President Trump

WASHINGTON — Rep. Robert Garcia and his team faced a monumental task on Nov. 5: Sift through more than 20,000 documents obtained from the estate of Jeffrey Epstein in search for something that would shed more light into President Trump’s relationship with the now-deceased convicted sex offender.

After six tedious days combing through the records, Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and four staff members identified three emails that would go on to ignite a political firestorm.

In the emails, Epstein wrote that Trump had “spent hours” at the late financier’s house with one of his victims and that he “knew about the girls,” suggesting the president knew more about Epstein’s abuse than he had previously acknowledged. The estate released the emails to the committee after receiving a subpoena.

“We thought [the emails] really raised questions about the relationship between the president and Jeffrey Epstein,” Garcia said in an interview last week. “We knew we had to get those out as soon as possible.”

Garcia’s plan to release the emails quickly thrust the second-term Democrat into the national spotlight, elevating his profile as a chief antagonist of Trump on a issue that has dogged the president since his first term. It also increased the pressure on the White House to release its investigative Epstein files.

The assertions in Epstein’s emails about Trump’s involvement or awareness of Epstein’s illicit acts have not been corroborated and the White House has denied the veracity of those accounts.

The White House accused Democrats of “selectively” leaking emails to create a “fake narrative to smear President Trump,” adding that Democrats redacted the name of one of the victims, Virginia Giuffre, who died by suicide in April and had previously said she had not witnessed Trump participating in abuse at Epstein’s house.

The email disclosures on Nov. 12 prompted Republicans on the committee to publish the full cache of records just hours later. At the same time, Democrats — joined by a handful of Republicans — were on the verge of forcing a House vote to compel the Justice Department to release its Epstein files. Days later, Trump urged GOP lawmakers to back the bill he had long resisted, and he ultimately signed it into law.

“If we hadn’t released the initial emails, Republicans would likely have released nothing,” Garcia said. “They never release anything until we push them and we bring pressure from the public.”

Garcia said Democrats were prepared to publish the full set themselves — but incrementally over the course of the week, arguing that such a release needed to be done carefully to protect victims’ privacy.

Republicans on the committee have criticized the minority party’s approach, arguing that it focuses on sensationalizing select pieces of information to damage Trump and politicizing the Epstein investigation.

“The most dangerous place in D.C. is between Robert Garcia and a cable news camera,” Republican strategist Matthew Gorman said. “This is simply a ploy for him to draw more attention to himself, and he’s using this issue to do it.”

‘Sometimes you gotta punch back harder’

Garcia’s allies view the 47-year-old’s rise as both foreseeable and reflective of his past.

Born in Peru, Garcia immigrated to the United States as a young child and became a citizen in his early 20s. He later became Long Beach’s first Latino and first openly gay mayor before arriving in Washington — where he is now one of the youngest to ever serve as the ranking member of the main investigative panel in the House.

Five months into the role, Garcia says he remains in disbelief that he is in the position that has been held by people like Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), whom he considers one of his “heroes.”

“To be in a place where I’m doing the job that he was in when I got to Congress a couple of years ago is not something that I expected,” Garcia said. “I want to contribute back as best I can, and take on this corruption, take on what is happening with the Jeffrey Epstein case and holding the administration accountable.”

The oversight committee is one of the House’s most high-profile panels and its chair, Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, has broad subpoena power. Comer, a staunch Trump ally, has been leading a review of the government’s investigation into Epstein and his longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Comer has subpoenaed both the Epstein estate and the Justice Department.

Comer declined to be interviewed for this article, as did other House Republicans. But Comer told Politico last week that he was “done with Garcia” and that the Democrat had “burned his bridges with this.”

“He just needs to do TikTok videos or something. … He’s not a serious investigator. He’s like a TikTok video kind of guy,” Comer said.

Garcia responded to Comer’s comments with a reference to the movie “Mean Girls.”

“Why’s he so obsessed with me?” he said Wednesday in an Instagram post — an example of how Garcia often uses pop culture to communicate to a more general audience.

Garcia says his tactics are motivated by an allergy to bullies.

“I grew up as an immigrant kid. … I know what it is like to be on the other side of the bully,” he said. “If the bully is going to punch or cause harm to you or others that you care about, you have to punch back. Sometimes you gotta punch back harder.”

Democrats credit Garcia for pushing Comer to act. In July, a Republican-led subcommittee passed a Democrat-led motion to subpoena the Justice Department’s Epstein documents — a move that ultimately prompted Comer to issue his subpoenas.

Rep. Robert Garcia speaks at a ceremonial swearing-in event in Long Beach in August to commemorate his new role as ranking member of the House oversight committee.

(Jonathan Alcorn / For The Times)

Rep. Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat, said the vote “began knocking over the dominoes” that eventually led to the public seeing a copy of Epstein’s “50th birthday book,” which includes Trump’s name, as well as the three emails linking Trump to Epstein.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), a member of the oversight committee, praised Garcia for securing bipartisan support to secure documents and pushing records out to the public. Khanna, who led the push to force a vote on the House floor to demand the Justice Department release the Epstein files, also co-wrote a letter with Garcia to Epstein’s estate requesting an unredacted copy of the birthday book.

Attorneys for the estate said that they would cooperate, but that they required a subpoena to release materials due to privacy concerns. Khanna said he believes the letter set in motion the push that ultimately led Comer to subpoena the estate.

“I think the way he has worked with Comer to make sure a lot of the investigation has been bipartisan, has been effective,” Khanna said in an interview.

A ‘dynamic’ approach to oversight

Garcia — who is known to use social media and pop culture to amplify his message — has folded those communication tactics into his role on the oversight committee.

The day the emails were released, Garcia promoted them in social media posts and videos and gave multiple interviews. The congressman — a self-described Bravo fan — is scheduled to appear this week on the cable channel’s “What Happens Live with Andy Cohen.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) told The Times that Garcia’s “dynamic” leadership approach is creating new ways to communicate to a younger generation about the work Congress is doing.

“He seems to thrive on it, and that’s a joy to behold,” the former speaker said. “He is young, but has brought members along and the public along as to what the challenge is.”

Rep. Robert Garcia speaks with Mayor Karen Bass at a congressional field hearing at the Metropolitan Water District on Monday.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

Republicans on the committee have accused Garcia and Democrats of intentionally using the Epstein investigation to generate a false narrative against Trump — criticism that Democrats see as Garcia being willing to “fight fire with fire.”

Sen. Adam Schiff, who served on the House Select Committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, said Garcia’s push to seek records “outside of traditional channels,” including the Epstein estate, helped drive a “public narrative that broke through.”

“Under such a lawless and corrupt administration, we need talented and creative leaders to do oversight work, expose the malfeasance to the public and break through in a fractured media environment, and Congressman Garcia has proven adept at all three,” Schiff said.

Matthew Bartlett, a Republican strategist and former Trump administration appointee, said Garcia’s strategy could backfire if or when all the information on the Epstein investigation comes out.

“I believe that they’ve sprung Pandora’s box with a whole bunch of conspiracy theories, fake memes and news that the left is fully embracing and that may not actually be real,” he said.

As more records from Epstein’s estate are expected to come to light in the coming weeks, Garcia says he is committed to exposing wrongdoing from anyone, regardless of party. The documents have already shown Epstein’s links to prominent Democrats.

The records have also shown links to major banks, a thread Garcia says he believes could be central in understanding Epstein’s plea deal negotiated by a prosecutor who served in Trump’s Cabinet during his first term.

“I am not interested in protecting anybody,” he said. “I’m interested in justice for the survivors.”

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has halted all asylum decisions and paused issuing visas for people traveling on Afghan passports, days after a shooting in the nation’s capital that left one National Guard member dead and another in critical condition.

Investigators continued Saturday to seek a motive in the shooting, in which the suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, faces charges including first-degree murder.

Lakanwal is a 29-year-old Afghan national who worked with the CIA during the Afghanistan war. He applied for asylum during the Biden administration, which was granted this year under President Trump, according to #AfghanEvac, a group that assists with resettlement of Afghans who helped U.S. forces in their country.

The Trump administration has seized on the shooting Wednesday several blocks from the White House to intensify efforts to rein in legal immigration, promising to pause entry from some poor countries and review Afghans and other legal migrants already in the country. That is in addition to other measures, some of which were previously set in motion.

Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died after Wednesday’s shooting, and Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, remains hospitalized in critical condition. They were deployed with the West Virginia National Guard as part of Trump’s mission in Washington, D.C., which he says aims to combat crime. The president also has deployed or tried to deploy National Guard members to other Democratic-run cities to assist with his mass deportation efforts but has faced court challenges.

U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro’s office said the charges against Lakanwal also include two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed. In an interview on Fox News, she said there were “many charges to come.”

Asylum decisions halted

Trump called the shooting a “terrorist attack” and criticized the Biden administration for enabling entry by Afghans who worked with U.S. forces.

The director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Joseph Edlow, said Friday in a post on the social platform X that asylum decisions would be paused “until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible.”

Experts say the U.S. has rigorous vetting systems for asylum seekers. Asylum claims made from inside the country through USCIS have long faced backlogs. Critics say the slowdown has been exacerbated during the Trump administration.

Also Friday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said his department was pausing “visa issuance for ALL individuals traveling on Afghan passports.”

