public

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear is directly asking Sen. Mitch McConnell, the state’s most powerful figure in Congress, to disclose more about his condition after three weeks of silence from the 84-year-old since he was hospitalized in Washington.

The letter released Wednesday from Beshear, a Democrat who is considered a potential presidential candidate in 2028, to the former Senate Republican leader says “Kentuckians have grown increasingly concerned about the current state of your health and well-being, and ability to hold office.”

McConnell, whose physical condition has visibly declined in recent years, was hospitalized June 14. He has not released a public statement, photos or videos since. Aides have disclosed nothing specific about his condition, other than to say last week that McConnell “continues to improve, and is working closely with his staff on Kentucky and Senate matters while the Senate is out of session.”

That lack of detail has fueled rampant speculation about his prognosis and whether he will return to the Senate when it reconvenes next week. The firestorm was enough that Republican Senate leaders made public statements Tuesday saying they had talked to McConnell and that he was alert and discussing current events.

McConnell is retiring at the end of his term in January, and the campaign to elect his successor already is underway. Kentucky’s Senate succession law, which Republican legislators have twice changed during Beshear’s tenure, does not give the governor a role in picking a temporary successor should McConnell’s seat become vacant before his term ends.

Under the latest change in 2024, Beshear would call a special election if the seat became vacant. The winner of that election could take office after the result is certified. The general election winner would be sworn in as part of the new Congress in January. But there are unresolved questions about the timing of a special election under the untested law, and the seat could remain vacant until January.

Beshear ended the letter by wishing McConnell “a safe and speedy recovery.”

A look at what an absence from the Senate or a vacancy could mean.

What happens if McConnell isn’t able to return?

There is not much, if anything, that Beshear, Kentucky lawmakers or the Senate could do if McConnell remains in office but is unable to perform his duties between now and when the current Congress expires in January.

Senate rules do not allow proxy voting. But there have been extended Senate absences before, and the chamber has continued its business with however many senators are in attendance. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 advantage. Without McConnell, that means a maximum of 52 Republican votes are available.

McConnell had been among the senators blocking war powers resolutions that seek to limit President Trump’s military options in Iran. Without him, the administration has less of a buffer. On the other hand, McConnell had already been among the Republicans refusing to support Trump’s sweeping elections law overhaul.

Why wouldn’t Beshear have a say in filling any vacancy?

The 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution calls for Senate vacancies to be filled by popular elections. But it allows state legislatures to empower governors to appoint an interim senator to serve through those campaigns. Most states have taken this option, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Kentucky law allowed interim appointments until 2021, when McConnell and other state GOP leaders persuaded the Republican-run Legislature to make a change. They did not want Beshear to shift the partisan balance in Washington if he got the opportunity. They called for a committee of the previous senator’s state party to select three people from whom the governor could choose an interim senator. In this case, that would mean Beshear picking which Republican would fill a vacancy. Several states have this system.

Kentucky lawmakers changed the law again in 2024 to require a special election. The only role for the governor is to call that election.

Beshear vetoed the 2021 and 2024 changes, but Republican lawmakers overrode him.

How would a special election work?

The 2024 law says Beshear “shall” issue a proclamation for a special vote but it does not say when he should make that proclamation or what the election date must be. Separate laws require certain minimum windows between a proclamation and the election date, but not necessarily a maximum window.

Some officials have argued that any vacancy after Aug. 3 would mean a special election concurrent with the general. They have even speculated that at some point, it would be impractical to have a special election at all given the regular election already taking place.

The Kentucky secretary of state’s office declined to speculate on a hypothetical time frame.

If a special election was needed, the simplest option would be to hold it at the same time as the regular general election.

For the full Senate term that begins in 2027, Republicans nominated U.S. Rep. Andy Barr, and the Democratic nominee is former state lawmaker Charles Booker. Concurrent elections would be separate, requiring new nominations by the parties, though they could choose Barr and Booker. Regardless, in this scenario, voters would be electing the immediate replacement and the full-term lawmaker on the same Election Day.

Multiple vacant House seats have been filled that way with little national attention.

Could there be a legal fight?

Yes. The 2024 law has never been tested. If a vacancy occurred, there could be different interests between parties and even among Republicans about special election timing and whether to hold one at all. That could create any number of legal questions and disputes that have to be settled by the courts.

Beshear’s office did not immediately respond to an inquiry about how he interprets the law.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

After 52 years of providing the Inland Empire with mini golf, roller skating and go-karting, Fiesta Village Family Fun Park is shutting down.

The Colton amusement park said in a statement Tuesday that it will remain open to the public for its final days this weekend.

“This decision has not been easy. For decades, Fiesta Village has been a place where families gathered, friendships grew and memories were made,” the company said in the statement.

Owner Michelle O’Brien said that rising operation costs and declining attendance were the main reasons behind the closure.

“It’s been a privilege to be the steward at the park. It’s devastating to have to close it, but you get to a point where there are no other options,” O’Brien said. “We’re so grateful that Fiesta Village carried a place in people’s hearts.”

The park first opened in 1974, with a mini golf course, waterslides and go-karts. O’Brien purchased it in 2002 and has operated it ever since. Under her and her husband Patrick’s ownership, the park added attractions such as the Scrambler and Tilt-a-Whirl, along with laser tag and a roller skating rink.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the theme park industry has struggled to fully rebound. Rising costs and a lack of tourism have made the business increasingly difficult to sustain.

Last year, California’s Great America, a Silicon Valley park operated by Six Flags Entertainment, had to cut its workforce and shorten its season. Even theme park giants such as Disneyland are seeing slight downturns in attendance. Disney previously said its U.S. theme parks saw a 1% drop in attendance compared with the prior year, which the company attributed to “continued softness” in attendance by international visitors. Disneyland’s Anaheim park also recently began offering $71 tickets to draw more local visitors.

