Politics

Nov. 14 (UPI) — The Georgia Prosecuting Attorneys Council announced a replacement for Fani Willis as the prosecutor in the election interference case against President Donald Trump and 14 others charged.

PAC Executive Director Peter J. Skandalakis announced on Friday, that he would prosecute the case because the group couldn’t find anyone to take it up.

“Several prosecutors were contacted and, while all were respectful and professional, each declined the appointment,” he said in the announcement. “Out of respect for their privacy and professional discretion, I will not identify those prosecutors or disclose their reasons for declining.”

In September, the Georgia Supreme Court denied Willis’ attempt to continue in the case. It refused to hear her appeal of a lower court’s decision to disqualify her because of “impropriety.” She had a romantic relationship with the special prosecutor in the case.

Another reason he chose to prosecute the case is that he has some familiarity with the case file. The documents he received to review included 101 banker boxes of documents and an 8-terabyte hard drive, which he hasn’t had the time to fully read.

Some of the others charged include former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani.

On Nov. 7, Trump pardoned 77 people, including those involved in the Georgia case.

Skandalakis said the pardons don’t apply to state charges, only federal ones. “Therefore, the task before my office remains unchanged,” he said.

Trump’s attorney Steve Sadow said the “politically charged prosecution has come to an end.”

“We remain confident that a fair and impartial review will lead to a dismissal of the case against President Trump,” Sadow said.

Skandalakis noted the importance of the case.

“I am keenly aware that this matter has been of significant public interest since January 2021, when District Attorney Fani Willis announced the initiation of the investigation,” he said in a statement. “My only objective is to ensure that this case is handled properly, fairly, and with full transparency discharging my duties without fear, favor, or affection.”

When millions of European immigrants came to the United States in the 19th century only to be scorned by mainstream society, it was the Catholic Church that embraced them, taught that keeping the customs of one’s native lands was not bad and created systems of mutual aid and education for the newcomers that didn’t rely on the government.

The 1960 election of John F. Kennedy, an Irish American Catholic, showed that the U.S. was ready to expand its definition of who could become president. Labor organizers like Cesar Chavez, Dorothy Day and Mother Jones pushed for the dignity of workers while frequently citing the woke words of Jesus — the Sermon of the Mount and the Beatitudes among the wokest — as the fuel for their spiritual fire.

Catholicism is the faith I was baptized in, the one I embraced as a teen and that’s the bedrock for my moral code of comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. My work desk covered with statues and devotional cards of Jesus, Mary and the saints is a physical testament to this.

But I’m also one of the 72% of U.S. Catholics that a Pew Research Center survey from earlier this year. found don’t attend weekly Mass, which we’re obligated to do.

I stopped going early on in my adulthood because the Church became something I didn’t recognize.

The bishops and cardinals who preached we should follow Jesus’ admonition we should tend to the least among us presided over a child sex abuse scandal in the 1990s and 2000s that cost parishioners billions of dollars in legal settlements and their ethical high ground. The obsession that too many of those same church leaders had over abortion and homosexuality — which Christ never talked about — over social justice matters during the Obama administration left me disappointed. Their continual condemnation of pro-choice Catholic Democratic politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden for taking Communion while staying silent about Donald Trump’s constant violations of the Ten Commandments was rank hypocrisy.

The Pew Research Center found 55% of my fellow faithful voted for Trump. Key Catholics have blessed Trump’s uglier tendencies: A majority of them rules over our revanchist Supreme Court while the president’s team features a vice president who’s a convert and a rogue’s gallery of influential insiders that bear surnames from previous generations of Catholic diasporas — Kennedy, Rubio, Bovino, Homan among the worst of the worst.

Yet I remain a Catholic because you shouldn’t turn your back so easily on institutions that formed you and you don’t cede your identity to heretics. The election of Pope Leo XIV, the first American to head the Holy See, to succeed Pope Francis stirred in me the sense that things might change for the better as our country worsens.

Now, without naming him, the U.S. Catholic hierarchy has rebuked Trump on his signature issue and one close to my heart in a way that shows my hope hasn’t been in vain.

Clergy attend the 2021 Fall General Assembly meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in Baltimore, Md.

(Julio Cortez/Associated Press)

This week the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops released a so-called “special message” to blast Trump’s deportation Leviathan, decrying its “vilification of immigrants” “the, indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and how hundreds of thousands of residents have “arbitrarily lost their legal status.” Citing passages from across the Bible — the Gospel, the Old Testament, the Letters of Paul — to argue for the human worth of the undocumented and the holy mandate that we must care about them, it was the first time since 2013 that American bishops collectively authored such a statement.

Even as a majority of U.S. Catholics have gone MAGA, support for the special message was overwhelming: 216 bishops voted in favor, 5 against, and there were 3 abstentions. Their missive even concluded with a shout-out to Our Lady of Guadalupe, the brown, pregnant apparition of the Virgin Mary who’s the patroness of the Americas for Catholics.

Talk about someone who would get deported if la migra saw Her on the street.

The cruelty this administration has shown throughout its deportation campaign — families torn apart as easily as the Constitution; U.S. citizens detained; wanton federal violence that a federal judge in Chicago described as “shock[ing] the conscience” — has become one of the most pressing moral issues of our times. The call by Catholic bishops to oppose this wrong is important — so like a voice crying in the wilderness, the church must set an example for the rest of the country to follow.

This example already is being set in parishes across Southern California.

Priests and deacons have marched at rallies and prayed for those detained and deported from Orange County to downtown L.A. and beyond. Dolores Mission in Boyle Heights has let local activists stage know-your-rights workshops since Trump won last November. While L.A archbishop José H. Gomez and Diocese of Orange bishop Kevin Vann, the two most senior Catholic prelates in the region, have spoken out forcefully against immigration raids, some of their local brother bishops have pushed harder.

Diocese of San Bernardino Bishop Alberto Rojas has allowed Catholics who are afraid of la migra to skip Mass since July after immigration agents detained migrants on church property, arguing “such fear constitutes a grave inconvenience” for his flock. In San Diego, Bishop Michael Pham — who’s been in his seat for only four months — helped launch a program encouraging religious leaders to accompany migrants to immigration court to bear witness to the injustices inside and has participated himself.

Expect to hear gnashing of the teeth from the conservative side of church pews about how everyone should respect the rule of law and to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s as if there ever was a Pope Donald. Already, Trump border czar Tom Homan has cried that the bishops are “wrong” for issuing their pro-immigrant letter and suggested they focus on “fixing the Catholic Church.”

But Homan’s dismissal and that of his fellow travelers doesn’t make the bishop’s admonition against Trump’s policies any more prophetic. The president’s immigration dictates are out of Herod — no less an authority than Pope Leo described them in October as “inhuman,” told a delegation of American bishops that “the church cannot remain silent” on those outrages and stated in a separate speech that such abuse was “not the legitimate exercise of national sovereignty, but rather grave crimes committed or tolerated by the state.”

The Catholic Church never will be as progressive as some want it to be. Even as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released its message, the group elected as its next president Diocese of Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley, whose public politics have so far mostly aligned with those of his deep-red state. But on the issue of dignity for immigrants during the Trump era, U.S. bishops have been on the right side of history — and God. They criticized Trump’s Muslim ban and his move to separate undocumented parents from their children during his first administration and have kept a watch on his attempt to cancel the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows some people who came to this country as children to legally remain in the U.S.

We’re about to enter the Christmas season, a holiday based on the story of a poor family seeking shelter in an era when their kind was rejected by the powers that be and ultimately had to flee home. It’s the story of the United States as well, one too many Americans have forsaken and that Trump wants all of us to forget.

May Catholics remind their fellow Americans anew of how powerful and righteous standing up for the stranger is.

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.

President Gustavo Petro says purchase of warplanes is a ‘deterrent weapon to achieve peace’ amid ‘messy’ geopolitics.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has announced a $4.3bn deal to buy Swedish warplanes at a time when his country is locked in tension with the United States.

Speaking on Friday, Petro confirmed an agreement was reached with Sweden’s Saab aircraft manufacturer to buy 17 Gripen fighter jets, giving the first confirmation of the size and cost of the military acquisition that was initially announced in April.

“This is a deterrent weapon to achieve peace,” Petro said in a post on social media.

The purchase of warplanes comes as Colombia and much of remaining Latin America are on edge due to a US military build-up in the region, and as US forces carry out a campaign of deadly attacks on vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific.

Washington claims – but has provided no evidence – that it has targeted drug smuggling vessels in its 20 confirmed attacks that have killed about 80 people so far in international waters.

Latin American leaders, legal scholars and rights groups have accused the US of carrying out extrajudicial killings of people who should face the courts if suspected of breaking laws related to drug smuggling.

US President Donald Trump has also accused both Petro and his Venezuelan counterpart, Nicolas Maduro, of being involved in the regional drug trade, a claim that both leaders have strenuously denied.

Petro said the new warplanes will be used to dissuade “aggression against Colombia, wherever it may come from”.

“In a world that is geopolitically messy,” he said, such aggression “can come from anywhere”.

The Colombian leader has for weeks traded insults with Donald Trump and said the ultimate goal of the US deployment in the region is to seize Venezuela’s oil wealth and destabilise Latin America.

Trump has long accused Venezuela’s Maduro of trafficking drugs and more recently branded Petro “an illegal drug leader” because of Colombia’s high level of cocaine production. Trump has also withdrawn US financial aid from Colombia and taken it off its list of countries seen as allies in fighting drug trafficking internationally.

Amid the war of words rumbling on between Washington and Bogota, Petro said last week that Colombia would suspend intelligence sharing with the US on combating drug trafficking, but officials in his government quickly rolled back that threat.

The AFP news agency reports that US and French firms had also tried to sell warplanes to Colombia, but, in the end, Bogota went with Sweden’s Saab.

Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson said Colombia was joining Sweden, Brazil and Thailand in choosing the Gripen fighter jet, and defence relations between Bogota and Stockholm would “deepen significantly” as a result.