Shawn VanDiver, president of San Diego-based #AfghanEvac, which has coordinated with the U.S. government on its Afghan resettlement efforts, said in response: “They are using a single violent individual as cover for a policy they have long planned, turning their own intelligence failures into an excuse to punish an entire community and the veterans who served alongside them.”

The suspect

Lakanwal lived in Bellingham, Wash., about 80 miles north of Seattle, with his wife and five children, former landlord Kristina Widman said.

Neighbor Mohammad Sherzad said Lakanwal was polite and quiet and spoke little English.

Sherzad said he attended the same mosque as Lakanwal and heard from other members that he was struggling to find work. He said Lakanwal “disappeared” about two weeks ago.

Lakanwal worked briefly this summer as an independent contractor for Amazon Flex, which lets people use their own cars to deliver packages, according to a company spokesperson.

Investigators are executing warrants in Washington state and other parts of the country.

Lakanwal entered the U.S. in 2021 through Operation Allies Welcome, a Biden administration program that resettled Afghans after the U.S. withdrawal, officials said. Lakanwal applied for asylum during that administration, but his asylum was approved this year under the Trump administration, #AfghanEvac said in a statement.

Lakanwal served in a CIA-backed Afghan army unit, known as one of the specialized Zero Units, in the southern province of Kandahar, according to a resident of the eastern province of Khost who identified himself as Lakanwal’s cousin and spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

The man said Lakanwal started out working for the unit as a security guard in 2012 and was later promoted to a team leader and a GPS specialist.

Binkley and Finley write for the Associated Press. AP journalists Sarah Brumfield, Siddiqullah Alizai, Elena Becatoros, Randy Herschaft, Cedar Attanasio and Hallie Golden contributed to this report.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For over an hour Tuesday night, Presidential Trump vied with pugnacious Trump.

The White House had promised a conciliatory and uplifting State of the Union address, which stood to reason. It’s one thing to inveigh against the mess Trump said he inherited a year ago and another to laud the job he claims to have done cleaning it up.

FULL COVERAGE: State of the Union »

Gone, then, was the wreckage, the ruin and the dystopian “American carnage” he deplored in the glowering speech at his inauguration. Instead, Trump offered a vision of hopefulness and light — for a time, anyway.

“This is our new American moment,” he said loftily in the early moments of his address. “There has never been a better time to start living the American dream.”

But those grace notes were soon overshadowed by an increasingly harsh tone, as though the president couldn’t or didn’t care to contain his more ad-libbed and aggressive self.

He needled Democrats over the partial dismantling of the Affordable Care Act, one of his predecessor’s proudest achievements. He resurrected the controversy over the national anthem and the dissent of kneeling black athletes.

When he spoke of immigration, perhaps the touchiest issue facing a gridlocked Congress, he placed it in a dark frame, with talk of gang violence, of alien intruders stealing jobs and a suggestion of unending “chain” migrants — aunts, uncles, cousins and other family members — leaching taxpayer dollars.

In his closest approximation to an olive branch, Trump said he would support a proposal offering a path to citizenship for 1.8 million children — so-called Dreamers — who were brought to America illegally by their parents. But only, he said, if Democrats would agree to a border wall and other changes in legal immigration they consider anathema.

The result was groans and hisses and boos from that side of the House chamber.

The annual speech to Congress is one of Washington’s most carefully choreographed set pieces, and for portions of it Trump hewed closely to a familiar script

He assayed the state of the union, pronouncing it “strong.” He outlined an ambitious agenda — which lawmakers will mostly ignore — crowed about his achievements, made a feint in the direction of bipartisanship and saluted a large number of invited guests who served as props representing different bullet points (immigration, a strong military, the opioid addiction crisis) of his speech.

It was all terribly conventional, but only to a point.

There were many long sections that could just have easily been delivered at one of Trump’s roisterous “Make America Great Again” campaign rallies, down to the moment when the ranks of Republican lawmakers broke into a lusty chant of “USA! USA!” as the president, chin out, approvingly took in the scene.

The contrast to the last time Trump stood in the well of the House was striking.

Eleven months ago, he delivered a more subdued performance, earning plaudits and generating widespread talk of a presidential turning point or, in that most overused expression, a pivot toward a more staid and conformist style of governance.

Then, days later, Trump was back to tweeting about a “bad (or sick)” President Obama bugging Trump Tower, a figment that roused his political base but instantly banished any Democratic goodwill or notions of presidential normalcy.

Trump has shattered political convention in so many ways that it is difficult to enumerate them all. One of the most significant is this: Although the economy is perking smartly along and Americans tell pollsters they feel better about their financial well-being than they have in years, the president has gotten very little credit.

Indeed, his approval rating stands at a historical low for a chief executive this early in his term, severing the long-standing correlation between economic good times and voter satisfaction.

His speech Tuesday night, with its prime-time prominence and audience reaching in the tens of millions, offered a chance to address that problem. “Over the last year, we have made incredible progress and achieved extraordinary success,” Trump said, reeling off a number of favorable economic statistics.

But much of the address seemed aimed at a far narrower audience.

To a greater degree than any recent president, Trump has used his time in office to appease the relatively narrow slice of the electorate — older, whiter, alienated, aggrieved — that placed him in power, opting not to reach out, bend and seek to broaden that coalition.

His uncompromising performance Tuesday night perfectly encapsulated that approach. Supporters found much to like and detractors plenty to reinforce their contempt.

It is too much to expect any single speech, much less one as politically freighted as the State of the Union, to instantly bridge such a yawning gap. If anything, though, Trump’s provocative remarks seemed likely to push warring Democrats and Republicans even further apart.

[email protected]

@markzbarabak

WASHINGTON — Charges against the man accused of shooting two National Guard members have been upgraded to first-degree murder after one of the soldiers died, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia announced Friday.

Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, were hospitalized in critical condition after the Wednesday afternoon shooting near the White House. President Trump announced Thursday evening that Beckstrom had died.

U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro’s office said the charges against Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national who worked with the CIA during the Afghanistan war, now include one count of first-degree murder, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence and two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed.

Beckstrom and Wolfe were deployed with the West Virginia National Guard as part of Trump’s mission in the nation’s capital that federalized the D.C. police force, which he says is a crime-fighting campaign. The president has deployed National Guard members to many Democratic-run cities, including Los Angeles, to assist with his mass deportation efforts.

Trump called the shooting a “terrorist attack” and criticized the Biden administration for allowing Afghans who worked with U.S. forces during the Afghanistan war to enter the U.S. The president has said he wants to “permanently pause migration” from poorer nations and expel millions of immigrants from the country.

In an interview on Fox News, Pirro said there are “many charges to come” beyond the upgraded murder charge. She said her heart goes out to the family of Beckstrom, who volunteered to serve and “ended up being shot ambush-style on the cold streets of Washington, D.C., by an individual who will now be charged with murder in the first degree.”

Pirro, a former Fox News host, declined to discuss the suspect’s motive, saying officials have been working around the clock on that question. Investigators are continuing to execute warrants in Washington state, where Lakanwal lived, and other parts of the country, she said.

Wolfe remains in “very critical condition,” West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey said Friday. He ordered flags to be flown at half-staff in recognition of Beckstrom’s death.

“These two West Virginia heroes were serving our country and protecting our nation’s capital when they were maliciously attacked,” Morrisey said. “Their courage and commitment to duty represent the very best of our state.”

Lakanwal entered the U.S. in 2021

Lakanwal entered the U.S. in 2021 through Operation Allies Welcome, a Biden administration program that evacuated and resettled tens of thousands of Afghans after the U.S. withdrawal from the country, officials said.

Lakanwal applied for asylum during the Biden administration, but his asylum was approved under the Trump administration, #AfghanEvac said in a statement. #AfghanEvac is a nonprofit organization that has worked with the U.S. government to resettle more than 195,000 Afghan evacuees, according to its website.

Lakanwal has been living in Bellingham, Wash., about 80 miles north of Seattle, with his wife and five children, said his former landlord, Kristina Widman.

Mohammad Sherzad, a neighbor of Lakanwal’s in Bellingham, told the Associated Press in a phone interview Friday that Lakanwal was polite, quiet and spoke very little English.

Sherzad said he attended the same mosque as Lakanwal and had heard from other members that Lakanwal was struggling to find work. Some of his children attended the same school as Lakanwal’s children, Sherzad said.

“He was so quiet and the kids were so polite, they were so playful. But we didn’t see anything bad about him. He was looking OK,” Sherzad said. Sherzad said Lakanwal “disappeared” about two weeks ago.

In his address to the troops Thursday, Trump said that Lakanwal “went cuckoo. I mean, he went nuts.”

People who knew Lakanwal say he served in a CIA-backed Afghan army unit before immigrating to the United States. Lakanwal worked in one of the special Zero Units in the southern province of Kandahar, according to a resident of the eastern Afghan province of Khost who identified himself as Lakanwal’s cousin. He said Lakanwal was originally from the province and his brother had worked in the unit as well.

The cousin spoke to AP on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals. He said Lakanwal had started out working as a security guard for the unit in 2012 and was later promoted to a team leader and a GPS specialist. A former official from the unit, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation, said Lakanwal’s brother was a platoon leader.

Zero Units were paramilitary units manned by Afghans and backed by the CIA that also served in front-line fighting with CIA paramilitary officers. Activists had attributed abuses to the units. They played a key role in the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from the country in 2021, providing security around Kabul International Airport as the Americans and Afghan evacuees withdrew from the country.

