testing

The U.S. Army says it has successfully completed a live-fire test of a hypersonic warhead using a cannon-based launch system at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, a demonstration that could provide a cheaper and faster way to evaluate the terminal performance of future hypersonic weapons. The gun in question is the Heavy Artillery Test System (HATS), or a modification of it, from the canceled Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC), a huge artillery piece intended to be able to hit targets out to a range of 1,000 miles or more. This suggests that the program could still provide value, this time in the test world.

According to the latest issue of The Outpost, the in-house news organ of the Army’s Yuma Proving Ground, the test marks the first successful live-fire demonstration of a full-scale hypersonic warhead launched from what it describes as a “cannon base test system.” Rather than relying on an expensive flight test of an operational hypersonic missile, the approach uses a gun to accelerate the warhead to high speed before impact, allowing engineers to study its lethality under controlled conditions. Hypersonic velocity means speeds of Mach 5 and above.

The concept has been under development for roughly two years as a way to create what the Army calls “a high throughput, alternative method for assessing terminal effects at velocity and scale.” While the release does not disclose the velocity achieved during the test, or exactly when it occurred, the underlying idea is straightforward. Hypersonic weapons derive some of their destructive effect from the enormous kinetic energy they carry into a target, as well as, at least in some cases, a relatively small warhead. A large-caliber gun offers a comparatively inexpensive way to reproduce at least part of a hypersonic weapon’s terminal conditions without expending an entire missile or firing from an airborne launch platform, costing millions of dollars.

The effort brought together researchers from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center (DEVCOM-AC), which developed a specialized launch package capable of surviving the extreme acceleration generated inside the gun barrel. Engineers also incorporated a DEVCOM-AC electronic safe-and-arm fuze while analyzing the internal ballistic forces the warhead would experience during launch. The extreme acceleration of being fired out a cannon is one major difference a warhead or test article would have to endure compared to being mounted on an actual missile and that must be accounted for.

Before the live-fire event, the team conducted an inert proof-of-concept firing that validated the overall approach. Army officials said those results led to a series of design refinements before progressing to a live warhead.

The service offered a detailed description of the final firing sequence.

After instrumentation checks and target preparation were completed, crews positioned the launch package, armed the fuze, and loaded the warhead and propelling charge. Personnel then withdrew to protective bunkers while test officials monitored telemetry.

As the article describes it, the test director issued the command to fire, followed by “a massive boom” that echoed across Yuma Proving Ground. Once the dust settled, engineers reviewed high-speed camera footage before confirming the shot had achieved all of its objectives. According to the Army, the silence was “quickly broken by loud cheers confirming a complete success.”

Beyond the immediate test, the Army reckons the capability could significantly increase the pace of hypersonic weapons development. Instead of relying exclusively on limited and expensive missile flight tests, engineers could use cannon-launched surrogates to generate impact data earlier and more frequently during development. The release says the demonstration has already attracted interest from multiple hypersonic programs that are considering incorporating the methodology into future test campaigns.

Although not mentioned in the article, the “cannon base test system” seen in the accompanying photo is the Heavy Artillery Test System (HATS) that was developed under the Strategic Long Range Cannon (SLRC) program before that was axed, when Congress directed the Army to stop funding the weapon in its fiscal 2022 appropriations act.

At the time, the service said it wanted to move funds into a more general account that it could use to help mature various advanced technologies.

The Army also said that it planned to complete various research and development and testing of SLRC components in the 2021 fiscal year. This included work on the very large rocket-assisted projectile that was supposed to give the cannon its 1,000-mile-plus range, as well as “system integration and technology maturation for SLRC to include designs for long lead prototypes to be used in upcoming major system level demonstrations.”

Returning to hypersonic testing, other alternatives to end-to-end missile flights include rocket sleds, which have long been used to replicate high speeds to test different technologies.

Back in 2022, as you can read about here, the U.S. Air Force successfully recovered a reusable rocket sled after traveling at a recorded speed of 6,400 feet per second, or just about Mach 5.8, beyond the hypersonic threshold, at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico.

This was the first time the Air Force successfully recovered a reusable rocket sled after traveling at such a speed. Being able to recover reusable sleds after traveling at hypersonic speeds allows for the collection of critical post-testing data, which is particularly important for hypersonic weapons testing.

Roughly 10 miles long, the Holloman High-Speed Test Track (HHSTT) is the only track capable of recovering sleds that hit hypersonic velocity via high-speed braking.

The Air Force also began the Hypersonic Readiness program (HSR) in 2020, which focused principally on fielding a hypersonic nine-inch monorail sled test with high-speed braking capability.

In general, hypersonic testing, a major priority across the U.S. military, is intended to push weapons and their components to the limits of what they can withstand. Test articles are subjected to the extreme heat, pressure, and mechanical loads associated with sustained flight at speeds above Mach 5 to determine whether materials, structures, and subsystems can survive the operational environment.

