politics

NEW YORK — Former New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced Friday that he had become a citizen of Albania, putting him one step closer to his oft-repeated dream of leaving politics behind for a life abroad.

Adams, a Democrat, received the honorary citizenship “at his request,” according to an official decree from the country’s president, Bajram Begaj.

The news was first reported in the Albanian press and confirmed by a spokesperson for Adams, who said the ex-mayor had “long been a friend and ally of the Albanian-American community.”

“The decision by the Republic of Albania to grant Mayor Adams citizenship reflects that enduring relationship and mutual respect,” the spokesperson, Todd Shapiro, said in a text message, adding that the recognition “further strengthens the bond between New York and Albania.”

Adams, who once described himself as an “international mayor,” has previously expressed an affinity for the small Balkan nation. His adult son lived in the country while competing in Albania’s version of “American Idol” and Adams traveled there himself in October — one of several international trips taken in his final months in office.

The purpose, he said at the time, was “to say hello to a friend and learn from a friend and build a relationship with the friendship that would not allow our oceans or seas to divide us.”

It wasn’t immediately clear what, if anything, Adams planned to do with his new citizenship. But he has previously expressed a desire to move far from his hometown of New York City.

“When I retire from government, I’m going to live in Baku,” Adams, then Brooklyn borough president, said at an event honoring the Azerbaijan community in 2018. A few years later, in an interview with a Jewish publication, Adams said he would like to retire in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.

As mayor, Adams’ penchant for international trips to Turkey prompted a federal indictment focused, in part, on allegations that he accepted improper travel benefits from foreign nationals.

Adams denied the allegations, and the case was later ordered dropped by President Trump’s Justice Department. Adams later met with Trump administration officials about the possibility of taking an ambassadorship, which did not materialize.

Shortly after dropping his ailing bid for reelection, Adams embarked on a four-day trip to Albania, meeting with the country’s Prime Minister Edi Rama and members of his Cabinet, along with local business leaders. The trip was paid for in part by the Albanian government.

Since leaving office, Adams has been spotted in Dubai and the Democratic Republic of Congo, though his day-to-day activities remain a source of some speculation.

In January, he launched a cryptocurrency coin that he said would beat back antisemitism and “anti-Americanism,” but it drew scrutiny after losing millions of dollars in value.

Offenhartz writes for the Associated Press.

Living outside the community they want to represent can be a handicap for political candidates, but it’s not likely to be a problem for Los Angeles mayoral hopeful Spencer Pratt, who until recently was living in Carpinteria in Santa Barbara County, analysts say.

That’s because Pratt’s home burned in the January 2025 Palisades fire, making him a sympathetic figure among many voters — especially those living in his Westside base, they say.

“I don’t think this is going to be electorally consequential,” said Zev Yaroslavsky, a former Los Angeles County supervisor and L.A. City Council member who now runs the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. “He’s a victim of the Palisades fire that doesn’t have a home to live in because it burned down.”

Pratt filed to run for mayor in February and was in second place behind Mayor Karen Bass in a recent poll by the Luskin school. He was certified by the Los Angeles city clerk on March 2 as one of 14 candidates in the June 2 primary election.

While some observers have raised questions about his eligibility, a state memorandum following the fires said that voters who were temporarily displaced from their homes can use their prior address as their permanent residence as long as they “intend to return” in the future.

Los Angeles mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt currently resides in a private community in Carpinteria, Calif.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Michael Sanchez, a spokesperson for the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, said this also applies to candidates.

“In situations where a candidate has been temporarily displaced (such as the 2025 wildfires), their eligibility to run for office is not impacted, provided they maintain domicile in their district,” Sanchez said in a statement.

He explained that domicile is determined by a person’s primary residence and their intent to return to that residence. “Temporary relocation during rebuilding or recovery does not, by itself, change a person’s domicile.”

The Times asked the L.A. city clerk’s office last week about Pratt’s residency and eligibility.

“We cannot comment on the specifics of a candidate’s address due to confidentiality. Any matter concerning a candidate’s eligibility or residency, such as this situation, can be formally challenged through the court,” said Josue Marcus, a spokesperson for the city clerk’s office.

Any potential challenge to Pratt’s eligibility based on residency would turn on the question of whether he had intent to return, said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Marymount University law professor. “Those are tricky inquiries because it depends on someone’s state of mind,” she said.

Pratt and his campaign aides didn’t respond to requests for comment. Pratt released a video Monday, following inquiries from The Times, defending his decision to move to Carpinteria but saying he now intends to live in a trailer placed on his burned-out lot in Pacific Palisades.

The city of Los Angeles sprawls across roughly 500 square miles, creating logistical hurdles if nothing else for a candidate seeking citywide office from a remote location, noted Democratic political consultant Mike Trujillo.

“Anyone that has done the drive from San Pedro to Sylmar knows that L.A. is a big place,” said Trujillo, who isn’t affiliated with any of the candidates in the June 2 mayoral primary. “To add another hour and a half to the drive is not advantageous if you’re trying to campaign in every corner of the city.”

Pratt, a former reality TV star, has millions of followers on social media, but Trujillo said that Pratt will need to show a strong presence in the community to wage a successful campaign.

Pratt is a Republican running in a Democrat-majority city. Developer Geoffrey H. Palmer, a major campaign donor to President Trump, plans to host a reception for Pratt at his Beverly Hills home April 28, according to a document the Pratt campaign filed with the city Ethics Commission.

The event is being organized by Trey Kozacik, who also organized a Trump fundraiser in Los Angeles in 2019.

The UCLA Luskin poll released this month showed Pratt with the support of 11% of likely voters, behind Bass with 25% and ahead of City Council member Nithya Raman with 9%.

Mayoral candidate Adam Miller, who polled at 3% in the survey, said Pratt’s party affiliation is his biggest hurdle to winning the mayoral race.

“I sympathize with Spencer for losing his home and feeling outrage toward the city, but he is not a viable candidate. It doesn’t matter where he lives, a Republican hasn’t been elected mayor in 30 years in this city, and he isn’t going to change that now,” said Miller, a tech executive.

Others say party affiliation is less of an issue.

“This is a nonpartisan race,” said Roxanne Hoge, the chair of the Los Angeles County Republican Party. “There’s no letter accompanying anyone’s name. … I personally support him because he’s an intelligent alternative.”

Some think Pratt will also hold appeal for some Democratic voters.

“There are people I speak to who I know to be Democrats who really, really like him,” said Maryam Zar, who heads the Palisades Recovery Coalition. “To the extent that people are disappointed in this recovery, they pin their hopes on Spencer. That’s not a bad place for him to be.”

MIAMI — President Trump shared video of a deadly attack allegedly by a Haitian immigrant accused of bludgeoning a woman with a hammer at a Florida gas station, portraying the killing as justification for his administration’s mass deportation agenda.

Rolbert Joachin, 40, was arrested and charged with killing a woman on April 2 in Fort Myers, about 160 miles northwest of Miami. Authorities said the man was from Haiti and arrived in the U.S. in 2022. The woman who was killed was identified as a 51-year-old immigrant from Bangladesh and a mother of two adult daughters.

Trump, who posted the video late Thursday to his Truth Social account, has often sought to portray immigrants as bringing crime to the U.S., and the video emerging from the Florida attack presented him with a new, particularly graphic opportunity to do so. Trump also often paints Democrats and his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, as allowing in immigrants who posed a criminal or national security threat to the U.S.

Critics say the president unjustly paints all immigrants as criminals in an effort to bolster his immigration agenda, when studies have found that people living in the U.S. illegally are less likely than native-born Americans to have been arrested for violent, drug and property crimes.

“The video of her brutal slaying is one of the most vicious things you will ever see,” Trump said in his post, describing the man as an “animal.”

Graphic video captured woman’s killing

The woman who was killed was working as a clerk at the convenience store of the gas station, according to court documents. The killing happened outside the store and the man was arrested the same day.

In security camera footage of her killing posted on the Department of Homeland Security’s X feed, the man can be seen repeatedly slamming the hammer into a black vehicle parked in front of the gas station. Eventually a woman in black pants and a pink shirt comes out and appears to question him.

The man, wearing a yellow shirt and black shorts, walks up to the woman and immediately swings the hammer at her head. The woman falls down on the sidewalk in front of the gas station’s front doors. The man attacks the woman with the hammer multiple times before stepping over her unmoving body and walking away, out of the frame of the camera.

The victim was later identified in a police report as Nilufa Easmin, 51. A GoFundMe started by Samir Bahadur Syed, the President of the Bangladesh Association of Southwest Florida, described her as a “devoted mother who worked tirelessly to provide for her two young daughters.”

Syed said that Easmin arrived in the United States about three decades ago and resided in Miami and Palm Beach before moving to Florida’s west coast. She was a single mother, and her two daughters — one 23 years old and the other about 26 — were born in the U.S., Syed told the Associated Press.

He added that Easmin had been working at the convenience store for nearly five months and that she also held another job.

Fort Myers police said they responded to a report of a woman being hit with a hammer at a Chevron gas station. When officers arrived they found a woman on the ground with blood around her head and multiple cuts.

Officers later located Joachin walking on the street and took him into custody. The police said he has confessed. He was charged with murder and property damage and appeared in court on Wednesday. His arraignment is set for May 4.

An email message sent to the public defender listed in court records as Joachin’s lawyer seeking comment was not immediately returned.

Trump administration criticizes temporary deportation protections

Trump blamed Biden for granting the man temporary protection to stay in the U.S.

Kelly Walker, acting field office director for ICE enforcement and removal operations for the Miami field office, said during a news conference Friday that Joachin arrived in a “water vessel” near Key West, Fla., in August 2022. He was arrested and given Temporary Protected Status in 2023. That status was revoked this week, Walker said.

The Trump administration has harshly criticized the use of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, which can be granted by an administration to citizens of a country going through turmoil or strife. Immigrants who qualify are allowed to stay in the U.S. and work for a temporary period, although Republican critics contend that the Biden administration misused its TPS authorities to broadly allow hundreds of thousands of people to stay in the country.

There are several lawsuits at the federal courts challenging Trump’s efforts to terminate TPS for more than one million people, including 350,000 Haitians. In March, a federal appeals court sided with a lower judge’s ruling against the end of temporary status for Haiti and the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on April 29.

The Department of Homeland Security and the Trump administration have often highlighted crimes committed by immigrants and created a website where one can look up people arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the crimes they’ve committed in the U.S.

The administration often highlights “Angel Families” who have lost family members to crimes committed by immigrants.

On Thursday, ICE held an event marking the one-year anniversary of the reopening of an office dedicated to assisting those families, including emotional testimony from some of the surviving family members.

Salomon, Bellisle and Santana write for the Associated Press. Bellisle reported from Seattle and Santana from Washington.

Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democratic front-runner in the hotly contested California governor’s race, was accused of sexual assault and misconduct by a former staff member and other women, according to reports published on Friday.

The woman who worked for the Northern California congressman said she had a consensual relationship at times, but that he sexually assaulted her twice when she was too inebriated to consent, according to a report by the San Francisco Chronicle. Three other woman also have accused Swalwell of sexual misconduct, including receiving unsolicited nude photos from the Democrat, according to CNN.

The allegations against Swalwell has his campaign teetering on collapse, with powerful labor organizations and other major supporters pulling their endorsements and dropping political ads promoting the once-promising candidate. U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, one of many prominent Democrats who supported Swalwell, and others have called on him to drop out of the race.

Swalwell had been gaining traction in the crowded field, and the controversy completely upends the race just as voters are starting to pay attention.

“It’s like a bomb went off,” said Mike Madrid, a Republican strategist who runs the research nonprofit Latino Working Class Project.

Swalwell’s staff member was 21 years old when she started working for the congressman, who is nearly two decades her senior, and said she did not report the incidents to police because of fears she would not be believed.

“I have no skin in the game of who becomes governor of California, but I feel people have a right to know whether the person who leads a state that is a safe haven for so many women actually treats women with dignity and will protect their rights,” the woman, who was not identified because she is the alleged victim of sexual assault, told the Chronicle. “No one protected me from him, and so I have to protect the other young women like me who aspire to work in this field and he could prey upon.”

Swalwell on Friday denied the accusations.

“These allegations are false and come on the eve of an election against the front-runner for governor,” he said in a statement. “For nearly 20 years, I have served the public — as a prosecutor and a congressman and have always protected women. I will defend myself with the facts and where necessary bring legal action. My focus in the coming days is to be with my wife and children and defend our decades of service against these lies.”

