrutinize homicide scenes.

“We count on you, in part, as eyes and ears in the community and in these high-value and very troubling cases of fatalities and deaths,” he said at the July 17 meeting.

Williams said the the sheriff’s department has also been “painfully slow” responding to requests for additional information and records following homicides by deputies. She said that in one particularly egregious example, “we served a subpoena in October of last year and we are still waiting for documents and answers.”

Responding to Huntsman’s letter on June 16, Luna wrote to the Board of Supervisors that the department’s Office of Constitutional Policing “has assisted the OIG by providing Department information to 49 of 53 instances” since January. “Suffice it to say,” he added later in the letter, “robust communications take place between the OIG and the Department. Any assertion to the contrary is false.”

Luna said sometimes access could be restricted to preserve evidence, but Williams said she does not “think it’s fair to say that we were excluded” for that reason.

Williams told the commission she was not allowed to tour a scene earlier this year that Huntsman later told The Times was a Feb. 27 incident in Rosemead.

The sheriff’s department’s incident summary stated that Deputy Gregory Chico shot Susan Lu, 56, after she refused commands to drop a meat cleaver and raised the blade “toward deputies.” Lu was taken to a hospital and declared dead later that day.

In his June 16 letter, Luna wrote that “the OIG, Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB), other Department units, and executives were denied access … due to concerns regarding evidence preservation, given the confined area and complexity of the scene layout.”

Williams told the commission “there was a narrow hallway but the actual incident took place in a bedroom, so I don’t know why we couldn’t have walked down that narrow hallway to just view into the bedroom” where the homicide took place.

“The bottom line,” she added later, “is we don’t want to mislead the public to give them the idea that this is actually effective oversight because, once again, we’re just getting the information from the department.”

July 19 (UPI) — President Donald Trump sued the Wall Street Journal and its parent company, seeking at least $10 billion in damages, after the newspaper published an article one day earlier about a letter Trump allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein before the financier was convicted of sex crimes.

The 18-page lawsuit, which was filed Friday in the Southern District of Florida in Miami’s division, names the two reporters, The Wall Street Journal, as well as Dow Jones, News Corp. and Rupert Murdoch, who controls the company, and New Corp’s CEO Robert Thomson.

“Defendants concocted this story to malign President Trump’s character and integrity and deceptively portray him in a false light,” the lawsuit, signed by Alejandro Brito of the Ian Michael law firm in Coral Gables, reads.

“We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit,” a Dow Jones spokeswoman told the Wall Street Journal, which noted that News Corp did not respond to its request for comment.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump sent Epstein a letter for his 50th birthday consisting of text in the outline of a naked woman over her signature. As noted in the filing, the newspaper did not publish the letter.

The letter was one of several published in a leather-bound album of birthday messages Epstein received as a gift that is reportedly among documents examined by the Justice Department several years ago.

“The reason for those failures is because no authentic letter or drawing exists,” Trump’s lawyer wrote in the lawsuit.

On Friday night, Trump posted on Truth Social: “We have just filed a POWERHOUSE Lawsuit against everyone involved in publishing the false, malicious, defamatory, FAKE NEWS ‘article’ in the useless ‘rag’ that is, The Wall Street Journal. ….

“This lawsuit is filed not only on behalf of your favorite President, ME, but also in order to continue standing up for ALL Americans who will no longer tolerate the abusive wrongdoings of the Fake News Media. I hope Rupert and his ‘friends’ are looking forward to the many hours of depositions and testimonies they will have to provide in this case. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

On his Truth Social account on Thursday, Trump claimed the letter was fake, and said “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women. It’s not my language. It’s not my words,” threatening to sue.

“The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,” the president posted Thursday.

He noted that Murdoch told him “he would take care to it. But, obviously, did not have the power to do it.”

Trump has been pressured by his Make America Great Again base and Democrats to release files on Epstein, of which the grand jury testimony is a small portion.

Attorney General Palm Bondi said earlier this month in a memo said that much of the information is under legal seal but that there is “no incriminating ‘client list'” in the files and that “there was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.”

On Thursday, Trump ordered grand jury testimony to be released by DOJ with victims’ names likely redacted.

