WASHINGTON — The Trump administration’s activation of a long-dormant court to seek an Afghan woman’s deportation violates her constitutional rights, a defense lawyer argued Thursday at a hearing for the first case to be heard in the obscure court since its creation 30 years ago.
Attorney Matthew Farley urged the chief judge of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court to dismiss the case against Nazira Haji Zada and immediately release his client. Judge Joan Ericksen denied Farley’s requests but said Zada’s lawyers can renew them as the case proceeds in the nation’s capital.
“This entire scheme is in violation of due process and unconstitutional,” said Farley, an assistant federal public defender.
The court, established in 1996, had never received a petition until this month, when the Justice Department filed an application seeking Zada’s removal. The court has a specific authority to conduct deportation proceedings for individuals whom the Department of Justice classifies as “alien terrorists.”
FBI agents arrested her Tuesday at her Fort Worth home. She is not charged with any crimes.
An FBI memo dated July 15 said it “developed information” that she is an Islamic State supporter who had her children pledge their loyalty to the terrorist group. The memo says she “supported” a plot by relatives to carry out an ISIS-inspired attack in the United States.
Court filings identify her as the mother and mother-in-law of two Afghan men who were convicted in Oklahoma for their roles in the 2024 election day plot. Her son, Abdullah Haji Zada, was sentenced in November to 15 years in prison and court records show he previously agreed to be removed from the U.S. after his release.
Kunzelman and Tucker write for the Associated Press.
Love Island’s 2026 summer of love has come to an end, with Julia and Lorenzo taking £50,000 home after the public voted them as the winners
22:20, 27 Jul 2026Updated 22:50, 27 Jul 2026
Love Island has crowned this year’s winners(Image: ITV)
Love Island‘s 2026 winners have been crowned. Lorenzo Alessi and Julia Majchrzak were voted the winners by the public, taking home £50,000 between the two of them. The final aired on Monday 27 July.
Julia and Lorenzo went up against Jasmine Muller and Kavan Murphy for the title and it was the former who took home the crown. It came after Simba Kudyiwa and Angelista Gunda bagged a third place finish.
The winners looked stunned after their name was called, but it was a well received decision from the live audience and former islanders alike, with Lorenzo being lofted up high by his villa pals.
But despite loud cheers from the crowd, not all fans online were impressed. One user on X fumed: “Such an awful love island uk finale. love island usa may have had awful production, people, and couples too but they went off with the final dates & the audience went off with crowning brinity the winners #loveislanduk #loveisland.”
Another added: “I already said what I said: the winners of love island uk this year are AWFUL. y’all just failed this season.” And a third said: “the final is the worst episode of Love Island, it’s always boring, they need a to rethink it and maybe go down a big brother route.”
Going into the final, there were four couples who could have taken the crown: Jasmine and Kavan, Lorenzo and Julia, Simba and Angelista and Yasmin Hadlow and Tommy Stagg. But a twist in the game meant Yasmin and Tommy were dumped before the show went live.
On Sunday night, after Mica Harris and Samraj Toor were axed by their series’ dumped Islanders, it was revealed that the pair would be allowed to pick another couple to leave with them.
Knowing what was at stake, Samraj vowed not to make his decision based on who he was friends with. As such, though many fans predicted that the couple’s arguments with Julia would mean she and Lorenzo would be dumped, it was Yasmin and Tommy who went instead.
The remaining couples were fairly strong. Simba and Angelista had mostly been together since Simba entered as a bombshell. Though he returned from Casa Amor with Mara, leaving Angelista single, he soon decided to get back with the OG Islander and won her over with a poem.
Meanwhile, Jasmine and Kavan have been together for weeks. Kavan also returned from Casa with a bombshell, Charleen Murphy, but he and Jasmine got back together as well, after Kavan saw just how hurt Jasmine was by his actions. Though some fans have been hoping she and Lorenzo, her original partner would get back together, and rumours of an ‘affair’ had swirled around the villa, former Islanders have said that Jasmine and Kavan are head over heels for each other.
Likewise, Sean Fitzgerald told Maya Jama on Aftersun that Julia and Lorenzo were well suited to each other. The two became a favourite to win after returning from Casa, not just because Lorenzo was a one of the public’s favourite boys, but because they felt Julia hadn’t been treated well by the other Islanders.