State Supt. Tony Thurmond and San José Mayor Matt Mahan, other Democrats running for governor, immediately called on Swalwell to drop out of the race. Multiple staff members working for Swalwell’s campaign have resigned, according to a source close to the candidate who was not authorized to speak about the matter.
.

Allegations of inappropriate behavior by the congressman have been circulating on social media and in political circles for weeks. On Thursday, an attorney representing Swalwell sent a cease-and-desist letter to at least one person demanding that they stop accusing the congressman of sexual assault.

Two days earlier, the congressman denounced online claims that he had inappropriate relationships with young congressional staff members.

“It’s false,” he told reporters after a town hall in Sacramento, saying he had never behaved inappropriately with female staff members or had a sexual relationship with a staff member or an intern, and denied allegations that his staff members were asked to sign nondisclosure agreements or entered into legal settlements.

In 2025, another woman said after drinking with Swalwell, she ended up in his hotel room without recollection of how she got there and that her memory of what happened is “a blur,” according to CNN. Two other women told the cable network’s reporters that the congressman sent them unsolicited photos of his penis and other sexual messages on Snapchat.

The allegations come at a pivotal time in the race to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. The primary is June 2, but ballots start landing in voters’ mailboxes in less than a month.

The race to lead the nation’s largest state remains up for grabs, with eight prominent Democrats and two top Republicans jockeying to finish in first or second place in the primary and advance to the November election.

Swalwell, 45, is among the leading Democrats with the support of 13% of likely voters in a recent UC Berkeley poll co-sponsored by the Los Angeles Times. That places him tied for first place among Democrats with former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, with billionaire Tom Steyer not far behind.

Swalwell has won the support of powerful unions, including the California Teachers Assn., along with Schiff (D-Calif.) and many of his Democratic colleagues in Congress.

CTA President David Goldberg called the allegations “incredibly disturbing and unacceptable.”

“We are immediately suspending our support,” he said. “Our elected board will be meeting as soon as possible to follow our union’s democratic process to determine next steps.”

Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, said victims must be believed and also reiterated his call for Democratic candidates to gauge their viability.

“The allegations against Congressmember Swalwell are deeply disturbing,” he said in a statement. “Any person engaged in misconduct must take responsibility and be held accountable for their actions — including a Member of Congress and candidate for Governor. Finally, my call for all — repeat, all — candidates for Governor to ‘honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign’ still stands. In fact, that call is more important now than ever before.”

The woman told the Chronicle that she was hired in 2019 to work in Swalwell’s Castro Valley district office when she was 21. He quickly began sending her messages and then nude pictures on Snapchat.

In September of that year, she said she had drinks with the congressman, blacked out and could feel the effects of intercourse when she woke up naked in Swalwell’s hotel bed, according to the report. In 2024, when she no longer worked for Swalwell, she said she attended a charity event honoring the congressman and met him for drinks afterward. She was intoxicated, but recalled Swalwell forcing himself upon her, and pushing him away and saying, “No,” according to the Chronicle.

The Chronicle corroborated her report with texts she sent a friend at the time and interviews with the friend and the woman’s then-boyfriend. The Chronicle’s reporters also reviewed medical records about a pregnancy and tests for sexually transmitted diseases a week after the alleged assault. She told them she had kept quiet about the alleged assaults because of fears about professional and personal repercussions.

Concern began brewing among Democrats before the allegations were published.

Cheyenne Hunt, a Laguna Hills attorney and executive director of a progressive advocacy group, and social media influencer Arielle Fodor, known online as Mrs. Frazzled, are among those publicizing the allegations online. Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, who has sparred with Swalwell in the past, has amplified the allegations on social media as well.

The Times has not independently corroborated reports of sexual misconduct.

Many politicians have survived serious allegations of sexual misconduct, including President Trump, who was accused of rape before winning the White House in 2016.

Others have seen a swift reckoning. In the hours and days after the late farmworkers rights leader César Chávez was accused of sexual abuse, his name and image were stripped from schools, streets and murals.

Two recent California governors have been accused of sexual impropriety; former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger admitted to behaving improperly during his movie career and Gov. Gavin Newsom acknowledged an affair with a married staffer while mayor of San Francisco.

Swalwell, a former prosecutor, is married and has three children. The Iowa native briefly ran for president in 2020. On Thursday, he canceled a town hall in Palm Desert, reportedly because he was sick.

He has previously spoken out against sexual misconduct, most recently in support of women who told the New York Times that they were assaulted by Chávez.

“The women who have come forward are carrying years of pain. Speaking about that takes real courage,” Swalwell wrote in a tweet last month. “Ana Murguia, Debra Rojas and Dolores Huerta are speaking with clarity and strength. I stand with them and condemn all instances of sexual assault.”

The congressman also defended women who accused Brett Kavanaugh, then a nominee to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, of sexual misconduct in 2018.

“The more and more cases that are separate and independent that look the same, pretty soon a prosecutor starts to say to a jury … that the arrows are pointing in the same directions and what are the chances that three or four women independently, who never met each other, would have similar experiences with one person,” he said on MSNOW’s Ari Melber in September 2018 amid Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings.

In Congress, Swalwell has been a prominent critic of President Trump, serving as a manager of the second impeachment of the president and frequently blistering Trump on cable news shows.

In late March, the Washington Post reported that FBI Director Kash Patel may release documents about a decade-old investigation about Swalwell’s connections with a suspected Chinese spy. Swalwell cut off ties with Christine Fang, or Fang Fang, in 2015 after intelligence officials warned him and other members of Congress about Chinese efforts to infiltrate legislators’ offices. Swalwell was not accused of impropriety.

After news of the potential release of the files broke, Swalwell accused Trump of trying to sway the gubernatorial election and weaponizing the federal government against his political enemies.

Swalwell’s attorneys filed a cease-and-desist letter with Patel and the FBI. No documents have been released as of Friday.

He was previously accused of mortgage fraud by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte. Swalwell sued Pulte last year but dropped the suit this month.

In the gubernatorial race, Swalwell has faced criticism from fellow Democrat Tom Steyer that he was ineligible to run for governor because he did not truly live in California. Earlier this year, a Sacramento County judge ruled against a similar claim made by a conservative filmmaker.

Times staff writer Melody Gutierrez in Sacramento contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — Calls inside Congress for investigations into the prediction market platform Polymarket are increasing after the latest instance in which groups of anonymous traders made strategic, well-timed bets on a major geopolitical event hours before it occurred.

On Wednesday, the Associated Press reported that at least 50 new accounts on Polymarket placed substantial bets on a U.S.-Iran ceasefire in the hours, even minutes, before President Trump announced it late Tuesday. These were the sole bets made on Polymarket through these accounts.

In January, an anonymous Polymarket user made a $400,000 profit by betting that Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro would be out of office, hours before Maduro was captured. In the hours before the start of the Iran war, another account made roughly $550,000 in a series of trades effectively betting that the U.S. would strike Iran and that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be removed from office.

Such prescient wagers have raised eyebrows — and accusations that prediction markets are ripe for insider trading. And the issue goes beyond these three geopolitical events, according to at least one report.

Researchers at Harvard University released a paper last month in which, using public blockchain data, they estimated that $143 million in profits have been made on Polymarket by individuals who potentially had insider information about events ranging from Taylor Swift’s engagement to the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize last year.

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y who sits on the House Financial Services Committee as well as the subcommittee on digital assets and financial technology, sent a letter Thursday to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission demanding the regulator review and investigate these well-timed trades. The CFTC regulates the derivatives markets, which includes prediction markets.

“This pattern raises serious concerns that certain market participants may have had access to material nonpublic information regarding a market-moving geopolitical event,” Torres wrote. The letter was shared exclusively with AP.

“What is the statistical likelihood that of anyone other than an insider trader placing a winning bet 12 minutes before a market-moving presidential announcement?” Torres said in an interview with AP. “There are two answers: God, or an insider trader. And something tells me that God is not placing bets around Donald Trump’s posts on Truth Social. “

Prediction market platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket allow users to bet on everything from whether it will rain in Phoenix, Ariz., next week to whether the Federal Reserve will raise or lower interest rates.

Americans have limited access to Polymarket, which was banned from the U.S. in 2022. The company has moved to reenter the country by acquiring a CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse, giving it a legal pathway to start offering contracts domestically. The company has begun a limited rollout in the U.S.

Polymarket also operates a separate, crypto-based platform offshore that remains outside U.S. jurisdiction. That platform accounts for most of its activity.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., sent a letter to Polymarket on Thursday demanding the company explain why it continues to allow trades on war and violence as well as whether the company is making efforts to keep insiders from trading on the platform.

“Polymarket has become an illicit market to sell and exploit national security secrets unlike any in history, and by extension a potential honeypot for foreign intelligence services watching for those same suspicious bets and wagers,” Blumenthal wrote.

Republicans also have criticized these platforms and called for bans on these sorts of bets. There are at least two bills pending in Congress co-signed by both parties, one in the House and one in the Senate.

“We don’t want to imagine a world where America’s adversaries use prediction markets to anticipate our next move,” Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, said after the release of AP’s findings on the ceasefire wagers.

Polymarket did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The stakes are high for both Polymarket and Kalshi as they seek approval to operate nationwide, particularly in the lucrative sports betting market.

Kalshi, which already is regulated in the U.S., and its executives have a goal of making the company the nation’s dominant prediction market. Kalshi has leaned heavily into sports, which critics have said effectively makes it a sports betting platform that dabbles in event-based contracts on the side. Both companies also announced partnerships with sports teams and even news organizations to broaden their reach as well. AP has an agreement to sell U.S. elections data to Kalshi.

The competition also carries political overtones. Donald Trump Jr. is an investor in Polymarket through his venture capital firm, 1789 Capital, and separately serves as a paid strategic adviser to Kalshi.

Sweet writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s plans for a new triumphal arch in the capital, unveiled on Friday, include a towering winged figure with a Lady Liberty-like torch and crown, flanked by two eagles and guarded by four lions — all gilded.

The 12-page plan released by the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts shows the arch will stand 250 feet tall from its base to the tip of the winged figure’s torch, with “One Nation Under God” and “Liberty and Justice for All” inscribed in gold atop either side of the monument.

The plan indicates the structure would stand between the Lincoln Memorial in the east and Arlington National Cemetery toward the west and within a traffic circle connecting Washington with northern Virginia. The arch would dwarf the Lincoln Memorial, which stands at 99 feet tall.

Trump has said he wants to build the arch near the Lincoln Memorial and argued that the nation’s capital first sought such a monument 200 years ago.

“It was interrupted by a thing called the Civil War, and so it never got built,” Trump said in February. “Then, they almost built something in 1902, but it never happened.”

Trump has said that major cities around the world have such monuments, and Washington is the only one without one.

The arch is one of several architectural changes Trump is making in his second term. In addition to building a large ballroom at the White House, he’s also made changes to the Oval Office and converted the Rose Garden into a stone-covered patio.

The arch goes beyond the White House, giving Trump a chance to leave another lasting monument in a city known for them. It would expand on his earlier talk of sprucing up the city by replacing its “tired” grasses, and broken signage and street medians.

For weeks, salacious talk swirled in campaign circles, ricocheted through email chains and was served up, like a buzzy side dish, over gossipy lunches from Sacramento to San Diego.

The talk revolved around Eric Swalwell, the 45-year-old congressman from the East Bay and one of the top Democratic contenders for California governor. The rumors involved allegations of inappropriate behavior with young staffers.

Pressed by rival camps, pursued by the political press corps, the claims were largely confined to unvetted corners of the internet until this week, when Swalwell’s campaign — knowing the whispers were getting louder — issued a public statement denying any wrongdoing.

The move was a prebuttal. Strategists figured it better to get out front of the chatter and address the online innuendo, even if it meant exposing the allegations to a much wider audience. The campaign’s statement was followed hours later by a categorical denial from the congressman.

“It’s false,” Swalwell told reporters Tuesday night in Sacramento. He said he never behaved inappropriately with female staff members or had a sexual relationship with any staffer or intern. There were no quiet legal settlements, he said. No hiding behind nondisclosure agreements.