Epstein died by suicide in 2019 in his Manhattan jail cell as he was awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges in connection with allegations of running a child sex-trafficking ring. The memo also confirmed he died by suicide with surveillance video included through three minutes were missing.

An unusual alliance of Republican lawmakers and animal rights advocates, together with others, is creating storm clouds for a plan to protect one threatened owl by killing a more common one.

Last August, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved a plan to shoot roughly 450,000 barred owls in California, Oregon and Washington over three decades. The barred owls have been out-competing imperiled northern spotted owls in the Pacific Northwest, as well as California spotted owls, pushing them out of their territory.

Supporters of the approach — including conservation groups and prominent scientists — believe the cull is necessary to avert disastrous consequences for the spotted owls.

But the coalition argues the effort is too expensive, unworkable and inhumane. They’re urging the Trump administration to cancel it and lawmakers could pursue a reversal through special congressional action.

Last month, The Times has found, federal officials canceled three owl-related grants to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife totaling roughly $1.1 million, including one study that would remove barred owls from over 192,000 acres in Mendocino and Sonoma counties.

A female barred owl sits on a branch in the wooded hills, Dec. 13, 2017, outside Philomath, Ore.

(Don Ryan / Associated Press)

Two were nixed before federal funding was allocated and never got off the ground, Peter Tira, a spokesperson for the state wildlife agency, said. Another, a collaboration with University of Maryland biologists to better understand barred owl dispersal patterns in western forests, was nearly complete when terminated.

“Under President Donald J. Trump’s leadership, we are eliminating wasteful programs, cutting unnecessary costs and ensuring every dollar serves a clear purpose,” a spokesperson for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in a statement when asked whether the grants had been terminated.

Another lever would be for Congress to overturn the owl-kill plan altogether using the Congressional Review Act.

The Government Accountability Office concluded in a late-May decision that the plan is subject to that act, sometimes used by new presidential administrations to reverse rules issued by federal agencies in the final months of prior administrations. Both chambers of Congress would need to pass a joint resolution to undo it.

In the months leading up to the GAO determination, bipartisan groups of U.S. House members wrote two letters to the secretary of the Interior laying out reasons why the owl-cull plan should not move forward. In total, 19 Republicans and 18 Democrats signed the letters, including seven lawmakers from California — David Valadao (R-Hanford), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), Gil Cisneros (D-Covina), Josh Harder (D-Tracy), Linda T. Sánchez (D-Whittier), Jim Costa (D-Fresno) and Adam Gray (D-Merced).

Rep. Troy E. Nehls (R-Texas), an ardent Trump supporter, signed the initial letter, and is “currently exploring other options to end this unnecessary plan, which prioritizes one species of owls over another, and wastes Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” communications director Emily Matthews said.

Kamlager-Dove said also said earlier this year that she objected to killing one species to preserve another. “And as an animal lover, I cannot support the widespread slaughter of these beautiful creatures,” she said.

If a resolution is introduced, passed and signed by President Trump, the plan will be over. The Fish and Wildlife Service would not be allowed to bring forward a similar rule, unless explicitly authorized by Congress.

Tom Wheeler, executive director of the Environmental Protection Information Center, which supports reducing the barred owl population, called the specter of the Congressional Review Act “very scary.”

It’s “an intrusion by Congress into areas where we’re relying on high agency expertise and scientific understanding,” he said. “It’s vibes versus science.”

A California spotted owl is shown inside the Tahoe National Forest in California on July 12, 2004.

(Debra Reid / Associated Press)

Wheeler said he believed it was more likely the program would be deprioritized amid budget cuts than eliminated through the Act.

“If we don’t move forward with barred owl removal, it will mean the extinction of the northern spotted owl, and it will likely mean the extinction of the California spotted owl as well,” he said.

Science is on its side, he said. A long-term field experiment showed that where barred owls were killed, the population of spotted owls stabilized.

For animal welfare activist Wayne Pacelle, who has galvanized opposition to the owl-cull plan, it’s a hopeful turn of events.

“Even if they had full funding for this, we don’t think it could possibly succeed,” said Pacelle, president of Animal Wellness Action and Center for a Humane Economy. The land area where the barred owls need to be controlled is just too vast, he said. And barred owls from elsewhere, he said, will simply fly in and replace those that are felled.