Beckstrom is remembered

Beckstrom enlisted in 2023, the same year she graduated high school, and served with distinction as a military police officer with the 863rd Military Police Company, the West Virginia National Guard said in a statement.

“She exemplified leadership, dedication, and professionalism,” the statement said, adding that Beckstrom “volunteered to serve as part of Operation D.C. Safe and Beautiful, helping to ensure the safety and security of our nation’s capital.”

The president called Beckstrom an “incredible person, outstanding in every single way.”

On Wednesday night, Trump called for the reinvestigation of all Afghan refugees who had entered under the Biden administration initiative that brought roughly 76,000 people to the country, many of whom had worked as interpreters and translators.

The program has faced intense scrutiny from Trump and others over allegations of gaps in the vetting process, even as advocates say there was extensive vetting and the program offered a lifeline to people at risk of Taliban reprisals.

The director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Joseph Edlow said in a statement that the agency would take additional steps to screen people from 19 “high-risk” countries “to the maximum degree possible.”

Edlow didn’t name the countries. But in June, the administration banned travel to the U.S. by citizens of 12 countries and restricted access from seven others, citing national security concerns.

Binkley and Finley write for the Associated Press. AP journalists Sarah Brumfield, Siddiqullah Alizai, Elena Becatoros and Randy Herschaft contributed to this report.

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump says he wants to “permanently pause migration” from poorer nations and is promising to seek to expel millions of immigrants from the United States by revoking their legal status.

Trump is blaming immigrants for problems from crime to housing shortages as part of what he calls “social dysfunction” in America and demanding “REVERSE MIGRATION.”

His most severe social media post against immigration since returning to the Oval Office in January came after the shooting Wednesday of two National Guard members who were patrolling the streets of the nation’s capital under his orders. One died and the other is in critical condition.

A 29-year-old Afghan national who worked with the CIA during the Afghanistan war is facing charges. The suspect came to the U.S. as part of a program after U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan to resettle those who had helped American troops.

Trump’s threat to stop immigration would be a serious blow to a nation that has long defined itself as welcoming immigrants.

Since Wednesday’s shooting near the White House, administration officials have pledged to reexamine millions of legal immigrants, building on a 10-month campaign to reduce the immigrant population. In a lengthy social media post late Thursday, the Republican president asserted that millions of people born outside the U.S. and now living in the country bore a large share of the blame for America’s societal ills.

“Only REVERSE MIGRATION can fully cure this situation,” Trump posted on his Truth Social platform. “Other than that, HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL, except those that hate, steal, murder, and destroy everything that America stands for — You won’t be here for long!”

Trump was elected on a promise to crack down on illegal migration, and raids and deportations undertaken by his administration have disrupted communities across the country. Construction sites and schools have been frequent targets. The prospect of more deportations could be economically dangerous as America’s foreign-born workers account for nearly 31 million jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The president said on Truth Social that “most” foreign-born U.S. residents “are on welfare, from failed nations, or from prisons, mental institutions, gangs, or drug cartels” as he blamed them for crime across the country that is predominantly committed by U.S. citizens.

There are roughly 50 million foreign-born residents in the U.S., and multiple studies have found that immigrants are generally less likely to commit crimes than are people who were born in the country.

The perception that immigration breeds crime “continues to falter under the weight of the evidence,” according to a review of academic literature last year in the Annual Review of Criminology.

“With few exceptions, studies conducted at both the aggregate and individual levels demonstrate that high concentrations of immigrants are not associated with increased levels of crime and delinquency across neighborhoods and cities in the United States,” it said.

A study by economists initially released in 2023 found immigrants are 60% less likely to be incarcerated than people born in the U.S. Immigrants have been imprisoned at lower rates for 150 years, the study found, adding to past research undermining Trump’s claims.

Trump seemed to have little interest in a policy debate in his post, which the White House, on its own rapid response social media account, called “one of the most important messages ever released by President Trump.”

He pledged to “terminate” millions of admissions to the country made during the term of his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden. He also wants to end federal benefits and subsidies for those who are not U.S. citizens, denaturalize people “who undermine domestic tranquility” and deport foreign nationals deemed “non-compatible with Western Civilization.”

Trump claimed immigrants from Somalia were “completely taking over the once great State of Minnesota” as he used a dated slur for intellectually disabled people to demean that state’s governor, Tim Walz, the Democratic vice presidential nominee last year.

On Wednesday night, Trump called for the reinvestigation of all Afghan refugees who had entered under the Biden administration. On Thursday, the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Joseph Edlow, said the agency would take additional steps to screen people from 19 “high-risk” countries “to the maximum degree possible.”

Edlow did not name the countries. But in June, the administration banned travel to the U.S. by citizens of 12 countries and restricted access from seven others, citing national security concerns.

The shooting of the two National Guard members appeared to trigger Trump’s anger over immigrants, yet he did not specifically refer to the event in his social media post.

The suspect, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, is accused of driving across the country to the District of Columbia and shooting two West Virginia National Guard members, Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24. Beckstrom died Thursday; Wolfe is in critical condition.

Lakanwal, currently in custody, was also shot and had wounds that were not believed to be life-threatening.

Trump was asked by a reporter Thursday if he blamed the shootings on all Afghans who came to the U.S.

“No, but we’ve had a lot of problems with Afghans,” the president said.

Boak writes for the Associated Press.

In a fiery rebuttal to allegations he’d criminally misrepresented facts in his mortgage documents, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) sued Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte on Tuesday — accusing him of criminally misusing government databases to baselessly target President Trump’s political opponents.

“Pulte has abused his position by scouring databases at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — two government-sponsored enterprises — for the private mortgage records of several prominent Democrats,” attorneys for Swalwell wrote in a federal lawsuit filed in Washington, D.C. “He then used those records to concoct fanciful allegations of mortgage fraud, which he referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution.”

They said Pulte launched his attack on Swalwell at a particularly inopportune time, just as Swalwell was launching his campaign for California governor.

Pulte’s attack, Swalwell’s attorneys wrote, “was not only a gross mischaracterization of reality” but “a gross abuse of power that violated the law,” infringing on Swalwell’s free speech rights to criticize the president without fear of reprisal, and violating the Privacy Act of 1974, which they said bars federal officials from “leveraging their access to citizens’ private information as a tool for harming their political opponents.”

Pulte, the FHFA and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

Pulte has previously defended his work probing mortgage documents of prominent Democrats, saying no one is above the law. His referrals have exclusively targeted Democrats, despite reporting on Republicans taking similar actions on their mortgages.

Swalwell’s lawsuit is the latest counterpunch to Pulte’s campaign, and part of mounting scrutiny over its unprecedented nature and unorthodox methods — not just from targets of his probes but from other investigators, too, according to one witness.

In addition to Swalwell, Pulte has referred mortgage fraud allegations to the Justice Department against Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, who have all denied wrongdoing and suggested the allegations amount to little more than political retribution.

James was criminally charged by an inexperienced, loyalist federal prosecutor specially appointed by Trump in Virginia, though a judge has since thrown out that case on the grounds that the prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed. The judge also threw out a case against former FBI Director James Comey, another Trump opponent.

Cook’s attorneys slammed Pulte in a letter to the Justice Department, writing that his “decision to use the FHFA to selectively — and publicly — investigate and target the President’s designated political enemies gives rise to the unmistakable impression that he has been improperly coordinating with the White House to manufacture flimsy predicates to launch these probes.”

Schiff also has lambasted Trump and Pulte for their targeting of him and other Democrats, and cheered the tossing of the cases against James and Comey, calling it “a triumph of the rule of law.”

In recent days, federal prosecutors in Maryland — where Schiff’s case is being investigated — have also started asking questions about the actions of Pulte and other Trump officials, according to Christine Bish, a Sacramento-area real estate agent and Republican congressional candidate who was summoned to Maryland to answer questions in the matter last week.

Pulte has alleged that Schiff broke the law by claiming primary residence for mortgages in both Maryland and California. Schiff has said he never broke any law and was always forthcoming with his mortgage lenders.

Bish has been investigating Schiff’s mortgage records since 2020, and had repeatedly submitted documents about Schiff to the federal government — first to the Office of Congressional Ethics, then earlier this year to an FHFA tip line and to the FBI, she told The Times.

When Trump subsequently posted one of Schiff’s mortgage documents to his Truth Social platform, Bish said she believed it was one she had submitted to the FHFA and FBI, because it was highlighted exactly as she had highlighted it. Then, she saw she had missed a call from Pulte, and was later asked by Pulte’s staff to email Pulte “the full file” she had worked up on Schiff.

“They wanted to make sure that I had sent the whole file,” Bish said.

Bish said she was subsequently interviewed via Google Meet on Oct. 22 by someone from the FHFA inspector general’s office and an FBI agent. She then got a subpoena in the mail that she interpreted as requiring her to be in Maryland last week. There, she was interviewed again, for about an hour, by the same official from the inspector general’s office and another FBI agent, she said — and was surprised their questions seemed more focused on her communications with people in the federal government than on Schiff.

“They wanted to know if I had been talking to anybody else,” she said. “You know, what did I communicate? Who did I communicate with?”

Schiff’s office declined to comment. However, Schiff’s attorney has previously told Justice Department officials that there was “ample basis” for them to launch an investigation into Pulte and his campaign targeting Trump’s opponents, calling it a “highly irregular” and “sordid” effort.

The acting FHFA inspector general at the time Bish was first contacted, Joe Allen, has since been fired, which has also raised questions.

