tells

‘The scale of needs is so huge.’ As Gaza’s displaced Palestinians suffer from winter storms after surviving two years of genocidal war, UNICEF’s Jonathan Crickx explains how many clothes, blankets and tents are needed to save children from dying.

Dec. 19 (UPI) — Wisconsin’s Republican leaders will begin impeachment proceedings against Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan if she does not resign after her felony obstruction conviction.

State Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August, both of whom are Republicans, issued the ultimatum in a joint statement, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported on Friday.

“Judge Hannah Dugan, while wearing judicial robes of the state of Wisconsin, attempted to impede the lawful work of federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents,” Vos and August said.

“The last time a Wisconsin judge was impeached was in 1853,” they said. “If Judge Dugan does not resign from her office immediately, the Assembly will begin impeachment proceedings.”

A jury of 12 on Thursday found Dugan guilty of obstructing federal agents as they attempted to arrest a man who was scheduled to appear on an unrelated matter in her courtroom in April.

The jury found her guilty of one count of obstruction, which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. The jury acquitted her on one count of concealment.

Dugan’s legal team said they will appeal her felony conviction.

Vos cited the Wisconsin Constitution’s Article XII, Section 3(2), which says no individual who has been convicted of a felony is eligible to serve in “any office of trust” in the state, unless that person is pardoned according to WISN.

Federal prosecutors tried Dugan in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Wisconsin in Milwaukee after she interfered with ICE agents’ efforts to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz for illegally being in the United States on April 18.

Court records show Dugan engaged the ICE agents in the court’s hallway after she helped Flores-Ruiz and his attorney use an entrance for jurors to exit the courthouse.

ICE agents arrested Flores-Ruiz after chasing him on foot.

Puka Nacua thinks NFL referees are “the worst.”

He feels they fabricate calls just so their friends can see them on TV.

But, to be honest, the Rams star receiver doesn’t seem too upset about the situation.

During a livestream Tuesday with YouTubers N3on and Adin Ross, Nacua was asked if he thought referees might bend the truth at times when making their calls.

“Oh, a hundred percent,” Nacua answered matter-of-factly. “Yes, the refs are the worst.”

The third-year player continued in the same casual manner, saying that NFL officials are generally part-time employees who probably get a thrill when they appear on screen during national broadcasts — even if it’s while making a call.

“These guys are lawyers, and like really they want to be on TV, too, bro,” Nacua said. “You don’t think he’s texting his friends in the group chat like, ‘Yo, you guys just saw me on “Sunday Night Football.” Like, that wasn’t [pass interference], but I called it.’”

He added: “I mean, these guys are normal human beings, too.”

The NFL’s competition committee states on the league’s football operations website that “criticism of officiating has always been considered conduct detrimental to the League.” Such conduct is often met with a fine. Cleveland Browns defensive end Myles Garrett, Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes and Chiefs coach Andy Reid have all been fined for public criticism of officiating in recent years.

The NFL did not immediately respond to questions from The Times on a possible fine for Nacua.

During another portion of the livestream, Nacua agrees to do a celebration dance of Ross and N3on’s choice after his next touchdown. With Nacua out of earshot, the two YouTubers discuss whether the 2023 Pro Bowl player would get in trouble if they have him perform a move that references an offensive stereotype about Jewish people. Ross is Jewish, but he often performs the move and teaches others how to do it in his livestreams.

He ends up teaching the move to Nacua, who practices it with Ross and promises to do it during a game. Ross does not explain the meaning of the move to Nacua, and the star receiver gives no indication he knows its background.

The Times reached out to the Rams and Nacua’s agent and did not receive an immediate response.

WASHINGTON — Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith told lawmakers in a closed-door interview on Wednesday that his team of investigators “developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt” that President Donald Trump had criminally conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election, according to portions of his opening statement obtained by The Associated Press.

He also said investigators had accrued “powerful evidence” that Trump broke the law by hoarding classified documents from his first term as president at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and by obstructing government efforts to recover the records.

“I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 election,” Smith said. “We took actions based on what the facts and the law required — the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.”

He said that if asked whether he would “prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether the president was a Republican or Democrat.”