Then, on Friday, the San Francisco Chronicle published a lengthy report — filled with highly specific and graphic details — quoting a woman who worked nearly two years for Swalwell, stating she had sexual encounters with him while he was her boss. Twice, she alleged, he sexually assaulted her when she was too intoxicated to consent.

The woman, who is 17 years younger than Swalwell, said the congressman began pursuing her within weeks of her hiring at age 21 to work in his district office in the East Bay Area. That was in 2019.

The woman said she largely kept quiet about Swalwell’s behavior out of fear she would suffer personal and professional consequences. She told the Chronicle she did not share her account with authorities because she was afraid they would not believe her. The newspaper said medical records show the woman obtained pregnancy and STD tests a week after one of the alleged assaults.

Swalwell issued another categorical denial.

“These allegations are false and come on the eve of an election against the front-runner for governor,” he said in a statement, somewhat overstating his status in the neck-and-neck gubernatorial race. “For nearly 20 years, I have served the public — as a prosecutor and a congressman and have always protected women.

“I will defend myself with the facts and where necessary bring legal action,” Swalwell said. “My focus in the coming days is to be with my wife and children and defend our decades of service against these lies.”

Even before the Chronicle published its article, once the privately bandied rumors were suddenly the open, you could almost hear the sound of a dam bursting. Swalwell’s competitors were quick to amplify the assertions, grappling for advantage in a race that remains stubbornly knotted up.

“Very, very troubling,” said fellow Democrat Katie Porter. “Deeply troubling,” echoed Betty Yee, another of the Democratic hopefuls.

A third Democrat running, Antonio Villaraigosa, was more inventive, accusing Swalwell “of skipping town” — he did not attend a Wednesday candidate forum in Sacramento — “as more and more women come forward with sexual harassment allegations.”

At that point no one with firsthand knowledge had come forward to contradict Swalwell’s denial of wrongdoing.

But with Friday’s article in the Chronicle, opponents escalated their attacks. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and state schools superintendent Tony Thurmond both called on Swalwell to quit the race.

One of his highest-profile backers, Democratic Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, withdrew his endorsement and expressed regret he had defended Swalwell on social media prior to the Chronicle’s account. Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez of Los Angeles also withdrew his endorsement and urged Swalwell to abandon his candidacy.

Behind closed doors, other major Swalwell backers were reassessing their support.

It’s understandable — and probably necessary — for the congressman to retreat, as he suggested, to spent time with his wife and family.

But in light of the Chronicle’s report, and its damning allegations, he’ll need to do more than issue strongly worded statements on threatened legal action if he has any hopes of salvaging his gubernatorial candidacy and political career. (Swalwell gave up his congressional seat to run for governor.)

If the allegations are false, he needs to refute each and every detail in thorough, incontrovertible fashion. If they’re true, then what could Swalwell possibly have been thinking — not just forcing himself on his alleged victim, but running for governor knowing what he’d done? Was he convinced his behavior would never come to light? Did he believe that adamant denials would allow him to brazen his way through?

Swalwell has a lot of explaining to do — about his behavior, his disclaimers, his judgment.

And even though the June primary is still many weeks away, he has very little time to do so.

Opinion polls in Hungary suggest longtime Prime Minister Viktor Orban has a battle on his hands in Sunday’s election.

Washington, Moscow, Kyiv and Brussels will be eagerly awaiting the outcome.

So why is this election so important outside of Hungary?

Presenter: Tom McRae

Guests:

Gabor Scheiring – Former member of Hungary’s National Assembly

Istvan Kiss – Director of the Danube Institute, a political scientist and former political adviser to Orban

Daniel Kelemen – Professor of law and politics and McCourt chair at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University

WASHINGTON — Vice President JD Vance departed Friday for Islamabad, Pakistan, to open the first direct negotiations aimed at ending the war between the United States and Iran.

Together with a delegation of deeply mistrusting negotiators from Tehran, Vance is tasked with striking a lasting peace between rival nations which have failed to keep promises made days ago in a delicate last-minute ceasefire. Ongoing military activity in the Middle East and disagreements over Iran’s control of key shipping routes have left the diplomatic effort vulnerable to collapse before the talks even begin.

“If the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we’re certainly willing to extend the open hand,” Vance told reporters before boarding Air Force Two. “If they’re gonna try and play us, then they’re gonna find that the negotiating team is not that receptive.”

On Tuesday, President Trump called off his plans to unleash “hell” on Iran based on assurances that it lift its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, but traffic through the vital waterway was still at a trickle Friday, as more than 600 ships remained stranded in the Persian Gulf, according to marine tracking data. Trump accused Iran on Thursday of doing a “very poor job, dishonorable some would say,” of allowing oil through the strait.

“The Iranians don’t seem to realize they have no cards, other than a short term extortion of the World by using International Waterways. The only reason they are alive today is to negotiate!” he wrote on Truth Social Friday.

Meanwhile, Lebanon has emerged as the central dispute threatening to derail the talks before they begin.

Hours after the ceasefire took effect, Israel launched what Lebanese officials described as its heaviest wave of strikes since the war began, killing at least 303 people, according to local health officials.

Jerusalem argues the Lebanese front is still on the table, but Iran and Pakistan disagree.

“The Iran–U.S. Ceasefire terms are clear and explicit: the U.S. must choose — ceasefire or continued war via Israel. It cannot have both,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said earlier this week. “The world sees the massacres in Lebanon. The ball is in the U.S. court, and the world is watching whether it will act on its commitments.”

Vance has acknowledged a “legitimate misunderstanding” over whether Lebanon was included in the ceasefire terms, telling reporters Washington never made that promise.

Separate negotiations regarding Lebanon are expected next week in Washington, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun confirmed Friday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also OK’d the talks, but said a ceasefire is not possible.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and the Iranian delegation arrived early Saturday in Islamabad, Iranian state media reported. Hours earlier he said a ceasefire in Lebanon “must be fulfilled before negotiations begin.”

Bagher Qalibaf added a second condition — the release of frozen Iranian assets — which he suggested must be returned before Tehran takes its seat at the bargaining table. Little is known about the halted Iranian funds overseas, but such assets are typically held back as a result of U.S.-imposed sanctions.

The vice president’s role in peace talks has grown in recent weeks. Administration officials have cast Vance as one of the few leaders Tehran would be willing to engage with directly. With a global economy upended by Trump’s far-reaching military ambitions, a victory in Islamabad could spike Vance’s standing as a prospect to lead the GOP post-Trump.

That’s if he’s able to take pressure off American wallets with an agreement that liberates Iran’s grip over the strait, which has choked much of the world’s oil supply,

Americans have continued to feel the fallout at the gas pump and grocery stores, as U.S. inflation climbed to 3.3% in March, the highest annual rate in nearly two years, according to the data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Monthly prices rose 0.9%, a sharp increase from February’s 0.3% monthly rise, when annual inflation sat at 2.4%, the new data showed.

The White House characterized the rising inflation as a short-term disruption caused by the Iran war, while noting that the administration is “diligently working to mitigate” rising costs.

“As the Administration ensures the free flow of energy through the Strait of Hormuz, the American economy remains on a solid trajectory thanks to the Administration’s robust supply-side agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, and energy abundance,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai wrote on X.

Britain announced a meeting next week with dozens of countries to coordinate efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The summit will focus countering Iran’s proposal to charge transit tolls to allow ships through the waterway.

In a televised address to the nation, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke of a “devastating storm of inflation,” if peace talks don’t succeed in liberating the Middle East’s oil supply. He characterized the current stage as a “make-or-break moment.”

“We will make every possible effort to ensure the success of the peace process,” he said.

WASHINGTON — Democrats are struggling to come up for air after outside groups flooded their first round of midterm primaries with campaign cash.

As the Democratic Party fights to regain control of Congress, organizations affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence have dominated the airwaves, sometimes leaving candidates on the sidelines of their own campaigns.

Democratic pollster Zac McCrary said the primaries have “become proxy wars, and the candidates are almost afterthoughts in larger skirmishes.”

Now the Democratic National Committee is advancing a resolution at its New Orleans spring meeting to condemn the surge of spending that has scrambled its primaries and exacerbated tensions within the party.

Candidates who lost have pointed their fingers at special interests, blaming them for derailing their campaigns. Others who are still in the running are courting voters by denouncing deep-pocketed outside groups. Even those who have benefited from the spending have expressed concern.

“It’s definitely a brave new world,” McCrary said.

“We’re not talking about doubling of campaign expenditures,” he added. “We’re talking about 10 times or 20 times more.”

Dan Sena, a former executive director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said party organizations are no longer the ones with the clout to push favored candidates.

“All that’s been completely smashed now,” Sena said. Even if Democrats regain control of the U.S. House, he warned that outside spending could damage the party in the long run.

Referring to House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, he said, “You’re going to hand Jeffries a caucus that is divided.”

Democrats bear the brunt of big spending

So far this cycle, outside money in U.S. House races has largely targeted districts particularly friendly to Democrats, meaning the primaries will likely determine who will win the general election in November. After a record number of House members retired this year, many of those seats opened up for the first time in years, drawing dozens of Democratic hopefuls.

In Illinois, for example, there was more than $125 million in outside spending across five open Democratic primaries. In all but one of those congressional races, the outside spending exceeded candidate spending.

While it’s still early in the calendar, there are indicators that many more races could see big spending. Almost 40 seats have already seen more than $1 million in outside spending, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

In Illinois, the top three spenders in U.S. House races were groups affiliated with American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, according to AdImpact, which tracks ad buys in political races, followed by the cryptocurrency-affiliated Fairshake.

AIPAC was founded to support strong ties between the U.S. and Israel, a particularly controversial issue as Democratic hostility toward Israel rises over the war in Gaza. Some Democratic National Committee, or DNC, members wanted to call out AIPAC’s role in primaries, but the final resolution did not.

“We had various resolutions that focused on different industries and groups, and instead of going one-by-one, we passed a blanket repudiation,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement.

Campaign spending has divided Democrats

The latest DNC meeting marks another chapter in longstanding disputes between progressives and the party establishment.

Progressives want the party to adopt official language that all Democratic presidential contenders oppose money from dark-money groups, or super PACs that aren’t required to disclose their donors.

“It’s necessary that we actually have the party do something on this issue, not just say something,” said Larry Cohen, co-chair of Our Revolution, a progressive group founded by independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with Democrats.

The resolution being advanced at the DNC meeting in New Orleans is viewed by progressives as a step toward that goal. However, some Democrats warn against weakening their candidates when facing a Republican Party that’s flush with cash.

“Provided that we don’t handcuff ourselves in the general elections — because if the Republicans are going to use dark money in general elections, we should be using our money in general elections, too — if you provide an even playing field, I think then that’s fine,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat. “But we just can’t be handcuffing ourselves in the general to lose races.”

Any DNC resolutions would not stop outside groups from surging funds into primary contests or general elections. But some Democrats believe the issue is core to the party’s values.

“We should eliminate any super PAC in a Democratic primary. And I think every presidential candidate in 2028 should pledge that they will not have any super PAC spending in a Democratic primary,” said Rep. Ro Khanna, a progressive and possible Democratic presidential contender who co-chaired Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign.

“That should be a litmus test,” Khanna argued. “If you’re not willing to take that pledge, then you’re part of the problem.”

Askarinam, Brown and Sweedler write for the Associated Press. Brown reported from New York.

NEW YORK — In his first 100 days in office, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has governed with a star power unusual in politics.

Crowds of supporters show up to his news conferences. Basic municipal services have been infused with newfound excitement. Celebrities help him promote his agenda.

In the process, he’s been able to notch a few notable early wins. And he’s reached a detente, at least for now, with President Trump, a mercurial leader with an affinity for celebrities.

But as Mamdani, a Democrat, marks an early milestone in his mayoralty, it remains to be seen whether he’ll be able to leverage his fame into achieving the progressive policy proposals that propelled him to office.

Though he still has staunch critics, many of whom still view his past criticisms of the police department and Israel as major problems, Mamdani has been able to ease concerns among at least some skeptics.

“It’s early but so far, so good,” said Jay Jacobs, chair of the state’s Democratic Party, who made waves for not endorsing Mamdani during the election. “We may not agree on everything philosophically, but he is getting the job done.”

‘The biggest needs and the smallest needs’

As the mayor approached his 100th day — long a benchmark for judging an administration’s opening vision — his team has moved to highlight the administration’s commitment to the everyday responsibilities of the job.