For parks like Fiesta Village, the rising cost of essentials such as food ultimately makes survival harder, said Dennis Speigel, president of International Theme Park Services, a consulting firm. He added that competition from nearby parks is also drawing business away. As a Southern California venue, Fiesta Village sits within driving distance of destinations such as Knott’s Berry Farm and Disneyland.

“It’s hard for smaller parks to compete with the big entities that surround them. Particularly now as we continue to see this amazing growth in technology for rides and attractions,” Speigel said. “Big attractions are very expensive propositions for parks to put in, and parks like Fiesta Village can’t keep up with that.”

Given the current economic uncertainty, Speigel said, theme parks will probably see a “flat year” — meaning no major growth or decline industrywide.

After Fiesta Village’s final celebration with the public on Friday and Saturday, the park will host a private event Sunday before shutting down for good. It’s unclear what will happen to the property afterward.

“Thank you for allowing us to be part of your lives and your family traditions,” the company wrote. “We will always cherish the role Fiesta Village has played in bringing people together.”

Times staff writer Samantha Masunaga contributed to this report.

Published on
06/07/2026 – 11:38 GMT+2

The South Korean government intends to set aside the extra tax income flowing from its record-breaking chip industry in a dedicated “future response fund”, the presidential office said, using the proceeds of the AI boom to bankroll public projects ranging from industrial infrastructure to support for younger generations.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Behind the windfall sit Samsung Electronics and SK hynix, whose memory chips have become essential to the data centres powering the global AI race.

Their record profits this year have propelled the wider economy, and swollen the government’s tax receipts along the way.

Presidential chief of staff Kang Hoon-sik outlined the plan at a meeting between the government and the ruling party on Sunday, saying the fund would help finance large-scale projects built around AI and semiconductors, while also tackling inequality and helping young people with housing, start-ups and work.

Kang warned that the extra revenue thrown off by the chip boom must not be squandered at what he described as a decisive moment for the country’s future.

No figure was provided for the fund’s size, as the government will consider its use at a fiscal strategy meeting this month before consulting the public.

In an interview with the Dong-A Ilbo newspaper, Kang added that part of the money would go towards the utilities on which chip plants depend, above all power and water.

A boom that keeps giving

The windfall reflects an extraordinary run for Korea’s chipmakers.

Samsung shares surged more than 170% in the first half of the year, and SK hynix shares rose more than 300%, carrying both companies past $1 trillion (€874bn) in market value.

Samsung is due to publish preliminary second-quarter earnings on Tuesday, while SK hynix plans to raise 45 trillion won (€25.7bn) through a listing on the Nasdaq.

Both are also part of an 800 trillion won (€457bn) public-private push, unveiled last week, to build a new chipmaking hub in the country’s southwest.

How the windfall should be spent has become a live political debate.

In May, presidential policy chief Kim Yong-beom floated using it for start-ups, young people, basic income schemes in rural and fishing communities, and support for artists.

The boom has also emboldened workers as Samsung averted a major walkout in May by agreeing to a bonus deal with its largest union.

Additional sources • AFP

The unification ministry said Friday it views growing calls to refer to North Korea by its official name as part of a broader effort to build public consensus on the issue.

“The ministry is paying attention to religious leaders’ call for the two Koreas to use each other’s official names,” deputy spokesperson Chang Yoon-jeong said at a regular briefing.

“Since their announcement, we have also noted support from various sectors of society, and we will continue listening to these voices going forward,” she added.

The Korean Council of Religious Leaders said the previous day that genuine peace begins with “acknowledging each other as they are,” urging both South and North Korea to refer to each other using their official names, respectively, the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

“Respecting each other’s name is the first step” toward peaceful coexistence, the group said.

Kang Chang-il, vice chair of the Peaceful Unification Advisory Council, a presidential advisory body on unification, echoed the call.

“I would first like to express my deep appreciation for the senior religious leaders who said peace begins with respecting each other’s name,” Kang said Thursday.

South Korea currently uses “North Korea” rather than its official name, “Joson” in Korean, as Seoul does not recognize its ties with North Korea as state-to-state relations under the 1991 inter-Korean Basic Agreement.

The debate has gained momentum in recent months, with senior officials, including Unification Minister Chung Dong-young, raising the need for Seoul to call North Korea by its official name to achieve peaceful coexistence.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Interim President of Venezuela, Delcy Rodriguez, says 80% of the buildings that collapsed in back-to-back earthquakes were privately developed. She also confirmed that more than 2,500 people are dead and that search and rescue operations still continue.

OLIVIA Attwood has revealed the ‘real reason’ why she was cuddling Pete Wicks in those cosy yacht pictures from last year.

The former Love Island star, 35, was seen pictured looking very close to Pete, 37, while lounging on a boat in Ibiza in August 2025.

Olivia and Pete went public with their relationship in March this year.

And it comes after she split from her ex husband Bradley Dack, who she tied the knot with in 2023, in January 2026.

In the most recent episode of the Olivia’s House podacst, the ITV star and pal Mark Johnson discussed the trip, and the pictures of her and Pete.

“Okay, let’s talk to my listeners about the yacht pictures with Pete,” Olivia said.

LIVING IT UP

Olivia Attwood flashes sideboob & ditches underwear in sexy £490 minidress

LIV LAUGH LOVE

Olivia Attwood reveals special gift Pete Wicks sent while they are apart

“Because there is a funny story here. Just as a subtext, okay I was obviously leaning back on him like on the yacht, but nothing happened.”

Mark then told her: “Tell the whole story!”

Olivia continued: “But the pictures, the actual came back was funny, right? So I am lent back on him and whatever…”

Mark chimed in: “Yeah, but let’s go first, when that woman dunked you! Do you remember? Rebecca is her name. She dunked. Do you remember?