The private deposition before the House Judiciary Committee gives Smith his first chance to face questions, albeit behind closed doors, about a pair of investigations into Trump that resulted in since-abandoned criminal charges between the Republican president’s first and second terms in office. Smith was subpoenaed earlier this month to provide both testimony and documents as part of a Republican investigation into the Trump probes during the Biden administration.

The former special counsel cooperated with the congressional demand despite having volunteered more than a month earlier to answer questions publicly before the committee, an overture his lawyers say was rebuffed by Republicans.

“Testifying before this committee, Jack is showing tremendous courage in light of the remarkable and unprecedented retribution campaign against him by this administration and this White House,” one of Smith’s lawyers, Lanny Breuer, told reporters Wednesday. “Let’s be clear: Jack Smith is a career prosecutor, who conducted this investigation based on the facts and based on the law and nothing more.”

Trump told reporters at the White House that he supported the idea of an open hearing, saying: “I’d rather see him testify publicly. There’s no way he can answer the questions.”

Smith is expected to discuss both of his investigations of Trump but will not answer questions that call for grand jury materials, which are restricted by law, according to a person familiar with the investigation who insisted on anonymity to discuss the interview. He is also expected to correct what he regards as mischaracterizations from Republicans about his work, including about his team’s use of cellphone records belonging to certain GOP lawmakers, the person said.

Smith was appointed in 2022 to oversee the Justice Department investigations into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss to Democrat Joe Biden and his hoarding of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Smith’s team filed charges in both investigations.

Smith abandoned the cases after Trump was elected to the White House again last year, citing Justice Department legal opinions that say a sitting president cannot be indicted.

Republicans who control Congress have sought interviews with at least some individual members of Smith’s team.

In recent weeks they have seized on revelations that the team, as part of its investigation, had analyzed the phone records of select GOP lawmakers from on and around Jan. 6, 2021, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol to try to halt the certification of Trump’s election loss to Biden. The phone records reviewed by prosecutors included details only about the incoming and outgoing phone numbers and the length of the call but not the contents of the conversation.

Tucker and Mascaro write for the Associated Press.

The Prime Minister has said Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich must “pay up now” to victims of the war in Ukraine or face court action.

Mr Abramovich, the former owner of Chelsea Football Club, pledged in 2022 that the £2.5bn he made from the sale of the club would be used to benefit victims of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

But there has been a delay in releasing the funds, which are currently frozen in a British bank account, due to a standoff over how exactly they should be used.

The government wants the money to be used for humanitarian aid, but Mr Abramovich insisted it should be used for “all victims of the war” – meaning that Russians could also benefit.

The oligarch cannot access the money under UK sanctions but the proceeds from the Chelsea sale still legally belong to him.

“If Mr Abramovich fails to act quickly, this government is fully committed and prepared to going to court to enforce that commitment if necessary,” a government spokesperson said.

They said the funds “would strengthen frontline capacity, enhance protection for the most vulnerable and support sustainable solutions that help Ukraine move from crisis response to long-term resilience”.

“It would be hard to overstate the impact that an additional two and a half billion pounds could have for the people of Ukraine.”

Mr Abramovich’s representatives declined to comment.

Speaking in the Commons, Sir Keir Starmer said the UK had issued a licence “to transfer £2.5bn from the sale of Chelsea Football Club that’s been frozen since 2022.”

Sir Keir said: “My message to Abramovich is clear: the clock is ticking.

“Honour the commitment that you made and pay up now, and if you don’t we’re prepared to go to court and ensure that every penny reaches those whose lives have been torn apart by Putin’s illegal war.”

The Treasury said that under the terms of the licence, the money must go to “humanitarian causes” in Ukraine and cannot benefit Mr Abramovich or any other sanctioned individual.

The government first threatened to sue Mr Abramovich in June.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves said: “It is unacceptable that more than £2.5bn of money owed to the Ukrainian people can be allowed to remain frozen in a UK bank account.”

Mr Abramovich – a Russian billionaire who made his fortune in oil and gas – was granted a special licence to sell Chelsea following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, providing he could prove he would not benefit from the sale.

He is alleged to have strong ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, something he has denied.

It is understood that Mr Abramovich has 90 days to act before the UK considers taking legal action.

On Thursday, EU leaders are set to review proposals to use proceeds from frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine’s huge budget and defence needs. Russia has fiercely opposed the proposals.