On Nov. 19, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) — the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — wrote a letter to Pulte denouncing his probes as politically motivated, questioning Allen’s dismissal and demanding documentation from Pulte, including any communications he has had with the White House.

Swalwell’s attorneys wrote in Tuesday’s lawsuit that he never claimed primary residence in both California and Washington, D.C., as alleged, and had not broken any laws.

They accused Pulte of orchestrating a coordinated effort to spread the allegations against Swalwell via a vast network of conservative influencers, which they said had “harmed [Swalwell’s] reputation at a critical juncture in his career: the very moment when he had planned to announce his campaign for Governor of California.”

They said the “widespread publication of information about the home where his wife and young children reside” had also “exposed him to heightened security risks and caused him significant anguish and distress.”

Swalwell said in a statement that Pulte has “combed through private records of political opponents” to “silence them,” which shouldn’t be allowed.

“There’s a reason the First Amendment — the freedom of speech — comes before all others,” he said.

LONDON — President Trump’s efforts to broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine war closely mirrors the tactics he used to end two years of fighting between Israel and Hamas: bold terms that favor one side, deadlines for the combatants and vague outlines for what comes next. The details — enforcing the terms, guaranteeing security, who pays for rebuilding — matter less.

“You know what the deadline is to me? When it’s over.” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One Tuesday.

The formula has worked so far in the tense Middle East, though its long-term viability remains in question. Trump got his moment to claim credit for “peace” in the region from the podium of the Israeli parliament. Even there, he made clear that next on his priority list was resolving the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

“Maybe we set out like a 20-point peace proposal, just like we did in Gaza,” U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff told Yuri Ushakov, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy adviser in a phone call the day after Trump’s speech, on Oct. 14. A recording of that call leaked to Bloomberg News.

They did just that, issuing a 28-point plan heavily tilted toward Russia’s interests that set off alarms in Europe, which had not been consulted. Trump insisted Ukraine had until Nov. 27 — Thanksgiving in the U.S. — to accept it.

But by Tuesday, Trump had eased off the hard deadline. It seemed clear, even to Trump, that the Israel-Gaza model doesn’t fully apply in Russia and Ukraine as long as Putin refuses to be flattered, pushed or otherwise moved to take the first step of a ceasefire, as Israel and Hamas consented for different reasons on Oct. 9. Making the point, Putin launched waves of bombings on Ukraine Tuesday and Wednesday even as American negotiators renewed Trump’s push to end the war.

“I thought (a Russia-Ukraine deal) would have been an easier one, but I think we’re making progress,” Trump said during the annual White House turkey pardon to mark the Thanksgiving holiday. Hours later, he told reporters that the 28-point plan actually “was not a plan, just a concept.”

The president’s goal may not be a formal, long-lasting peace treaty, one expert said.

“Trump’s approach emphasizes the proclamation of a ceasefire, not its observance,” Mariia Zolkina, a political analyst at the Kyiv-based Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, wrote on Liga.net, a Ukrainian news outlet, adding: “Donald Trump is not interested in whether the ceasefire will be sustainable.”

Similarities to the tactics and style used in the Israel-Gaza talks

Fresh off the Gaza deal and coveting the Nobel Peace Prize, Trump named his next priority before he’d even left the Israeli Knesset.

“If you don’t mind, Steve, let’s focus on Russia first, All right?” Trump said, turning to Witkoff.

Where the Gaza ceasefire agreement had 20 points, the Russia-Ukraine proposal would start with 28 items and include more detail on who would pay for reconstruction. They envision “peace” boards headed by the president to lead and administer the aftermath. Both lack detail on incentives for complying and enforcement. And both depend on a ceasefire.

Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the Brussels-based European Policy Centre think tank, said the proposals for Gaza and Ukraine show a kind of “naivete by believing that by intervening at that level, by imposing your will on something like this, that you will reach some form of long-term conclusion.”

He said both proposals reflect Trump’s political and personal self-interest.

“In the end, the focus is solely on what Trump thinks he will get out of this in terms of reputation and money,” Zuleeg said.

Each Trump administration plan to end the wars heavily favor one side.

The Trump plan for Gaza leans to Israeli terms. It makes disarming Hamas a central condition for any progress in rebuilding the devastated territory. It also lays out no strict timetable for a full Israeli troop withdrawal, making it conditional on deployment of an international security force.

For Russia and Ukraine, Witkoff looked to open peace plan talks with terms skewing toward Russia. He quietly hosted Kirill Dmitriev, a close ally of Putin’s, for talks in south Florida to help launch the plan that opened talks in Geneva, according to a senior administration official and a U.S. official familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The White House insists that the plan was U.S.-authored with input from both the Ukrainians and Russians.

But that’s where the similarities end. The differences are buy-in — and Putin

The draft that was formally presented to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky decidedly favored the Russians, with no European input. In contrast, the Gaza ceasefire talks got buy-in from Egypt, Qatari, Jordanian, Saudi and other regional powers.

The 28-point Russia-Ukraine plan called for Ukraine to give up land in the industrial Donbas region that the Russians currently don’t control and dramatically shrink the size of its military. It also effectively gave Russia oversight of both NATO and EU expansion. The draft has narrowed by a few points since it was first presented, and Trump is sending his envoys on a bit of shuttle diplomacy to “sell it,” as he said. He said Witkoff will visit Moscow next week — perhaps joined by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who was also involved in the Gaza plan. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll will meet with the Ukranians.

European leaders worried that Trump is leaving them out of high-level discussions and vulnerable to Russian aggression.

“He appears perfectly ready to sacrifice Ukraine’s security and Europe’s in the process,” Hannah Neumann, a German member of the European Parliament, said of Trump on Tuesday.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu resisted Trump’s pressure to agree to a ceasefire, for a time. But Putin refuses to concede anything on Ukraine.

He’s appeared to be considering the matter, notably when Trump rolled out a red carpet for the Russian leader at a summer summit in Alaska — an old front line of the Cold War. Trump left without an agreement from Putin to end the bloodshed. The Russian leader walked off with long-sought recognition on the world stage.

To the horror of Ukraine and the vexation of Trump, Putin has stood firm.

As the envoys flew home from Geneva last week without any agreement, the White House scrambled to explain. One U.S. official argued that the 28-page plan, which calls on Ukraine to cede the Donbas region and bar Ukraine from joining NATO, represents considerable concessions from Putin because he would be agreeing to give up on his claim, once and for all, that all of Ukraine should be part of Russia.

Putin, the official noted, has long grumbled that the West doesn’t respect Russia’s position in the global world order. The official added that the Trump White House in its approach is not affirming Putin’s position but trying to reflect the Russian perspective is given its due in the emerging peace plan.

It’s not for the administration to judge Putin’s positions, the official said, but it does have “to understand them if we want to get to a deal.”

Kellman, McNeil and Madhani write for the Associated Press. McNeil reported from Brussels and Madhani from Washington. AP writer Lee Keath in Cairo contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge’s dismissal of criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, two political foes of President Trump, won’t be the final word on the matter.

The Justice Department says it plans to immediately appeal a pair of rulings that held that Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. It also has the ability to try to refile the cases, though whether it can successfully secure fresh indictments through a different prosecutor is unclear, as is whether any new indictments could survive the crush of legal challenges that would invariably follow.

A look at the possible next steps:

What exactly did the rulings say?

At issue is the slapdash way the Trump administration raced to put Halligan in charge of one of the Justice Department’s most elite offices. A White House aide with no prior experience as a federal prosecutor, Halligan was named interim U.S. attorney in September after the veteran prosecutor who held the job, Erik Siebert, was effectively forced out amid Trump administration pressure to charge Comey and James.

U.S. attorneys, top federal prosecutors who oversee regional Justice Department outposts across the country, are typically nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, though attorneys general do have the authority to directly appoint interim U.S. attorneys who can serve in the job for 120 days.

But lawyers for Comey and James argued that the law empowers only one such temporary appointment and that, after that, federal judges in the district have say over who fills the vacancy until a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney can be installed.

Since Halligan replaced an interim U.S. attorney who had already served for more than 120 days, the lawyers said, her appointment was invalid and the indictments she secured must be dismissed as a result.

U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie overwhelmingly agreed. Currie, an appointee of President Bill Clinton who was assigned to hear the dispute despite serving in South Carolina, not only dismissed the cases but also concluded that Halligan had been serving illegally in her position since the day she was sworn in.

Could the Justice Department appeal?

Yes, and Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi indicated that the department would do exactly that.

Any appeal would first be considered by the Richmond, Va.-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but theoretically could go all the way up to the Supreme Court and present a fresh constitutional test about the Justice Department’s appointment authority.

Interestingly, Currie implied that her interpretation of the law might be well-received by at least one current conservative member of the Supreme Court.

In a footnote, she cited a 1986 legal memo from Samuel Alito, then a deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, that concluded that the Justice Department could not make another temporary appointment after a first 120-day period expired.

Can the cases be filed again?

Since the cases were dismissed “without prejudice,” the Justice Department is clearly able to seek a new indictment against James using a different prosecutor with lawful authority to present to the grand jury.

The question, however, is much trickier in Comey’s case. It’s complicated by the fact that the five-year statute of limitations — or the limited time in which charges can be filed — expired at the end of the September, just days after Halligan raced to present to the grand jury.