This came amid a feud with Lola Deal, who objected to how Julia flirted with Sean during Casa. Shortly afterwards, Julia and Lorenzo were voted favourite couple. They were given the opportunity to dump a couple, but Lola and Sean decided to volunteer to be dumped.
This was the 13th series of Love Island. Last year’s winners Toni Laites and Cach Mercer have since split, but have gone on to feature in other reality series. Toni has taken a role on new Love Island spin off The Debrief, providing commentary on the main show, while Cach will appear on Strictly Come Dancing later this year.
The show is expected to return in January for an All Stars addition, which could include some Islanders from this season. Earlier this summer, All Stars winners Tom Clare and Molly Smith married after meeting on series two of the spin off.
Governments have become remarkably efficient at producing information. During crises, official statements, emergency regulations and public updates appear almost instantly. Yet recent global emergencies have exposed a fundamental paradox: more information does not necessarily create greater public trust.
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated this with exceptional clarity. Around the world, governments introduced unprecedented public-health measures, revised policies at remarkable speed and communicated with citizens almost continuously. Despite these efforts, public responses varied dramatically. Accurate information competed with rumours, institutional confidence fluctuated and misinformation often spread faster than official corrections.
The challenge extended well beyond the pandemic. Whether societies face natural disasters, armed conflicts, cyberattacks or public-health emergencies, governments confront the same question: how can accurate information become trusted information?
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
These principles remain indispensable.
Yet they share an important assumption-that once reliable information is produced, effective communication naturally follows.
Recent experience suggests otherwise.
Between governments and citizens lies an often-overlooked stage of communication. Official information rarely reaches the public directly. Instead, journalists, editors, producers and broadcasters interpret complex events, provide context and translate institutional language into messages ordinary audiences can understand.
This intermediary role becomes especially important during uncertainty.
People rarely judge information on facts alone. They also respond to clarity, consistency and the credibility of those delivering the message. Two governments may release nearly identical information yet receive very different public reactions because the communication itself inspires different levels of confidence.
Television illustrated this particularly well during the COVID-19 pandemic. While social media accelerated both verified information and misinformation, television remained one of the most trusted sources of crisis reporting because journalists explained changing regulations, interpreted complex developments and provided continuity during uncertain periods.
In such moments, credibility becomes inseparable from presentation.
This raises a broader question. If governments are responsible for making decisions, who ensures those decisions are understood?
Despite its practical importance, that question has received surprisingly little attention.
One researcher exploring this overlooked dimension of crisis communication is Kazakh journalist Kydyr-Zhan Mukhatayev. His work examines what happens after official information reaches television audiences.
Using Kazakhstan’s experience during the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, Mukhatayev argues that broadcasters should not be viewed as passive channels transmitting government messages. Through editorial judgement, presentation and audience engagement, they actively influence how information is interpreted, trusted and ultimately acted upon.
When Information Isn’t Enough
One of the most persistent assumptions in crisis communication is that accurate information naturally leads to public understanding. In reality, the relationship is far more complex.
Citizens rarely interpret official messages in isolation. They assess institutional credibility, the clarity of explanations and the consistency of communication over time. Trust therefore develops not through information alone but through the interaction between governments, professional media and public perception.
This helps explain why countries facing similar crises often achieve different public outcomes. During uncertainty, people seek more than facts. They look for reassurance, competence and evidence that those responsible understand the situation themselves.
Professional journalism therefore becomes central to crisis communication.
Broadcasters do far more than repeat official announcements. Through editorial choices, language and presentation, they transform complex information into something audiences can understand and trust.
The pandemic made this responsibility especially visible. As governments adapted policies almost daily, broadcasters helped distinguish verified information from speculation and placed individual developments within a broader context.
Rather than treating broadcasting as a technical process of information delivery, Mukhatayev presents it as a dynamic relationship between institutions, journalism and public trust.
A Case Study with Broader Implications
Mukhatayev explores this relationship through two complementary studies based on Kazakhstan’s broadcasting experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The first examines the professional role of television journalists during prolonged uncertainty. Rather than focusing exclusively on government communication, it considers how broadcasters themselves contributed to public understanding through responsible reporting, editorial judgement and effective communication.
The second expands the discussion beyond the pandemic, presenting crisis broadcasting as an interconnected system in which institutional credibility, journalism, visual communication and audience psychology continuously influence one another.
Although grounded in Kazakhstan’s experience, the questions raised extend far beyond one country. They suggest that successful crisis communication depends not only on what governments say but also on how professional media transform official information into messages citizens are prepared to understand, trust and follow.