As few as 3,000 northern spotted owls are left on federal lands. The brown raptors with white spots are listed as threatened under both the California and federal Endangered Species Act.

California spotted owls are also in decline, and federal wildlife officials have proposed endangered species protections for two populations.

The two sides of the fierce debate agree that barred and spotted owls compete for nesting sites and food — such as woodrats and northern flying squirrels.

Barred owls and spotted owls are similar in appearance and can even interbreed. But barred owls are more aggressive and slightly larger, in addition to being more generalist when it comes to what they’ll eat and where they’ll live, allowing them to muscle out their fellow raptors.

Federal wildlife officials and some conservationists consider barred owls invasive.

As Europeans settled the Great Plains, they suppressed fire and planted trees, allowing barred owls to expand westward from their origin in eastern North America, biologists believe.

“I would call this an invasion, and I would call these non-native species,” Wheeler said.

On the flip side, some see the owl arrival along the West Coast as natural range expansion.

There are also conflicting views of the cost of exterminating so many owls.

Opponents estimate it will cost about $1.35 billion, extrapolated from a $4.5-million contract awarded to a Northern California Native American tribe last year to hunt about 1,500 barred owls over four years.

A 2024 research paper, however, concluded that barred owl removal in the range of the northern spotted owl would cost from $4.5 million to $12 million per year in its initial stages, and would likely decrease over time. At $12 million a year, the 30-year plan would run $360 million.

Pacelle’s Animal Wellness Action and the Center for a Humane Economy have also sued the Fish and Wildlife Service in U.S. District Court in Washington state over the plan. Friends of Animals, another animal welfare group, filed suit in Oregon.

Wheeler’s Environmental Protection Information Center has intervened in the suits in defense of the plan, and those cases continue to advance.

WASHINGTON — President Trump sued Dow Jones and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, for libel on Friday, striking back against the publication of a bombshell story in the Wall Street Journal alleging the president sent a sordid letter to notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein in the early 2000s.

The Journal, a Dow Jones publication, reported Thursday that Trump sent a raunchy 50th birthday card to Epstein that included a sketch of a naked woman, featuring breasts and a squiggly “Donald” signature mimicking pubic hair.

The paper said it had reviewed copies of a collection of lewd letters that Epstein’s longtime companion, Ghislaine Maxwell, gathered from Epstein’s friends and colleagues and compiled in an album to mark his 2003 birthday.

“We have just filed a POWERHOUSE Lawsuit against everyone involved in publishing the false, malicious, defamatory, FAKE NEWS ‘article’ in the useless ‘rag’ that is, The Wall Street Journal,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Friday, adding that the suit also targets Murdoch and the reporters on the story.

The suit comes amid renewed questions over the nature of Trump’s years-long friendship with Epstein, the late and disgraced financier whose sprawling sex trafficking ring victimized more than 200 women and girls.

On Friday, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee said that FBI officials reviewing more 100,000 records from the Epstein investigation in March were directed to flag any documents that mentioned Trump.

In a letter to leadership of the Justice Department, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said his office “was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned.”

Trump had already been facing mounting pressure from his MAGA base to publicly release Justice Department files from the case of Epstein.

Trump ordered Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to reverse course on a recent decision to close the case and unseal grand jury testimony. The Justice Department filed a motion to begin that process on Friday afternoon.

“Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,” Trump announced Thursday on Truth Social. “This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!”

The Department of Justice and FBI declared earlier this month in a memo that Epstein’s case was closed and his 2019 death in a New York city jail was a suicide. But Bondi, a Trump appointee and arch loyalist, immediately agreed Thursday to Trump’s new demand.

“President Trump — we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts,” Bondi wrote on X.

It remains to be seen if Trump and Bondi will persuade a federal judge in New York to release the grand jury transcripts. Such documents are typically not made public and released only under narrowly defined circumstances.

Trump and Epstein became friends in the 1980s.

“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Mr. Trump told New York magazine, in 2002, noting that Epstein was “a lot of fun to be with” and “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

But their friendship apparently broke down in 2008 after Epstein was convicted of child sexual offenses. Their relationship — and the possibility of Trump’s involvement in Epstein’s crimes — has been scrutinized ever since.