While much of those duties are typical for his local office — picking up trash, plowing snow and filling potholes — the 34-year-old mayor has leaned on his knack for viral content creation to drive interest and awareness of government programs.

To hype up his child-care program for 2-year-olds, Mamdani recruited Cardi B to help judge a jingle contest that will determine the initiative’s theme song. His slick social media videos helped recruit thousands of new snow shovelers as a storm bore down on the city. A public service announcement he made brought more than 50,000 new subscribers to the city’s emergency alert system in a single week.

A few weeks ago, alongside Natasha Cloud of the New York Liberty, Mamdani announced a bracket-style competition in which people could vote on small projects for him to come and personally fix on his 100th day.

On Friday, Mamdani selected a winner — a garbage-filled lot in the Bronx — and helped pick up some of the junk with a sanitation crew, following a celebratory event that featured an overflowing trash can mascot and a cheerleading squad.

“I think every single day it’s an opportunity to meet the needs of New Yorkers,” he said. “And what we’ve seen over the course of this 100 days is that New York City wants to see a city government that is able to meet the biggest needs and the smallest needs.”

The celebrity status, though, can also prompt backlash. During a bitter cold snap, his surprise appearance on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” was seen by some as insensitive at a moment when the death toll of homeless New Yorkers was rapidly rising.

“Too much styling and profiling,” said Curtis Sliwa, a Republican who ran against Mamdani during last year’s election, noting longstanding problems with street homelessness, public housing and infrastructure.

Still, Sliwa, who hammered Mamdani during the campaign but recently appeared in a comedy skit with the mayor during the City Hall press corps’ annual roast, appeared to give Mamdani some credit, even if it came with a caveat.

“We just had Eric Adams, swagger man who’d party to the break of dawn, and now we have a guy who seems like he’s got a normal working schedule,” said Sliwa, referencing the city’s previous mayor. “So having Zohran as the alternative, I think for a lot of people even if they disagree with him, there’s some stability.”

Still a star among supporters

On the night of Mamdani’s election party, hundreds packed the streets, some spontaneously, waiting for a glimpse of the mayor-elect leaving the venue. Departing campaign aides were cheered, by name, well after midnight. One attendee likened the street party to Beatlemania.

“I feel like I’m at a presidential inauguration,” said Medhavie Agnihotri, a 25-year-old tech consultant. “This is the first time in a while I’ve felt this hope.”

His star power has not appeared to wane since then.

Outside City Hall, New Yorkers and tourists frequently stop for selfies, peering through the iron gates in search of the mayor.

This week, on the mayor’s 97th day in office, a crowd gathered in the lobby of the busy Bellevue Hospital in Manhattan to watch as Mamdani announced the city would start transferring Rikers Island jail detainees with serious medical illnesses to a specialized unit at the hospital.

He entered to woos and applause from the onlookers, as many held up cellphones to record videos of the mayor. Dozens more watched along from a set of elevated walkways.

One man, Ricardo Granados, a 67-year-old retiree, was on his way to take his son to a medical appointment but stopped to see what all the hubbub was about just before the news conference started. He appeared delighted to learn the mayor was going to show up, saying he met Mamdani previously when the mayor was campaigning in his neighborhood.

“I’m extremely fond of him. I think he’s going to make a real difference,” Granados said. “He wants to find out who needs what and he wants to help.”

Izaguirre writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jake Offenhartz contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom has dismissed questions about the race to succeed him in California for much of the last year.

“You know my position,” he said to reporters last month. “I don’t talk about this governor’s race.”

But as his party runs the risk of losing the most powerful office in the state, Newsom recognizes that he may need to step in and endorse one of the Democratic candidates whether he wants to or not.

California Democrats have put themselves in an unnecessary pickle in the 2026 gubernatorial election: Too many candidates, with few policy distinctions between them, are running to replace Newsom. Opinion polls show no clear favorite and Democrats largely splitting votes.

The tepid support raises the possibility that two Republicans in the race could place first and second in the June primary and advance to the general election. By their own strategic blunder, Democrats could be knocked out of the contest in a state where they outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1.

It’s a disaster everyone saw coming and no Democrat, except perhaps Newsom, has the power to stop, said Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego.

“Gavin Newsom’s megaphone is loud enough to echo across this race, leading other prominent members of the party to endorse whomever he chooses and vaulting someone, finally, out of the crowded pack,” Kousser said. “This could be the last remaining chance for the party to avoid splitting its vote in June and being locked out of November.”

Endorsing a successor before the primary carries inherent risk and perhaps more so for Newsom, who is positioning himself as a potential leading candidate in the 2028 presidential contest. Publicly backing a candidate for governor ties Newsom to the outcome of the race and the candidate.

“If it doesn’t work, his endorsement would broadcast his political vulnerabilities and attach him to his party’s weakness just at the time when he needs to project his personal strength,” Kousser said. “But if his intervention rescues the party and elevates his chosen successor into being an overwhelming favorite in the general, it would further elevate his national profile while winning him a close friend in Sacramento.”

Newsom is taking a wait-and-see approach for now, tracking polls to determine whether his intervention is necessary.

President Trump’s decision to endorse conservative commentator Steve Hilton over the weekend could relieve some pressure on Newsom to weigh in.

Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, the top two Republicans in the race, were leading the field of candidates before the president got involved, according to a recent poll by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies.

If Trump’s support causes support for Hilton to rise and Bianco to drop, it’s more likely that one Democrat and one Republican will place in the top two in the primary.

Trump’s endorsement left Kousser and other California political observers scratching their heads. If a candidate from each party advances to November, the Democrat is expected to easily win the race because of the voter registration advantage.

Until this week, Newsom had held back from responding to Bianco’s controversial investigation into voter fraud, in which the Sheriff’s Department seized thousands of ballots in Riverside County. State Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta led the court challenges. Bianco said he paused his inquiry in late March, citing “politically motivated lawsuits and court filings.”

But the governor publicly celebrated a California Supreme Court ruling this week that Bianco halt the investigation.

“This rogue sheriff chased conspiracy theories, tried to undermine our elections, and got the ruling he deserved,” Newsom posted on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk. “Trump and MAGA’s election denialism is a cancer, a danger to our democracy, and it must be stopped.”

Rob Stutzman, a Republican political consultant in California, compared Newsom’s posts about Bianco to “trying to return a gift.” The Democratic governor’s attack could boost Bianco’s profile and support among Newsom-hating voters.

“Trump has probably bailed the Democrats out of their dilemma by elevating Hilton and for Newsom’s response to be to elevate and draw attention to Bianco, just doesn’t make any sense, and it’s everything Bianco wanted out of this whole ballot seizure gambit to start with,” Stutzman said.

Newsom’s reluctance to endorse a Democrat in the race is, in part, a reflection of his feelings about leaving a position he’s held for eight years and a recognition of his own “sell-by date” in the post. His answers to questions about the contest vary from declining to comment to pointing out that voters don’t appear interested in the race, either.

The focus on national politics, attention Trump draws “24 hours a day” and earlier speculation over whether former Vice President Kamala Harris or U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla would run for governor distracted from the candidates in the field, he said.

“But when I’m out in the community, people aren’t talking to me about it, which is interesting this late, just weeks and weeks before early voting,” Newsom said in March. “And so, as a consequence, I’m not directly as engaged as perhaps I might need to be.”

His comments suggesting that he isn’t paying attention to the race haven’t sat well with some of the candidates. Some Democrats, including San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, were already running against Newsom’s record.

For Newsom, inaction is more risky than picking a losing candidate, Kousser said. Though California’s top-two system and poor leadership from the state party would mostly be to blame if Democrats lose, giving control of California to the GOP would bolster criticism of Newsom’s leadership.

“A Republican victory in the state Newsom leads would be read, on the national stage, as a rejection of his legacy,” Kousser said.

Biblical stories like Jonah and the whale would be required reading for Texas public schools students under proposals that are putting the state at the center of another contentious wrangling over the role of religion in classrooms.

Religious leaders, teachers, parents and students spent hours Tuesday before the state education board arguing about the reading list for the state’s 5.4 million kindergartners to 12th-graders. The debate is part of widening efforts in the U.S. to incorporate religion in schools, mostly in Republican-led states, driving legislation and legal action.

Nationally, President Trump has pledged to protect and expand religious expression in public schools. And Texas, a red state that is home to about 1 in 10 of the nation’s public school students, often helps set the agenda.

Texas became the first state to allow chaplains, in 2023. And just last year, a Republican-led mandate that the Ten Commandments be displayed in public schools took effect in the state, although around two dozen districts took them down because of a lawsuit.

But while the debate over Texas’ reading list could have national implications, to the speakers the issue boiled down to whether the passages are essential to understanding the nation’s history and morals — or unconstitutional.

“Our children need truth,” said Nathan Irving, a pastor and father of eight from Myrtle Springs, Texas. “Truth is the only currency that never devalues. Investing truth into our children is the most loving thing that we can do for them. This is the truth. This country and this state were founded upon a Christian worldview. Like it or not, it is true.”

Final vote on the changes still ahead

A final vote on the list is expected in June, and if approved by the Texas State Board of Education, the changes would take effect in 2030.

Several speakers cited the “establishment clause” of the 1st Amendment, which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

“This list is a tool of proselytization that has no place in our public schools,” Rabbi Josh Fixler, of Congregation Emanu El, a reform synagogue in Houston, told the board. “There is a difference between teaching about religion and teaching religion, and this list will force teachers to cross that line.”

Megan Boyden, a mother of three from Denton, Texas, described is as a direct attack on her private faith.

“As a Christian mother, it is my right and responsibility to teach our family’s religion,” she said. “It is not the state’s job to shed through the lens of a teacher who may not share the same beliefs I do. Will Bible passages be taught in conflict with my beliefs?

“What,” she asked, “of non-Christian students?”

The list stems from a state law passed in 2023, which called for the creation of a state-approved list of high-quality materials.

Third-graders would learn about the Road to Damascus, which tells the story of Paul’s transformation from an early persecutor of Christians into a follower. Seniors, meanwhile, would learn about the Book of Job, a story about a man whose faith is tested when he loses everything.

The list also includes classics like Dr. Seuss’ “The Cat in the Hat,” stories about the national folk hero Daniel Boone. And there are also works by famous African Americans like Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr. and a book about Harriet Tubman of the Underground Railroad fame.

Texas has already approved optional curriculum that incorporates the Bible

The GOP-leaning board previously approved a new Bible-infused curriculum that is optional for schools to incorporate in kindergarten through fifth grades.

The board also is considering social studies standards that have been criticized as too state-centric, not focused enough on world events and rife with an undercurrent of American exceptionalism. They call for students to “identify the Texas flag as a symbol of Texas pride,” and recognize the state song “Texas, Our Texas.”

Students also are supposed to be able to understand stories about Texas Independence.

Curriculum debates crop up occasionally. Over the years, state boards in places such as Kansas have debated whether the teaching of evolution should reflect doubt about the well-established scientific theory — and leave room for arguments that the universe’s complexity points to an intelligent design.

Allison Cardwell, a mother of a fourth-grader and a fifth-grade social studies teacher, urged the board to rethink the standards. She said fifth grade would be the only time most Texas students would receive instruction in U.S. history until high school.

“We have to ask ourselves, how can we expect to create citizens who value liberty, responsibility, and the principles this country was founded on, if we don’t ensure that they truly understand those foundations?” she said.

Hollingsworth writes for the Associated Press.

April 10 (UPI) — Ecuador raised tariffs to 100% on imports from Colombia, and Colombian President Gustavo Petro ordered the immediate return of his ambassador from Quito.

This represents a new escalation of the diplomatic and trade crisis between the two countries, according to an Ecuadorian statement and remarks from both leaders.

Ecuador said it will implement the tariff increase May 1, according to the Ministry of Production, Foreign Trade and Investment. It argued that Colombia has not taken concrete steps to curb drug trafficking and organized crime along the shared border.

“It is not possible to reach agreements with someone who does not have the same commitment to fighting narco-terrorism,” Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa said Thursday night.

Petro described the tariff increase as “a monstrosity” and announced immediate measures.

“Our ambassador to Ecuador must return immediately,” he wrote on X, where he also called for a Cabinet meeting at the border between the two countries.

The Colombian president also defended his anti-drug policy.

“The president of Ecuador insults the Colombian government that has seized more cocaine than in the entire history of the world,” he said.