How Trust Is Actually Built
If trust is not created by official statements alone, what determines whether crisis communication succeeds?
Kazakhstan’s experience suggests that public confidence is shaped not by a single government message but by the interaction of several interconnected factors.
The first is institutional credibility. Citizens are far more likely to follow official guidance when public institutions are perceived as competent, transparent and consistent. Even accurate information quickly loses its impact if communication appears contradictory or uncertain.
The second is professional journalism. During a crisis, broadcasters become interpreters rather than mere messengers. Through editorial decisions, language and context, they help audiences understand not only what is happening but also why it matters.
The third factor is visual communication. Television communicates through images as much as words. Live reporting, graphics and interviews shape public perception and emotional responses long before audiences consciously evaluate facts.
Finally, there is public perception. People’s reactions are influenced by previous experience, culture, emotions and existing levels of institutional trust. Crisis communication therefore becomes an ongoing interaction between governments, media and society rather than a simple transfer of information.
Together, these factors suggest that public trust is rarely created by institutions acting alone. It emerges through the combined influence of credible governance, responsible journalism and informed public engagement.
Mukhatayev’s research brings these elements together into a single analytical perspective. Rather than viewing broadcasting as a channel for delivering official information, it presents television journalism as an active component of crisis management capable of strengthening-or undermining-public confidence.
Beyond COVID-19
Although these observations are drawn from Kazakhstan’s experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, the issues they highlight extend far beyond public health.
Future crises may involve cyberattacks, geopolitical instability, climate-related disasters or AI-driven misinformation. While each presents different challenges, all require governments to maintain public trust under conditions of uncertainty.
The information environment has also changed dramatically. Television now operates alongside social media, digital news platforms, messaging applications and AI-generated content. Information spreads faster than ever-but so does misinformation.
This makes professional journalism more important, not less.
In an environment where virtually anyone can publish information instantly, audiences continue searching for reliable sources capable of explaining complex events with accuracy, responsibility and context. The principles of credible journalism-verification, editorial independence and clear communication-remain essential regardless of the platform.
For this reason, Kazakhstan’s experience deserves attention beyond its national context. Although every country has its own political and media landscape, the relationship between governments, journalism and public trust has become a shared international challenge.
The Next Crisis Will Test More Than Governments
Every crisis eventually ends.
The real question is what remains once it does.
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated that governments cannot manage crises through policy alone. Success depends equally on whether citizens understand those policies, trust those communicating them and believe the information they receive.
Mukhatayev’s work contributes to this discussion by shifting attention toward a stage of crisis communication that has often been overlooked. Rather than asking only how governments should communicate, it examines what happens after official information enters the public sphere-and how journalism influences whether that information ultimately earns public confidence.
As artificial intelligence reshapes the global information landscape and misinformation becomes increasingly sophisticated, this perspective is likely to become even more relevant. The future of crisis communication will depend not only on producing accurate information but also on ensuring that trustworthy information remains understandable, credible and persuasive.
Kazakhstan’s experience therefore offers more than a national case study. It illustrates a challenge that governments, journalists and policymakers around the world are likely to face repeatedly in the years ahead.
Governments can always produce more information.
Whether societies choose to trust it is another matter.
In the end, people do not simply need information. They need information they are willing to believe.
SPAIN is set to implement stricter rules when it comes to smoking and vaping – and it will affect all holidaymakers.
The list of smoke-free places that already exists could be expanded to beaches and national parks under new law.
Spain is set to ban smoking and vaping in more places – like National ParksCredit: AlamyStricter rules could be on the cards thanks to a new billCredit: Getty
This week, Spain approved a draft law to extend the list of smoke-free places.
It will be forbidden to smoke or vape on the terraces of bars and restaurants as well as on beaches, riverside beaches, national parks and swimming pools.
Sign up for the Travel newsletter
Thank you!
Health Minister Mónica García said: “Anyone who wants to have a coffee or enjoy their leisure time freely on a terrace should be able to do so without the smoke from nearby tables becoming part of the menu.”
Also affected are outdoor performance spaces, university campuses and work vehicles such as delivery vans.
It’s not just a ban directly in these areas – Spain is also hoping to introduce ‘enhanced protection zones’
This is where smoking and vaping will be banned within a 15-metre perimeter around them in certain places like museums and children’s parks and playgrounds.
The amount people can be fined could also change.