If the new gun-based approach proves broadly applicable, it could offer one answer to a persistent challenge in hypersonic development: generating meaningful terminal-effects data without consuming scarce and costly prototype missiles.

Exactly how closely the cannon-launched tests replicate the conditions experienced during an actual hypersonic weapon’s flight, and what velocity envelope the Army has achieved, remain unclear. Those details may ultimately determine how valuable the new test capability becomes across the Pentagon’s growing portfolio of hypersonic weapons. At the same time, any help in accelerating hypersonic weapons development would likely be of high value as China, in particular, has gained a clear lead in this critical new capability set.

Special thanks to X user @lfx160219 for alerting us to this story.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

July 31 (UPI) — Anthropic said some of its artificial intelligence models mistakenly accessed the Internet and hacked into the databases of three other companies during cybersecurity testing.

Anthropic said Thursday it reviewed 141,006 recent operations by its Claude models after rival OpenAI recently revealed a similar incident with its own systems.

OpenAI said one of its agents had been in a sandbox test on July 22, without Internet access, when the AI model exploited a vulnerability in the system, gained access to the web and hacked into Hugging Face, a platform for open-source machine learning.

Following OpenAI’s admission, Anthropic conducted an internal review focusing on the possibility that its systems could also have unexpectedly accessed the Internet.

Anthropic said it identified three such incidents.

“Each incident involved a different fictional capture-the-flag scenario — for example, in one, Claude played an employee of a made-up company, attacking that company’s internal systems inside a private test environment,” the company said in a statement. “In all cases, our evaluation prompt stated explicitly that Claude had no internet access, but didn’t give Claude any limits on where to look for the flag.

“However, a misconfiguration left the machines that Claude accessed as part of the evaluation with live internet access,” the statement continued. “Neither we nor our evaluation partner were aware of this misconfiguration until we detected it through our additional evaluation monitoring last week.”

Anthropic said it considered the incident to have been an “operational failure,” but it maintained “cautious optimism” that “this type of risk can be overcome.”

“Our models were told they had no internet access and to capture the flag, while in fact being misconfigured to have internet access,” the company statement said. “This led them to believe — arguably reasonably — that the real environments they encountered were simulations.

“Notably, our most recent model, on realizing that it was working in a real environment, stopped its pursuit of the evaluation goal.”

University of Cambridge professor Gina Neff told the BBC the incident “shows why independent testing and government oversight is crucial.”

“The moral of this story is not to fear robots that will take over, but the companies behind powerful AI agents who are making the decisions about what is safe for the rest of us,” she told the outlet.

The Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) is to require all players to undergo genetic sex testing in order to compete on the WTA Tour.

In the latest edition of its women’s eligibility policy, which will come into effect on Tuesday, players will be required to provide a cheek swab, blood or saliva sample to test for the presence of the SRY gene which is part of the Y chromosome and causes male characteristics to develop.

Players will be tested just once in their lifetime and only a negative result, showing no presence of the gene, will permit them to compete on the Tour.

If they test positive, players will face further medical assessment before being allowed to play.

The new policy also requires players to sign a document that states they could face disciplinary action if they refuse testing.

The WTA’s previous policy, last updated in 2024, allowed transgender women to compete on the Tour if they had lowered their testosterone levels to below 2.5 nmol/L continuously for the previous two years.

There are no known transgender women currently playing on the WTA Tour.

“The WTA’s women’s eligibility policy is designed to promote equal athletic opportunities in women’s professional tennis and maintain fair competition for all players participating in WTA tournaments,” the governing body said.

“Since first being introduced in 1975, the eligibility policy has undergone periodic review in light of developments across international sport.

“Following the most recent review, which included consultation with WTA members and evolving standards across women’s sport, the WTA board approved an updated WTA women’s eligibility policy beginning in 2026 based on biological sex.”

It added: “The WTA recognises that this is a sensitive and complex issue and is committed to treating all players with dignity and implementing the policy in a respectful and thoughtful way.”

The policy change comes a year after World Athletics announced new regulations – brought into effect in September 2025 – requiring athletes wanting to compete in the female category for world ranking competitions to take a one-time gene test.

World Boxing also approved the use of the SRY test in May 2025 when it introduced mandatory sex testing for all athletes wanting to compete in the women’s category.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) says low availability of unnamed “legacy” aircraft has created hurdles for flight testing of the new AGM-181A Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) nuclear-armed cruise missile. The B-52 is the only platform known to be involved in this effort. The fleet of these bombers is highly in demand, underscored by heavy use in strikes on Iran earlier this year, and has also recently suffered a tragic loss. U.S. Air Force officials have previously highlighted how the relatively small number of B-52s in service and the heavy demands placed on them create challenges when it comes to modernizing the aircraft themselves.

GAO, a Congressional watchdog, provided new details about flight testing plans and other aspects of the LRSO program in an annual report published last week. The AGM-181A has been in active development since 2020, when the Air Force chose Raytheon to be the prime contractor.