Ecuador’s decision marks a new critical point in a dispute that has intensified in recent months and is affecting bilateral trade, energy cooperation and diplomatic channels, according to local media reports.

Negotiations between the two countries within the Andean Community of Nations are suspended, Ecuador’s foreign minister Gabriela Sommerfeld said.

Relations deteriorated further after Petro’s recent statements about former Ecuadorian Vice President Jorge Glas, whom he described as a “political prisoner” and to whom Colombia granted nationality. Glas is serving corruption sentences in Ecuador.

The case dates to 2024, when Noboa’s government ordered his capture inside the Mexican embassy in Quito — an operation that led to a break in diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Ecuador maintains that tightening its trade policy also responds to the need to strengthen security along the roughly 373-mile shared border, where networks linked to drug trafficking, arms smuggling, human trafficking and illegal mining operate.

The Ecuadorian government estimates these efforts imply additional spending of about $400 million.

Since the start of the trade dispute, Colombia has responded with reciprocal measures, including tariffs on Ecuadorian imports and suspending energy sales to Ecuador, which in 2024 experienced power outages of up to 14 hours per day.

The economic impact is raising concerns in both countries.

In Colombia, business groups have called for de-escalation, while in Ecuador, companies in the pharmaceutical and cosmetics sectors have reported disruptions due to restrictions on Colombian imports, according to local media.

The figures reflect the scale of the exchange. In 2025, Colombia exported $1.846 billion in goods to Ecuador, making it its sixth-largest trading partner and second destination for non-mining, non-energy exports. Ecuador, exported about $857 million to Colombia, in a trade balance historically favorable to Bogotá.

Colombia’s National Business Council warned that with a 30% tariff, losses for exporters could reach $750 million annually and affect 82% of bilateral trade. With the increase to 100%, the impact would be far greater.

The new increase by Noboa “definitively closes any possibility of trade between Colombia and Ecuador,” Javier Díaz, president of the National Association of Foreign Trade, said to Clarín, Argentina’s largest newspaper.

On the Ecuadorian side, Pablo Cerón, a transport representative in the border province of Carchi, described the decision as “unilateral, improvised, misguided.”

The bilateral crisis comes at a politically sensitive time in Colombia, just months before general elections.

April 10 (UPI) — President Donald Trump‘s tariffs are back in court Friday to decide on their legality.

The U.S. Court of International Trade will consider the president’s 10% global tariff that he created on Feb. 20 after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his previous tariffs over his use of emergency powers. The new tariffs are based on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

That law allows the president to unilaterally surcharge imports up to 15% for up to 150 days “to deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits.”

Challenging the new levies are Democratic-led states and small businesses.

“This is another case where the president invokes a statute to impose whatever tariffs he wants, its limits be damned,” the states wrote in court filings.

Timothy C. Brightbill, a trade lawyer for the Washington law firm Wiley Rein, told The New York Times that he expects the court to be “skeptical of President Trump’s ability to impose broad tariffs,” including the global 10% rate.

Brightbill said it could be months before the legal system can give a full verdict.

“By then, there will most likely be a new tariff regime in place,” Brightbill said.

The White House said in a statement that Trump was “lawfully using the executive powers granted to him” and the administration was “committed to robustly defending the legality of the president’s actions in court.”

“For over a century, Congress has supplemented the president’s constitutional power over foreign affairs and national security by delegating to him the authority to manage foreign trade in response to international conditions, including by imposing tariffs,” the administration said.

But critics say Trump’s position only includes the U.S trade deficit. They argue that the president is ignoring inflows of foreign capital and financial investment. Those help “balance” the deficit.

They argue that a balance-of-payments crisis is impossible because the United States stopped using the gold standard and a fixed exchange rate system in the 1970s.

“A balance-of-payments crisis is a currency crisis that was of great concern when Congress enacted Section 122, but which can no longer exist,” the states wrote in court filings.

There are 24 states in the suit, along with two small businesses: spice and e-commerce business Burlap & Barrel and Basic Fun!, a toy company that designs and markets Tonka, Lincoln Logs, K’nex and others. They filed separate suits against the tariffs, but the cases will be heard together.

“When these tariffs were first announced last April, we made two promises: we would not raise our prices, and we would not ask our partner farmers to absorb the costs,” Burlap & Barrel wrote on its website. “A year later, we’re proud to say we’ve kept those promises. This lawsuit is about protecting our ability to continue doing that.”

The plaintiffs are represented by the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian firm that worked on the tariff case that the administration lost at the Supreme Court. The three-judge panel is made up of different judges from the previous panel at the Court of International Trade.

Islamabad, Pakistan – With key differences in the Iranian and American positions seemingly intact, Pakistan is aiming for what officials describe as a realistic – if modest – outcome from the negotiations between the two warring nations set to commence in Islamabad on Saturday.

The aim: to get the United States and Iranian negotiators to find enough common ground to continue talks.

On Friday, US Vice President JD Vance left Washington for Islamabad, where he will lead the American team, which will also consist of President Donald Trump’s chief negotiator Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner. While Iran has not formally confirmed its representatives at the talks, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf are expected to lead Tehran’s team.

These high-level talks follow days after the US and Iran agreed to a Pakistan-mediated two-week ceasefire, and will be held exactly six weeks after the US and Israel launched their war on Iran with the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on February 28.

Experts and sources close to the mediation effort said there was little expectation that a major breakthrough would be reached on Saturday. But by setting a more realistic ceiling – an agreement in Islamabad to continue deeper negotiations aimed at finding a lasting peace deal – Pakistan is hopeful it can help build on a truce that led to a collective sigh of relief globally.

“Pakistan has succeeded in getting them together. We got them to sit at a table. Now it is for the parties to decide whether they are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to reach an eventual solution,” Zamir Akram, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United Nations, told Al Jazeera.

Now, he added, it will aim to secure an agreement for the US and Iran to continue dialogue.

The ‘proximity format’

The US and Iranian delegations will land at the Nur Khan airbase outside Islamabad and then drive to the Serena Hotel, where they will stay, and where the talks will be held.

Though the two teams will be in the same hotel, they will not come face to face for the negotiations, officials said.

Instead, they will sit in two separate rooms, with Pakistani officials shuttling messages between them.

In diplomatic jargon, such negotiations are known as proximity talks.

Pakistan’s experience with such a dialogue is not new. In 1988, Islamabad itself participated in the Geneva Accords negotiations on the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, where UN-mediated indirect talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan produced a landmark agreement.

Akram, who has represented Pakistan at the UN in Geneva from 2008 to 2015, said that history was relevant.

“Proximity talks have been used before. Pakistan itself participated in one in Geneva in 1988 on the Afghan issue,” he told Al Jazeera. “If the parties did not trust Pakistan, they would not be here. The metric of success should be an agreement to continue this process in search of a solution. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Building diplomatic momentum

In the days between the ceasefire announcement on April 7 and the arrival of the delegations in Islamabad, world leaders moved quickly to register support.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed the ceasefire and expressed appreciation for Pakistan’s role. Kazakhstan, Romania and the United Kingdom also issued statements endorsing Islamabad’s mediation.

French President Emmanuel Macron called Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to congratulate him, while Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan also spoke to the Pakistani leader.

Analysts say these calls were not only expressions of goodwill but signals of international backing, aimed at strengthening Pakistan’s hand in pushing both Washington and Tehran to deliver results.

Sharif spoke with eight world leaders, including the emir of Qatar, the presidents of France and Turkiye, the prime ministers of Italy and Lebanon, the king of Bahrain and the chancellors of Germany and Austria.

Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who is also deputy prime minister, engaged with more than a dozen counterparts over the past two days and held an in-person meeting with China’s ambassador in Islamabad.

In total, Pakistan’s leadership made or received more than 25 diplomatic contacts in roughly 48 hours.

Salma Malik, a professor of strategic studies at Quaid-i-Azam University, said the scale of engagement reflected confidence in Pakistan’s role.

“The two main parties showed confidence in Pakistan to act as a neutral agent, that is the first and most critical litmus test for any mediating country, and Pakistan passed it,” she told Al Jazeera.

The Lebanon problem

The most immediate threat to Saturday’s talks lies outside the negotiating room.

Iran has framed Israeli strikes on Lebanon as a direct challenge to the ceasefire. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who spoke to Sharif earlier this week, warned that continued attacks would render negotiations meaningless.

Hours after the ceasefire was announced, Israel launched its most widespread bombardment of Lebanon since the start of the conflict, killing more than 300 people across Beirut and southern Lebanon in a single day.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran could abandon the ceasefire entirely if the strikes continued.

Sharif, in a call with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam on April 9, strongly condemned Israel’s actions.

Whether Lebanon is covered by the ceasefire remains contested. Pakistan has maintained that the truce extends across the wider region, including Lebanon, as reflected in Sharif’s statement earlier this week.

Washington has taken a different view. US Vice President JD Vance, who will lead the American delegation, said in Budapest that Lebanon falls outside the ceasefire’s terms, a position echoed by President Donald Trump and the White House.

Seema Baloch, a former Pakistani envoy, said the issue ultimately rests with Washington.

“Lebanon is key and Israel will use it to play the spoiler role,” she told Al Jazeera. “It is now the US decision whether it will allow Israel, which is not seated at the negotiating table, to play that role.”

There are, however, signs of limited de-escalation.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday that Israel was ready to begin direct negotiations with Lebanon “as soon as possible”, focusing on disarming Hezbollah and reaching a peace agreement.

The announcement followed US pressure. Trump told NBC he had asked Netanyahu to “low-key it” on Lebanon.

However, Netanyahu made clear there was no ceasefire in Lebanon, saying Israel would continue striking Hezbollah even as talks proceed.

Salman Bashir, a former Pakistani foreign secretary, said Lebanon remains within the ceasefire’s scope.

“Lebanon is very much part of the ceasefire, as was mentioned in the prime minister’s statement,” he told Al Jazeera. “The Israelis may be inclined to keep the pressure on Lebanon, but not for long if the US is keen on a cessation of hostilities, as it seems.”

Stumbling blocks

Beyond Lebanon, several other obstacles remain.

Washington is expected to push for verifiable restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, including limits on enrichment and the removal of stockpiled material.

Tehran, in turn, is demanding full sanctions relief, formal recognition of its right to enrich uranium and compensation for wartime damage.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes in peacetime, remains a key pressure point, with Iran retaining the ability to disrupt maritime traffic.

Bashir said there could be movement on some of these issues.

“There may be an opening on the Strait of Hormuz, under Iranian control. Iran will not give up on the right to enrichment. If nothing else, there should be an extension of the ceasefire deadline,” he told Al Jazeera.

Muhammad Shoaib, a professor of international relations in Islamabad, said progress would depend on movement on core issues.

“Both parties agreeing on the need to continue or even extend the ceasefire, while in principle agreeing on crucial points such as the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s right to enrichment and respect for sovereignty, will suggest that the first round is meaningful and successful,” he told Al Jazeera.

The regional atmosphere has also been shaped by sharp rhetoric from some of Iran’s Gulf neighbours.

The United Arab Emirates, which faced hundreds of missile and drone attacks during the conflict, has been among the most vocal.

Its ambassador to Washington wrote in The Wall Street Journal that a ceasefire alone would not be sufficient and called for a comprehensive outcome addressing Iran’s “full range of threats”.

Bahrain, meanwhile, presented a United Nations Security Council resolution on April 7 calling for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The measure received 11 votes in favour but was vetoed by Russia and China, with Pakistan and Colombia abstaining.

Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Egypt are not expected to have a formal presence at the talks, despite being closely involved in pre-negotiation diplomacy. The four countries held meetings in Riyadh and later in Islamabad aimed at securing a pause in hostilities.

Israel, a party to the conflict, will also not be represented. Pakistan, like most Muslim-majority countries, does not recognise Israel and has no diplomatic relations with it.

A slight easing

There are, however, tentative signs of easing tensions ahead of Saturday’s talks.

On Friday, as he was departing from Washington, Vance said that the US team was “looking forward to the negotiations”.

“We think it’s going to be positive. We’ll, of course, see. As the president of the United States said, if the Iranians are willing to negotiate in good faith, we are certainly willing to extend an open hand,” the US vice president said. “If they try to play us, they’re going to find that the negotiating team is not that receptive. So we’ll try to have a positive negotiation.”

He also said that Trump had given the US team “some pretty clear guidelines”.

Earlier this week, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister spoke with his Iranian counterpart for the first time since the war started.