🇸🇪🇨🇴I’m proud that Colombia today joins the Gripen E family, alongside Sweden, Brazil and Thailand. With the Colombian purchase of 17 Gripen E/F, our defence relations will deepen significantly & Colombia will receive one of the world’s greatest fighter jets. (1/4) pic.twitter.com/g0rESq69nD

— Pål Jonson (@PlJonson) November 14, 2025

United States President Donald Trump has said he is withdrawing his support for Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, calling the lawmaker a “lunatic” and accusing her of going “far left”.

In a post on his Truth Social platform late on Friday, Trump said, “I am withdrawing my support and endorsement of ‘Congresswoman’ Marjorie Taylor Greene, of the great state of Georgia.”

The US leader, labelling Greene “wacky”, said all the lawmaker did was “COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN”, despite his “record achievements” in office.

Greene, a member of the House of Representatives, has long been a reliable ally and fierce defender of Trump, even sporting a Make America Great Again (MAGA) baseball hat at President Joe Biden’s 2024 State of the Union address.

But in recent months, she has taken positions at odds with the White House and her fellow Republicans, including criticising them during the just-ended federal government shutdown, saying the Trump administration needed a plan to help people set to lose health insurance subsidies as part of planned cuts.

More notably, Greene has also become a vocal campaigner for transparency and the full release of files related to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein – a recurrent scandal that continues to engulf President Trump.

Greene responded to Trump’s announcement on Friday with screenshots of a text message she sent the president about the Epstein case, claiming it “sent him over the edge”.

“It’s astonishing really how hard he’s fighting to stop the Epstein files from coming out that he actually goes to this level,” she wrote on X.

“Most Americans wish he would fight this hard to help the forgotten men and women of America who are fed up with foreign wars and foreign causes, are going broke trying to feed their families, and are losing hope of ever achieving the American dream,” she said.

Greene also claimed Trump is going after her “hard to make an example to scare all the other Republicans before next week’s vote to release the Epstein files”.

President Trump just attacked me and lied about me. I haven’t called him at all, but I did send these text messages today. Apparently this is what sent him over the edge.

The Epstein files.

And of course he’s coming after me hard to make an example to scare all the other… pic.twitter.com/EcUzaohZZs

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) November 15, 2025

On Wednesday, House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson said the body will hold a vote next week on whether to force the Department of Justice to disclose all files related to Epstein – who died by suicide in prison in 2019.

It came as a result of the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act – a discharge petition allowing a majority of lawmakers to bypass the House leadership and force a vote on the issue – which was signed by Greene and three other House Republicans.

If backed, the measure would force the release of flight logs and travel records, individuals named or referenced in connection with the Epstein investigation, and materials related to Epstein’s former girlfriend and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.

How well did Trump know Epstein and Maxwell?

Trump has faced growing scrutiny over his alleged ties to the disgraced financier, most recently on Wednesday, when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released new emails appearing to further link the pair.

In one email, Epstein told Maxwell that Trump had “spent hours” at his house with one abuse victim. The White House claimed the communications “prove nothing”.

Trump has repeatedly urged his supporters to move on from the scandal, labelling suggestions that there is an Epstein client list with his name on it a “hoax” pushed by his Democratic opponents.

In an interview on Friday, Greene labelled Trump’s resistance to releasing the files a “huge miscalculation”, adding that she does not believe he has anything to hide.

Trump made no mention of the Epstein issue in his post disowning Greene, claiming the schism between the pair began when he discouraged her from running for senator or governor due to low polling numbers.

“She has told many people that she is upset that I don’t return her phone calls any more, but with 219 Congressmen/women, 53 US Senators, 24 Cabinet Members, almost 200 Countries, and an otherwise normal life to lead, I can’t take a ranting Lunatic ‘s call every day,” Trump said.

Trump continued that Republicans in Georgia are “fed up with her and her antics” and should they find an alternative to run at the next midterms, that candidate will have his “complete and unyielding support”.

Jawhar Ben Mbarek’s sister said his health had ‘severely deteriorated’ and a ‘dangerous toxin’ was detected in his body.

Jailed Tunisian opposition figure Jawhar Ben Mbarek has been hospitalised due to severe dehydration, his family has said, as his health continues to deteriorate after more than two weeks on hunger strike.

Ben Mbarek, the cofounder of Tunisia’s main opposition alliance, the National Salvation Front, started his hunger strike on October 29 to protest his detention in jail since February 2023.

In a Facebook post on Friday, Ben Mbarek’s sister, Dalila Ben Mbarek Msaddek, warned that her brother’s health had now “severely deteriorated” and doctors detected “a highly dangerous toxin” affecting his kidneys.

Msaddek said Ben Mbarek had “received treatment but refused nutritional supplements” at the hospital where he was transferred on Thursday night, insisting on continuing his now 17-day protest.

The politician was discharged from hospital on Friday afternoon and returned to prison, Msaddek added.

On Wednesday, Ben Mbarek’s lawyer Hanen Khmiri said he had “faced torture” at the hands of guards at Belli prison, as they attempted to force him to end his protest.

“He was severely beaten, we saw fractures and bruises on his body,” Khmiri said, adding that she had filed a complaint with the public prosecutor, who promised to investigate.

“He told me that four of the prison guards beat him severely in a place where there is no surveillance camera,” she said.

Ben Mbarek is one of the most prominent opponents of Tunisian strongman President Kais Saied, who has been in power since 2019.

In April, he was sentenced to 18 years in prison on charges of “conspiracy against state security” and “belonging to a terrorist group”, in a mass trial of opposition figures slammed by human rights groups as politically motivated.

Ben Mbarek has denied the charges, which he has called fabricated.

Rights groups have warned of a sharp decline in civil liberties in Tunisia since a sweeping power grab by Saied in July 2021, when he dissolved parliament and expanded executive power so he could rule by decree.

That decree was later enshrined in a new constitution, ratified by a widely boycotted 2022 referendum. Media figures and lawyers critical of Saied have also been prosecuted and detained under a harsh “fake news” law enacted the same year.

Last week, Ben Mbarek’s family and prominent members of Tunisia’s political opposition announced they would join him in a collective hunger strike.

Among the participants was Issam Chebbi, the leader of the centrist Al Joumhouri (Republican) Party, who is also behind bars after being convicted in the same mass trial as Ben Mbarek earlier this year.

Rached Ghannouchi, the 84-year-old leader of the Ennahdha party, who is also serving a hefty prison sentence, also said he would join the protest. Chebbi and Ghannouchi’s current condition is not known.

Prison authorities have maintained the men are under “continuous medical supervision” and denied “rumours about the deterioration in the health of any detainees”.

When Donald Trump apologized for saying in 2005 that he could grope women because of his celebrity, he immediately pointed to Bill Clinton as having done worse. Trump appeared before a debate alongside Clinton’s accusers and again mentioned the former president’s past while onstage with Hillary Clinton. But Trump’s argument was undercut when more women publicly came forward with allegations that he had groped or kissed them without consent.

Here’s a look at the pasts of both Trump and Bill Clinton and accusations against them.

Donald Trump

In a screen grab of a 2005 “Access Hollywood” video, Donald Trump prepares for his cameo on “Days of Our Lives” with actress Arianne Zucker and Billy Bush, right, then “Access” co-host. (Getty)

(Getty)

1977, 31-year-old Trump

Trump marries his first wife, Ivana Trump

Donald Trump Jr. is born

Early-1980s, 30-something Donald Trump

Allegation: While Trump was seated next to her on a plane, businesswoman Jessica Leeds said, he lifted her armrest and touched her inappropriately.

“He was like an octopus,” Leeds, now 74, told the New York Times. “His hands were everywhere.”

Response: Trump called it a “ridiculous tale.” At a rally in North Carolina, he said, “She would not be my first choice.”

1981, 35-year-old Trump

Ivanka Trump is born.

1984, 38-year-old Trump

Eric Trump is born.

1989, 43-year-old Trump

Allegation: Ivana Trump used the word “rape” in a 1992 deposition during their divorce to describe an encounter with Trump when they were married in 1989. In 2015, after the allegation resurfaced, she said it was “without merit” and that she had made it “at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald.”

Response: After the allegation resurfaced last summer, Michael Cohen, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, incorrectly said that a man cannot legally rape his wife. Many states have laws outlawing marital rape. Trump distanced himself from that statement.

Early 1990s, 40-something Trump

Allegation: Kristin Anderson told the Washington Post that when she was at a Manhattan nightclub, someone sitting next to her “touched her vagina through her underwear.” Anderson said she fled the couch and only then realized it was Trump. 

Response: “Mr. Trump strongly denies this phony allegation by someone looking to get some free publicity. It is totally ridiculous,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said to the Post.

1991, 44-year-old Trump

Ivana Trump files for divorce.

1992, 45-year-old Trump

Accusation: Donald Trump reportedly talked about dating young girls once they reached maturity. A 1992 wire service report said he joked to 14-year-old girls that he’d be dating them “in a few years.” In CBS footage from around the same time, he says of a 10-year-old girl that he’d be “dating her in 10 years.”  

Response: Trump has not commented specifically on those allegations.

Accusation: Jill Harth filed a sexual assault lawsuit against Trump, alleging that while working on a beauty competition with him, he harassed her to the point of what she called “attempted rape.”

“He pushed me up against the wall, and had his hands all over me and tried to get up my dress again,” she told the Guardian. “And I had to physically say: ‘What are you doing? Stop it.’”

Response: In an interview with CNN on Friday, Trump said he was the victim of a political smear campaign.

1993, 46-year-old Trump

Tiffany Trump is born.

Trump marries Marla Maples.

1997, 50-year-old Trump

Trump and Marla Maples separate.

Accusation: Temple Taggart told the New York Times that when she was Miss Utah, Trump kissed her on the lips without consent.

Response: Trump has denied the allegations.

1998, 51-year-old Trump

Accusation: During a press conference with Gloria Allred on Thursday, Karena Virginia said Trump approached her after the 1998 U.S. Open tennis tournament in Flushing, N.Y. He then grabbed her arm and touched her breast.