“She slipped drunk and dunked you.”

Olivia confessed that she didn’t remember and Mark explained: “What the hell? You were getting out off the board, you know that board, where you jump? Do you not remember? Where were you?!”

“Did she give me concussion?! Because I don’t remember,” Olivia told him.

Mark continued: “So when you were getting out of the water, you know when you get in that board bit.

“You were getting out and she was rotten, fell down the stairs, slid and dunked you.”

Olivia asked: “So is that why he was cuddling me?”

Mark told her: “Yeah so when you were getting out, you were crying, and I was laughing.”

“I remember hitting my head, but I thought I hit it inside,” Olivia confessed.

Mark said: “No. It was when you got dunked under the water. And you were crying. I don’t see you cry at all.

“So I thought it was funny!”

Olivia then went on to explain the other part of the story.

She said: “Our friend Megan Elliot, who we love, we adore her. She is my second sister. She is my blood, my family.

“But love her, sometimes, she is a couple of sandwiches short of the whole picnic. Sometimes she comes out with things, we go “Oh, shut up, Megan!”

“So anyway, she goes, we’re in the middle of the ocean, right? And not posted anything for days.

“There’s a catamaran, so if you don’t know what a catamaran is, it’s one of those boats that has two bits, and then the middle bit is like, it’s a weird boat.

“She goes, “Someone is taking pictures of us off that boat! I saw a flash, it was massive.”

“And we go “Shut up, Megan!” We were all taking the p**s. Someone is taking pictures of us. Who do you think you are? Jennifer Aniston?!

“We were actually mocking her for it. And then she was like “No I swear!” We carried on about our business, next day we’re at the pool and I’m so hungover, I think I’m going to die.

“I’m on the back. I’m on the bed, and she comes in and she goes “Told you.” And then she was going all like “I told you, I told you”.

“She’s scrolling through and she goes “I knew it, I knew it. I saw…”

“She had her t*ts out.”

TV star Olivia had kept tight-tipped about her romance with Pete after being pictured snogging the hunk and leaving a hotel together after the Brits.

But in March, in a statement accusing her ex Bradley of cheating on her multiple times over their 10-year relationship, Olivia admitted she’s trying to move on.

“Yes, I’m dating,” wrote Olivia.

“Yes, I’m getting up every single day even when I have cried all night to film the shows I love filming, record my podcast, record my radio show, shoot campaigns and somewhere in there TRY to move on.”

Since then, the pair haven’t been able to keep their hands off each other.

They were spotted smooching on a sun lounger while on Nikki Beach in St. Tropez.

Olivia and Bradley first met in 2015, dated for three months, and then went their separate ways.

After Olivia went on Love Island in 2017, and split from ex Chris Hughes, the pair got back together in 2018.

Bradley proposed to the star in 2019, and they tied the knot in 2023.

Meanwhile Pete has dated the likes of Maura Higgins, Megan McKenna and Chloe Sims.

June 26 (UPI) — Authorities in Paris implemented restrictions on drinking in public and takeout alcohol sales on Friday for the second time in five days, amid one of the most severe June heat waves on record.

In an effort to reduce stress on the capital’s hospitals, public consumption of alcohol will be banned from noon through 7 a.m. Saturday, local time, and from noon on Saturday through 7 a.m. on Sunday, and can only be sold in bars and restaurants between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m on both days.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu said the health alert level was being raised to its highest, to boost hospital staffing and protect the vulnerable while Paris police chief Patrice Faure said the the capacity of hospitals to cope was “reaching a saturation point.”

“As you know, drinking alcohol with the sun beating down can have a devastating effect,” said Faure.

The bans coincided with a France-Norway game at the FIFA World Cup in Boston, due to kick off in the early hours of Saturday, local time.

Paris Pride, which was due to run Thursday through Sunday, was moved to September, and the Solidays music festival, scheduled to be held over the same period, was canceled because police felt going ahead with either amid the searing temperatures posed a major public health risk.

On Thursday, a three-year-old child died in a hot car in Saint-Gratien in the northern Paris suburbs.

As Paris baked in record temperatures that peaked at 40.9 degrees Celsius earlier in the week, Health Minister Stephanie Rist warned the health impacts of the heat were not restricted to the elderly, infants and other vulnerable groups.

“Even if you are young and in good health with no underlying medical issues, this heat will affect you too. Young people are also suffering from cardiac arrests,” she said, explaining that the Paris ambulance responded to a four-fold jump in cardiac arrests, compared with normal, during a 24-hour period.

Paris mayor Emmanuel Gregoire said the mortality rate was on the increase and urged people, especially the young, to suspend normal physical activity such as jogging.

“We must not believe we are invulnerable. It’s fine to take a couple of days off from exercising,” he said.

WASHINGTON  — Licensed gun owners have a right to carry a concealed firearm into stores and other private places unless the owner objects, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The 6-3 decision extends gun rights and strikes down laws in Hawaii, California, New York, New Jersey and Maryland.

Those measures would prohibit carrying guns onto private property that is open to the public unless the owner has expressly authorized them.

“This regime hobbles what the 2nd Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. said for the court.

The new laws, if upheld, would “impose severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the state’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit. When these permit holders leave home in the morning, … they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, coffee shops, drug stores, grocery stores, ‘big box’ stores, home improvement stores, barber shops or hair salons, dry cleaners, and laundromats.”

The three liberals dissented, saying the law would protect property owners who don’t want guns in their stores.

“There is no constitutional right to enter private property without the owner’s permission, let alone with a firearm,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Trump administration lawyers had joined a coalition of Hawaii gun owners in urging the court to strike down these blue state laws in the case of Wolford vs. Lopez.

They said the laws, if enforced, would mean “a person carrying a handgun for self-defense commits a crime by entering a mall, a gas station, a convenience store, a supermarket, a restaurant or a coffee shop.”