The Epstein case has riveted Trump’s Republican base, largely because of the multimillionaire financier’s connections to rich and powerful people they suspect were involved in his child sex trafficking.

But releasing the files is not entirely up to Trump, even if he wanted to.

“You’ve got decades’ worth of materials,” said David Weinstein, a Miami defense attorney and former federal prosecutor, who said the disclosure of grand jury information is governed by federal rules and cannot be released without a court order.

Even if material does get released, it will pertain only to Epstein and Maxwell’s direct activities — and will be much more limited than the volume of investigative materials, including witness interviews, emails, videos and photos that otherwise exist.

Additionally, “there’s a lot of redactions that will have to be made,” Weinstein said, noting the number of individuals who might have been associated with Epstein during the investigation but were not themselves suspected or charged with crimes. “You’ve seen some of that already in the civil cases that were filed, and where courts have said, ‘No, this is what can be put on the docket.’”

After the Department of Justice dropped the case, many of Trump’s most vocal allies, such as U.S. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), openly dissented from the administration and called for the release of all files.

Earlier this week, Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie introduced the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act, which would require Bondi to make public all unclassified records, documents and investigative materials that the Department of Justice holds on the Epstein case.

“We all deserve to know what’s in the Epstein files, who’s implicated, and how deep this corruption goes,” Massie said in a statement. “Americans were promised justice and transparency. We’re introducing a discharge petition to force a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on releasing the COMPLETE files.”

A poll conducted by the Economist/YouGov this month found that 83% of Trump’s 2024 supporters favor the government releasing all material related to the Epstein case.

Wilner reported from Washington, Jarvie from Atlanta. Times staff writer Clara Harter contributed to this report.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) is calling on Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to explain why the Trump administration has repeatedly ordered cuts to HIV/AIDS programs both at home and abroad.

In a letter to Kennedy dated Thursday, Garcia asserted that the cabinet secretary has a history of peddling misinformation about the virus and disease, and that the planned cuts — which he called “alarming and unprecedented” — would cost lives.

“We are concerned that your motivations for disrupting HIV funding and delaying preventative services and research are grounded not in sound science, but in misinformation and disinformation you have spread previously about HIV and AIDS, including your repeated claim that HIV does not cause AIDS,” wrote Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.

A Health and Human Services spokesperson said Kennedy remains committed to science-based public health, that critical HIV/AIDS programs will continue under his leadership, and that ongoing investments in such work demonstrate that commitment.

Both President Trump and Kennedy have previously defended the sweeping cuts to Health and Human Services programs and staff under Kennedy’s leadership. Agency spokespeople have said they would allow for a greater focus on Kennedy’s priorities of “ending America’s epidemic of chronic illness by focusing on safe, wholesome food, clean water, and the elimination of environmental toxins.”

Kennedy has said the department under his watch “will do more — a lot more — at a lower cost to the taxpayer.”

Garcia’s letter — which he co-wrote with Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), the ranking Democrat on the Health Care and Financial Services subcommittee — requested that the health department produce a list of all HIV/AIDS-related funding it has cut and an explanation for how those funds were identified for elimination, as well as other documentation and communications around several of the largest cuts.

The letter is the latest attempt by Democrats, in coordination with health experts and LGBTQ+ organizations, to challenge what they see as an inexplicable yet coordinated effort by the Trump administration to dismantle public health initiatives aimed at controlling and ultimately ending one of the most devastating and deadly epidemics in human history.

It comes the same day that Senate Republicans agreed to a Trump administration request to claw back billions of dollars in funding for public media and foreign aid, but declined an earlier White House request to include in those cuts about $400 million in HIV/AIDS funding for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR, which is credited with saving millions of lives in some of the poorest nations around the world.

The House had previously voted for an earlier version of the measure that did cut the funding for PEPFAR, which was started by President George W. Bush in 2003. However, senators pushed for the restoration of the funding before agreeing to sign the broader rescission package.

The House must now approve the Senate version of the measure by Friday for it to take effect.