 “Don’t you know who I am?” Virginia said Trump asked her when she flinched.

Response: “Gloria Allred, in another coordinated, publicity seeking attack with the Clinton campaign, will stop at nothing to smear Mr. Trump,” Trump spokeswoman Jessica Ditto said. “Give me a break. Voters are tired of these circus-like antics and reject these fictional stories and the clear efforts to benefit Hillary Clinton.”

1999, 52-year-old Trump

Trump and Marla Maples divorce

2003, 56-year-old Trump

Accusation: Mindy McGillivray says Trump groped her at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida while she was working with a photographer at the site. She was 23.

Response: Trump has denied the allegations.

2005, 58-year-old Trump

Trump marries Melania Trump

Allegation: Trump makes lewd comments about groping women. 

Response: Apologized, calling it “locker room talk,” while dismissing it as a distraction.

Accusation: Natasha Stoynoff of People magazine says Trump groped her while she was waiting for Melania Trump to return for an interview.

“Within seconds, he was pushing me against the wall, and forcing his tongue down my throat,”

Response: Trump called the story a “total lie.”

Accusation: Rachel Crooks says Trump kissed her without permission outside an elevator bank at Trump Tower in Manhattan when she was 22.

Response: Trump denied the allegations. When questioned by a New York Times reporter, he told the journalist, “You are a disgusting human being.”

2006, 59-year-old Trump

Barron Trump is born.

Allegation: During a Saturday press conference with Gloria Allred, adult film star Jessica Drake said she met Trump in 2006 at a golf tournament in Lake Tahoe where she said he made sexual advances toward her and two friends.

“When we entered the room he grabbed each of us tightly in a hug and kissed each one of us without asking permission,” Drake said, releasing a posed photo she took with Trump at the event.

Drake said that later, Trump or a “male speaking on his behalf” offered her $10,000 and use of his private jet for sex. She said she declined.

Response: “This story is totally false and ridiculous. The picture is one of thousands taken out of respect for people asking to have their picture taken with Mr. Trump,” Trump’s campaign said in a statement. “Mr. Trump does not know this person, does not remember this person and would have no interest in ever knowing her.”

2007, 60-year-old Trump

Accusation: Former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos says Trump invited her into his bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel and proceeded to kiss her against her will, groped her and shoved his genitals towards her.

Response: “To be clear, I never met her at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately a decade ago. That is not who I am as a person, and it is not how I’ve conducted my life,” Trump said in a statement.

Bill Clinton

President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.

(Getty Images)

1975, 29-year-old Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton marries Hillary Rodham.

Mid-1970s to 1992, 30- to 40-something Clinton

Allegation: Dolly Kyle Browning, a high school friend of Clinton’s, said she had an occasional sexual relationship with him over about 15 years. 

Response: Clinton has not publicly responded. 

1978, 32-year-old Clinton

Allegation: Juanita Broaddrick said in 1999 that when Clinton was Arkansas governor, he invited her to a hotel room where she said he kissed, then raped her.

Response: Clinton denied the allegations.

1980, 34-year-old Clinton

Chelsea Clinton is born.

1982, 36-year-old Clinton

Allegation: In 1998, Elizabeth Ward Gracen said she had had a consensual one-night stand with Clinton when he was Arkansas governor in 1982. It was the same year she won the title of Miss America.

Response: Clinton denied the allegations.

1983, 37-year-old Clinton

Allegation: In 1994, 1958’s Miss Arkansas, Sally Perdue, said she had an affair with Clinton the previous year. She claimed that a Democratic staffer told her not to reveal any information, and was warned “they knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.”

Response: He has not publicly responded to the allegation.

1991, 44-year-old Clinton

Allegation: Paula Jones said a state trooper asked her to meet then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in his hotel room. Jones said that Clinton dropped his pants and underwear and told her to “kiss it.” She refused.

Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment in 1998, prompting the investigation that culminated in the revelation of Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky. 

Response: Clinton settled a sexual harassment suit with Jones with no apology or admission of guilt. 

1980-1992, 45-year-old Clinton

Allegation: During Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992, Gennifer Flowers said she had had a 12-year sexual relationship with him.

Response: Clinton admitted to a sexual affair with Flowers while under oath in 1998.

1993, 46-year-old Bill Clinton

Allegation: In 1998, Kathleen Willey alleged Clinton groped her without permission in the Oval Office.

Response: Clinton denied the encounter while under oath in 1998.

1995-1996, 49-year-old Bill Clinton

Allegation: Monica Lewinsky’s affair with Bill Clinton surfaced in 1998, when Lewinsky’s friend Linda Tripp learned that she had signed an affidavit in the Paula Jones case denying her relationship with Clinton. Tripp handed secret recordings of Lewinsky’s account of the affair to investigator Kenneth Starr.

Response: Clinton initially denied the allegations. 

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” he said famously. 

Clinton later admitted to the affair, and the House of Representatives voted to impeach him.

Updated at 11:10 a.m. on Oct. 24, 2016: This story was updated with Jessica Drake’s statements.

Updated at 1:20 p.m. on Oct. 20, 2016: This story was updated with Karena Virginia’s statements.

This article was originally published at 3:35 p.m. on Oct. 19, 2016.

[email protected]

Twitter: @cshalby

ALSO:

Melania Trump echoes Hillary Clinton as she defends her husband

More women accuse Trump: ‘You do not have a right to treat women as sexual objects just because you are a star’

New sex assault allegations against Trump: ‘He was like an octopus’

NEW YORK — Acceding to President Trump’s demands, U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said Friday that she has ordered a top federal prosecutor to investigate sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Trump political foes, including former President Clinton.

Bondi posted on X that she was assigning Manhattan U.S. Atty. Jay Clayton to lead the probe, capping an eventful week in which congressional Republicans released nearly 23,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate and House Democrats seized on emails mentioning Trump.

Trump, who was friends with Epstein for years, didn’t explain what supposed crimes he wanted the Justice Department to investigate. None of the men he mentioned in a social media post demanding the probe has been accused of sexual misconduct by any of Epstein’s victims.

Hours before Bondi’s announcement, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he would ask her, the Justice Department and the FBI to investigate Epstein’s “involvement and relationship” with Clinton and others, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and LinkedIn founder and Democratic donor Reid Hoffman.

Trump, calling the matter “the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats, not Republicans,” said the investigation should also include financial giant JPMorgan Chase, which provided banking services to Epstein, and “many other people and institutions.”

“This is another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats,” the Republican president wrote, referring to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of alleged Russian interference in Trump’s 2016 election victory over Bill Clinton’s wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Big names in Epstein’s emails

Trump, Bill Clinton, Summers and Hoffman were all mentioned in the documents released this week — a collection of emails Epstein exchanged with friends and business associates, news articles, book excerpts, legal papers and other material.

Epstein kept in touch with Summers and Hoffman via email, according to the documents, and wrote to other people about Trump and Clinton being in his company at various times over the years — though nothing in the messages suggested any wrongdoing on the men’s part.

Clinton has acknowledged traveling on Epstein’s private jet but has said through a spokesperson that he had no knowledge of the late financier’s crimes. Neither Clinton nor Trump has been accused of wrongdoing by any of the women who say Epstein abused them.

Summers, who served in Clinton’s Cabinet and is a former Harvard University president, previously said in a statement that he has “great regrets in my life” and that “my association with Jeffrey Epstein was a major error of judgment.”

Messages seeking comment were left for Hoffman through his investment firm, Greylock, and with a spokesperson for JPMorgan Chase.

After Epstein’s sex trafficking arrest in 2019, Hoffman said he’d had only a few interactions with Epstein, all related to his fundraising for MIT’s Media Lab. He nevertheless apologized, saying that “by agreeing to participate in any fundraising activity where Epstein was present, I helped to repair his reputation and perpetuate injustice.”

None of Epstein’s victims has accused Hoffman of misconduct.

Bondi, in her post, praised Clayton as “one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country” and said the Justice Department “will pursue this with urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people.”

Clayton, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first term, took over in April as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York — the same office that indicted Epstein and won a sex trafficking conviction against Epstein’s longtime confidante, Ghislaine Maxwell, in 2021.

Trump changes course on Epstein files

Trump has raised questions about Epstein’s death in jail a month after his arrest and suggested while campaigning last year that he’d seek to open up the government’s case files.

But Trump has changed course in recent months — blaming Democrats and painting the matter as a “hoax” — amid questions about his own friendship with Epstein and what knowledge he may have had about Epstein’s years-long exploitation of underage girls.

On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released three Epstein email exchanges that referenced Trump, including one from 2019 in which Epstein said the president “knew about the girls” and another from 2011 in which he said Trump had “spent hours” at his house with a sex trafficking victim.

The emails did not say what Trump knew and did not give any details of what Trump did while at Epstein’s house. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt accused Democrats of having “selectively leaked emails” to “create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.”

Soon after, Republicans on the committee disclosed what they said was an additional 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate. Among them were emails Epstein wrote, including many where he commented — often unfavorably — on Trump’s rise in politics and corresponded with journalists.

Other emails show Epstein keeping up friendly relationships with academic and business leaders, including Summers and Hoffman, well after he pleaded guilty in 2008 and served 13 months in jail for procuring a person under 18 for prostitution.

Epstein and Summers discussed politics, arranged calls with each other and spoke on more intimate matters, according to the emails, including about a woman Summers had interactions with. Epstein’s advice to him: “You care very much for this person. You might want to demonstrate that.”

Sisak and Bedayn write for the Associated Press.

The FBI was secretly listening last year when a high-ranking advisor to Gov. Gavin Newsom unleashed a stream of profanities as she vented about a public records request from an unnamed individual.

“Double f— her!” said Dana Williamson, Newsom’s chief of staff, repeating the f word throughout the conversation. She also called another person an “a—,” according to federal court documents made public this week.

Before Wednesday, few people outside of California’s political bubble likely knew Williamson’s name.