This litigation is part of much broader debate over where guns may be permitted or prohibited.

Four years ago, the justices ruled that law-abiding persons had a right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed gun when they left home. They also agreed there are “sensitive places” where guns may be prohibited, such as schools, courts and other government buildings.

In response, lawmakers in California and Hawaii adopted their own lists of “sensitive places.” They imposed restrictions on concealed weapons at parks, beaches, playgrounds, places of worship and public transit as well as bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

Gun owners sued but the 9th Circuit Court refused to block most of those restrictions in a single 83-page opinion covering Hawaii and California. Both states would prohibit carrying guns onto private property open to the public without the owner’s consent.

The 9th Circuit upheld that measure in principle but said California went too far by requiring the owner to post a prominent sign expressly authorizing guns.

“While today’s ruling in Wolford is disappointing, owners still have every right to decide whether firearms are allowed in their stores and businesses,” said Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment Litigation at Everytown Law. “The Supreme Court may have changed the default rule, but it cannot take away a private property owner’s authority over their own land.”

The Firearms Policy Coalition said the court had properly protected gun rights and barred states from carving out their “own regional version of the 2nd Amendment.”

“The historical record does not support forcing peaceable people to obtain advance permission before carrying for self-defense in places held open to them,” the group said.

Last week, the court upheld gun rights in a Texas case and said the government may not make it a crime for an “unlawful user” of a drug such as marijuana to own a gun.

For as long as I’ve been a journalist, which is a really long time, public entities have hated public records requests, even while claiming they don’t.

Ask your typical elected or hired official, from the governor to the animal control folks, and they’ll tell you transparency is vital and sunshine in government a key value.

Then turn in the most benign of public records requests — access to a calendar, for example — and prepare for weeks of delays and excuses. Want emails or financial records or, heaven forbid, anything from the police? Months or even years may pass before a single page is delivered, no joke.

That’s why I am deeply concerned about a bill winding its way through the California Legislature that would definitely slow down public records requests and likely make them more difficult and expensive. At its worst, it could push people into costly court battles just for having the audacity to ask for information.

The legislation, Assembly Bill 1821, is authored by Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, whose district includes Norwalk, Downey and Bell, where legendary scandals are Example 1 of why public records matter.

Pacheco’s office told me Wednesday that the troubles with the bill are far from what Pacheco set out to do.

“It was never the author’s intention to take away people’s rights to a [Public Records Act] request,” said her chief of staff, Nikki Johnson.

Johnson said the bill was meant to curtail malicious records requests, which do happen, where a citizen goes after copious amounts of records just to be a jerk and cost the government time and money.

It was also meant to address the growing problem of artificial intelligence and other for-profit businesses requesting thousands of records with the intent of using the information to create money-making products — think of sites that already sell publicly available personal information as “background checks.”

I believe Johnson on the good intentions of the bill in addressing those real if nebulous difficulties, but you know what they say about the best-laid plans.

The bill passed through the Assembly recently with ease, largely because most of its problematic portions (I’ll get to those in a minute) were removed — though not all. Even in a watered-down form, which basically gave government more time to answer requests, I found myself in the unlikely position of agreeing with conservative Republican Assemblymember and Trump supporter Carl DeMaio of San Diego, who offered some of the only opposition from elected leaders during the Assembly vote.

“We cannot police the public’s right to know, and we want to err on the side of transparency in how government agencies operate,” DeMaio said.

Amen, brother.

But the Democratic-controlled Assembly erred on the side of secrecy and slowdown instead, and the measure sailed to the Senate, where seemingly out of the blue, a bunch of new provisions were added that fill it with loopholes, vague language and tons of room for abuse.

David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said the bill as written now was “comprehensively bad for transparency and therefore for government accountability.”

Sean McMorris, transparency, ethics and accountability program manager for the advocacy organization California Common Cause, put it even more forcefully. He pointed out that “public records are the public’s records.”

“They’re not owned by the government,” he said. But this bill would shift that paradigm and make the public “prove why you need them.”

“It’s going to chill people who want to make requests, and it’s going to complicate the process, and it’s just wrong,” McMorris said.

In its new form, the bill basically allows government entities to decide if they feel a public records request is malicious or for commercial gain. If they do, they can petition a court to intervene — potentially sparking both legal costs and new fees associated with fulfilling the request.

It would also, Snyder said, force a requester to explain why they wanted the records — something California law has repeatedly avoided because it gives power to government to treat those it perceives as enemies differently.

In this age of fairness and reason, it’s hard to imagine a government official misusing power to keep secrets, but I’m told it happens. That makes it all the more crucial that people not be forced to explain why they want information, or if they will use it to, say, expose corruption — be it wrongdoing by a single individual or the entire system.

Faced with unintended consequences, Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco (D-Downey), shown in 2023, will seek to scale back the bill to its original form, according to her chief of staff.

(Rich Polk / Getty Images for Equality California)

“I have little doubt that some agencies will use that provision to overburden requesters that they view as political opponents, requesters that they view as just a hassle, requesters that ask for things the government doesn’t want to disclose,” Snyder said. “They can bring the requester into court, and at a minimum, slow down the process, and probably more likely get the requester to simply withdraw.”

As written, the bill also gives a shoddy carve-out meant to protect journalists, but which in reality could be used to curtail requests from freelancers, student journalists and more.

McMorris said access to public records is a “moral issue,” and fixing any problems with the current law requires “a scalpel, not a meat ax.”

This bill, he warned, is a meat ax.

“I don’t discount that there are abusive requests, and that there are requests that really are a burden on government agencies, but the law right now has ways for government agencies to address that,” he pointed out. “Once these laws go into place, they’re going to be hard to roll back.”

It could “fundamentally change” our access to public records, he said.