Federal law allows prosecutors to return a new indictment within six months of dismissal even after the statute of limitations has passed. But Comey’s lawyers said they will argue the judge’s ruling makes the indictment “void,” and therefore “the statute of limitations has run and there can be no further indictment.”

The judge noted in her ruling that the deadline had passed and suggested that the statute of limitations is not tolled — or paused — in the case of an “invalid indictment.” Quoting from an earlier ruling, the judge wrote that “if the earlier indictment is void, there is no legitimate peg on which” to extend the deadline.

Regardless, the Justice Department in either case would have to convince a new grand jury to return new indictments, and that may be harder given the intense publicity around the cases. Widespread media coverage of the allegations and the defense claims of improper conduct by prosecutors could make it more difficult to find grand jurors who can view the cases impartially.

What happens to the other challenges to the indictments?

For now, those arguments are all moot as the Justice Department labors to salvage the indictments.

But in the event prosecutors do succeed in getting new indictments, they’ll likely have to fend off some of the same challenges that Comey and James had already raised and that remain pending as of Monday’s rulings.

Comey is charged with lying to Congress about whether he authorized an associate to serve as an anonymous source for the news media. James was charged with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution in connection with a home purchase in Norfolk, Va., in 2020.

Both have pleaded not guilty and had urged judges to throw out their indictments on grounds that the prosecutions were illegally vindictive and emblematic of a Justice Department that’s been weaponized to pursue the president’s adversaries. Those arguments would presumably be revived in the event of any new indictments.

Comey, for his part, has challenged a series of irregularities in Halligan’s presentation to the grand jury after a different judge who reviewed a record of the proceedings said he had identified a series of flaws — including the fact that the prosecutor apparently suggested to the panel that Comey did not have a Fifth Amendment right to not testify at trial.

He has also said that the testimony he gave to the Senate Judiciary Committee that underpins his criminal case was truthful and that, in any event, the question he was responding to was so vague and ambiguous as to make a false statement prosecution a legal impossibility.

Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems.…They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.”

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign stop in Council Bluffs, Iowa, Tuesday, Dec. 29, 2015. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik) ORG XMIT: IANH116

(Nati Harnik / Associated Press)

Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

A memorial to the San Bernardino shooting victims near the Inland Regional Center on Dec. 8, 2015.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

After disavowing the endorsement of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, Trump equivocated when he was asked in a nationally televised interview whether he would say flatly that he did not want the vote of Duke or other white supremacists.

“Well, just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke, OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don’t know.”

Former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

(Burt Steel / Associated Press)

“Look at my African American over here. Look at him.”

At a campaign rally in Redding, Donald Trump referred to a man in the crowd as “my African American.”

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Trump said the Mexican ancestry of a federal judge born in Indiana should disqualify him from presiding over a fraud lawsuit against Trump because of his proposed border wall.

After he called U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel “a member of a club or society very strongly pro-Mexican,” a reporter asked Trump whether he would also feel that a Muslim could not treat him fairly because of his proposed Muslim ban. “It’s possible, yes,” Trump said.

U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel.

(John Gastaldo / TNS)

Trump defended his posting on Twitter of a six-pointed star, a pile of cash and an image of Hillary Clinton with the caption, “Most Corrupt Candidate Ever!” Widespread denunciations of the tweet as anti-Semitic led an aide to delete it, but Trump said it should have stayed up.

“Just leave it up and say, no, that’s not a star of David, that’s just a star,” he said. It “could have been a sheriff’s star,” he said.

“Our inner cities, African Americans, Hispanics are living in hell because it’s so dangerous. You walk down the street, you get shot.”

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton listens as Donald Trump makes his argument during their first debate at Hofstra University on Sept. 26, 2016.

(Joe Raedle / Getty Images)

Haitian immigrants “all have AIDS” and Nigerian immigrants will never “go back to their huts” in Africa.

President Donald Trump.

(Brendan Smialowski / AFP/Getty Images)

“I think there is blame on both sides.…You also had people that were very fine people on both sides.…Not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch.”

Members of the Ku Klux Klan arrive at a rally in Charlottesville, Va. on July 8, 2017.

(Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP/Getty Images)

“They’re trying to take away our culture. They’re trying to take away our history. And our weak leaders, they do it overnight. These things have been there for 150 years, for a hundred years. You go back to a university and it’s gone. Weak, weak people.”

A monument to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee in Richmond, Va.

(Steve Helber / Associated Press)

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the field right now. Out. He’s fired. He’s fired!’”

San Francisco 49ers safety Eric Reid and quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneel during the national anthem before their game against the Los Angeles Rams on Sept. 12, 2016.

(Marcio Jose Sanchez / Associated Press)

“You were here long before any of us were here. Although we have a representative in Congress who they say was here a long time ago. They call her Pocahontas.”

President Trump with Navajo Code Talkers in the Oval Office on Nov. 27, 2017.

(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

Trump drew condemnation from British Prime Minister Theresa May for sharing three anti-Muslim videos from a far-right British nationalist who was recently arrested for inciting hatred and violence against Muslims. The videos purported to show Muslims engaged in violent or anti-Christian acts. One of them, titled “Muslim migrant beats up Dutch boy on crutches!” did not actually show a migrant beating the boy; the attacker was born and raised in the Netherlands.

President Trump retweeted videos from a far-right group on Wednesday, Nov. 29, 2017.

(Los Angeles Times)

[email protected] | Twitter: @markzbarabak

[email protected] | Twitter: ​​​​​​​@finneganLAT

UPDATES:

Jan. 12, 2:25 p.m.: This article was updated with additional instances of President Trump’s racially charged language.

This article was originally published 6:30 p.m. Jan. 11.

NEW YORK — A tax on tea once sparked rebellion. This time, it’s just causing headaches.

Importers of the prized leaves have watched costs climb, orders stall and margins shrink under the weight of President Trump’s tariffs. Now, even after Trump has given them a reprieve, tea traders say it won’t immediately undo the damage.

“It took a while to work its way through the system, these tariffs, and it will take a while for it to work its way out of the system,” says Bruce Richardson, a celebrated tea master, tea historian and purveyor of teas at his shop, Elmwood Inn Fine Teas, in Danville, Ky. “That tariffed tea is still working its way out of our warehouses.”

While some bigger firms are behind the biggest supermarket brands, the premium tea market is largely the work of smaller businesses — family farms, specialty importers and a web of little tea shops, tea rooms and tea cafes across the U.S. Amid an onslaught of tariffs, they have become showcases for the levies’ effects.

On their shelves, selection has narrowed, with some teas missing because they’re no longer viable products to stock with the steep levies. In their warehouses, managers are consumed with uncertainty and operational headaches, including calculating what a blend really costs, with ingredients from multiple countries on a roller coaster of tariffs. And in backrooms where the wafting scent of fresh tea permeates, owners have been forced to put off job postings, raises, advertising and other investments so they can have cash available to pay duties when their containers arrive at U.S. ports.

“If I were to add up all the money I’ve spent on tariffs that weren’t there a year ago, it could equal a new employee,” says Hartley Johnson, who owns the Mark T. Wendell Tea Co. in Acton, Mass.

Johnson’s prices used to stay static for a year or longer. He ate the tariff costs before being forced to respond. His most popular tea, a smoky Taiwanese one called Hu-Kwa, has steadily risen from $26 to $46 a pound.

He knows some customers are reconsidering.

“Where is that tipping point?” Johnson asks. “I’m kind of finding that tipping point is happening now.”

That tipping point already came for one tea company in the City of Commerce.

International Tea Importers, already under financial strain from climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic, said that tariffs were the final blow, creating an untenable cash flow crunch and forcing its closure after 35 years in business.

“We just became over-leveraged financing — not just the inventory, but also the tariffs,” says the company’s chief executive, Brendan Shah.

Despite the other financial challenges, if not for the tariffs, Shah says, it may have survived.

“Unpredictable tariff policies,” he wrote to customers in announcing the company’s closure, “have created the final, insurmountable barrier.”

Though Trump backed off some tariffs on agricultural products last week, many in the tea trade are wary of celebrating too soon and caution tea drinkers shouldn’t either. Much of next year’s supply has already been imported and tariffed, and the full impact of those duties may not have fully spilled downhill.

Meantime, other tariff-driven price hikes persist. All sorts of other products tea businesses import, such as teapots and infusers, remain subject to levies, and costs for some American-made items, like tins for packaging, have spiked because they rely on foreign materials.

“The canisters, the bamboo boxes, the matcha whisks, everything that we import, everything that we sell has been affected by tariffs,” says Gilbert Tsang, owner of MEM Tea Imports in Wakefield, Mass.

Though globally tea reigns supreme, imbibed more than anything but water, it has long been overshadowed by coffee in the U.S. Still, tea is entwined in American history from the very beginning, even before colonists angry with tariffs dumped tons of it in Boston Harbor.

Boston may run on Dunkin’ today, but it was born on tea.

The 1773 revolt that became known as the Boston Tea Party rose out of the British Parliament’s implementation of tea tariffs on colonists, who rejected taxation without representation in government. After an independent United States was born, one of the new government’s first major acts, the Tariff Act of 1789, ironically set in law import taxes on a range of products including tea. In time, though, trade policy came to include carve-outs for many products Americans rely on but don’t produce.

For more than 150 years, most tea has passed through U.S. ports with little to no duties.

That began to change in Trump’s first term with his hard-line approach to China. But nothing compared to what came with his return to the White House.