In an interview with The Times, Garcia said he has long viewed Kennedy as a dangerous “conspiracy theorist” who has “peddled in all sorts of lies” about HIV, vaccines and other medical science. Now that Kennedy is Health secretary, he said, the American people deserve to know whether national and international health decisions are being driven by his baseless personal beliefs.

“Folks need to understand what he’s trying to do, and I think that he has to be responsible and be held accountable for his actions,” Garcia said.

In their letter, Garcia and Krishnamoorthi noted that recent scientific advancements — including the creation of new preventative drugs — are making the eradication of HIV more attainable than ever. And yet Kennedy and the Trump administration are pushing the nation and the world in the opposite direction, they said.

“Since taking office, the Trump Administration has systematically attacked HIV-related funding and blocked critical HIV-related services and care for those who need it most,” Garcia and Krishnamoorthi wrote. “These disruptions would threaten Americans most at risk of contracting HIV, and many people living with HIV will get sicker or infect others without programs they rely on for treatment.”

The letter outlines a number of examples of such cuts, including:

• The elimination of the HIV prevention division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and termination or delay of billions of dollars in HIV prevention grants from that office.
• The termination of a $258-million program within the National Institutes of Health to find a vaccine to prevent new HIV infections.
• The termination of dozens of NIH grants for HIV research, particularly around preventing new infections among Black and Latino gay men who are disproportionately at risk of contracting the virus.
• The targeting of HIV prevention initiatives abroad, including PEPFAR.
• The U.S. drawing back from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Many in the medical and foreign aid community expressed grave concerns about Kennedy being appointed as Health secretary, in part because of his past remarks about HIV/AIDS. Kennedy told a reporter for New York Magazine as recently as June 2023 that there “are much better candidates than H.I.V. for what causes AIDS.”

In their letter, Garcia and Krishnamoorthi called out a specific theory shared by Kennedy that the recreational drug known as “poppers” may cause AIDS, rather than the HIV virus, writing, “We are deeply concerned that the Trump Administration’s HIV-related funding cuts are indiscriminate, rooted in a political agenda, and not at all in the interest of public health.”

Kennedy’s skepticism about the link between HIV and AIDS conflicts with well established science that has long been accepted by the medical establishment, and by the federal government. Studies around the world have proved the link, and found that HIV is the only common factor in AIDS cases.

In August 2023, about a week before Kennedy threw his support behind Trump, his presidential campaign addressed the controversy surrounding his “poppers” comment, stating that Kennedy did not believe poppers were “the sole cause” of AIDS, but contended they were “a significant factor in the disease progression” of early patients in the 1980s.

Garcia and Krishnamoorthi also noted a successful effort by local officials and advocates in Los Angeles County to get about $20 million in HIV/AIDS funding restored last month, after it and similar funding nationwide was frozen by the Trump administration.

The restoration of those funds followed another letter sent to Kennedy by Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Glendale) and other House members, who cited estimates from the Foundation for AIDS Research, known as amfAR, that the nationwide cuts could lead to 127,000 additional deaths from AIDS-related causes within five years.

Garcia and Krishnamoorthi cited the same statistics in their letter.

In his interview with The Times, Garcia, who is gay, also said the LGBTQ+ community “is rightly outraged” at Kennedy’s actions to date and deserves to know if Kennedy “is using his own conspiracy theories and his own warped view of what the facts are” to dismantle public health infrastructure around HIV and AIDS that they fought for decades to build.

WASHINGTON — President Trump recently had a medical checkup after noticing “mild swelling” in his lower legs and was found to have a condition common in older adults that causes blood to pool in his veins, the White House said Thursday.

Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said tests by the White House medical unit showed that Trump has chronic venous insufficiency, which occurs when little valves inside the veins that normally help move blood against gravity gradually lose the ability to work properly.

Leavitt also addressed bruising on the back of Trump’s hand, seen in recent photos covered by makeup that was not an exact match to his skin tone. She said the bruising was “consistent” with irritation from his “frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin.” Trump takes aspirin to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke.

She said during her briefing that her disclosure of Trump’s medical checkup was meant to dispel recent speculation about the 79-year-old president’s health. Nonetheless, the announcement was notable given that the Republican president has routinely kept secret basic facts about his health.