Now she’s engulfed in a scandal involving political consultants and illicit payments that threatens to haunt her former boss, Newsom, as he challenges President Trump and looks toward the 2028 presidential race.

A smart and savvy negotiator who bridged Sacramento’s overlapping worlds of government, business and labor, Williamson is also someone who picked unnecessary fights and launched cruel missives, political consultants and friends said this week.

Federal agents arrested Williamson Wednesday at her home in Carmichael, a Sacramento suburb. Her lawyer, former U.S. Atty. McGregor Scott, was furious about how the arrest was handled, saying she was seriously ill and in need of a liver transplant.

Federal prosecutors allege that she conspired to funnel money out of one of her one-time client’s state campaign accounts for bogus services, and falsified documents related to her COVID loan.

She also is accused of lying on her tax returns about luxury items and services, including a $150,000 birthday trip to Mexico, that she allegedly sought to pass off as business expenses, according to the government.

Williamson, who pleaded not guilty to the charges this week, appeared in a courtroom in Sacramento. She appeared solemn during the hearing, at one point reportedly lifting her cuffed hand to wipe away a tear, and left without talking to reporters.

Court documents filed this week paint an image of both a conniving player and a fragile individual. “I’m scared,” she wrote in a February 2022 text message to a colleague as they discussed the alleged money-laundering scheme, which was allegedly in the early planning stages.

Public affairs consultant Steven Maviglio has known her since the two worked in President Clinton’s administration — and then later the administration of Gov. Gray Davis. He is now trying to put together a legal defense fund for her.

He described Williamson as a “no nonsense, no BS, get it done” person who was “straight-talking, sometimes to the point of offensive to people.”

She regularly dropped f-bombs, he added.

In another recording captured by the FBI, Williamson joined two colleagues last year in a restaurant near the state Capitol in Sacramento. The government was asking questions about money she received through her COVID loan.

She complained about the “f—” drama and said her Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan got “popped” — before adding another swear word. According to federal officials, she created false contracts in an attempt to show the COVID money was appropriately used.

There is little sympathy from her detractors. Gil Duran, the former press secretary to Gov. Jerry Brown, who worked alongside Williamson, likened her to a “mafia boss” in an interview with CNN. She also has numerous defenders in Sacramento, many of them women, who view her as a tough and inspiring figure.

The details in the federal filings sent shock waves beyond Sacramento and the state Capitol this week.

“I’m stunned about the allegation and find it hard to believe,” said Alison Gaulden, who supervised Williamson when she worked as an associate vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte from 2002 to 2004.

Gaulden described her as “incredibly bright and well versed in policy. I’ve admired how she grew in her career.”

Williamson, who grew up in Santa Rosa, moved between the private and public sectors, and was employed by three governors, Davis, Jerry Brown and Newsom.

At Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E), she worked alongside two other women who would be remarkably influential in her life: Nancy McFadden, the late advisor to Brown and Alexis Podesta, a longtime California political insider who also appears in the federal court documents filed this week.

Podesta is the person identified as “Co-Conspirator 2,” but has not been charged and is cooperating with investigators, according to her attorney.

Williamson was hired as a senior advisor for Brown and was later promoted to Cabinet secretary.

While working for Brown, Williamson publicly advocated for children’s health, testifying in favor of legislation that would eliminate the state’s personal-belief exemption for childhood vaccines. She said the issue was meaningful to her because she was a mother of four.

“Usually, staff doesn’t speak on bills, the great thing about the governor is that he respects that we are people first,” Williamson told the San Francisco Chronicle. “This was important to me.”

Business advocates appreciated her direct approach when she worked for Brown.

“She was very straightforward, she was a good person to work with,” said Stuart Waldman, president of Valley Industry and Commerce Assn. He said he hadn’t dealt with her in years.

She flip-flopped between private and government work, drawing criticism from groups like Consumer Watchdog for her “revolving door” career.

In one episode, she was allegedly seen negotiating for her energy clients in Brown’s office as the state hammered out details over a grid deal, drawing outrage from the watchdog group.

She started her own government relations firm, Grace Public Affairs, which handled an array of campaigns, including the online sports betting initiative Proposition 27, which appeared on the 2022 ballot, but failed to pass.

Her clients included California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, and former Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, whose campaign fund was allegedly raided by Williamson, and others.

By 2017, she had a close group of female friends, who had also risen to the top of their professions. But to those who weren’t in her inner circle, she was all elbows, one political insider said this week.

At the California Democratic Party headquarters in downtown Sacramento, a bronze statue of Williamson’s then-5-year-old daughter was installed as part of a campaign to promote female empowerment following Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss.

Those behind the statue included Williamson’s friends Robin Swanson, a Democratic communications consultant, and Angie Tate, then a chief fundraiser for the California Democratic Party.

The installation was intended to mimic the “Fearless Girl” statue at New York’s Wall Street, which shows a 4-foot young woman looking defiantly at the famous charging bull statue.

In 2022, Newsom’s office announced Williamson was joining his office as chief of staff. Though the two weren’t particularly close when she joined, she quickly became part of his inner circle, Politico reported at the time.

Anthony York, Newsom’s former communications director and a former L.A. Times reporter, told Politico at the time that Williamson was not intimidated by the governor’s celebrity status. “She gives zero f—s, which is part of what makes her so great,” York said.

During her time in Newsom’s office, she worked with former Senate leader Darrell Steinberg on the successful passage of Proposition 1, which borrows billions of dollars for mental health services, and was a personal issue for her family.

“I had a particularly tough experience with my husband that I learned a lot from… when the incident happened with him, I learned about all the holes in the system,” she told KQED.

She moved from Elk Grove last year to Carmichael, purchasing a home for $1.695 million, according to property records. The records show her linked to several homes in Elk Grove, including one that went into foreclosure in 2012.

Williamson would send off combative messages, including social media posts or texts, often at night. Among her targets: California Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez and U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), whom she called an “entertaining idiot” on X.

She took aim at former Assemblymember Kevin McCarty during his campaign last year for Sacramento mayor. She called him a “devil” on X and urged others not to vote for him, before her comment was taken down a few days later.

Newsom placed Williamson on leave when she informed him last year she was under criminal investigation. Her last day in office was in November 2024. At the time, the governor said in a statement that “her insight, tenacity, and big heart will be missed.”

This week, a spokesperson for the governor struck a different tone: “Ms. Williamson no longer serves in this administration. While we are still learning details of the allegations, the Governor expects all public servants to uphold the highest standards of integrity.”

SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court may reveal Thursday whether it intends to uphold Proposition 8, and if so, whether an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages will remain valid, during a high-stakes televised session that has sparked plans for demonstrations throughout the state.

By now, the court already has drafted a decision on the case, with an author and at least three other justices willing to sign it. Oral arguments sometimes result in changes to the draft, but rarely do they change the majority position. The ruling is due in 90 days.

Chief Justice Ronald M. George, who wrote the historic May 15, 2008, decision that gave same-sex couples the right to marry, will be the one to watch during the hearing because he is often in the majority and usually writes the rulings in the most controversial cases.

Most legal analysts expect that the court will garner enough votes to uphold existing marriages but not enough to overturn Proposition 8. The dissenters in May’s 4-3 marriage ruling said the decision should be left to the voters.

One conservative constitutional scholar has said that the court could both affirm its historic May 15 ruling giving gays equality and uphold Proposition 8 by requiring the state to use a term other than “marriage” and apply it to all couples, gay and straight.

“The alternatives are for the court to accept Proposition 8 and authorize the people to rewrite the Constitution in a way that undermines a basic principle of equality,” said Pepperdine law professor Douglas Kmiec. If the court overturns Proposition 8, “that is the short course toward impeachment.”

The court is under intense pressure. Opponents of gay marriage have threatened to mount a campaign to boot justices who vote to overturn the initiative. The last time voters ousted state high court justices was in 1986, when then-Chief Justice Rose Bird and two colleagues lost a retention election.

On the other side, the Legislature has passed two resolutions opposing Proposition 8, and protests are being planned statewide to urge the court to throw out the measure.

Thousands are expected to descend Thursday on the San Francisco Civic Center to watch the hearing live on a giant outdoor screen, just steps from the courtroom where the justices will be prodding lawyers in a jammed courtroom.

“It is one of the most important cases in the history of the California Supreme Court,” said Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU of Southern California. “The core tenet of our constitutional democracy is that fundamental rights of historically disadvantaged minorities are not dependent on the whim of the majority.”

The challenges to the initiative are based on novel legal theories. Gay rights lawyers argue that the measure was an illegal constitutional revision, rather than a more limited amendment. The court has struck down constitutional amendments passed by voters as impermissible revisions only twice in its history, and there are relatively few precedents on the subject.

“While no case forecloses the revision argument, there is no case that really supports it, and most of the cases mildly cut against it,” said UC Davis law professor Vikram Amar.

Upholding existing same-sex marriages would be a lower hurdle for the court, Amar and other scholars said.

“There is enough ambiguity in Prop. 8 that the court could easily interpret the measure as not applying to existing marriages,” Amar said. “That is a legally plausible interpretation, and it is so clearly the just interpretation that I think getting four votes for that seems easier.”

State Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown’s office will ask the court to uphold the marriages and strike down the initiative as an illegal repeal of an inalienable right without compelling justification. Brown’s argument is even more novel than the revision challenge, which his office said had no merit.

The Proposition 8 case has attracted more friend-of-the-court briefs than the marriage dispute that led to last year’s historic ruling — the previous record-holder. Most of the outside groups that have weighed in have asked the court to overturn the initiative.

Pepperdine’s Kmiec said replacing the word “marriage” with another term would both leave intact the court’s May 15 ruling and deter a recall campaign that could damage the court as an institution. He said couples could still marry in their religious communities.

That would “restore a religious meaning to a word that is a religious word,” he said. Kmiec, a Catholic, said he reluctantly voted for Proposition 8 “because of the instructions of my faith community” but felt “entirely unsatisfied” with the outcome.