According to local media, those breaking these rules could be be fined between €200-€600 (£170-£511).
The law will also ban the use of tobacco-related products by those under the age of 18.
Until now, the law only prohibited the sale and supply to under 18s.
If the new bill is approved then fines could also increase to up to €600Credit: Alamy
For minors who break the ban on consuming tobacco or vapes,fines for minor offences will start at €200 (£170).
Athough this could be replaced by community service.
These rules aren’t in effect yet as the changes will only be made if the bill is approved by Spanish parliament.
It’s not the only rule that could see you fined in Spain – some areas ban sunlounger hogging, with £216 fines.
Trips to waterfalls, gardens, galleries, medieval forests and prehistoric caves will make the long school holidays a lot more fun. To help families explore affordably, throughout August buses in England will be free for kids and adult fares will be capped at £3 single. Or, if you arrive somewhere by train, you could buy a PlusBus ticket, which include unlimited local bus travel. Here are six ideas for family outings by bus around England.
Great North Museum, Newcastle
Tynemouth Priory and Castle on a headland overlooking two beaches east of Newcastle. Photograph: Robert Harding/Alamy
Painted mummy cases, fossilised dino teeth, a stuffed wombat, a fake merman … Newcastle’s Great North Museum: Hancock is full of things kids might love – and entrance is free. Some of the impressive Roman altars are lit with colourful projections and there’s a planetarium with shows (from £2.95). This summer’s exhibition Treasure: Hidden, Lost, Found (free, until 20 Sept) involves thoughtfully curated shiny stuff, from Roman coins to Viking silver unearthed across northern England. Lots of buses stop nearby, and a bus ticket gets you 10% off in the cafe.
This summer, there’s also a Tales on the Tyne trail across Newcastle of giant Peter Rabbit sculptures and other, smaller “fluffles” to raise funds for St Oswald’s hospice. The waterfront hotel INNSiDE Newcastle, near the station, hosts a Tynetastic Peter sculpture, plus art and reading events. Its riverside restaurant has a bambino menu and under-11s get free meals until 6 September. The hotel offers family-friendly rooms (from £119 for four in August, room-only), activity hampers and a free soft-drink minibar.
In stylish Ouseburn, a short bus ride away, the Biscuit Factory gallery hosts three further fluffles, free kids’ activities, rabbit-themed food and a roof terrace. Bus 306 runs regularly all the way out to Tynemouth for an afternoon on the beach under castle-topped cliffs. Back in the city, the art deco Tyneside cinema has selected films at £5 each week and kids’ classics over the summer.
Forest fun near Hatfield, Essex
The boardwalk through Hatfield Forest’s ancient royal hunting ground. Photograph: PBP Vision/Alamy
Open every day and free to enter, the National Trust’s Hatfield Forest has 400 hectares (1,000 acres) of Frisbee-ready flowering fields and shady woodland. Incongruously close to Stansted airport, the forest was once a royal hunting ground and is still home to hundreds of deer, some descended from Henry I’s original 12th-century herds. You can follow a boardwalk through twisting hornbeams, ramble across buttercup-carpeted meadows, build a den and hear yaffling woodpeckers.
Bus 509 from Bishop’s Stortford stops outside The Green Man, a short walk from the forest’s edge. Briefly follow the road signed Hatfield Forest and turn right up the path just after the bridge to find a map and gateway.
The lakeside picnic tables and alfresco cafe are a delightful mile away, past cattle-grazed pastures busy with butterflies, and 1,000-year-old trees. With no car to get back to (parking costs £9), make this a linear walk. Loop through woods to Thremhall Priory or follow the Three Forests way for 4½ miles to the village of Hatfield Broad Oak and catch bus 305 (not Sundays).
In Bishop’s Stortford itself, there’s a riverside splash pool and playgrounds near the recently revamped castle mound. South Mill arts centre has kids’ crafts for £2 and Much Hadham Forge museum has a free event on 27 August, featuring a Tudor storyteller, to celebrate 450 years since their Elizabethan murals were painted. Half-timbered Much Hadham is 20 minutes from Stortford on hourly bus 35 (not Sundays).
Cave art inNottinghamshire
Prehistoric rock art can be found at spectacular Cresswell Crags. Photograph: Steve Bramall/Getty Images/iStockphoto
The Welbeck Estate’s walking map includes an easy-going, sculpture-dotted trail to Creswell Crags, where a bus ticket gets you free entry to the museum and 10% off in the cafe. A stroll through the limestone gorge is spectacular, past ponds and caves where prehistoric humans lived and left rock art on the walls. Bus 209 from Worksop stops every couple of hours (not Sundays) near the Dukeries garden centre and Welbeck courtyard at the start of the trail.