Trump in April had a comprehensive physical exam with more than a dozen medical specialists. The three-page report released then by the White House did not include a finding of chronic venous insufficiency. At the time, Trump’s doctor, Sean Barbabella, determined that the president’s joints and muscles had a full range of motion, with normal blood flow and no swelling.

Leavitt did not say when Trump first noticed the swelling in his lower legs. As part of the president’s routine medical care and out of an “abundance of caution,” she said he had a “comprehensive exam” that included vascular, lower extremity and ultrasound testing.

She noted that chronic venous insufficiency is a benign condition that is common in people older than 70.

She said the tests revealed no evidence of deep vein thrombosis, a more serious medical condition in which a blood clot forms in one or more of the deep veins in the body, usually in the legs. Nor was there any evidence of arterial disease, she said, reading a letter from Barbabella.

People often are advised to lose weight, walk for exercise and elevate their legs periodically, and some may be advised to wear compression stockings. Severe cases over time can lead to complications including lower leg sores called ulcers. Blood clots are one cause, but was ruled out, Leavitt said.

Leavitt said the condition wasn’t causing the president discomfort. She wouldn’t discuss how he was treating the condition and suggested those details would be in the doctor’s letter, which was released to the public. But the letter was the same as what she read, and it did not include additional details.

Dr. Anahita Dua, a vascular surgeon at Mass General Brigham who has never treated Trump, said there is no cure for chronic venous insufficiency.

“The vast majority of people, probably including our president, have a mild to moderate form of it,” Dua said.

People with the condition can reduce the swelling by wearing medical-grade compression socks or stockings, to help the blood circulate back to the heart, or by walking, she said.

The exam the White House disclosed Thursday included other testing that found no signs of heart failure, renal impairment or systemic illness in Trump, Leavitt said.

“The president remains in excellent health, which I think all of you witness on a daily basis here,” she told reporters.

Superville and Neergaard write for the Associated Press.

We, the presidents of Gaza’s three non-profit universities— Al-Aqsa University, Al-Azhar University-Gaza, and the Islamic University of Gaza — together accounting for the vast majority of Gaza’s students and faculty members, issue this unified statement to the international academic community at a time of unprecedented devastation of higher education in Gaza.

Israel’s ongoing genocidal war has brought about scholasticide—a systematic and deliberate attempt to eliminate our universities, their infrastructure, faculty, and students. This destruction is not collateral; it is part of a targeted effort to eradicate the foundations of higher education in Gaza—foundations that have long stood as pillars of resilience, hope, and intellectual freedom under conditions of occupation and siege. While academic institutions across Palestine have faced attacks for decades, what we are witnessing today is an escalation: a shift from repeated acts of destruction to an attempt at total annihilation.

Yet, we remain resolute. For more than a year, we have mobilised and taken steps to resist this assault and ensure that our universities endure.

Despite the physical obliteration of campuses, laboratories, libraries, and other facilities, and the assassination of our students and colleagues, our universities continue to exist. We are more than buildings — we are academic communities, comprised of students, faculty, and staff, still alive and determined to carry forward our mission.

As articulated in the Unified Emergency Statement from Palestinian Academics and Administrators issued on May 29, 2024, “Israeli occupation forces have demolished our buildings, but our universities live on.”

For over a year, our faculty, staff and students have persisted in our core mission — teaching — under unimaginably harsh conditions. Constant bombardment, starvation, restrictions on internet access, unstable electricity, and the ongoing horrors of genocide have not broken our will. We are still here, still teaching, and still committed to the future of education in Gaza.

We urgently call on our colleagues around the world to work for:

• A sustainable and lasting ceasefire, without which no education system can thrive, and an end to all complicity with this genocide.
• Immediate international mobilisation to support and protect Gaza’s higher education institutions as vital to the survival and long-term future of the Palestinian people.
• Recognition of scholasticide as a systematic war on education, and the necessity of coordinated and strategic international support in partnership with our universities for the resilience and rebuilding of our academic infrastructure and communities.