And Iran’s Supreme National Security Council said on April 8 that discussions could continue for up to 15 days, suggesting readiness for a prolonged process.

Akram, the former envoy, said the benchmark for success was clear.

“What they need to agree is that they will find a solution, and that in itself would be a step in the right direction,” he told Al Jazeera. “Finding a long-term solution will take time. It will not happen in a couple of days.”

Malik, the academic in Islamabad, said Pakistan’s expectations remained modest.

“What Pakistan expects is breathing space, an opportunity for peace. It is not expecting anything big. It is a small wish, but realising it will be very difficult,” she told Al Jazeera.

While many of us were worried in recent days about our president ending a “whole civilization,” one Silicon Valley tech company was warning, without much notice, it might accidentally disrupt all civilization as we know it.

The San Francisco technology company Anthrophic announced Tuesday that it wasn’t releasing a new version of its Claude AI super-brain — because it is so powerful that it has the ability to hack into just about any computer system, no matter how secure, in a matter of days if not hours.

“The fallout — for economies, public safety, and national security — could be severe,” Anthropic said in a statement.

AI worry isn’t anything new. We are worried about artificial intelligence taking jobs, about toys that seem too real to our kids, about mass surveillance of our every move. But Anthropic’s warning about its own product is bigger than any of those singular problems. It is a call from inside the house that disaster is hiding right around the corner. That sounds awfully dire and overblown, I know. But here’s the thing — it’s not.

Anthropic, you may recall, is the company that U.S. Secretary of “War” Pete Hegseth is beefing with because it didn’t want Claude going into battle without supervision and maybe doing something like accidentally bombing little girls at a school.

Now, that company has put out this chilling warning: The existing Claude that caused that kerfuffle is outdated and shockingly less powerful than the new one it’s trying very hard to not unleash — though this new Claude, dubbed Claude Mythos Preview, has already escaped at least once on its own. More on that in a moment — there’s only so much existential dread a person can handle.

“We should all be worried,” Roman Yampolskiy told me of this latest advance of a technology certain to change the course of humanity. He’s one of the country’s preeminent AI safety researchers, and a professor at the University of Louisville in Kentucky.

“We’re about to create general super intelligence and that threatens humanity as a whole,” Yampolskiy said.

“Everything else is irrelevant,” he added, before suggesting I stop calling myself an idiot for not understanding the tech-heavy parts of this debate. My simplistic take, he assured me, was “a reasonable way to explain it.”

So here you go.

This isn’t a “really smart computer geniuses could misuse this,” scenario, or an “everyone’s going to be unemployed” scenario, or even a “it might accidentally bomb children” scenario, which is a truly terrible scenario.

This is a “your teenage son could use it to break into the local school district system to change a grade with pretty much minimal knowledge and accidentally destroy the California power grid” scenario.

Or maybe, a country that doesn’t like us — I can think of a few — could drain every U.S. citizen’s bank account, while also clicking open the auto locks on jail cells, shutting down our sewage plants and taking over air control systems. Or maybe Claude Mythos just does that on its own.

For example, Anthropic said that in one popular operating system it tested, used by thousands of companies including Netflix and Sony, Claude Mythos found a flaw that had existed undetected for 17 years. Then, on its own — without human guidance or help — figured out how to use that flaw to take control of any server running the operating system, using any computer, anywhere in the world.

Just spitballing here, but if almost no security system is safe, the possibilities for social, financial and general chaos really are unlimited. And to be honest, any security expert will tell you that some of America’s greatest weak points when it comes to cybersecurity are local and state governments, because strangely, the top experts aren’t working five-figure jobs for cities in the Great Plains.

Based on its own testing, Anthropic predicts it could find “over a thousand more critical severity vulnerabilities and thousands more high severity vulnerabilities.”

That means Claude Mythos puts at risk our infrastructure, well, everywhere — because so much is connected in backdoor ways most of us never consider and it just takes one weak system to open the door to hundreds of others. But it is almost impossible to protect and fix all those systems quickly enough and robustly enough to guard against this kind of AI.

And that’s just the cybersecurity risk, Yampolskiy said. An AI with the capabilities of Claude Mythos could be used to leaps and bounds ahead in so many more ways.

“We see the same happening with synthetic biology. We’ll see the same with chemical weapons, possibly something novel in terms of weapons of mass destruction,” he said.

To Anthropic’s great credit, it sounded the warning on its creation and created, if not a solution, then a game plan of sorts — Project Glasswing, named I suspect, because no matter how bad this gets we’re going to make it sound like a thriller with an exciting ending.

Project Glasswing would have been better named Project Headstart because that’s what it is. Before releasing Mythos into the wild, Anthropic is releasing it to about 40 technology companies, including Apple, Google and Nvidia, to see whether they can collectively patch all the vulnerabilities they find before the general public has a chance at them. It’s kind of like in the movies when the killer gives the victim 15 seconds to run.

I mean, I’ll take the 15 seconds and hope they’re real. But, as Anthropic also said in a statement, the “work of defending the world’s cyber infrastructure might take years; frontier AI capabilities are likely to advance substantially over just the next few months. For cyber defenders to come out ahead, we need to act now.”

And do we really have 15 seconds? One of Claude Mythos’ overseers posted on social media recently that he was having lunch in a park when Mythos emailed him — even though it’s not supposed to have access to the internet. Researchers had tasked Mythos with trying to break out of its not-connected “sandbox” and it did.

That’s another problem with Mythos and other AI — they rarely do what we expect and find sneaky ways around rules. Virtually every AI super-brain created has been shown to lie, deceive, and in general behave in disturbing and unethical ways when put in the right conditions.

Even Claude, billed as one of the most ethical AI super-brains out there, engages in bad behavior. Anthropic boasts its the “best-aligned model” it’s ever made — which is tech-speak for following human values and intentions, but also acknowledges it “likely poses the greatest alignment-related risk,” which is tech-speak for, well, maybe not.

So, at least for now, being the most ethical AI super-brain is a bit like being the most ethical serial killer. Run, people, run.

Again, thank you Anthropic (and its chief executive, Dario Amodei, who often warns of the dangers of what he’s creating, whatever that’s worth) for not plunging us into global chaos with no warning, because I’m betting that some other companies might have just tossed their super-AI onto society and let the destruction fall where it may. There is little doubt that other AI brains as capable as Mythos are coming, and soon — Anthropic was first with this level of capability, but it’s only 15 seconds ahead of its competitors.

But the idea that the technology industry is going to — or should— solve these problems on their own is an absurd, gross abdication of duty and common sense on behalf of governments big and small to protect their people. This isn’t a race for domination as President Trump has described it. It is a race to protect ourselves from ourselves — and from the majority of the superrich titans of the industry who seem to consistently place business and commerce over societal good.

We are down to the last 15 seconds before AI changes everything. Either we demand oversight and regulation now, or we let technology companies decide the fate of the world.

Donald Trump is accustomed to criticism from coast to coast — Democrats, disaffected Republicans, late-night comedians, massive protests. Yet in his second presidency, Trump’s most influential American critic doesn’t live in the country but at the Vatican.

It’s an unprecedented situation, with the first American pope directly assailing the American president over the war in Iran, where a fragile ceasefire took hold this week. The announcement came after Pope Leo XIV declared that Trump’s belligerence was “truly unacceptable.”

Never before has the relationship between Washington and the Vatican revolved around two Americans — specifically, a 79-year-old politician from Queens and a 70-year-old pontiff from Chicago. They come from the same generation and share some common cultural roots yet bring jarringly distinct approaches to their positions of vast power. And the relationship comes with risks for both sides.

“They’re two white guy boomers but they could not be any more different in their life experiences, in their values, in the way they have chosen to live those values,” said theology professor Natalia Imperatori-Lee of Fordham University. “This is a very stark contrast, and I think an inflection point for American Christianity.”

Polar positions on Iran among U.S. Christians

Experts on the Catholic Church emphasized that Leo’s opposition to the war reflects established church teachings, not the reflexive politics of the moment.

“For the last five centuries, the church has been involved in a project of helping develop strong international norms,” including the Geneva Conventions in recent centuries, said Catholic University professor William Barbieri. “It is a very long-standing tradition rooted in Scripture and theology and philosophy.”

Yet the U.S. administration, which has close ties to conservative evangelical Protestant leaders, has claimed heavenly endorsement for Trump’s war on Iran.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth urged Americans to pray for victory “in the name of Jesus Christ.” When Trump was asked whether he thought God approved of the war, he said, “I do, because God is good — because God is good and God wants to see people taken care of.”

The Rev. Franklin Graham, son of iconic Baptist evangelist Billy Graham, said of Trump that God “raised him up for such a time as this.” And Graham prayed for victory so Iranians can “be set free from these Islamic lunatics.”

Leo countered in his Palm Sunday message that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.” He referenced an Old Testament passage from Isaiah, saying that “even though you make many prayers, I will not listen — your hands are full of blood.”

While it’s not unusual for popes and presidents to be at cross purposes, it’s exceedingly rare for the leader of the Catholic Church to directly criticize a U.S. leader, and Leo later named Trump directly and expressed optimism that the president would seek “an off-ramp” in Iran.

An even stronger condemnation came after Trump warned of mass strikes against Iranian power plants and infrastructure, writing on social media that “an entire civilization will die tonight.” Leo described that as a “threat against the entire people of Iran” and said it was “truly unacceptable.”

Experts: Leo doesn’t see himself as a Trump rival

Imperatori-Lee said Leo’s direct criticism stands out from the church’s more general critiques of political and social systems. For example, Pope Francis urged U.S. bishops to defend migrants without specifically mentioning Trump or his deportation agenda. Leo also previously called for humane treatment of migrants.

“Popes have critiqued unfettered capitalism before, very robustly. The popes have critiqued the Industrial Revolution, right? Things that the U.S. has been at the forefront of,” Imperatori-Lee said, “but it’s never been this specific and localized.”

She said Leo’s commentary resonates in the U.S. — with Catholics and non-Catholics — because he is a native English speaker.

“There’s no question about his inflection and meaning,” she said. “It removes any ambiguities.”

Trump welcomed Leo’s election last May as a “great honor” for the country, and he hasn’t responded to the latest criticisms. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

“What Pope Leo and Donald Trump have in common is they both lived through the post-war polarization,” including the political upheaval of the Civil Rights Movement and Vietnam War, said Steven Millies, a professor at Chicago’s Catholic Theological Union, one of the pope’s alma maters.

He noted that Leo is a subscriber to The New York Times, plays the “Wordle” game, keeps up with U.S. sports and talks regularly with his brothers, including an avowed Trump supporter.

“In some ways he’s just like us,” Millies said, someone “who understands where our domestic political crisis came from,” unlike the Argentinian Francis, “who did not fully understand the peculiarities of the United States” even as he offered implicit criticism.

Barbieri said Leo’s American savvy still does not change an underappreciated reality of Catholicism and the papacy. “The Catholic Church doesn’t neatly fit into either right or left boxes as they’re understood in U.S. politics,” he said.

Leo’s global focus vs. Trump’s ‘transactional’ politics

Leo spent much of his pre-papal ministry, including all his time as a bishop and cardinal, outside the U.S.

He was educated in Rome as a canon lawyer within the church. He was a bishop in poor, rural swaths of Peru. He led the Augustinian order and served as Francis’ prefect for recommending bishop appointees around the world.

Imperatori-Lee said that global reach gave him a first-hand perspective on how Washington’s economic and military policies — including backing dictators in Latin America — have negatively affected less powerful nations and their citizens.

His varied experiences made then-Cardinal Robert Prevost uniquely suited to be elected pope despite the College of Cardinals’ traditional skepticism toward the U.S. and its superpower status. Millies argued that Trump and his advisers, even Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert, may not appreciate those distinctions.

“This is an administration that seems to think only in terms of transactional politics — who’s for us and who’s against us,” he said.

Polarization poses risks for Leo and Trump

Relations between Washington and the Vatican have become so strained that a report of an allegedly contentious meeting involving Pentagon and Catholic Church officials sent shockwaves through both cities.

According to the report in The Free Press, a member of Trump’s administration warned the church in January not to stand in the way of U.S. military might.

The Vatican on Friday issued a statement rejecting the report’s characterization of the meeting, saying it “does not correspond to the truth in any way.”

The U.S. Embassy to the Holy See also pushed back, writing on social media that “deliberate misrepresentation of these routine meetings sows unfounded division and misunderstanding.”