In July, the most recent month for which the U.S. International Trade Commission has tallied tariff numbers, tea was taxed at an average rate of over 12%, a huge increase from a year earlier when it was just under one-tenth of a percent. In that single month, American businesses and consumers paid more than $6 million in tea import taxes, amassing in just 31 days more tariffs than any previous full year on record.

“All over again, taxation without representation,” says Richardson, an advisor to the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum. “Our wants and needs and our voices are not being represented because Congress is avoiding the issue by simply allowing the president to act like George III.”

All told, tea importers paid about $19.6 million in tariffs in the first seven months of 2025, nearly seven times as much as the same period last year.

It’s all been confounding to those steeped in the world of tea, on which the U.S. depends on foreign countries for nearly all of the billions of pounds Americans brew each year. Though a number of small tea farms exist in the U.S., they can’t fill Americans’ cups for more than a few hours of the year.

Said Angela McDonald, president of the United States League of Tea Growers: “We don’t have an industry and we can’t produce one overnight.”

Sedensky writes for the Associated Press.

MINNEAPOLIS — Since it was created in 2018, the federal government’s cybersecurity agency has helped warn state and local election officials about potential threats from foreign governments, showed officials how to protect polling places from attacks and gamed out how to respond to the unexpected, such as an election day bomb threat or sudden disinformation campaign.

The agency was largely absent from that space for elections this month in several states, a potential preview for the 2026 midterms. Shifting priorities of the Trump administration, staffing reductions and budget cuts have many election officials concerned about how engaged the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency will be next year, when control of Congress will be at stake in those elections.

Some officials say they have begun scrambling to fill the anticipated gaps.

“We do not have a sense of whether we can rely on CISA for these services as we approach a big election year in 2026,” said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat who until recently led the bipartisan National Assn. of Secretaries of State.

The association’s leaders sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in February asking her to preserve the cybersecurity agency’s core election functions. Noem, whose department oversees the agency, replied the following month that it was reviewing its “funding, products, services, and positions” related to election security and that its services would remain available to election officials.

Simon said secretaries of state are still waiting to hear about the agency’s plans.

“I regret to say that months later, the letter remains very timely and relevant,” he said.

An agency in transition

CISA, as the agency is known, was formed under the first Trump administration to help safeguard the nation’s critical infrastructure, including dams, power plants and election systems. It has been undergoing a major transformation since President Trump’s second term began in January.

Public records suggest that roughly 1,000 CISA employees have lost their jobs in recent years. The Republican administration in March cut $10 million from two cybersecurity initiatives, including one dedicated to helping state and local election officials.

That was a few weeks after CISA announced it was conducting a review of its election-related work, and more than a dozen staffers who have worked on elections were placed on administrative leave. The FBI also disbanded a task force on foreign influence operations, including those that target U.S. elections.

CISA is still without an official director. Trump’s nomination of Sean Plankey, a cybersecurity expert in the first Trump administration, has stalled in the Senate.

CISA officials did not answer questions seeking specifics about the agency’s role in the recently completed elections, its plans for the 2026 election cycle or staffing levels. They said the agency remains ready to help protect election infrastructure.

“Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Noem, CISA is laser-focused on securing America’s critical infrastructure and strengthening cyber resilience across the government and industry,” said Marci McCarthy, CISA’s director of public affairs.

She said CISA would announce its future organizational plans “at the appropriate time.”

Christine Serrano Glassner, CISA’s chief external affairs officer, said the agency’s experts are ready to provide election guidance if asked.

“In the event of disruptions or threats to critical infrastructure, whether Election Day-related or not, CISA swiftly coordinates with the Office of Emergency Management and the appropriate federal, state and local authorities,” she said in a statement.

States left on their own

California’s top election security agencies said CISA has played a “critical role” since 2018 but provided little, if any, help for the state’s Nov. 4 special election, when voters approved a redrawn congressional redistricting map.

“Over the past year, CISA’s capacity to support elections has been significantly diminished,” the California secretary of state’s office said in a statement to the Associated Press. “The agency has experienced major reductions in staffing, funding, and mission focus — including the elimination of personnel dedicated specifically to election security and foreign influence mitigation.

“This shift has left election officials nationwide without the critical federal partnership they have relied on for several election cycles,” the statement said.

CISA alerted California officials in September that it would no longer participate in a task force that brought together federal, state and local agencies to support county election offices. California election officials and the governor’s Office of Emergency Services did what they could to fill the gaps and plan for various security scenarios.

In Orange County, Registrar of Voters Bob Page said in an email that the state offices and other county departments “stepped up” to support his office “to fill the void left by CISA’s absence.”

Neighboring Los Angeles County had a different experience. The registrar’s office, which oversees elections, said it continues to get a range of cybersecurity services from CISA, including threat intelligence, network monitoring and security testing of its equipment, although local jurisdictions now have to cover the costs of some services that had been federally funded.

Some other states that held elections this month also said they did not have coordination with CISA.

Mississippi’s secretary of state, who heads the national association that sent the letter to Noem, did not directly respond to a request for comment, but his office confirmed that CISA was not involved in the state’s recent elections.

In Pennsylvania, which held a nationally watched retention election for three state Supreme Court justices this month, the Department of State said it is also relied more on its own partners to ensure the elections were secure.

In an email, the department said it was “relying much less on CISA than it had in recent years.” Instead, it has begun collaborating with the state police, the state’s own homeland security department, local cybersecurity experts and other agencies.

Looking for alternatives

Simon, the former head of the secretary of state’s association, said state and local election officials need answers about CISA’s plans because officials will have to seek alternatives if the services it had been providing will not be available next year.

In some cases, such as classified intelligence briefings, there are no alternatives to the federal government, he said. But there might be ways to get other services, such as testing of election equipment to see if it can be penetrated from outside.

In past election years, CISA also would conduct tabletop exercises with local agencies and election offices to game out various scenarios that might affecting voting or ballot counting, and how they would react. Simon said that is something CISA was very good at.

“We are starting to assume that some of those services are not going to be available to us, and we are looking elsewhere to fill that void,” Simon said.

Karnowski and Smyth write for the Associated Press. Smyth reported from Columbus, Ohio.

President Trump’s pledge to terminate temporary legal protections for Somalis living in Minnesota is triggering fear in the state’s deeply rooted immigrant community, along with doubts about whether the White House has the legal authority to enact the directive as described.

In a social media post late Friday, Trump said he would “immediately” strip Somali residents in Minnesota of Temporary Protected Status, a legal safeguard against deportation for immigrants from certain countries.

The announcement was immediately challenged by some state leaders and immigration experts, who characterized Trump’s declaration as a legally dubious effort to sow fear and suspicion toward Minnesota’s Somali community, the largest in the nation.

“There’s no legal mechanism that allows the president to terminate protected status for a particular community or state that he has beef with,” said Heidi Altman, policy director at the National Immigrant Justice Center.

“This is Trump doing what he always does: demagoguing immigrants without justification or evidence and using that demagoguery in an attempt to take away important life-saving protections,” she added.

The protection has been extended 27 times for Somalis since 1991, with U.S. authorities determining that it was unsafe for people already in the United States to return to Somalia.

The Trump administration could, however, move to revoke the legal protection for Somalis nationally. But that move would affect only a tiny fraction of the tens of thousands of Somalis living in Minnesota. A report produced for Congress in August put the number of Somalis covered by TPS at 705 nationwide.

“I am a citizen and so are [the] majority of Somalis in America,” Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Democrat born in Somalia, said in a social media post Friday. “Good luck celebrating a policy change that really doesn’t have much impact on the Somalis you love to hate.”

Still, advocates warned the move could inflame hate against a community at a time of rising Islamophobia.

“This is not just a bureaucratic change,” said Jaylani Hussein, president of the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “It is a political attack on the Somali and Muslim community driven by Islamophobic and hateful rhetoric.”

In his social media post, Trump claimed, without offering evidence, that Somali gangs had targeted Minnesota residents and referred to the state as a “hub of fraudulent money laundering activity.”

Federal prosecutors have in recent weeks brought charges against dozens of people in a social-services fraud scheme. Some of the defendants are from Somalia.

Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, has noted that Minnesota consistently ranks among the safest states in the country.

“It’s not surprising that the president has chosen to broadly target an entire community,” Walz said Friday. “This is what he does to change the subject.”

Community advocates say that the Somali diaspora in Minnesota has helped to revitalize downtown corridors in Minneapolis and plays a prominent role in the state’s politics.

“The truth is that the Somali community is beloved and long-woven into the fabric of many neighborhoods and communities in Minnesota,” Altman said. “Destabilizing families and communities makes all of us less safe and not more.”

As part of a broader push to adopt hard-line immigration policies, the Trump administration has moved to withdraw various protections that had allowed immigrants to remain in the United States and work legally.

That included ending TPS for 600,000 Venezuelans and 500,000 Haitians who were granted protection under former President Biden. The Trump administration has also sought to limit protections previously extended to migrants from Cuba and Syria, among other countries.

Offenhartz writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, a once-loyal supporter of President Trump who has become a critic, said Friday that she is resigning from Congress in January.

Greene, in a more than 10-minute video posted online, explained her decision and said she’s “always been despised in Washington, D.C., and just never fit in.”

Greene’s resignation followed a public fallout with Trump in recent months, as the congresswoman criticized him for his stance on files related to Jeffrey Epstein, along with foreign policy and healthcare.