We appeal to the international academic community — our colleagues, institutions, and friends — to:

• Support our efforts to continue teaching and conducting research, under siege and amidst loss.
• Commit to the long-term rebuilding of Gaza’s universities in partnership with us, respecting our institutional autonomy and academic agency.
• Work in partnership with us. Engage directly with and support the very institutions that continue to embody academic life and collective intellectual resistance in Gaza.

Last year, we formally established the Emergency Committee of the Universities in Gaza, representing our three institutions and affiliated colleges — together enrolling between 80 and 85 percent of Gaza universities’ students. The committee exists to resist the erasure of our universities and offer a unified voice for Gaza’s academic community. It has since established subject-focused subcommittees to serve as trusted and coordinated channels for support.

We call upon academic communities around the world to coordinate themselves in response to this call. The time for symbolic solidarity has passed. We now ask for practical, structured, and enduring partnership.

Work alongside us to ensure that Gaza’s universities live on and remain a vital part of our collective future.

The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Lately, while watching the Dodgers play, losing streak and all, I am reminded of something the great Benoit Benjamin once said: “Bad team, man. Bad [bleeping] team.”

Brian Lipson
Beverly Hills

The signing of closer Tanner Scott will go down as the worst in Dodgers history. It’s even worse than the signing of outfielder Michael Conforto. Scott has already blown six saves, has two losses and has an ERA creeping up to 4.00. He is the third-highest paid relief pitcher in history. What makes his signing far worse than Conforto’s is the fact the Dodgers are stuck with him for four seasons.

Geno Apicella
Placentia

After beating up on cupcakes — Colorado, Kansas City, Chicago White Sox — in the previous nine games, the Houston Astros came to town and showed the Dodgers how a good team plays. Even more disturbing was manager Dave Roberts’ continued mismanagement of his pitching staff. On top of his inept pitching decisions, Roberts actually sought to have the weak-hitting Michael Conforto pinch-hit on Saturday.

Roberts is too prone to cede games when his team falls behind by allowing clearly ineffective pitchers to stay on the mound. Enough already. Replace Roberts with a manager who actually understands the nuances of the game. With their prodigious talent, the Dodgers should not be swept in a series. And they certainly shouldn’t be outscored 29-6 over three games.

Brian Gura
Redondo Beach

Ten runs in six games! That must be a new low for the Dodgers. Although Shohei Ohtani is leading the league in home runs, he is not even in the top 10 in RBIs. This is what comes from having him hit leadoff. It makes no sense. Did any of the great home run hitters ever hit leadoff?

Mike Schaller
Temple City

Messed-up Mookie

Regarding “He’s (Ohtani) swinging to get his balance back.” What about Mookie Betts? His offensive production is way off since he switched to the more physically demanding position of shortstop. Why not move Mookie back to right field (where he won multiple gold gloves) to get his offensive output back to his lofty standards? Play Tommy Edmon at shortstop, Hyeseong Kim at second, with Miguel Rojas as backup. Now you have three great arms in the outfield while improving the infield defense. Just a thought.

Michael N. Antonoplis
Sherman Oaks

Mookie Betts’ bat has suffered since he has struggled to adapt to playing shortstop. It’s time to move him back to right field, where he will be more comfortable in the field and at the plate.

Harris J. Levey
Venice

One last pitch

Can you stand one more letter about the Sandy Koufax-Clayton Kershaw “greatest” controversy? Koufax pitched with an arthritic arm that he soaked in ice for hours after every game. He did not have 21st century medical technology, which could have extended his career.

Carolyn Rothberg
Tarzana

Ganging up on the Jameses

Are you laboring under a misconception that there’s a Bronny James fan club out there somewhere?
You seem to work him into every story, whether he plays or not. In the story about the Lakers’ win over the Spurs on Tuesday, you rightly credited Darius Bazley with leading the team with 27 points, with Dalton Knecht adding 25.

Then you felt the need to add, “Bronny James, still working to ramp up his conditioning, played just over five minutes and scored two points.” Who cares? Other than his parents, whom do you presume is clamoring for stats on a bench warmer?

Steve Rutledge
Beaumont

A week after signing a $52-million option for next season, LeBron James still owns the acronym of GOAT, only the descriptor has changed slightly: Greediest Of All Time.