Johnson, Pacheco’s chief of staff, told me that faced with all these unintended consequences, the Assembly member is going to ask for the amendments to be removed, and for the bill to progress as it was written when it passed the Assembly. That could happen as early as next week, when the bill with the new provisions is scheduled to come up again in a Senate committee for debate.

Reverting to the bill the Assembly voted on would be better, but slowing down public records is in government’s best interests, not the people’s. The bill does nothing to address the problems it seeks to fix, but stretches out the time officials have to simply tell a requester if any records do exist — never mind delivering them.

So even back to its watered-down form, the bill remains a meat ax for a scalpel problem, chopping up transparency with good intentions.

WASHINGTON — Bobby Ray Inman’s bizarre withdrawal as the defense secretary nominee provides a glimpse into a peculiar Washington phenomenon–the insider who has spent so long behind the scenes that he is unprepared for the glare of the public limelight.

For more than 20 years, first as a Navy admiral and later as director of the National Security Agency and then deputy CIA director, Inman was part of a cadre of people who exercise great power in government but are insulated from the give-and-take of daily political life.

Inman’s remarks in announcing his withdrawal Tuesday and interviews with some of his friends suggest that the retired admiral was unequipped to step into the public arena. Despite his stated reasons, that lack of exposure to public life has emerged as the most plausible explanation for Inman’s abrupt turnabout.

“We thought: ‘He’s an insider–he probably knows the rules of the game.’ But he didn’t,” said Stephen H. Hess, a Brookings Institution political analyst. “We were all caught off guard by that.”

William Safire, the New York Times columnist accused by Inman of mounting unfair attacks, said Wednesday that he suspects Inman withdrew because he and other journalists were working on stories that might have damaged Inman’s chances for winning confirmation.

In his column appearing today, Safire wrote that Inman might have been worried by probes into reports that Inman had used a source on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff to help “manipulate” unsuspecting senators during Inman’s time at the CIA.

Inman had blamed a “new McCarthyism” in the press and the threat of a “partisan attack” by Republicans for his decision, but the media coverage and the GOP were overwhelmingly favorable toward him.

There were other ingredients as well: By Inman’s own admission, he did not thirst for the post. “I did not want a job in Washington,” he said in an interview.

He said he accepted Clinton’s offer because, as a career military officer, he found it difficult to refuse a presidential request.

Friends suggest that Inman’s longtime insecurities, apparently stemming from his days as a clumsy, bespectacled youngster, may have played a part by prompting him to overreact to fears that his reputation was being besmirched.

Inman’s experience is not unique in Washington politics. Others who have made the transition–notably Dwight D. Eisenhower, who went from five-star general to President, have had similar adjustments to make, although Eisenhower managed it more deftly.

Being an admiral or general provides a degree of insulation that often is a handicap for a would-be politician. Few are willing to criticize a senior military officer, especially in public.

And someone who has spent the bulk of his career as an intelligence officer is even more protected. By nature, the chiefs of the nation’s intelligence agencies stay in the background, even while advising presidents, briefing congressional leaders and influencing policies.

Especially during the Cold War, the bulk of their contact with the outside was behind closed doors–with lawmakers or reporters respectfully grateful for any morsel of information they were given.

Inman’s circumstances, and his own talents, accustomed him to receiving nothing but plaudits. Presidents, lawmakers and even the press praised him lavishly, extolling his brilliance and wisdom. Hardly an unkind word was to be found.

What Inman actually had to face during his few short weeks as defense secretary-designate was mild:

* A potential flap over his failure to pay Social Security taxes for a housekeeper peaked a few hours after it was announced, leaked by the White House to head off any serious brouhaha. The issue had been a major element in toppling two candidates for top Justice Department posts.

* News stories, backed up by bankruptcy records, noted his mixed performance in various business ventures. The articles were brought on mainly by Inman’s statements that he planned to bring more business techniques to government.

As Inman eventually admitted, the only real criticism came from a handful of columnists. News coverage and most editorials were heavy with praise; Inman said Tuesday that the working press had treated him fairly.

Inman did “more to besmirch his own reputation in his press conference than the press or the Republicans ever did,” Hess said. “Most people think his response bordered on the bizarre.”

Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), whom Inman accused–apparently without foundation–of spearheading a GOP attack against him, offered perhaps the unkindest cut of all:

“I think it’s probably a break for President Clinton that he didn’t get the job, the way he carried on yesterday,” the senator said Wednesday on CBS-TV’s “This Morning” program, in a view shared by some White House aides.

Times staff writer James Risen contributed to this story.

June 21 (UPI) — The Russian government on Sunday halted fuel sales to civilians and businesses not considered vital to functioning and security in Crimea.

Sergey Aksyonov, the governor of Crimea, announced people would be turned away from gas stations amid a fuel shortage and logistical difficulties related to the war with Ukraine, the BBC reported.

“Further decisions regarding the current situation in the republic’s fuel market will be announced at a later date,” he said in a post on Telegram.

The announcement came amid new attacks by Ukraine on energy and transportation infrastructure on the Crimean Peninsula, Politico reported. Russia illegally annexed the peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, and it has been at the center of fighting between the two countries ever since.

Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russia’s energy supply in an effort to hobble its defenses and ability to transport troops and machinery. Fuel facilities in the Kerch Strait in Russia’s Krasnodar region have also been attacked.

Aksyonov said a Ukrainian drone attack on an oil depot in Kerch killed four people and injured 28.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said the attack was a “just response to Russia’s brutal attacks.”

“Russia understands only strength, and our long-range strength is certainly working for peace,” he wrote in a post on X.

June 21 (UPI) — French police issued a ban on certain alcoholic drinks Sunday amid unusually high temperatures coinciding with one Paris’ largest street parties.

The order banned people from consuming certain high-alcohol content drinks after 8 a.m. Sunday along areas of Canal Saint-Martin and along riverside zones along the Seine.