Millies, meanwhile, questioned whether anything the pope or U.S. bishops say can sway individual Catholics. Trump is likely to lose support among Catholics as he loses support across the broader electorate, Millies said, but that’s not necessarily because members of Leo’s flock are applying church doctrine.

“Partisan preferences always trump the religious commitments,” Millies said, describing a “disconnect” between church leaders and many parishioners who look to other sources, politicians included, when shaping their views of faith and politics.

“The icon of Catholicism in American politics now is JD Vance, and it’s more about winning an argument,” he said. “It’s a very different emphasis, but it’s one that may suit the Trump administration very well.”

Barrow writes for the Associated Press. AP reporters Nicole Winfield in Rome and Konstantin Toropin in Washington contributed to this report.

RANCHO MIRAGE, Calif. — As Republicans vie for their best shot to win the California governor’s office in two decades, the fight between the most prominent candidates to win over the party of President Trump has switched from subdued to vicious.

Conservative commentator Steve Hilton, at their first one-on-one debate in Rancho Mirage earlier this month, accused rival Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco of coddling illegal immigrants and called him “wishy-washy.” The law enforcement chief called Hilton, a British immigrant, a “fraud” and heartless for denying others the same pathway to U.S. citizenship he received.

“What an outrageous and offensive insult that Chad just made to every legal immigrant in this state and in this country,” Hilton fumed.

The heated exchange took place days before the California Republican Party weighs making an endorsement in the 2026 race for California governor. Hundreds of party delegates will gather in San Diego this weekend to decide, though it’s unclear if either candidate will be able to win the 60% vote threshold to receive the official party nod.

Most polls have shown the two Republicans as the top candidates in the race, despite registered Democratic voters outnumbering Republicans nearly 2-to-1 in California.

Bianco and Hilton are competing against eight heavyweight Democrats who are splintering their party’s votes in the election to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. Under California’s unique primary system, the two candidates who receive the most votes in the primary will move on to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.

The prospect has alarmed state Democratic leaders, who unsuccessfully urged struggling candidates to drop out to avoid their party being shut out of the November election.

Still, a lot can happen before the June 2 primary to stir up the race. President Trump endorsed Hilton late Sunday, which could significantly influence the state’s GOP voters. More than 6 million Californians voted for Trump in the 2024 presidential election, though he was trounced by Vice President Kamala Harris, one of the state’s top Democrats.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican candidate for governor, and Kate Monroe, chief executive of VETCOMM, talk with a woman lying on the sidewalk on Skid Row in Los Angeles in January.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

On the campaign trail, Bianco and Hilton have frequently raised the prospect of a Republican being elected governor as the result of failed Democratic rule of the nation’s most populous state and the world’s fourth-largest economy.

“For the first time in probably our lifetimes, really since Ronald Reagan … every legitimate poll has either shown me or Steve Hilton at the top two Republicans at the top of [every] statewide poll,” for the last six months, Bianco recently told about 100 attendees at a Valley Unity Republican Women luncheon at the Woodland Hills County Club overlooking verdant fairways.

Hilton, who has participated in more gubernatorial forums and debates than Bianco, said polling that shows him besting Democratic rivals proves that Californians are fed up with 15 years of one-party rule.

“I tell you right now, there is not a single one of them who represents to the slightest degree the change we need in California,” he told a few hundred people at Big Bear’s Calvary Chapel. “We are going to do it this year.”

From afar, Bianco appears to be out of central casting for a GOP candidate for governor: an armed lawman, with a salt-and-pepper mustache and close-cropped hair who has dedicated his life to protecting the vulnerable and locking up criminals.

Bianco, echoing independent pollsters as well as political strategists in both parties, said having “Riverside County Sheriff” next to his name on the official state ballot will be a major boon to his campaign.

“I will tell you this, if we took the names and the party off of the ballot and simply went up with resume — we made you all read a resume of who you’re going to put as your next governor — I would win this election 100% to nothing,” Bianco told the GOP women’s group.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton greets a member of the Big Bear Valley Republican Assembly before speaking at a town hall at Calvary Chapel in Big Bear in March.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

But Bianco’s badge hasn’t shielded him from Hilton’s blistering attacks about the sheriff’s past statements about immigration, pandemic mask mandates and Black Lives Matter protests — which is disqualifying for some GOP voters.

Bianco opposes “sanctuary city” laws, calls for the deportation of criminal illegal immigrants and says the border must be secured. But he has also supported a pathway to citizenship for lawful, working undocumented people and told his constituents that his deputies were not taking part in ICE raids.

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, Bianco ordered county residents to wear masks or face punishment, though he later pushed back at Newsom’s stay-at-home orders.

That same year, he and his deputies were photographed kneeling and speaking with protesters in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd, an action he has since recast as praying.

Bianco’s wife, Denise, on Thursday accused Hilton of endangering her husband by sending mailers to voters that featured Bianco’s face surrounded by circles that she described as a “bullseye target.”

“We have all watched way too much political violence directed at law enforcement officers in recent years. I never imagined it would come from a political candidate directed at my husband,” she said in an Instagram post. “Steve, why on God’s earth would you think it’s acceptable to put my husband’s face, a dedicated sheriff, on a shooting target?”

Election security has also highlighted differences in the candidates’ views.

Hilton and Bianco echoed Trump’s call to make GOP voter turnout “too big to rig.” But their statements about alleged malfeasance differed.

Hilton decried “total corruption in the voting system in California.”

“I’ve said for the longest possible time that I don’t understand why we can’t do things the way that most places do it, which is vote on one day, count on one day, get the results on one day,” he said.

Asked by a voter about electoral fraud in California in March, Bianco replied that he was confident that law enforcement in California ensures that such fraud is “not happening here,” while agreeing that such “cheating” occurred in states such as Ohio and Pennsylvania in the 2020 election.

But the same month, he seized more than 650,000 ballots from the November election as part of an investigation to determine if they were fraudulently counted.

Bianco put the investigation on hold shortly before the California Supreme Court halted it pending further review.

California voters have not elected a Republican as governor since Arnold Schwarzenegger won reelection in 2006. Two Republicans on the ballot in the June 2 primary election hope to change that.

(Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)

Hilton has sought to capitalize on these positions, labeling Bianco the “shifty sheriff,” an attack that resonates with some voters.

“The man lies. The man is not honest about taking a knee to BLM, which is unacceptable,” said Agnes Gibboney, 71, of Rancho Cucamonga. “And coming up with three, four different excuses is unacceptable. And then to get mad at the voters for asking the question.”

Bianco has labeled Hilton as a shape-shifting opportunist, pointing to him championing a climate change agenda while advising British Prime Minister David Cameron and expressing support for views expressed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the 2016 presidential election, and posting a picture of Hilton hugging Newsom on social media.

“Steve is a fraud. He’s a liar, and I’m not going to sit by and just let him do it anymore,” Bianco said after the Rancho Mirage debate. “When he starts attacking me, he starts attacking my deputies, my profession, I’m not gonna let it happen anymore.”

“He remade himself just for this governor election, and everyone is starting to see through it,” Bianco said.

The son of Hungarians who emigrated to Britain, Hilton served as an advisor to Cameron before becoming an American citizen. At campaign events, supporters have gifted Hilton with a Kézimunka, a traditional Hungarian embroidered cloth, which was stitched with a heart, as well as stars-and-stripes bathing trunks.

“My parents are Hungarian refugees from communism,” Hilton said. “I am fighting to make sure that this state that I love does not turn into the country that I left …. I have renounced my U.K. citizenship. I’m all in for California and America.”

Of the two candidates, Hilton has been more publicly visible, and benefits from GOP voters seeing him speak on Fox News for several years.

Both men argue one-party Democratic rule of California has destroyed a state once viewed as the epitome of the American dream.

Hilton describes state leaders as “far-left lunatics.” They’ve ruined the most amazing, the most beautiful place on earth,” and tweaked a popular Texas slight about someone being all hat and no cattle to describe Newsom.

“He’s all hair, nothing there. Don’t you think it’s time in California we have a governor with less hair?” said Hilton, who sports a smooth crown.

Bianco calls the state’s Democratic leaders “far-left psychopaths” who have enacted policies, taxes and fees that are forcing Californians to flee the state.

“We all know government has completely failed and we’re ready to take our state back,” he said, later adding, “They don’t want our lives better. I do …. No one leaves California because they want to. It’s government agenda and policy that is harming California and making it bad.”

Most of the candidates’ pledges, such as tackling unaffordability, reducing gas prices, increasing capacity in state prisons, protecting gun owners’ rights and keeping trans athletes out of girls’ locker rooms, are nearly identical.

They both promise to slash California’s vehicle registration fees, a proposal that echoes former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s pledge to repeal the car tax during the 2003 recall election that was immortalized by his campaign dropping a wrecking ball on an Oldsmobile in Costa Mesa.

Schwarzenegger was elected governor soon after.

No candidate in either party can match Schwarzenegger’s global appeal, or voters’ familiarity with the state’s most recent Democratic governors — including Jerry Brown, the scion of a storied political family — or Newsom’s charisma, added GOP strategist Rob Stutzman, a former Schwarzenegger advisor who is not aligned with any candidate in the 2026 race.

“Voters are finding this to be an uninspiring list of candidates. And in fact, the impressive list would be those that chose not to run, right?” he said, referring to Harris, Sen. Alex Padilla and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta. “So it’s not a surprise that there isn’t much interest.”

Though Hilton and Bianco were previously cordial in person, such as when they crossed paths at September’s state GOP convention, their public criticism of each other has ratcheted up in recent weeks, which could sway the many undecided GOP voters in the race.

“My main contention is looking to see whether or not they’re gonna follow the will of the Lord. So I’m paying attention to what they say and what they do,” said retired Air Force IT specialist David Solomon, 42, after seeing Hilton speak in Big Bear. “It really just comes down to who’s gonna be able to enact their plan.”

Jane Price, a 77-year-old Sherman Oaks resident, said she worried that Republicans failing to unite behind a candidate would give Democrats an edge in the governor’s race.

“We don’t want to split, right? That’s a problem,” the charter member of the woman’s GOP group said after seeing Bianco speak. “The state of California is at stake. We were thriving here in California. But now, it has been nothing but a downhill slide. We need people who appreciate what California is all about.”

A war for the soul of the world is happening right now that’s straight out of the Bible — and I’m not just talking about the Middle East.

In one corner are President Trump and his minions, who insist that everything they do is divinely mandated. They have consistently invoked a violent version of God as they deport undocumented immigrants, try to make the United States whiter, rip up long-standing treaties with allies, rain down bombs like a biblical plague on supposed narco boats and choke nations they deem a threat or whose resources they covet.

They’re the ones who lecture religious leaders on what Jesus stood for, demanding blessings for Trump’s actions — or else.

Just check out the recent allegations in The Free Press that senior defense officials dressed down the Vatican’s ambassador to the U.S. in January over Pope Leo XIV’s lack of enthusiasm for Trump’s imperialist ambitions. Or Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, he of the tattoos hailing the blood thirst of the Crusades (another Middle Eastern forever war that the “civilized” side lost), who compared the rescue of a downed American aviator in Iran over Easter weekend to the resurrection of Jesus.

It’s a playbook straight out of the Book of Revelations, which describes a Beast in the End Times with “a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” in its quest to hold dominion over the earth.

In the other corner of this existential fight is an actual man of God: Pope Leo XIV.

Rather than cower before a despot who makes the Pharaoh in the Old Testament seem as stable and kind as St. Francis, the first American pope has resisted Trump like a protester at a “No Kings” rally. He has yet to denounce by name anyone in the president’s sordid orbit — but Pope Leo has returned to their actions again and again in his first year as head of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics.

He began his papacy by greeting a cheering crowd with “Peace be with you all” — what Jesus told his disciples after his Resurrection and a brilliant, biblical way to telegraph where he stands in our bellicose times.

On Palm Sunday a few weeks ago, the pontiff proclaimed during Mass in St. Peter’s Square that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war” — a not-so-subtle rebuke to Hegseth, who prayed shortly after the U.S. launched the Iran war for “every round [to] find its mark” and for “overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”

For his first Easter message, Pope Leo wrote, “Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace! Not a peace imposed by force, but through dialogue!”

Meanwhile, President Trump told a reporter that God supports the destruction he’s inflicting on Iran because “God is good. God wants to see people taken care of.”