Ron Ovadia
Irvin

Talking like a winner

I enjoyed Broderick Turner’s article on Deandre Ayton coming to the Lakers. I liked Ayton a lot at the beginning of his career. I thought Ayton had a lot of potential. I hope that LeBron James and Luka Doncic, with their assist skills, can bring that potential out of Ayton this season. I liked that during the course of Turner’s article, Ayton was quoted 15 times using “win” as part of a word, like “wins,” “winning,” “winner,” etc. We will have to see if Ayton can convert his words to deeds and be a winner for the Lakers this season.

Vaughn Hardenberg
Westwood

Practice squaring up

Thank you for the article on the Angels interim manager Ron Montgomery. I have one bit of advice for him. Practice bunting. There are a bunch of games the Angels have lost in extra innings because they (along with most of the other major league teams) don’t bunt the player on second base over to third with no outs. So much easier to score a run if the runner is at third base.

Steve Shaevel
Woodland Hills

Title says it all

USC eliminated the position of executive senior associate athletic director. The fact that a position with such a convoluted title even existed tells you all you need to know about administrative bloat in the Trojans’ athletic department.

Gerry Swider
Sherman Oaks

The Los Angeles Times welcomes expressions of all views. Letters should be brief and become the property of The Times. They may be edited and republished in any format. Each must include a valid mailing address and telephone number. Pseudonyms will not be used.

Email: [email protected]

The BBC has told Greg Wallace that they don’t believe he’ll change his behaviour in a scathing letter from compliance boss Claire Powell that has been shared with The Mirror

Gregg Wallace struggles to grasp the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, BBC bosses claim. And in a letter sacking him from his MasterChef job, the corporation insisted he is unlikely to change amid accusations that include groping, flashing and making sexual comments that go back years.

While the 60-year-old has admitted using inappropriate language at times, he denies the more serious allegations and has now hired an “aggressive” lawyer who may challenge his axing. In the letter from the BBC to Wallace, extracts of which have been seen by the Mirror, compliance boss Claire Powell refers to the findings of a law firm’s probe into his behaviour – which are yet to be released.

She said: “I do not have the confidence that you can change what seems to be learned behaviour for you to make what you perceive to be jokes in the work -environment, without understanding the boundaries of what is appropriate.

“You acknowledge some of your comments have offended or upset people. But it is clear that you struggle to distinguish the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate -behaviour in the workplace, as well as lacking an awareness of why your behaviour impacts others.

“I do not have confidence that your behaviour can change.”

A source close to Wallace said the TV chef claims the letter is unfair. But show producers Banijay are understood to be in no doubt about the next steps that need to be taken after the report by law firm Lewis Silkin.

The insider said the letter refers to Wallace’s autism and appears to accept his condition. The source said: “He’s been formally diagnosed with autism, a recognised disability, but the BBC seems to be saying it can’t cope with a disabled person. It sounds a lot like discrimination to us.”

Wallace is now understood to have hired Dan Morrison, one of the UK’s top litigation lawyers who has worked with Nigel Farage and footballer John Terry.

His firm’s profile page states: “Dan has recovered billions of pounds for his clients over 25 years of legal practice. He is known for his aggressive approach to litigation and his ability to negotiate favourable settlements for his clients.”

Wallace is expected to try to sue the BBC, although it is not yet clear if this will be for unfair dismissal, or something else.

He was warned by the BBC after a complaint was raised about him in 2018 on the show Impossible Celebrities. He apologised and was offered counselling.

Wallace was told in a meeting to change his behaviour and had coaching the following year. There were also complaints about him that same year on MasterChef. He was given a dressing down by Kate Phillips, who was then controller of entertainment and is now the BBC’s chief content officer.

She reportedly told Wallace his behaviour had been -“unacceptable and cannot continue”. BBC News has claimed that 50 more people have made claims about him.

Banijay last night declined to comment. The BBC also said it would not comment beyond the statement issued on Tuesday, which stated: “Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace.

“We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.”

Wallace insisted earlier this week: “I will not go quietly. I will not be cancelled for convenience.”

Join The Mirror’s WhatsApp Community or follow us on Google News , Flipboard , Apple News, TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads – or visit The Mirror homepage.