Trump branded her a “traitor” and “wacky” and said he would endorse a challenger against her when she ran for reelection next year.

She said her last day would be Jan. 5.

The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Friday night.

Greene was one of the most vocal and visible supporters of Trump’s Make America Great Again politics, and she embraced some of his unapologetic political style.

Her break with him was a notable fissure in his grip over conservatives, particularly his most ardent base. But her decision to step down in the face of his opposition put her on the same track as many of the more moderate establishment Republicans before her who went crosswise with Trump.

Greene had been closely tied to the Republican president since she launched her political career five years ago.

In her video Friday, she underscored her longtime loyalty to Trump except on a few issues, and said it was “unfair and wrong” that he attacked her for disagreeing.

“Loyalty should be a two-way street and we should be able to vote our conscience and represent our district’s interest, because our job title is literally ‘representative,’” she said.

Greene swept to office at the forefront of Trump’s MAGA movement and swiftly became a lightning rod on Capitol Hill for her often beyond-mainstream views.

As she embraced the QAnon conspiracy theory and appeared with white supremacists, Greene was opposed by party leaders but welcomed by Trump. He called her “a real WINNER!”

Yet over time she proved a deft legislator, having aligned herself with then-GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, who would go on to become House speaker. She was a trusted voice on the right flank, until McCarthy was ousted in 2023.

While there has been an onslaught of lawmakers from both parties heading for the exits ahead of next fall’s midterm elections, as the House struggles through an often chaotic session, Greene’s announced retirement will ripple throughout the ranks — and raise questions about her next moves.

Greene was first elected to the House in 2020. She initially planned to run in a competitive district in northern Atlanta’s suburbs, but relocated to the much more conservative 14th District in Georgia’s northwestern corner.

She showed a penchant for harsh rhetoric and conspiracy theories even before her election, suggesting a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas was a coordinated attack to spur support for new gun restrictions. In 2018, she endorsed the idea that the U.S. government perpetrated the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, and mused that a “so-called” plane had hit the Pentagon.

Greene argued in 2019 that Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), both Muslim women, weren’t “official” members of Congress because they used Qurans rather than Bibles in their swearing-in ceremonies.

Greene was once a sympathizer with QAnon, an online network that believes a global cabal of Satan-worshipping cannibals, including U.S. government leaders, operates a child sex trafficking ring. She eventually distanced herself, saying she got “sucked into some of the things I had seen on the internet.”

Price, Mascaro and Amy write for the Associated Press.

President Trump’s tight grip on the GOP, long assumed to be an inevitable feature of American life (like gravity or the McRib’s seasonal return), has started to loosen.

Republicans are now openly defying him. The man who once ruled the GOP like a casino boss can’t even strong-arm Indiana Republicans into gerrymandering themselves properly.

This sort of resistance didn’t emerge overnight. It fermented like prison wine or bad ideas in a faculty lounge. First came the Iran bombing: an early shock that suggested “America First” might also mean “Israel First,” at least to the populist-nationalist camp inside the GOP.

Then came the effort to muffle the Jeffrey Epstein files, a notion so foreign to MAGA’s ethos that the subsequent drama, according to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), “ripped MAGA apart.”

Greene also expressed concern that the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies are set to lapse, and that Republicans have no plan to fix the imminent premium spikes — an occurrence that threatens to alienate the very working-class voters that MAGA now insists it represents.

All the while, another MAGA soap opera was churning. Tucker Carlson decided to “platform” white nationalist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes, leading to an outcry of criticism that prompted the Heritage Foundation’s president to defend them (sparking another Republican “civil war” subplot).

The common thread in these stories is the sense that Trump’s days are numbered. The question of “Who gets MAGA when Dad can no longer operate the remote?” has become unavoidable.

True, pundits have been prematurely writing Trump’s political obituary since he first came down that escalator. But it feels different this time. The question is why.

There are likely numerous reasons, but I’ve zeroed in on the five that I think are the most important.

The first, and most obvious, reason is that Trump is now a lame duck, and everyone knows it.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) made the logic explicit when, during the Epstein-file fight, he warned his colleagues: “Donald Trump can protect you in red districts right now … but by 2030, he’s not going to be president, and you will have voted to protect pedophiles if you don’t vote to release those files.”

Once politicians and influencers start imagining their post-Trump resumes, his spell over them shatters. This probably explains why Trump has dangled the idea of an unconstitutional third term.

The second reason we are seeing Trump’s grip weaken is that, frankly, Trump’s not popular. In fact, according to a new Reuters poll, his approval rating is just 38%.

This rating plummets when it comes to the issues that divide Republicans. For example, according to that same survey, a mere 20% of American adults — including just 44% of Republicans — approve of Trump’s handling of the Epstein files.

The third reason is that Trump is increasingly isolated from the constituency that once fine-tuned his political instincts.

The Trump of 2016-2020 essentially crowdsourced his political instincts at rallies, where he learned to read the room like a comedian. Now he’s physically isolated and increasingly out of touch with his base. His inner circle consists of ideologues and billionaires — people who don’t worry about the price of milk.

So when Trump insists the economy is thriving, as he hosts Gatsby-themed soirees and tears down the East Wing of the White House to build a new ballroom, populists look up from their grocery bills, spy Trump on TV meeting with the Saudi crown prince, and are suddenly flooded with buyer’s remorse. This creates an opening, and the movement’s would-be heirs can sense it.

Of course, Trump could conceivably adjust his policies and rhetoric in an effort to restore his populist appeal.

But the fourth reason for Trump’s loss of power within the GOP concerns his mortality: Trump is the oldest person to win the presidency in U.S. history. He has had two “annual” physicals this calendar year — including an MRI no one will adequately explain (this is not part of a routine physical).

This brings us to the fifth and final reason the cracks are starting to show: Trump’s 2024 coalition was always like a game of Jenga.

It was a convenient alliance of disparate factions and individuals whose interests converged because Trump’s charisma (and lack of a coherent political worldview) was like the glue holding incompatible pieces together. But as that binding force weakens, the contradictions become clear, and open warfare is inevitable.

For years now, Trump imposed peace the way an aging rock frontman keeps peace within a band. But once that star starts forgetting lyrics or showing up late, his bandmates start imagining solo careers.

We’re watching MAGA realize that the Trump era is ending, and that the next battle is about what — or who — will fill the vacuum when he’s gone.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Thursday said he believed Democratic lawmakers who publicly urged active service members to “refuse illegal orders” amounted to seditious behavior, which he said should be punishable by death.

“It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand — We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET,” Trump said in a social media post.

Trump went on to amplify more than a dozen social media posts from other people, who in reaction to Trump’s post called for the Democrats to be arrested, charged and in one instance hanged. Trump then continued: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

The president’s remarks were in reaction to a joint video released by six Democrat lawmakers in which they urged military and intelligence personnel to “refuse illegal orders.”

The Democratic lawmakers who released the video — Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Michigan Sen. Alyssa Slotkin, Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Deluzio, New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander, Pennsylvania Rep. Chrissy Houlahan and Colorado Rep. Jason Crow — served in the military or as intelligence officers.

They did not specify which orders they were referring to. But they said the Trump administration was “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professional against American citizens” and that threats to the Constitution were coming “from right here at home.”

The video, which was posted on Tuesday, quickly drew criticism from Republicans, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth who characterized it as “Stage 4 [Trump Derangement Syndrome].” But Trump, who first reacted to the video on Thursday, saw the video as more than partisan speech.

“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP???” Trump said in another post.

When asked Thursday if the president wanted to execute members of Congress, as suggested in one of his social media posts, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “no.”

But, Leavitt said, the president does want to see them be “held accountable.”

“That is a very, very dangerous message and it is perhaps punishable by law,” Leavitt said. “I’ll leave that to the Department of justice and the Department of War to decide.”

What the law says

Under a federal law known as “seditious conspiracy,” it is a crime for two or more individuals to “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States” or to “prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States” by force.

A seditious conspiracy charge is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Federal courts and legal scholars have long emphasized that seditious conspiracy charges apply only to coordinated efforts to use force against the government, rather than political dissent.

The last time federal prosecutors pursued seditious conspiracy charges was in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were convicted of seditious conspiracy and other charges for plotting to prevent by force the transfer of presidential power to Joe Biden.

Among the convicted individuals was former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, whose 22-year sentence was the stiffest of any of the Jan. 6 rioters. Trump pardoned him earlier this year.

Hours after the president’s posts, the six Democratic lawmakers issued a joint statement, calling on Americans to “unite and condemn the President’s calls for our murder and political violence.”

“What’s most telling is that the President considers it punishable by death for us to restate the law,” the lawmakers said in a statement posted to X. “Our service members should know that we have their backs as they fulfill their oath to the Constitution and obligation to follow only lawful orders.”

Democratic leaders in Washington and across the country denounced Trump’s post.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement with other Democratic leaders that Trump’s comments were “disgusting and dangerous death threats against members of Congress.” They added that they had been in contact with U.S. Capitol Police to ensure the safety of the Democrat lawmakers and their families.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom reacted to the posts by saying Trump “is sick in the head” for calling for the death of Democratic lawmakers.

In October of 2018, U.S.-based journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi was murdered inside Saudi Arabia’s embassy in Istanbul, Turkey. The CIA concluded that the assassination was carried out by Saudi operatives, on order of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The prince denied the accusations, although other U.S. intelligence agencies later made the same formal assessment.