Welbeck has a free museum and gallery in converted outbuildings. Highlights include the pearl earring Charles I was wearing when he was beheaded and a red chalk Madonna by Michelangelo. The award-winning Harley cafe next door serves local food (kids’ soup £5, cheese on toast £6).
Half-price Harewood,WestYorkshire
Harewood House is packed with kids’ activities – and art for the adults. Photograph: Tom Arber
Like many big country houses, Harewood usually charges adults well over £20 for a day’s worth of paintings, porcelain and landscaped gardens. But arrive on the frequent bus 36 from Leeds or Harrogate, and you get 50% off walk-up ticket prices. This gives you access to the art-filled house, the Capability Brown parkland and gardens with scented borders, waterfalls and bridges in thickets of bamboo.
For kids, there’s a wooded adventure playground with zipwire and slides, a treehouse and a willow maze. They can also borrow a nature safari bag, complete with map and compass, torch, binoculars and magnifying glass. And the summer holidays are packed with extra offers, all free with a ticket: den-building, gardening, statue-cleaning, dressing up, circus skills, and mid-August workshops by Tibetan monks.
Inside, there’s an exhibition of glamorous photos by Cecil Beaton (until 4 October). Alternatively, a 5-mile circular walk from the bus stop takes in deer, buzzards, rolling parkland and the Muddy Boots cafe. Half an hour away on the 36 bus, Leeds has the free five-storey Royal Armouries museum overlooking the dock.
Word-class art indoors and out in Norwich
A family enjoys the outdoor sculpture trail at the Sainsbury Centre. Photograph: Kate Wolstenholme
Elisabeth Frink’s ostrich-like structures stalk through waterside woods. Antony Gormley’s cast iron figures stand poised on rooftops and walkways across the brutalist University of East Anglia (UEA) campus. Henry Moore’s bronze forms recline on the lawns, and angular steel beasts by Lynn Chadwick crouch under a model of Vladimir Tatlin’s tower. The free sculpture park at the Sainsbury Centre is packed with iconic names from 20th-century art and architecture and set in 140 hectares of parkland that are yours to explore, with centuries-old oaks, wild rabbits, and free family-friendly tours and trails.
Inside the Norman Foster-designed gallery (pay what you can), relaunched in 2023, the works are eclectic. You can wander from ancient Chinese tomb figures to a dynamic new installation via a work by Picasso. Kids might like the glass box you can stand in to “become a work of art” near John Davies’ hyper-realistic Bucket Man. The ambitious summer exhibitions look at the meaning of life and aspects of play. Show your bus ticket in the cafe for a 10% discount.
Bus 25 from the station or city centre runs frequently to UEA and stops close to the Sainsbury Centre. It passes the huge square keep of Norwich Castle, which reopened last year after a £27.5m renovation project. There are sound-and-light shows on the old stone walls of the Great Hall and a £2.50 twilight ticket if you visit an hour before closing time.
Wildlife watching in the Lakes
There’s dippers, dragonflies and red squirrels to be spotted at Aira Force waterfall in the Lake District. Photograph: Dave Porter/Alamy
The mossy, fern-fringed waterfalls at Aira Force are 45 minutes on bus 508 from Penrith station. The route runs beside Ullswater with views across the lake to bracken-cloaked Hallin Fell. It’s one of the trips in a new book on Where to Watch Wildlife in Britain By Low-Carbon Transport, along with 100 other car-free trips to nature-rich sites across the UK.
Look out for dippers, dragonflies and red squirrels. The area offers varied and spectacular walks, such as a pushchair- and mobility scooter-friendly stroll through the woods at Pooley Bridge or a hike up Gowbarrow Fell.
MIAMI — The Trump administration is reviving a rule that could deny green cards to immigrants who use public benefits that could include food stamps, Medicaid, housing vouchers and others.
The policy, known as “public charge,” appeared on Thursday in the Federal Register and will be formally published on Monday.
The policy was first implemented in February 2020 as one of President Trump’s moves to limit legal immigration during his first administration, but it was reversed after Democratic President Biden came to power.
Its return comes when the Republican administration is implementing a hard-line policy to curb both illegal and legal immigration, and when the cost of healthcare and food is rising.