Businesses were also banned from selling takeaway drinks after 1 p.m., with exemptions for restaurants and bars, Politico reported.

Paris hosts the Fête de la Musique (World Music Day) one of its largest street festivals, Sunday. Free concerts are held throughout the city, and residents are encouraged to play music outside in public spaces and neighborhoods.

This year’s festival is taking place during a heatwave that could see temperatures break 100 degree Fahrenheit in the coming week. The country issued Level 1 and Level 2 heat alerts Sunday for an area encompassing about 75% of its population.

“Very high temperatures are setting in for the long term,” the national meteorological service, Météo-France said, as cited by The Guardian. The agency said the heat would be of “exceptional severity and duration” and will likely break records.

Officials also put wildfire crews on alert in case of fire, and canceled some outdoor events. Some locations in France canceled concerts scheduled to take place before 7 p.m.

A new commission made up of legislators, public defenders, academics and advocates seeks to push California — one of just two states that don’t pay for basic public defense — to begin providing resources and enforcing minimum standards for county public defender systems.

The California Independent Commission on Public Defense includes three assemblymembers and two senators — among them Jesse Arreguín and Nick Schultz, chairs of the Senate and Assembly Public Safety Committees — as well as chief public defenders from several counties, retired judges, the directors of criminal justice nonprofits, and the heads of organizations representing thousands of defense attorneys in the state.

“We have discussed the problem of our public defense system for years,” said Schultz, a Democrat from Burbank and former prosecutor who has sponsored legislation to improve public defense.

The goal is to “move past discussion and study, and come up with an actionable road map of what we need to do to really build out the robust public defense infrastructure that Californians are rightfully entitled to,” he said.

The commissioners plan to develop a five-year plan to phase in state funding, along with enforceable standards like caseload limits and access to defense investigators.

A CalMatters investigation last year found that criminal defendants across the state are routinely convicted without anyone investigating the charges against them, significantly increasing the likelihood of wrongful convictions. Many California counties do not employ a single defense investigator who can interview witnesses, review police reports, visit crime scenes and retrieve video surveillance footage. CalMatters also found that lawyers in some rural counties are handling caseloads that far exceed even the most permissive standards, making them less likely than other defense attorneys to challenge the prosecution’s evidence in legal motions and take their cases to trial.

But the state has resisted stepping in. After a proposed bill that would have created an official state commission to address the issue was abandoned, two advocacy groups, the Wren Collective and UC Berkeley’s Criminal Law and Justice Center, decided to form an independent commission and began assembling participants who could develop and act on reforms. These types of commissions, which have facilitated significant improvements in other states’ public defender systems, are usually established by the governor.

“It became clear that this was an issue that was not a high priority for Sacramento, especially during a budget crisis,” said Chesa Boudin, the Berkeley center’s founding director and a former San Francisco district attorney. It also became clear, Boudin said, that “there was a tremendous gap between what experts understood to be the crisis and the public perception of California government as a kind of progressive leader in the country.”

In the decades since the U.S. Supreme Court established the right to an attorney in state court criminal proceedings, California has saddled its counties with the responsibility of providing lawyers to poor people accused of crimes. Many of those counties have opted for the cheapest path: paying private lawyers and firms a flat fee to represent indigent defendants, regardless of how many cases they handle or how much time they spend on each case.

“You’ve got some offices that have an incredibly high caliber of representation that they can provide, and you have other offices that are doing these flat-fee contracts where the quality has been documented to be pretty bad,” said Eve Brensike Primus, a law professor at the University of Michigan.

Primus is the only member of the new commission from outside of California. She was asked to join because of her extensive research and writing about the structure of indigent defense.

An indigent defense commission in Michigan, which was formed by the legislature in 2013, has led to significant reforms and a substantial influx in state funding.

The California commission’s work, Primus said, can serve “as a catalyst for political actors to do the right thing and start to fund and improve indigent defense delivery, or as fodder for lawsuits that then can try to get the judiciary to push the political actors to do what is necessary to provide for effective representation.”

The commission is scheduled to hold its first in-person meeting, which will be open to the public, in Berkeley in October, with additional meetings planned for Los Angeles, the Central Valley and Northern California over the next 12 months. Commissioners say they will work in subcommittees in between these quarterly sessions to develop a concrete fiscal plan for the state, draft legislative language, and establish minimum standards for how counties should structure their public defender offices, compensate their attorneys, provide access to experts, and report on their work.

Anat Rubin writes for CalMatters.

Published on
12/06/2026 – 17:57 GMT+2

The moment that Wall Street had anticipated all year arrived on Friday as SpaceX, the AI and aerospace company controlled by Elon Musk, began trading publicly on the Nasdaq in the largest initial public offering (IPO) in the history of financial markets.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

In a speech before the New York session opened for trading, Musk stated that SpaceX’s goal is to “take the fiction out of science fiction.”

SPCX opened at $150, over 10% above its $135 IPO price, and it was already at more than $160 after the first few minutes of live trading.

The company confirmed on Thursday that it had priced 555.6 million Class A shares at $135 each, valuing the firm at roughly $1.78 trillion (€1.54trn) and targeting a raise of $75 billion (€64.5bn) that instantly eclipsed Saudi Aramco’s $29.4 billion (€25.4bn) listing, which had stood as the global record for almost seven years.

Only around 3% to 4% of SpaceX shares are currently available for public trading.

The company earmarked as much as 30% of its offering for retail investors, including 10% dedicated to European buyers, but the final amount was set at 20%. As for options contracts on SPCX, they are scheduled to begin trading next week.

The IPO has also brought Elon Musk closer to becoming the world’s first trillionaire.

Forbes valued his pre-IPO SpaceX stake, estimated at around 42% of the company, at about $500bn (€435bn). At the IPO valuation, those holdings are worth roughly $690bn (€600bn), adding nearly $190bn (€165bn) to his fortune and pushing his net worth closer to the $1tn (€870bn) milestone.