“I am not sure Ron George wants to be remembered as the chief justice who denied the principle of fundamental equality,” the law professor said. “It is not a legacy we should ask anyone to live with, and it is wholly unnecessary.”

George, a moderate Republican, is considered a swing vote on the court and, until the marriage decision, was widely regarded as cautious. Scholars have said the marriage ruling would be pivotal to his legacy on the court.

“It is difficult to imagine, although obviously plausible, that the majority of justices who ruled in the marriage cases would so quickly endorse an undermining of at least a significant portion of their ruling,” said Kate Kendell, executive director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights.

Pepperdine law school Dean Kenneth Starr, hired by the Proposition 8 campaign, will urge the court to uphold the measure and declare that existing same-sex marriages are no longer valid. Benefits, such as inheritance, acquired by couples during their marriages would not be taken away, but couples would have to register as domestic partners to protect their future rights.

“The people ultimately decided,” Starr wrote in his final brief in the case. “Under our system of constitutional government, that is the end of the matter.”

—

[email protected]

Times staff writer Jessica Garrison also contributed to this report.

The hearing is scheduled to be shown live from 9 a.m. to noon Thursday on the California Channel, available to cable customers. (A list of local channel numbers for this service is available at www.calchannel.com/channel “> www.calchannel.com/channel /carriage/ .) The hearing also will be streamed live on www.calchannel.com .

Reporting from Washington — It was classic Donald Trump: The president, angry and embarrassed that most Philadelphia Eagles players planned to boycott the traditional White House victory celebration for Super Bowl champs, dramatically lashed back with his own punishing spin.

Not only did Trump disinvite the entire team late Monday, but he transformed the celebration on Tuesday to dramatically inflame the culture war he ignited two years ago — casting the mostly African American players as unpatriotic and ignoring their protests both of police brutality and of Trump’s perceived divisiveness.

The president, in an early morning Twitter statement, said the White House would hold an alternative celebration of patriotism for the fans, “where we will proudly be playing the National Anthem and other wonderful music.”

“NFL, no escaping to the Locker Rooms!” Trump added, referring to the league owners’ new policy of requiring players to stand for the pregame playing of the national anthem or stay off the field. Though that policy is largely viewed as a response to the president’s pressure, Trump made plain that he was not satisfied; he’s called in the past for owners to force players to stand or be fired.

Later, at the fete on the South Lawn with military bands at the ready, Trump briefly opened the program before an audience that seemed to have fewer than the promised 1,000 Eagles fans, bolstered by a number of administration aides.

“I want to use this opportunity to explain why young Americans stand for the national anthem,” Trump said. “Maybe it’s about time that we understand. We stand to honor our military, and to honor our country and to remember the fallen heroes who never made it back home.”

The president’s reaction this week was more dramatic than his response to a similar snub last year by the 2017 National Basketball Assn. champion Golden State Warriors. That reflects not only his long-running fight with professional football players about the flag and the anthem, but also renewed tensions between Trump and the National Football League that date to the 1980s. Trump failed then both in acquiring an NFL team and in challenging the NFL commercially as a prominent owner in a new, rival sports league, the USFL, which subsequently folded.

Since the campaign, Trump has often used the NFL player protests to rally his supporters and distract from other controversies. Polls show a plurality of Americans, and large majorities of whites and Republicans, do not support the player protests.

As Trump was attacking the Eagles, a variety of other controversies swirled and vied for attention.

Former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was accused by federal prosecutors of witness tampering in his tax and money-laundering case. Trump’s press secretary and lawyer were under fire for falsely saying Trump did not dictate the misleading statement last year about a meeting that Trump’s son, son-in-law and Manafort had with a Russian lawyer promising “dirt” on rival Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign.

Trump himself faced new questions after his tweet Monday that he had the “absolute right to PARDON myself.” And he was being assailed for ignoring a new study estimating that about 4,600 Americans died from the hurricanes last year in Puerto Rico, not 16 or 17 as he’d said in the past.

The Eagles’ snub presented yet another controversy, but one Trump sought to turn to advantage.

“These cultural issues that stir controversy, they’re winners for the president,” said one Trump ally who speaks with the president and his top aides regularly and requested anonymity.

No Eagles players knelt in protest during the 2017 season. Torrey Smith, a former Eagles player, tweeted, “The President continues to spread the false narrative that players are anti-military.”

Many pro athletes on championship teams, especially African Americans, have been conflicted about White House visits during the Trump presidency, or simply stayed away. The Warriors had their invitation for a visit with Trump rescinded after publicly equivocating about attending.

LeBron James of the NBA’s Cleveland Cavaliers, arguably the league’s most influential player, told reporters on Tuesday that “no matter who wins” the NBA Finals now underway between the Cavs and the Warriors, “no one wants to go anyway” to the White House. Warriors star guard Stephen Curry agreed.

Trump, on Twitter, noted that he’d hosted celebrations at the White House for other professional and college teams and sports, including NASCAR, the Chicago Cubs, Houston Astros, Pittsburgh Penguins, New England Patriots, the University of Alabama and Clemson University.

Trump decided late Monday, less than 24 hours before the planned Super Bowl tribute, to instead make it “a celebration of the American flag,” as White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called it in a statement Tuesday. Fewer than 10 players out of more than 70 who were eligible had been expected to attend, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Sanders blamed the Eagles for botching the visit. She said 81 people from the team — including employees, coaches, managers and players — had accepted invitations to come, along with 1,000 fans. With only a small number of players expected, the team tried Friday to reschedule the event, Sanders said, to a time when Trump planned to be overseas.

The White House said that “despite sensing a lack of good faith” on the Eagles’ part, it tried to work with the team “to change the event format that could accommodate a smaller group of players.”

“Unfortunately, the Eagles offered to send only a tiny handful of representatives, while making clear that the great majority of players would not attend the event, despite planning to be in D.C. today,” she said. “In other words, the vast majority of the Eagles team decided to abandon their fans.”

In a statement, the NFL Players Assn. said it was “disappointed” with Trump’s decision to disinvite the team, adding that it led to the cancellation of several “player-led community service events for young people in the Washington, D.C., area.”

“The NFL players love their country, support our troops, give back to their communities and strive to make America a better place,” the union said.

The Eagles ownership released a statement Monday night that did not mention Trump or the canceled visit, calling it “an inspiration” to watch “the entire Eagles community come together.”

Individual players showed more frustration. The team’s star tight end, Zach Ertz, tweeted angrily after Fox News, Trump’s media ally, used file footage of Eagles players kneeling in prayer to falsely suggest they were kneeling in protest during the anthem.

“This can’t be serious,” Ertz wrote. “Praying before games with my teammates, well before the anthem, is being used for your propaganda?! Just sad, I feel like you guys should have to be better than this.”

Fox News issued a rare correction on Twitter.

Some of Pennsylvania’s Democratic lawmakers also weighed in. Sen. Bob Casey wrote on Twitter, “I’m skipping this political stunt at the White House and just invited the Eagles to Congress.”

Follow the latest news of the Trump administration on Essential Washington »

[email protected] | Twitter: @noahbierman

Special correspondents Eli Stokols and Eliza Fawcett contributed to this report.

UPDATES:

2:35 p.m.: This article was updated with details of White House celebration.

This article was originally published at 12:15 p.m.

ORLANDO, Fla. — The daughter of a Hollywood screenwriter who was imprisoned and blacklisted during the anti-communist Red Scare has decried Florida’s new social studies teaching standards that other critics have warned rehabilitate shameful aspects of the McCarthy era.

“The new Florida standards you write about are appalling,” Mitzi Trumbo said late Thursday in an email to the Associated Press. “History should never be rewritten to match the politics of the day, as history has valuable lessons to teach.”

The standards approved Thursday for middle- and high-school students by the Florida Board of Education include instruction on the use of “‘McCarthyism’ as an insult” and how using the terms “red-baiter and Red Scare” is identified with “slander against anti-communists.”

The standards soften decades of criticism of former U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, who led a political movement to root out what he labeled communism in government, the civil rights movement and artistic communities in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The public inquisitions, ideological loyalty tests and firings of that period are often viewed as a shameful chapter in U.S. history.

The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union fueled concerns in the late 1940s about communist Soviet spies infiltrating American life, including the movies and U.S. government. Many of the targets of McCarthy and the U.S. House Un-American Activities Committee were banned from jobs and career opportunities for a decade or more.

One of them, Dalton Trumbo, who wrote the screenplays for classics including “Roman Holiday” and “Spartacus,” used other names or had colleagues take credit for screenplays he wrote in the 1950s because he was on a Hollywood blacklist.

Mitzi Trumbo said she and her two siblings had “some difficult and painful experiences growing up in the 1950s” because of their father’s time in prison and the repercussions of him being on the blacklist.

During the 1940s, Trumbo had been the highest-paid screenwriter in Hollywood. He was also a member of the Communist Party, supporting unions, equal pay and civil rights.

When Trumbo and nine other members of the film industry were called before the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1947, they refused to answer questions about their communist affiliations and were found in contempt. Trumbo landed in federal prison for 11 months.

While blacklisted, Trumbo wrote screenplays under a pseudonym or fronted by others, including “Roman Holiday” and “The Brave One,” whose scripts won Academy Awards. It wasn’t until 1960 when Trumbo was able to get public credit for the screenplays “Exodus” and “Spartacus.” This period of his life was recounted in the 2015 film, “Trumbo,” starring actor Bryan Cranston.

Other blacklisted Hollywood figures included actress Lee Grant, singer and actress Lena Horne and actor and director Charlie Chaplin.

Florida’s new teaching benchmarks were prompted by a law signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2024 requiring instruction on “the consequences of communism” to prepare students against purported indoctrination in higher education.

“It is our responsibility to make sure future generations can thrive and they learn how to think, not what to think,” Layla Collins, a member of the State Board of Education, said during Thursday’s standards meeting.

The move follows the Republican-controlled Legislature’s designation of Nov. 7 as Victims of Communism Day in Florida’s public schools, to include at least 45 minutes of instruction on figures such as Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro.