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth speaks to reporters at the Pentagon, July 16, 2025, in Washington.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

According to the Free Press article, the Vatican declined an invitation from Vice President JD Vance for Pope Leo to visit the U.S., for fear that Trump would use him as a political pawn. Instead, the man born in Chicago as Robert Prevost plans to spend July 4 — America’s 250th birthday — on a Mediterranean island that has long served as a gateway for migrants trying to make it to Europe.

Critics will accuse Pope Leo of Trump Derangement Syndrome and call him particularly short-sighted, since he stands athwart the desires of many American Catholics.

Though he isn’t Catholic, Trump has favored Catholicism far above any other mainline Christian denomination, from acknowledging feast days to packing his administration and the Supreme Court with adherents in a way that even Joe Biden — a lifelong Catholic — never did.

About 55% of Catholics voted for Trump in 2024, per the Pew Research Center. A survey last year by The Catholic Project at The Catholic University of America found “a clear generational shift away from liberal self-identification” among younger priests. Dioceses across the country are reporting the highest amount of converts in decades, many of them drawn in by orthodox Catholic influencers.

But Trump’s embrace of Catholicism, like everything else in his life, has been conditional on fealty to him. His administration pulled tens of millions of federal funds from Catholic charities because they assisted migrants regardless of legal status — something the American Catholic church has done for over a century. Vance, himself a Catholic convert, accused bishops of being “worried about their bottom line” for daring to criticize the move and his boss’ deportation Leviathan.

The Free Press also reported that Trump’s lackeys invoked the Avignon Papacy — when 14th century French kings exiled a succession of popes from the Vatican and made them their puppets — during their browbeating of the Vatican ambassador.

Re-litigating history is an obsession of the Trump regime, so bringing up a medieval episode amounted to a threat to Leo to shape up — or else.

That’s what makes Pope Leo’s stance against a modern-day Babylon even braver. A pope’s main role is to bear witness to the words of Christ, who said far more about taking care of the meek and turning the other cheek than he did about waging war.

The best popes, from John XXIII to John Paul II, know that their words stand as a challenge for all people, believers and not, to create a better world that paves the way for the world to come. Trump wages war for himself; Pope Leo urges us to stand for something other than ourselves.

At this point in his reign, Trump is a dead ringer for the Antichrist, described in the Second Book of Thessalonians as a “man of sin … the son of perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all.”

Pope Leo would never characterize his opposition to Trump in such apocalyptic terms, of course. But his stance against the president’s tyranny is a call to action in the same vein as John Paul II’s exhortation to the free world to oppose the Soviet empire.

“Let us abandon every desire for conflict, domination, and power,” Pope Leo stated on Easter, “and implore the Lord to grant his peace to a world ravaged by wars and marked by a hatred and indifference that make us feel powerless in the face of evil.”

Amen, amen, amen.

Taipei, Taiwan – Opposition leader Cheng Li-wun and Chinese President Xi Jinping have met in Beijing, where both leaders stated their opposition to Taiwan independence and expressed a desire for a “peaceful” resolution to the long-running dispute over the island’s future.

They posed for photos at the Great Hall of the People and exchanged public remarks, in addition to holding their closed-door meeting.

Cheng is the highest-ranking Taiwanese leader to meet Xi since President Ma Ying-jeou talked with the Chinese leader in Singapore in 2015. They met again in China two years ago when Ma was a private citizen.

Both Cheng and Ma are members of the Kuomintang, the conservative-leaning Taiwanese political party that advocates for greater engagement with China by Taiwan’s self-ruled democratic government.

During her public remarks, Cheng stressed that Chinese and Taiwanese leaders should work to “transcend political confrontation and mutual hostility”.

“Through the unremitting efforts of our two parties, we hope the Taiwan Strait will no longer become a potential flashpoint of conflict, nor a chessboard for external powers,” Cheng said, according to an English translation.

“Instead, it should become a strait that connects family ties, civilisation and hope – a symbol of peace jointly safeguarded by Chinese people on both sides,” she said.

Cheng’s remarks were sprinkled with well-known Chinese Communist Party talking points, praising its success in eradicating absolute poverty to its goal of achieving the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”

“During their open-door meeting, Xi also emphasised Taiwan and China’s shared history and culture, stating that “people of all ethnic groups, including Taiwanese compatriots,” had “jointly written the glorious history of China.”

“All sons and daughters of China share the same Chinese roots and the same Chinese spirit. This originates from blood ties and is deeply embedded in our history – it cannot be forgotten and cannot be erased,” Xi said.

He added that together with the KMT and other members of Taiwanese society, Beijing was ready to “work for peace” across the Taiwan Strait.

Both leaders said they oppose “foreign meddling” in Taiwan-China relations – a reference to US interference – while Cheng suggested that she would slow Taiwan’s military build up, according to Wen-ti Sung, a nonresident fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub.

“She talked about the ‘institutional arrangement for war prevention,’ which was a euphemism for saying that under her leadership, the KMT would not be seeking a defence and deterrence-oriented approach to war prevention,” he told Al Jazeera.

The message, in short, was that “Taiwan ought to slow down on defence buildup and buying US arms,” Sung said.

Taiwan’s military expansion has been a hotly debated issue in the legislature, where the KMT has for months blocked a $40bn special budget to acquire US weapons. The opposition party alleges that the defence bill is too large and too vague. It offered a smaller $12bn alternative instead.

Writing on Facebook ahead of the meeting, Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wrote that the KMT continues to “deliberately avoid cross-party negotiations” while delaying approval of the special defence budget.

Lai said that his government also supports peace, but not “unrealistic fantasies”. Despite promises of peace from Xi, China has steadily ramped up its military presence in the waters and airspace around Taiwan in recent years. Since 2022, China’s armed forces have had six rounds of multi-day live-fire military drills in the Taiwan Strait, the 180-kilometre wide waterway dividing Taiwan from mainland Asia.

“History tells us that compromising with authoritarian regimes only sacrifices sovereignty and democracy; it will not bring freedom, nor will it bring peace,” Lai wrote on Facebook.

China accuses the ruling DPP’s leadership of pushing a “separatist” agenda. The DPP advocates for a distinct Taiwanese identity and, over the past decade, has tried to raise Taiwan’s profile on the world stage — which has provoked anger in Beijing.

The Chinese leadership cut off formal contact with Taipei shortly after the DPP came to power in 2016, although it continues to communicate through different groups, including the KMT.

That is partly why Cheng’s trip to China has been viewed with scepticism in some corners of Taiwan, particularly among the ruling DPP.

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Cheng sidestepped questions of whether she supported Taiwanese and Chinese unification, but said her main goal was to seek “reconciliation” based on shared history and culture.

However, the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party have not always got along.

They fought a bloody civil war from the 1920s to the 1940s during China’s republican era, only pausing to fight the Japanese during the Second World War.

The KMT-led Republic of China government later retreated to Taiwan, a former Japanese colony, in the late 1940s, vowing to one day return to China. The conflict was never fully resolved. The CCP continues to claim Taiwan as a province, and remains committed to annexing it one day, peacefully or by force.

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council – which sets Taiwan’s policy towards China – said this week that Cheng’s talking point that Taiwan and China are “one family” mischaracterises Taiwan’s sovereignty dispute as an internal disagreement rather than one between two governments.

While still formally known as the Republic of China, Taiwan has undergone a cultural and political sea change since democratisation in the 1990s, accompanied by a rise in Taiwanese nationalism.

In 2025, a national identity survey by the National Chengchi University in Taiwan found that 62 per cent of respondents identified as “Taiwanese”, up from 17.6 per cent in 1992, the first year of the survey.

The percentage of respondents who identify as “Taiwanese and Chinese” has fallen from 46.4 per cent to 31.7 per cent over the same period, while respondents identifying as “Chinese” fell from 25.5 to 2.5 per cent.

The disciplinary files of Los Angeles police officers are closely guarded secrets, protected by some of the nation’s strictest confidentiality laws.

But now, many of those secret files have been splashed across the internet, along with tens of thousands of other sensitive records from the L.A. city attorney’s office.

The extent of the data breach is still unclear, and city officials have said they are investigating to find out what was taken, who was responsible and how the city’s cybersecurity was compromised.

A ransomware hacking collective called WorldLeaks, which has gained a reputation for extorting private and public entities by threatening to disclose confidential files on the internet, has claimed responsibility.

The group first announced the breach on March 20. City and LAPD officials did not comment on whether the hackers requested a ransom in return for not releasing the information — or whether the city paid one. Some reports suggest that the group was behind a hack of L.A. Metro last month that forced it to shut down part of its transit network.

The Times spoke with several sources familiar with the investigation into the data breach who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case publicly, and reviewed a partial inventory of the leaked files, including screenshots of some materials.

Here’s what we know so far.

How did hackers get the LAPD files?

The hacking group appears to have exploited vulnerabilities in a system used by the Los Angeles city attorney’s office, enabling the group to make off with nearly 340,000 files, according to the sources familiar with the case.

In the wake of the George Floyd protests, the sources said, the city was flooded with dozens of lawsuits from protesters who had been injured by LAPD officers. To handle the deluge of new cases, the city created a file-sharing system so that attorneys on both sides could access discovery materials, including some considered private under court orders.

It was akin to Dropbox or Google Drive, the sources said, and access was supposed to be restricted to just authorized users.

But the system, according to two sources familiar with the investigation, was not password-protected because city officials believed that it needed to be accessible to other parties, including outside attorneys hired to assist with civil litigation.

The sources said the system expanded far beyond its initial scope and came to include records from hundreds of lawsuits involving the LAPD.

In a statement issued to The Times on Wednesday, Ivor Pine, a spokesperson for the city attorney’s office, described the hack as “unauthorized access to a third-party tool used by the City Attorney’s Office to transfer discovery to opposing counsel and litigants.”

How did the LAPD and city officials find out?

Few inside the LAPD knew about the extent of the leak until The Times published a story Tuesday revealing files that appeared online.

After the news broke on Tuesday, the department released a brief public statement acknowledging the disclosure of “discovery documents from previously adjudicated or settled LAPD civil litigation cases.” The department noted that the “breach does not involve any LAPD systems or networks.”

Pine said that once the city attorney’s office realized its file-sharing system was compromised, it “took immediate steps to secure the tool and investigate what information was accessed.”

“No other City applications or systems were involved in this incident,” Pine said. “The information was self contained in this application without any links or access to any department records or systems.”

What are the consequences of the massive leak?

The data breach could have political ramifications for embattled City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, who is up for reelection.

Last week, she earned the endorsement of the powerful Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents rank-and-file LAPD officers. But union officials contend that Feldstein Soto failed to mention the leaked documents to them until they learned of the hack Tuesday evening.

On Wednesday, the union issued a scathing statement.

“To say we are disappointed by the lack of urgency and forthrightness from the City Attorney’s office is an understatement,” the union’s statement said. “We will keep asking the tough questions and once we receive answers we will take appropriate action.”

Feldstein Soto’s challenger in the city attorney’s race, John McKinney, said the public deserves immediate answers.

“The lack of transparency isn’t just concerning, it’s unacceptable,” said McKinney, who currently leads the major crimes bureau at the L.A. County district attorney’s office. “By keeping the public in the dark, witnesses and Los Angeles Police Department families may have been put at risk.”

Lawyers for police officers reported numerous calls from clients worried their personnel and medical records were exposed, raising the prospect of more costly litigation. About 900 officers are currently suing the department over the 2023 release of mugshot-style images and other materials in response to a public records request.

How much information was snatched and what’s in it?

In all, according to posts about the data breach, 7.7 terabytes of information was available for download.

The LAPD statement described the files in the recent hack as coming from closed cases, but at least one of the files reviewed by The Times involved a lawsuit over an alleged sexual assault by a police officer that was set for trial next week.

Also disclosed were personnel files from dozens of current and former officers. Every officer’s personnel records are contained within a system called TEAMS II.

It is a detailed history that includes records on arrests they have made, training sessions they have attended, citizen complaints received against them and lawsuits they have been involved in, along with any history of traffic collisions, shootings or other uses of force, commendations, assignments, workers’ compensation claims and more.

Such records can be turned over as discovery in civil cases, but almost always under a protective order that restricts them from being shared publicly.

An untold number of internet users have downloaded the terabytes of data in the weeks since its release. What surfaces next remains to be seen.