Along with Musk, thousands of SpaceX employees are benefitting from the IPO and becoming millionaires.

The listing will give millions of savers indirect exposure to SpaceX as the company is expected to qualify for major stock market indexes shortly after its debut, meaning its shares could be automatically purchased by index-tracking funds.

SpaceX is estimated to be fast-tracked into the Nasdaq-100 in less than a month, as opposed to a typical wait of as much as a year.

Nasdaq’s new fast-entry rule, introduced in May, now sees it evaluating newly listed stocks for potential entry ‌by ranking ⁠their market capitalisation on the seventh trading day and assessing whether they would rank within the top 40 index members.

SpaceX is already in the top 10.

Among other changes announced, the rule that requires companies to float a minimum of 10% of their shares was also scrapped.

Analysts estimate that funds tracking the Nasdaq-100 will be required to purchase at least $7bn (€6bn) worth of SpaceX shares around the inclusion date, creating a wave of mechanical demand.

SpaceX has also already become eligible for inclusion in both the Russell US Equity Indexes and the FTSE Global Equity Index Series under the newly announced fast-entry rules from the index provider FTSE Russell.

The S&P 500, however, will not adopt a similar fast-track approach.

S&P Dow Jones Indices confirmed in early June that it would maintain its 12-month seasoning requirement and GAAP profitability test, meaning SpaceX will not join the index before mid-2027.

This is a developing story and will be updated as more information becomes available.

This article does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research and invest according to your specific circumstances.

June 8 (UPI) — Artificial intelligence company OpenAI confidentially filed for an initial public offering Monday, becoming the third in a well-known trio of U.S. AI companies to do so in the past few weeks.

Rival AI company Anthropic filed for an IPO on June 1, and SpaceX (which merged with xAI, also owned by Elon Musk) filed in late May. SpaceX’s debut is set for Friday. All three are expected to be very lucrative for early investors, as they have valuations around $1 trillion, Axios reported.

OpenAI said in a post that there has been no decision on the IPO’s timing yet.

“It may be a while because there are things we want to do that are likely easier as a private company,” the post said.

The company has had both successes and trials in recent months, CNN reported. Musk lost a lawsuit against it in mid-May because of the statute of limitations, and the company has expanded ChatGPT options and other AI tools and programs.

However, the company and founder/CEO Sam Altman are also facing lawsuits because of ChatGPT’s role in recent shootings and other issues. Florida announced last week that it is suing the company and Altman, claiming the company chose “profits over public safety” in creating a dangerous product in the form of ChatGPT. The state also has an ongoing criminal investigation into the company.

Individuals including the family members of those killed or injured in a recent school shooting have also sued, saying that the company should have warned authorities about the shooter’s interactions with ChatGPT.

The pontiff praises Madrid as a beacon of inclusion as about 1.2 million people gather for Sunday mass.

An oceanic crowd has filled the streets of the Spanish capital Madrid with chants, cheers and applause to greet Pope Leo XIV on the second day of a weeklong apostolic journey to mainland Spain and the Canary Islands.

The Vatican and local organisers said about 1.2 million people braved the heat to be present in the landmark Cibeles Square on Sunday in what is expected to be the largest event during his visit to the country.

Throngs of people pressed along barriers near the square – best known as the rallying point for Real Madrid football fans celebrating the club’s titles – waving flags and shouting “Long live the pope”, as Leo arrived in his white popemobile for the event. Some tossed flower petals marking his arrival.

“May Madrid continue to be a welcoming and inclusive city, where social life is inspired by true human values,” the pontiff wrote in the guestbook as he was handed the key to the city by its mayor.

Leo began his trip on Saturday, ⁠meeting migrants and the homeless and attending a vigil with about 600,000 young people in Madrid. His June 6-12 visit also includes stops in Barcelona and the Canary Islands, where he will meet migrants and refugees who ⁠risked their lives crossing there from West Africa.

He said he hoped the visit, his first to a European Union country outside Italy, ⁠⁠would set an example to the world about respecting “every ⁠⁠human being” and urged leaders to stop dividing electorates.

“I am delighted that he is praying for us migrants and for our safety,” said Andrea Margarita, a 72-year-old Peruvian who arrived in Spain six months ago, as she ‌‌waited in the crowd in a wheelchair with her daughter.

After mass, Leo was scheduled to hold a private meeting with fellow members of his Augustinian religious order in ‌‌the afternoon ‌‌before meeting figures from the world of entertainment, sport and culture at a concert venue in central Madrid.

WASHINGTON — It was perhaps a surprising private overture from OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman to Sen. Bernie Sanders.

The meeting between the two had come just after the Vermont senator announced a plan for the public to take a 50% ownership stake in artificial intelligence companies such as OpenAI, using their stock to create a public wealth fund that would spread the fortune generated by AI behemoths.

Altman told Sanders that he, too, wants the public to have equity in AI companies. Though the CEO said he couldn’t support Sanders’ threshold of 50%, he nonetheless wanted to work with him to advocate for the general idea, according to people with knowledge of the conversation.

The nearly hourlong meeting in Sanders’ Senate office this week, held at Altman’s request, highlighted the inherent tension between AI powerhouses and policymakers as Americans are increasingly asked to accept the costs of the AI boom even as many remain unconvinced of its direct benefits. Yet it’s also creating odd political bedfellows fueled by populism as politicians from Sanders to President Trump embrace giving the public a stake in AI’s growth.

Speaking to reporters Friday on Air Force One, Trump described a potential partnership “where the American people can benefit from the success of AI” and said executives from leading AI companies will visit the White House, perhaps in the coming week, to discuss the idea.

“There’s something very interesting about it, where it almost becomes a partnership with the American public,” Trump said.