Under the new standards, Florida teachers should instruct on efforts by “anti-communist politicians,” such as McCarthy, the House Un-American Activities Committee and Presidents Truman and Nixon.

Teachers also are instructed to identify “propaganda and defamation” used to “delegitimize” anti-communists.

“Instruction includes using ‘McCarthyism’ as an insult and shorthand for all anti-communism,” the new standards said. “Instruction includes slander against anti-communists, such as red-baiter and Red Scare.”

Trumbo, who exchanged email messages with the Associated Press from her Northern California home, said she didn’t want to be interviewed by telephone or video because she wasn’t comfortable talking about politics, “especially in today’s political climate.”

“I am glad people are speaking out about the actual history of the period and are explaining how careers and lives were destroyed by HUAC and McCarthyism,” she said, “and how dangerous such political repression is to our freedom of speech and to democracy itself.”

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON  — The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups urged the Supreme Court on Friday to block new California laws that will require thousands of companies to disclose their emissions and their impacts on climate change.

One of the laws is due to take effect on Jan. 1, and the emergency appeal asks the court to put it on hold temporarily.

Their lawyers argue the measures violate the 1st Amendment because the state would be forcing companies to speak on its preferred topic.

“In less than eight weeks, California will compel thousands of companies across the nation to speak on the deeply controversial topic of climate change,” they said in an appeal that also spoke for the California Chamber of Commerce and the Los Angeles County Business Federation.

They say the two new laws would require companies to disclose the “climate-related risks” they foresee and how their operations and emissions contribute to climate change.

“Both laws are part of California’s open campaign to force companies into the public debate on climate issues and pressure them to alter their behavior,” they said. Their aim, according to their sponsors, is to “make sure that the public actually knows who’s green and who isn’t.”

One law, SB 261, will require several thousand companies that do business in California to assess their “climate-related financial risk” and how they may reduce that risk. A second measure, Senate Bill 253, which applies to larger companies, requires them to assess and disclose their emissions and how their operations could impact the climate.

The appeal argues these laws amount to unconstitutional compelled speech.

“No state may violate 1st Amendment rights to set climate policy for the Nation. Compelled-speech laws are presumptively unconstitutional — especially where, as here, they dictate a value-laden script on a controversial subject such as climate change,” they argue.

The emergency appeal was filed by Washington attorney Eugene Scalia, a son of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

The companies have tried and failed to persuade judges in California to block the measures. Exxon Mobil filed a suit in Sacramento, while the Chamber of Commerce sued in Los Angeles.

In August, U.S. District Judge Otis Wright II in Los Angeles refused to block the laws on the grounds they “regulate commercial speech,” which gets less protection under the 1st Amendment. He said businesses are routinely required to disclose financial data and factual information on their operations.

The business lawyers said they had appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals asking for an injunction, but no action has been taken.

Shortly after the chamber’s appeal was filed, state attorneys for Iowa and 24 other Republican-leaning states joined in support. They said they “strongly oppose this radical green speech mandate that California seeks to impose on companies.”

The justices are likely to ask for a response next week from California’s state attorneys before acting on the appeal.

As Jaime Moore prepares to take the helm of the Los Angeles Fire Department, he said he plans to commission an outside investigation into missteps by fire officials during the mop-up of a small brush fire that reignited days later into the destructive Palisades fire.

Mayor Karen Bass had requested a probe late last month in response to reporting by The Times that firefighters were ordered to roll up their hoses and leave the burn area, even though they had complained that the ground was still smoldering.

Moore — a 30-year department veteran whose appointment was confirmed Friday by the Los Angeles City Council — said the reports have generated “understandable mistrust” in the agency.

The Times found that at least one chief assigned to LAFD’s risk management section knew about the complaints for months, but that the department kept that information hidden despite Palisades fire victims pleading for answers about whether more could have been done to protect their community.

On Wednesday, Moore told the council’s public safety committee that bringing in an outside organization to investigate the LAFD’s handling of the Jan. 1 Lachman fire would be one of his first moves as chief.

“Transparency and accountability are vital to ensure that we learn from every incident and is essential if we are to restore confidence in our Fire Department,” Moore said. “As fire chief, I will focus on rebuilding trust, not just with the public, but within the LAFD itself.”

Federal investigators say the Lachman fire was deliberately set on New Years’ Day and burned underground in a canyon root system until it was rekindled by high winds on Jan. 7. LAFD officials have said they believed the earlier fire was fully extinguished.

Moore said one of his top priorities is raising morale in a department that has come under heavy criticism for its handling of the worst wildfire in city history, which killed 12 people and destroyed thousands of homes.

In the days after the Jan. 7 Palisades fire, The Times reported that LAFD decided not to pre-deploy any engines or firefighters to the Palisades — as they had done in the past — despite being warned that some of the most dangerous winds in recent years were headed for the region.

An LAFD after-action report released last month described fire officials’ chaotic response, which included major staffing and communication issues.

Moore — who has the backing of the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City, the union that represents firefighters — said his other priorities include better preparation for major disasters, with a focus on pre-deployment and staffing, as well as for the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Olympics.

“I’ve got skin in the game,” he said, adding that his son is an LAFD firefighter. “We need to address the amount of calls they’re going on, and make sure that they’re going on the right calls with the right resources, and if that means us having to change our department model, so be it. I have the courage to do that.”

He also said he wants to expand the LAFD’s technological capabilities and better deploy the equipment it already has, like the thermal imaging cameras and heat-detecting drones that officials did not deploy during the Lachman fire mop-up.

“We are now requiring them to be used, and we’re not picking up any type of hose until we know that we’ve been able to identify through the use of the drone, thermal imaging cameras to ensure that those surface hot spots are all taken care of,” he said.

“I wish it didn’t take this for us to have to learn the lesson about using the tools we already have,” Councilmember Traci Park replied.

Park grilled Moore on reporting by The Times that firefighters warned a battalion chief about the Lachman fire not being fully extinguished.

“We know now that our own firefighters on the ground were offering warnings that it was still too hot, that it was still too smoldering,” Park said. “For Palisades residents and Angelenos across the city who have questions and concerns, what would you say to them at this point?”

Moore referred back to independent investigation he plans to launch.

“I want to know why it happened, how it happened, and take the necessary steps to ensure that never happens again,” he said.

The Times reviewed text messages among firefighters and a third party that indicated crews had expressed concerns that the Lachman fire would reignite if left unprotected. The exchanges occurred in the weeks and months after the Palisades fire.

In one text message, a firefighter who was at the Lachman scene Jan. 2 wrote that the battalion chief in charge had been told it was a “bad idea” to leave because of visible signs of smoldering terrain, which crews feared could start a new fire.

A second firefighter was told that tree stumps were still hot at the location when the crew packed up and left, according to the texts. And another said in texts last month that crew members were upset when directed to leave the scene, but that they could not ignore orders.

The firefighters’ accounts line up with a video recorded by a hiker above Skull Rock Trailhead late in the morning on Jan. 2 — almost 36 hours after the Lachman fire started — that shows smoke rising from the dirt. “It’s still smoldering,” the hiker says from behind the camera.

A federal grand jury subpoena was served on the LAFD for firefighters’ communications, including text messages, about smoke or hot spots in the area of the Lachman fire, according to an LAFD memo. It is unclear if the subpoena is directly related to the arson case against Jonathan Rinderknecht, who is accused of setting the Jan. 1 fire and has pleaded not guilty.

Complaints that the city and state failed to properly prepare for and respond to the Palisades fire are the subject of numerous lawsuits and a Republican-led inquiry by a U.S. Senate committee.

In addition to the pre-deployment issue, the LAFD’s after-action report found other problems during the Jan. 7 fire fight. The initial dispatch called for only seven engine companies, when the weather conditions required 27. Confusion over which radio channel to use hampered communication. At one point in the first hour, three L.A. County engines showed up requesting an assignment, and received no reply. Another four LAFD engines assembled, but waited 20 minutes without an assignment. In the early afternoon that day, the staging area — where engines were checking in — was overrun by fire.

Moore said he is closely evaluating the 42 recommendations in the report to make sure they are properly implemented.

Bass announced Moore’s selection last month after conducting a nationwide search that included interviews with fire chiefs of other cities. She had ousted Kristen Crowley, who was chief during the Palisades fire, citing deployment decisions ahead of the extreme weather, and appointed interim Fire Chief Ronnie Villanueva in February.

Moore — who said he grew up in the Mar Vista and Venice area — joined the LAFD as a firefighter in 1995, working his way up the ranks in various assignments throughout the city, including supervising arson investigations and serving as a spokesperson for the agency, according to his resume. He most recently was deputy chief of Operations Valley Bureau, directing the response to emergencies across 39 fire stations.

Nov. 14 (UPI) — The White House announced new “trade framework agreements” with Argentina, Ecuador, El Salvador and Guatemala, all governed by administrations aligned with president Donald Trump, with the goal of reducing certain tariffs, eliminating non-tariff barriers and expanding access for U.S. products in those markets.

According to a statement issued by Washington on Thursday, the agreements establish reciprocal commitments.

The Latin American countries will eliminate or ease requirements and licenses that restrict the entry of U.S. goods — including agricultural products, medical devices, machinery and automobiles — while the U.S. government will reduce or waive tariffs on some key exports from those countries, as long as the products are not produced in sufficient quantities domestically.

“These agreements will help American farmers, ranchers, fishermen, small businesses and manufacturers increase U.S. exports and expand trade opportunities with these partners,” the White House said.

The commitments agreed to range from the acceptance of U.S. standards for vehicles, auto parts, medical devices and pharmaceuticals in El Salvador’s case to preferential access in Argentina for machinery, technology products, chemicals and agricultural goods, along with reforms to its intellectual property regime.

Guatemala agreed to ensure a favorable framework for digital trade, including free data transfers and a pledge not to impose taxes on U.S. digital services, while also strengthening its labor rules to prohibit goods linked to forced labor.

Ecuador assumed stricter environmental obligations, such as improving forest governance and combating illegal logging, as well as fully complying with international rules on fisheries subsidies.