Tuesday, President Trump showered the Saudi leader with praise during his first invitation to the White House since the killing. “We’ve been really good friends for a long period of time,” said Trump. “We’ve always been on the same side of every issue.”

Clearly. Their shared disdain — and fear — of a free press was evident, from downplaying the killing of Khashoggi to snapping at ABC News reporter Mary Bruce when she asked about his murder.

“You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that,” Trump said, then he proceeded to debase a journalist who wasn’t there to report on the event because he’d been silenced, forever. Referring to Khashoggi, he said, “A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about. Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Mohammed bin Salman, left, and Jamal Khashoggi.

(Associated Press / Tribune News Service)

Fender-benders happen. Spilled milk happens. But the orchestrated assassination of a journalist by a regime that he covers is not one of those “things” that just happen. It’s an orchestrated hit meant to silence critics, control the narrative and bury whatever corruption, human rights abuses or malfeasance that a healthy free press is meant to expose.

Bruce did what a competent reporter is supposed to do. She deviated from Tuesday’s up-with-Saudi-Arabia! agenda to ask the hard questions of powerful men not used to being questioned about anything, let alone murder. The meeting was meant to highlight the oil-rich country’s investment in the U.S. economy, and at Trump’s prompting, Prince Mohammed said those investments could total $1 trillion.

Prince Mohammed addressed the death of Khashoggi by saying his country hopes to do better in the future, whatever that means. “It’s painful and it’s a huge mistake, and we are doing our best that this doesn’t happen again.”

And just in case the two men hadn’t made clear how little they cared about the slain journalist, and how much they disdain the news media, Trump drove those points home when he referred to Bruce’s query as “a horrible, insubordinate, and just a terrible question.” He suggesting that ABC should lose its broadcasting license.

Trump confirmed Tuesday that he intends to sell “top of the line” F-35 stealth fighter jets to Riyadh. It’s worth noting that the team of 15 Saudi agents allegedly involved in Khashoggi’s murder flew to Istanbul on government aircraft. The reporter was lured to the Saudi embassy to pick up documents that were needed for his planned marriage to a Turkish woman.

The prince knew nothing about it, said Trump on Tuesday, despite the findings of a 2021 report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that cited “the direct involvement of a key adviser and members of Mohammad bin Salman’s protective detail.” It concluded that it was “highly unlikely that Saudi officials would have carried out an operation of this nature without the Crown Prince’s authorization.”

To no one’s surprise, the Saudi government had tried to dodge the issue before claiming Khashoggi had been killed by rogue officials, insisting that the slaying and dismemberment was not premeditated. They offered no explanation of how a bonesaw just happened to be available inside the embassy.

President Trump shakes hands with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House in 2018.

(MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Five men were sentenced to death, but one of Khashoggi’s sons later announced that the family had forgiven the killers, which, in accordance with Islamic law, spared them from execution.

The president’s castigation of ABC’s Bruce was the second time in a week that he has ripped into a female journalist when she asked a “tough” question (i.e. anything Newsmax won’t ask). Trump was speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One last Friday when Bloomberg News’ Catherine Lucey asked him follow-up question about the Epstein files. The president replied, “Quiet. Quiet, piggy.”

Trump’s contempt for the press was clear, but so was something else he shares with the crown prince, Hungary’s Victor Orban and Vladimir Putin: The president doesn’t just hate the press. He fears it.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The Justice Department acknowledged in court Wednesday the grand jury that charged former FBI Director James Comey was not presented with a copy of the final indictment, a concession that may further imperil a prosecution already subject to multiple challenges and demands for its dismissal.

The revelation is the latest indication of a troubled presentation of the case to the grand jury by an inexperienced and hastily appointed U.S. attorney named to the job just days earlier by President Trump.

Concerns about the process surfaced earlier in the week when a different judge in the case said there was no record in the transcript he had reviewed of the grand jury reviewing the indictment that was actually presented against Comey.

Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. attorney in charge of the case, said under questioning that only the foreperson of the grand jury and a second grand juror were present for the returning of the indictment.

Comey has pleaded not guilty to charges accusing him of making a false statement and obstructing Congress and has denied any wrongdoing.

The Justice Department has denied that the prosecution was vindictive or selective and insists that the allegations support the indictment.

Trump fired Comey as FBI director in May 2017 as Comey was overseeing an FBI investigation into potential ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 campaign. The two have been publicly at odds ever since, with Trump deriding Comey as “a weak and untruthful slime ball” and calling for his prosecution.

Tucker and Kunzelman write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The House is poised to vote overwhelmingly on Tuesday to demand the Justice Department release all documents tied to its investigation of the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

President Trump, who initially worked to thwart the vote before reversing course on Sunday night, has said he will sign the measure if it reaches his desk. For that to happen, the bill will also need to pass the Senate, which could consider the measure as soon as Tuesday night.

Republicans for months pushed back on the release of the Epstein files, joining Trump in claiming the Epstein issue was being brought up by Democrats as a way to distract from Republicans’ legislative successes.

But that all seismically shifted Sunday when Trump had a drastic reversal and urged Republicans to vote to release the documents, saying there was “nothing to hide.”

“It’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The reversal came days after 20,000 documents from Epstein’s private estate were released by lawmakers in the House Oversight Committee. The files referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

In private emails, Epstein wrote that Trump had “spent hours” at his house and “knew about the girls,” a revelation that reignited the push in Congress for further disclosures.

Trump has continued to deny wrongdoing in the Epstein saga despite opposing the release of files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker. He died by suicide while in federal custody in 2019.

Many members of Trump’s MAGA base have demanded the files be released, convinced they contain revelations about powerful people involved in Epstein’s abuse of what is believed to be more than 200 women and girls. Tension among his base spiked when Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in July that an “Epstein client list” did not exist, after saying in February that the list was sitting on her desk awaiting review. She later said she was referring to the Epstein files more generally.

Trump’s call to release the files now highlights how he is trying to prevent an embarrassing defeat as a growing number of Republicans in the House have joined Democrats to vote for the legislation in recent days.

The Epstein files have been a hugely divisive congressional fight in recent months, with Democrats pushing the release, but Republican congressional leaders largely refusing to take the votes. The issue even led to a rift within the MAGA movement, and Trump to cut ties with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia who had long been an ardent support of the president.

“Watching this actually turn into a fight has ripped MAGA apart,” Greene said at a news conference Tuesday in reference to the resistance to release the files.

Democrats have accused Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of delaying the swearing-in of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, because she promised to cast the final vote needed to move a so-called discharge petition, which would force a vote on the floor. Johnson has denied those claims.

If the House and Senate do vote to release the files, all eyes will turn to the Department of Justice, and what exactly it will choose to publicly release.

“The fight, the real fight, will happen after that,” Greene said. “The real test will be: Will the Department of Justice release the files? Or will it all remain tied up in an investigation?”

Several Epstein survivors joined lawmakers at the news conference to talk about how important the vote was for them.

Haley Robson, one of the survivors, questioned Trump’s resistance to the vote even now as he supports it.

“While I do understand that your position has changed on the Epstein files, and I’m grateful that you have pledged to sign this bill, I can’t help to be skeptical of what the agenda is,” Robson said.

If signed into law by Trump, the bill would prohibit the attorney general, Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

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

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

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said the Trump administration will be forced to release the files with an act of Congress.

“They will be breaking the law if they do not release these files,” he said.

Hundreds of National Guard troops deployed to Chicago and Portland, Ore., are being sent home, and those who will remain will continue to stay off the streets amid court battles over their deployment by the Trump administration, a defense official said Monday.

The withdrawal of soldiers — sent from California and Texas — is part of a larger change to troop deployments after President Trump began his immigration crackdown in various cities with Democratic leadership. The official requested anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the issue.

U.S. Northern Command said in a statement Sunday it was “shifting and/or rightsizing” units in Portland, Los Angeles and Chicago. Although it said there would be a “constant, enduring, and long-term presence in each city.”

In the coming days, 200 California National Guard troops currently deployed to Oregon will be sent home, and about 100 will remain in the Portland area doing training, the official said. The military also plans to cut in half the number of Oregon National Guard troops on deployment there from 200 soldiers to 100, the official said.

About 200 Texas National Guard troops in Chicago also are being sent home and about 200 soldiers will be on standby at Fort Bliss, an Army base that stretches across parts of Texas and New Mexico, the official said.

About 300 Illinois National Guard troops will remain in the Chicago area, also doing training, but they currently are not legally allowed to conduct operations with the Department of Homeland Security, the official said.

The official said the upcoming holiday season may have played a role in the change in deployments.

Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, said Trump “never should have illegally deployed our troops in the first place.”

“We’re glad they’re finally coming home,” she wrote in an email. “It’s long overdue!”

Separately, the Trump administration has stepped up immigration enforcement in Charlotte, North Carolina, expanding an aggressive campaign that’s been spearheaded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

National Guard deployments have been one of the most controversial initiatives of Trump’s second term, demonstrating an expanded willingness to use the military to accomplish domestic goals.

Troops, including active-duty Marines, were deployed to Los Angeles during immigration protests earlier this year.

The National Guard was also sent to Washington, D.C., where they were part of a broader federal intervention that Trump claimed was necessary because of crime problems.

The deployments later expanded to Portland and Chicago.

Although they don’t play a law enforcement role, members of the National Guard have been tasked with protecting federal facilities, particularly those run by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

About 100 troops who have been in Los Angeles will remain on deployment, the defense official said.

Watson writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.