When reporters noted to the Republican president that Sanders, a democratic socialist and political independent, had proposed public ownership in AI companies, he pointed to similarities in their coalitions. The economic views of Trump voters and those who have supported Sanders for president, Trump said, “aren’t that far apart.”

Trump has embraced government investment in private companies in his second term, scrambling his party’s politics. His administration last year secured a 10% stake in the struggling Silicon Valley company Intel, and it considered a government takeover of Spirit Airlines earlier this year, although the airline couldn’t reach a deal and ultimately closed.

Public backlash

The positioning of leading figures such as Trump and Sanders comes as concerns about AI are emerging far beyond Washington.

In Michigan, Democrats recently clashed over Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s appearance with Altman at the site of a major data center. Candidates such as New York Democratic House candidate Alex Bores have also made AI regulation a campaign issue by tapping into voters’ unease about the technology.

“This is a real change to society,” Altman told reporters this week. “I think it’s possible both that people can use AI a lot and like using it and also have anxiety about what it’s going to do for the future.”

Data center projects across the country have drawn opposition from residents concerned about electricity demand, water consumption and environmental impacts. Some states once eager to attract the facilities, including Ohio and Virginia, have moved to reconsider tax incentives.

“We need to pass legislation right now that says there’s not going to be any further data center development until they agree to pay for their own electricity, build their own grids and pay for their own water supply,” Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, a leading Republican skeptic of Big Tech, told the Associated Press.

Before arriving in Washington, Altman stopped in Michigan on Monday to appear alongside Whitmer, a Democrat, at the site of a 1.65 million-square-foot data center project. Whitmer’s team said the project will create more than 2,500 union construction jobs.

But it also drew criticism from local activists and some fellow Democrats, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, who called the project “disgusting.” She said she was “so disappointed” in Whitmer.

“It’s a very controversial topic right now and it’s coming from the ground up,” Sen. Elissa Slotkin, another Michigan Democrat, said about the grassroots resistance. “People feel very strongly about it.”

Whitmer defended her appearance, telling reporters afterward that “one thing’s very clear: Everyone has a cellphone in our pocket.”

“We are all, more and more, consuming technology and data, and these data centers are going to get built. So, my thought is if we can hold them to a high standard and do it in Michigan, that’s the best way to do it,” she said.

The tensions extend beyond data centers. On college campuses, commencement speakers have been interrupted by boos when discussing artificial intelligence. About 70% of college students see AI as a threat to their job prospects, according to a 2025 poll by the Institute of Politics at the Harvard Kennedy School.

Altman acknowledged those concerns. He said that while “the impact on jobs has been less than many people in our field expected,” he understands “that college students have a lot of anxiety about the future.”

Washington seeks an AI bargain

The idea that AI’s expansion is inevitable is increasingly shared by leaders across the political spectrum, even as they disagree sharply about how to manage it.

That reality was at the center of Altman’s conversations in Washington. In addition to Sanders, Altman met with Trump administration officials such as Michael Kratsios, the White House’s chief science and technology advisor, and congressional leaders from both parties.

Sanders’ team emphasized that the two did not reach an agreement on the main points that the senator made to Altman, including the 50% figure to ensure that the public has decision-making power. The senator also expressed opposition to the growing spending on elections by the AI industry.

“Unfortunately, Sam Altman did not commit to any of those,” Sanders spokesperson Jeremy Slevin said.

Altman, emerging from the conversation, described it as “great,” though noting that the two “obviously don’t agree on everything.”

How AI should be governed

Congress this week released a bipartisan framework that would establish the first broad federal approach to AI regulation while temporarily preempting many state laws.

Anthropic, one of OpenAI’s top competitors, has proposed mechanisms for coordinating pauses on advanced AI development if systems become too powerful.

The Trump administration has also begun constructing its own oversight structure, signing an executive order to establish a process for reviewing national security risks posed by advanced AI systems before their public release.

Sanders said he found the administration’s move notable after years of warnings that regulation could slow American innovation.

“Even these guys are beginning to catch on that there are legitimate concerns that have to be dealt with,” Sanders said.

Cappelletti and Kim write for the Associated Press.

Former Cuban president Raul Castro made his first public appearance in Havana since being indicted by the United States on murder charges linked to the 1996 downing of two civilian aircraft. He was cheered at an event commemorating the Interior Ministry, attended by military officials and Cuba’s Olympic wrestling champion.

June 1 (UPI) — Artificial intelligence company Anthropic confidentially filed Monday for an initial public offering with the Securities and Exchange Commission, joining SpaceX and OpenAI in plans to go public this year.

“This gives us the option to go public after the SEC completes its review,” Anthropic said in a statement, CNBC reported. “The proposed initial public offering will depend on market conditions and other factors.”

That makes three prominent companies with IPO plans in 2026. SpaceX plans to debut next week, while OpenAI is preparing to file. Anthropic’s filing did not give any further information on timing, but it could go public as soon as this fall, The New York Times reported.

Last week, Anthropic passed OpenAI in valuation, reporting $965 billion as opposed to OpenAI’s $852 billion reported in March, CNBC reported. The company, based in San Francisco, is the creator of the Claude chatbot and the Claude Mythos Preview AI model. It has a focus on software coding.

Anthropic’s founders left OpenAI in 2021 to found the new company after concerns about OpenAI’s direction. Anthropic leaders have stressed safety in the use of AI, which caused issues with the U.S. Department of Defense after the company wanted limits on military and intelligence usage of its products.

President Donald Trump then called it a “radical left, woke company” and ordered federal agencies to stop using Anthropic products, while Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, called the company a supply chain risk to national security. Anthropic has sued the Trump administration to reverse the blacklisting, and that lawsuit is ongoing. Meanwhile, the company’s growth in the private sector has accelerated, CNBC reported.