On the trade front, it will eliminate or reduce tariffs on key products — fruits, nuts, legumes, wheat, wine and spirits — and dismantle its variable agricultural tariff system, opening significant access for U.S. exports.

The governments of all four countries welcomed the initiative as an opportunity to boost their exports, attract foreign investment and strengthen their competitiveness.

Argentine Foreign Minister Pablo Quirno said on X that the agreement “creates the conditions to increase U.S. investment in Argentina” and includes tariff reductions for key industries.

In a statement, the government of Javier Milei said that as part of this understanding, the two countries agreed to significantly expand access for Argentine beef in the U.S. market and to work together to eliminate non-tariff barriers to bilateral agrifood trade.

It added that the United States will eliminate tariffs on products it does not produce, while Argentina will grant tariff preferences to facilitate the entry of capital goods and intermediate inputs.

Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo and Economy Minister Gabriela García said on social media that more than 70% of the products the country exports to the United States will now enter tariff-free. They added that most remaining products will face a 10% tariff, Prensa Libre reported.

In Ecuador’s case, as Agriculture, Fisheries and Livestock Minister Danilo Palacios had previously indicated, among the products that will no longer pay the 15% tariff imposed by the United States in August are bananas and cacao, two of the main goods in Ecuador’s export basket, the newspaper Primicias reported.

While Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele reposted the White House’s official statement on X with the caption “Friends” alongside both countries’ flags, the Salvadoran Association of Industrialists said the agreement is a “unique opportunity” for exports and for attracting investment.

The Trump administration’s announcement remains at the framework stage, and the agreements are expected to be formalized in the coming weeks.

However, they do not amount to full free trade agreements, but are designed as specific market-access and regulatory commitments, including a guarantee not to impose digital taxes on U.S. companies.

The Transportation Department announced its plan in September after referring to the requirement as ‘unnecessary regulatory burdens’.

The United States Department of Transportation is officially withdrawing from a directive that requires airlines to pay passengers if their flights are delayed.

The White House announced its official withdrawal on Friday after first disclosing its plan back in September.

The plan was first outlined during the administration of former US President Joe Biden, a Democrat.

In December 2024, the federal agency under former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg sought public comment on the plan, which would have required airlines to pay $200 to $300 for domestic delays totalling more than three hours and as high as $775 for even longer, unspecified delays.

Trump’s Transportation Department said the rules would be “unnecessary regulatory burdens” amid its explanation of why it will scrap the plan.

Last month, a group of 18 Democratic senators urged the Trump administration not to drop the compensation plan.

“This is a common-sense proposal: when an airline’s mistake imposes unanticipated costs on families, the airline should try to remedy the situation by providing accommodations to consumers and helping cover their costs,” said the letter signed by Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal, Maria Cantwell, Ed Markey and others.

Airlines in the US must refund passengers for cancelled flights, but are not required to compensate customers for delays.

The European Union, Canada, Brazil and the United Kingdom all have airline delay compensation rules. No large US airline currently guarantees cash compensation for significant flight disruption.

The Transportation Department said on Friday that abandoning the compensation plan would “allow airlines to compete on the services and compensation that they provide to passengers rather than imposing new minimum requirements for these services and compensation through regulation, which would impose significant costs on airlines.”

New rules

The Transportation Department also announced in September that it was considering rescinding Biden regulations requiring airlines and ticket agents to disclose service fees alongside airfares.

It also plans to reduce regulatory burdens on airlines and ticket agents by writing new rules detailing the definition of a flight cancellation that entitles consumers to ticket refunds, as well as revisiting rules on ticket pricing and advertising.

The department did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Al Jazeera also reached out to Buttigieg, who was behind the policy that is now being scrapped, but did not receive a response.

On Wall Street, most airline stocks remain below the market open but were trending upwards in midday trading. American Airlines is down 1.2 percent from the opening bell, United Airlines is down 1 percent, and Delta is down 1.3 percent. JetBlue is tumbling 3.6 percent for the day. Southwest is down by 0.2 percent.

The airline industry is still dealing with delays and cancellations brought on by the US government shutdown, which ended on Wednesday. There are still 1,000 delays on flights to, from and within the United States and 615 cancellations, according to FlightAware, a platform that tracks flight cancellations globally.

SEATTLE — First-term Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell conceded his reelection fight to progressive activist Katie Wilson on Thursday, handing another victory to leftist Democrats around the country frustrated with unaffordability, homelessness, public safety and the actions of President Trump’s administration.

Harrell, a centrist Democrat who previously served three terms on the City Council, led in early results. But Washington conducts all-mail elections, with ballots postmarked by Election Day. Later-arriving votes, which historically trend more liberal, broke heavily in Wilson’s favor, adding to a progressive shift to the left nationally.

In a concession speech at City Hall on Thursday afternoon, Harrell said he had congratulated Wilson in a “delightful” call.

“I feel very good about the future of this country and this city still,” he said.

Wilson, 43, is a democratic socialist who has never held elected office. She told a news conference later Thursday that it was hard for her to believe she had been elected mayor, considering that at the beginning of this year she had no intention of running, and she acknowledged concerns about her lack of experience: “No one saw this coming.”

But she also spoke to the resonance of her volunteer-driven campaign among voters concerned about affordability and public safety in a city where the cost of living has soared as Amazon and other tech companies proliferated. Universal child care, better mass transit, better public safety and stable, affordable housing are among her priorities, and she said she would take office with a strong mandate to pursue them, though she acknowledged the city also faces a significant budget shortfall.

Wilson called herself a coalition builder and community organizer, and said she would also work with those who questioned her qualifications to lead a city with more than 13,000 employees and a budget of nearly $9 billion: “This is your city too.”

“When I say this is your city, that means you have a right to be here and to live a dignified life — whatever your background, whatever your income,” Wilson said. “But it also means that we all have a collective responsibility for this city and for each other. … We cannot tackle the major challenges facing our city unless we do it together.”

She will be working with a relatively new City Council: Only two of the seven council members have served more than one term.

Harrell was elected mayor in 2021 following the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic and racial justice protests over George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police. With crime falling, more police being hired, less visible drug use and many homeless encampments removed from city parks, the business-backed Harrell once seemed likely to cruise to reelection.

But Trump’s return to office — and his efforts to send in federal agents or cut funding for blue cities — helped reawaken Seattle’s progressive voters. The lesser-known Wilson, a democratic socialist, ran a campaign that echoed some of the themes of progressive mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani in New York. She trounced Harrell by nearly 10 percentage points in the August primary and quickly became favored to win the mayor’s office.

Wilson studied at an Oxford University college in England but did not graduate. She founded the small nonprofit Transit Riders Union in 2011 and has led campaigns for better public transportation, higher minimum wages, stronger renter protections and more affordable housing. She herself is a renter, living in a one-bedroom apartment in the city’s Capitol Hill neighborhood, and says that has shaped her understanding of Seattle’s affordability crisis.

Wilson criticized Harrell as doing too little to provide more shelter and said his encampment sweeps have been cosmetic, merely pushing unhoused people around the city. Wilson also painted him as a City Hall fixture who bore responsibility for the status quo.

Harrell, 67, played on the Rose Bowl champion University of Washington football team in 1978 before going to law school. His father, who was Black, came to Seattle from the segregated Jim Crow South, and his mother, a Japanese American, was incarcerated at an internment camp in Minidoka, Idaho, during World War II after officials seized her family’s Seattle flower shop — experiences that fostered his understanding of the importance of civil rights and inclusivity.

Both candidates touted plans for affordable housing, combating crime and attempting to Trump-proof the city, which receives about $150 million a year in federal funding. Both want to protect Seattle’s sanctuary city status.

Wilson has proposed a city-level capital gains tax to help offset federal funding the city might lose and to pay for housing. Harrell says that idea is ineffective because a city capital gains tax could easily be avoided by those who would be required to pay it.

Johnson writes for the Associated Press.

ATLANTA — The leader of a nonpartisan organization announced he will take over the Georgia election interference case against President Trump and others after Fulton County Dist. Atty. Fani Willis was removed from the case.

The Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia was tasked with finding someone to lead the case after Willis was disqualified over an “appearance of impropriety” created by a romantic relationship with the special prosecutor she’d chosen to lead it. The organization’s executive director, Pete Skandalakis, said Friday that he would take the case on himself.

“The filing of this appointment reflects my inability to secure another conflict prosecutor to assume responsibility for this case,” Skandalakis said in an emailed statement. “Several prosecutors were contacted and, while all were respectful and professional, each declined the appointment.”

While it is unlikely that any action against Trump could proceed while he is the sitting president, there are 14 other people still facing charges in the case, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former New York mayor and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani.

Trump earlier this week announced pardons for people accused of backing his efforts to overturn the results of that election — including those charged in Georgia — but that doesn’t affect state charges.

After the Georgia Supreme Court in September declined to hear Willis’ appeal of her disqualification, it fell to the nonpartisan Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council to find a new prosecutor. Skandalakis can continue to follow Willis’ vision for the prosecution, decide to pursue only some charges or dismiss the case altogether.

“While it would have been simple to allow Judge McAfee’s deadline to lapse or to inform the Court that no conflict prosecutor could be secured — thereby allowing the case to be dismissed for want of prosecution — I did not believe that to be the right course of action,” Skandalakis wrote. “The public has a legitimate interest in the outcome of this case. Accordingly, it is important that someone make an informed and transparent determination about how best to proceed.”

The Associated Press sent text messages seeking comment to a spokesperson for Willis and a lawyer for Trump.

Willis announced the sprawling indictment against Trump and 18 others in August 2023. She used the state’s anti-racketeering law to allege a wide-ranging conspiracy to try to illegally overturn Trump’s narrow loss to Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

Defense attorneys sought Willis’ removal after one of them revealed in January 2024 that Willis had engaged in a romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, the special prosecutor she had hired to lead the case. The defense attorneys said the relationship created a conflict of interest, alleging that Willis personally profited from the case when Wade used his earnings to pay for vacations the pair took.