The federal government “is reaffirming the requirement of self-reliance, protecting public resources and ending policies that encouraged dependency on the backs of hard-working American taxpayers,” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said in a post published on its X account.
“Under President Trump, USCIS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves,” the post said.
Under the policy, applicants for green cards have to show they wouldn’t be burdens to the country or “public charges.”
TOURS are now available of a secret network of rivers located under a major UK city.
However, adventure-seekers will want to be quick as tickets are selling out fast.
The Sheaf & Porter Rivers Trust are currently running tours of the underground river systemCredit: The Sheaf and Porter Rivers TrustThe Trust has been working to restore the underground system, with ticket sales going towards fundingCredit: The Sheaf and Porter Rivers Trust
These tours will be run by volunteers, who will take explorers on twice-daily trips around Sheffield’s underground.
Sign up for the Travel newsletter
Thank you!
Dating back to the mid-1800s, the Megatron is a large maze of tunnels located under various parts of the city, including the railway station, BBC Sheffield, the Sheffield Archives, and Red Tape Studios.
The extravagent system was originally constructed to contain the overflow from the rivers Sheaf, Porter, and the Don.
Trust volunteers run the tours, which will take place twice daily throughout July, August, and SeptemberCredit: The Sheaf and Porter Rivers TrustTour tickets have already sold out for JulyCredit: The Sheaf and Porter Rivers Trust
However, the system of rivers eventually became polluted and even covered over the years.
Now, the Trust is working to uncover and restore these historic features, even taking those who dare venture into the depths of the Megatron on tours in order to fund the project.
On these tours, volunteers share their passion for the ecology of the city’s waterways and other interesting facts as they guide you on the two-mile water walk.
Ticket prices help to fund everything from river clean-ups to the installation of “light wells”, which cast some light onto the hidden rivers for the first time in 150 years.
If you’re looking to participate, make sure you have the proper attire before you embark on this underground adventure.
Varying water depths throughout the tour mean waders and sturdy footwear are recommend.
You will also want to be fairly agile for this experience, with lots to navigate, from slippery algae-covered rocks to tight gaps that require crouching.
This tour also provides glimpses into the city’s industrial past, with aged grindstones, crucible caps, even some tools found along the way.
You may also spot some stalactiteshanging from the tunnels, but make sure you don’t touch these.
And Broad Street West, the culvert transforms into a large single looming arch, named “Megatron” by urban explorers.
The name was chosen in response to Manchester’s “Optimus Prime” culvert, both of which took inspiration from after the comic and movie series “Transformers”.
While the first section of the culvert is built from huge stone blocks from theold Castlefolds Wholesale Market, a shorter stretch of blue brick under Exchange Street was built around 1890 to serve as a ramp for electric trams travelling from Rotherham to central Sheffield.
You may also spot some wildlife on your tour, with a variety of birds, invertebrates, and even the Daubenton’s bat taking up residence.
The public is advised that points of the water can reach chest height on this tour, with rainfall impacting both the current and depth.
While the Sheaf and Porter River Trust Megatron Tour has sold out for July, more information on ticket releases for August and September can be found here.
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.
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.
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.
Chang Yoon-jeong, deputy spokesperson at South Korea’s Unification Ministry, speaks at a regular briefing in Seoul in this June 26 file photo. File Photo by Yonhap
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 yearCredit: YouTube/Olivia’s House with Olivia AttwoodThe pair were snapped looking very cosy on a yacht in IbizaCredit: BackGrid
“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.”
Olivia and her ex Bradley Dack split up earlier this yearCredit: GettyOlivia confirmed her relationship with Pete four months agoCredit: Getty
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…”
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.”
A young man dives from a bridge over the Saint-Martin Canal in Paris on Thursday amid a searing heat wave that prompted authorites in the capital to impose restrictions on drinking alcohol in public and takeout sales for the second time in five days. Photo by Yoan Valet/EPA
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.
Troops in landing craft approach Omaha Beach on D-Day in Normandy, France, on June 6, 1944. D-Day was the largest seaborne invasion in history and turned the tide of World War II. Photo by UPI | License Photo
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.
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.
Smoke billows in the background following a reported Ukrainian drone attack on a fuel facility in Moscow on Thursday. Photo by Stringer/EPA
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.
People cool off along the Canal Saint-Martin in Paris on Saturday. Photo by Yoan Valat/EPA
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.