During an extraordinary hearing the following month, Willis and Wade both testified about the intimate details of their personal relationship. They maintained that their romance didn’t begin until after Wade was hired and said that they split the costs for vacations and other outings.

The trial judge, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, rebuked Willis, saying in an order in March 2024 that her actions showed a “tremendous lapse in judgment.” But he said he did not find a conflict of interest that would disqualify Willis. He ultimately ruled that Willis could remain on the case if Wade resigned, which the special prosecutor did hours later.

Defense attorneys appealed that ruling, and the Georgia Court of Appeals removed Willis from the case in December, citing an “appearance of impropriety.” The high court in September declined to hear Willis’ appeal.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

Nov. 14 (UPI) — The BBC issued a retraction and a formal apology to U.S. President Donald Trump for edits to a speech he gave ahead of the Jan. 6 riots on Capitol Hill that made it appear as if he was inciting his supporters to violence.

The British public service broadcaster apologized Thursday night via the corrections page on its website, with the apology the lead story across all of its news platforms on television, radio and online during the evening and first thing Friday morning.

BBC Chairman Samir Shah also penned a personal written apology to the White House, however, the BBC indicated it would not be paying compensation, as demanded by Trump.

The retraction said an edition of Panorama titled Trump: A Second Chance, broadcast on Oct. 28, 2024, used excerpts lifted from different parts of Trump’s speech in a way that inadvertently made it appear they were contiguous.

The BBC’s version had Trump saying, “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell,” when his actual words were, “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.”

The BBC said it accepted that this “gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.”

“The BBC would like to apologize to President Trump for that error of judgment.”

However, the notice made no mention of compensation, one of President Trump’s key demands in his letter threatening the BBC with a $1 billion lawsuit alleging the program had defamed him and giving it until 5 p.m. EST on Friday to respond.

A BBC spokesman said the corporation strongly disagreed “there is a basis for a defamation claim.”

There was no immediate response from either the White House or Trump’s legal counsel.

The Panorama program was not an isolated incident, according to The Telegraph, which said the BBC’s Newsnight program did something very similar with the same speech in a broadcast in 2022.

A spokesman for Trump’s legal team said that from the latest revelation it was “now clear that the BBC engaged in a pattern of defamation against President Trump” and accused it of attempting to try to influence the outcome of the 2024 election.

The debacle has sparked a furious debate about editorial impartiality at the BBC, which is funded by a $229 annual license that every household with a TV must pay, prompting calls for an overhaul of internal processes and procedures.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy acknowledged the BBC’s editorial rules were “in some cases not robust enough and in other cases not consistently applied,” and appeared to suggest the replacement for director-general Tim Davie, who quit Sunday, must be from a journalism background.

Davie spent the first half of his career as a senior marketing executive at PepsiCo before joining the BBC’s marketing division.

The opposition Conservative’s Shadow Culture Secretary, Nigel Huddleston, said he was waiting to see if Trump accepted the BBC’s response to be the “fulsome apology” he was entitled to receive.

“I do not want the British license fee payer or the rest of the BBC to pay the price for poor editorial decisions made by BBC journalists, he said in a post on X.

“However, we would all be in a better position if the BBC had never made these errors in the first place. The BBC needs a fundamental review of processes and procedures to ensure that such failures in impartiality never happen again.”

United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer has sought to distance himself from an unofficial briefing to the media by unnamed “allies” that he intends to fight off a leadership contest which, they say, could come just 18 months into his premiership.

On Tuesday evening, unnamed sources were cited in The Guardian newspaper saying Health Secretary Wes Streeting has gathered significant backing to supplant Starmer.

But on Wednesday morning, Streeting denied this, telling journalists that he was “not challenging the prime minister”.

“I’m not doing any of the things some silly briefer said overnight,” he stated.

Asked if those responsible for the briefing should be sacked, Streeting said, “Yes. But he’s [Starmer] got to find them first, and I wouldn’t expect him to waste loads of time on this.”

“There are people around the prime minister who do not follow his model and style of leadership,” he said.

In response to the ensuing media storm, Starmer, whose premiership since last year has been marred by poor polling, told reporters in north Wales on Thursday that briefings against ministers are “completely unacceptable”.

“I have been talking to my team today. I have been assured that no briefing against ministers was done from Number 10, but I have made it clear that I find it absolutely unacceptable,” he said.

The current internal party strife has shone a light on the prime minister’s standing as leader of the Labour Party.

In its most recent poll on Tuesday, pollster YouGov said of 4,989 people polled, only 27 percent thought he should continue as Labour Party leader.

Here’s what we know about the rumours of a leadership plot:

What are the rumours about a leadership challenge?

On Tuesday evening, unnamed senior Starmer aides told The Guardian newspaper that any attempt to remove the prime minister would be “reckless” and “dangerous”. According to the aides, deposing Starmer so early in his term as prime minister would undermine financial markets and reverberate on the stock market, the party and its international relationships.

“The party would not recover for a generation,” one of the unnamed sources told The Guardian.

Number 10 sources also told The Guardian they are concerned about rumours that Streeting could be planning a “coup” and is just one of several Labour ministers who are “on manoeuvres” to take the leadership if the opportunity arises. However, none of them were likely to move against the prime minister right now.

They said the most likely moment for a leadership challenge would be after the autumn budget – the government’s tax-and-spending review, due in parliament on November 26 – if higher taxes are announced, or after May elections next year if the Labour party performs poorly.

“Keir will not stand aside at this point, for Wes or anybody else,” one source told The Guardian.

On Friday, the UK’s Financial Times cited an unnamed minister who claimed that support for the health secretary was growing following the news of the unsanctioned “briefing”.

Streeting was not the only name mentioned as a potential leadership contender. Both Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Energy Secretary and a former leader of the Labour Party, Ed Miliband were named as possible contenders, the sources said.

Who briefed the press?

The British press is speculating that the unofficial briefing may have been organised by Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, as a tactic designed to put off any ministers thinking about challenging him.

McSweeney, who has been widely credited with helping Starmer to win the July 2024 election, is now facing calls to resign from unnamed members of parliament, according to reports.

However, Starmer appeared not to support such a move on Thursday when he reiterated that he “of course” has complete confidence in his chief of staff.

What do opposition parties say?

Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch was quick to respond, accusing Starmer of losing control of his party during Wednesday’s Prime Minister’s Question Time.

Badenoch called Starmer a “weak prime minister at war with his own cabinet”.

“Two weeks before the budget, isn’t it the case that this prime minister has lost control of government, he’s lost control of his party and lost the trust of the British people,” she said.

Earlier in the debate, Badenoch referred to an interview Streeting gave to the BBC in which he accused Downing Street of having a “toxic culture”, and asked Starmer if his minister was correct.

“Any attack on any member of my cabinet is completely unacceptable,” Starmer said in response.

Meanwhile, the far-right Reform UK party’s head of policy, Zia Yusuf, wrote on X on Thursday that the “terrifying thing about the coup against Starmer is that Labour members will choose his replacement”.

“Their favourite Labour minister is Ed Miliband. Some of the most unhinged people in the country will choose the next Prime Minister,” he added.

Reform’s popularity has risen hugely in the UK since last year’s election.

How does the autumn budget fit into this, and how is Labour polling?

The briefing came just two weeks before Starmer and his chancellor of the exchequer, Rachel Reeves, announce the autumn budget on November 26.

The budget, which outlines the government’s tax-and-spending plans for the next year, has been the subject of intense speculation in recent weeks, as it was widely expected to break one of Labour’s main election pledges: not to increase income taxes.

However, the Financial Times reported on Friday morning that Reeves is now ruling out any rise in income tax amid concerns that it could seriously anger voters and backbench legislators.

Why else is Starmer losing popularity in the UK?

Since winning the election in 2024, the prime minister has received backlash from across the political spectrum, including from Labour voters, over several issues.

According to a YouGov poll in September, if an election were to be called now, the far-right Reform UK would win, leaving the Labour Party as the second-largest party and the former governing party, the Conservatives, in third place.

Here are some of the main areas of domestic policy which are causing the popularity of Starmer’s Labour Party to wane.

Migration

The opposition Reform UK party has risen in popularity largely on the back of its calls for stricter migrant control. The key issue is the rapid rise in the numbers of people arriving in small boats across the English Channel from France, particularly in the past year.

In September, Starmer struck a “one-in-one-out” migrant exchange deal with France in an effort to deter people from attempting the Channel crossing. Under the deal, France will accept the return of asylum seekers who crossed to the UK but cannot prove a family connection to the UK.

For each migrant France takes back, the UK will grant asylum to one person who has arrived from France through official channels and who can prove they have family connections in the UK.

But only a handful of migrants have been deported under the scheme so far. Furthermore, on Monday, the Home Office reported that a second migrant had re-entered the UK after being deported to France.

Rise of the far-right

Starmer has faced criticism for his lukewarm response to the rising number of far-right protests across the country.

In September, at least 11,000 people joined a “Unite the Kingdom” march, displaying the St George flag in London.

While Starmer denounced violence against police officers during the protests and argued that the US was “built on diversity”, the antifascist group, Hope Not Hate, and several MPs have urged the government to take stronger action against the rise of far-right groups.

Critics also say Starmer has not done enough to appeal to people who support Reform, or to address their concerns about migration.

Accidental prison releases

In a major blunder, HMP Wandsworth prison in London wrongly released two offenders in early November, including an Algerian sex offender.

Both men were eventually returned to prison but, in the case of the Algerian offender, only after the man handed himself in. Conservative Party shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said the mistake revealed “the incompetence of this government”.

Economy

Starmer has been grappling with a low-growth economy since the start of his term in government.

According to new figures from the Office for National Statistics on Thursday, between July and September, the UK’s gross domestic product (GDP) increased by just 0.1 percent in comparison with growth of 0.3 percent between April and July.

Meanwhile, inflation remained stuck at 3.8 percent in September 2025 – unchanged from July and August. This is the highest it has been since the start of 2024.