“LRSO reported unfavorable cost and schedule changes over the past year,” GAO reported. “For example, flight testing challenges, largely due to the poor readiness rates of legacy aircraft supporting LRSO testing, resulted in a 4-month delay to its initial capability.”

The Air Force is now aiming to reach initial operational capability with the AGM-181 in November 2030.

GAO says that there have been nine LRSO test flights since October 2024. That is when developmental testing of the missile began. Six of those flight tests, along with seven ground test events, occurred last year. In a report dated December 2022, the Pentagon had previously disclosed nine more test flights as part of earlier phases of the program. Whether additional test flights occurred between December 2022 and October 2024 is unclear.

“Since our last assessment, program officials realigned the test schedule, leaving less time to complete the 27 remaining test flights before operational testing starts in September 2027,” the report GAO put out last week also notes. “However, they noted that some re-testing can still be accommodated.”

As noted, the B-52 is the only aircraft known to be involved in LRSO flight testing, and certainly meets the definition of a “legacy” platform. The last of these bombers rolled off Boeing’s production line in 1962, though the remaining examples have been upgraded repeatedly since then. The sighting last year of a B-52 carrying a pair of AGM-181s, or relevant test articles, on a pylon under its right wing offered the first public glimpse of the missile. Spotters have caught these bombers supporting LRSO tests on several other occasions since then.

The Air Force currently has 75 B-52H bombers in service, in total. The entire fleet is never available at any one time for taskings of any kind, due to routine maintenance and other factors. The mission-capable rate for the bombers has been hovering between 50 and 55 percent in recent years.

In addition, only one of the bombers is explicitly set aside to support test and evaluation efforts. B-52s from operational units are also used to support research and development and test and evaluation work on a more ad hoc basis. This is on top of the heavy operational demands put on the fleet, both for conventional combat operations and as a key component of the air leg of America’s nuclear deterrent triad. As mentioned, B-52s were heavily utilized just earlier this year for conventional strikes on Iran, adding to these strains.

Last month, the Air Force also lost one of its B-52s in a fatal crash at Edwards Air Force Base in California, which tragically killed all eight individuals onboard at the time. The aircraft in question was headed out on a flight test in support of a critical radar modernization program for the bombers when it went down, as you can read more about here.

The radar modernization effort is part of a slew of major upgrades for the B-52 fleet, which also includes all-new engines, improved communication suites, and more. The upgrades are so substantial that the bombers’ designations will change from B-52H to B-52J in the process. They are also in line to see their arsenals grow, including with the addition of the LRSO. The future B-52Js are set to continue serving through at least 2050.

B-52 Future Stratofortress: The Upgrades That Will Transform The B-52H Into The B-52J

Other aspects of the B-52 modernization plan have also been beset by cost growth and delays. Air Force officials have said this has been compounded by the total size of the fleet and operational demands placed on it.

“The challenge with B-52 that I think everybody forgets, it’s such a small fleet that has such a tremendous requirement in terms of readiness,” Air Force Gen. Dale White, the service’s Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapon Systems, told TWZ and others at the Air & Space Forces Association’s (AFA) annual Warfare Symposium in February. “You’ve got to have a certain number on the ramp. That’s a requirement.”

The question becomes “how do you get these through the depot while at the same time meeting the operational requirements?” Gen. White further explained at that time. “That choreography, I think, is going to be tough.”

It’s worth pointing out here that both the war with Iran and the crash at Edwards came after the cutoff date for GAO’s report, and further impacts on the LRSO flight test schedule would not have been recorded therein. There has also been a broader surge in demand across the U.S. military for flight test assets. This is being driven by the needs of modernization efforts for several aircraft beyond the B-52, including the F-22 Raptor, as well as next-generation developments, like the F-47 sixth-generation fighter.

Going back to LRSO, GAO’s latest assessment also highlights other challenges that the program has been facing that are unrelated to flight testing.

“Program officials stated that 12 of 14 software releases are delivered, with the final delivery planned for March 2026. According to program officials, nuclear certification of LRSO software continues to be a risk that they expect to fully address by November 2026. As we reported last year, the program risks delays if additional LRSO software development is needed to satisfy this certification requirement,” per the report. “LRSO cybersecurity testing continues with some delays reported during the past year. Program officials stated these delays did not bring about any cost or schedule changes, with the final cybersecurity assessment still planned for September 2027.”

“The missile’s technology maturity has advanced since our last assessment, with only two out of the six critical technologies still approaching maturity. They are both expected to be fully mature in fiscal year 2026, about 5 years after development start. DOE [Department of Energy] also identified critical technologies for the warhead, of which 80 percent are considered mature, more than double the percentage reported last year,” the report adds. “However, DOE may not mature all the remaining warhead technologies until the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2026. As we previously reported, both the missile and warhead started development with immature technologies, requiring parallel technology and design maturity efforts. This method falls short of the best practice to start with mature technologies and would have minimized the risks of future cost increases and schedule delays associated with concurrency during system development.”

There is also cost growth, as well as cost discrepancies.

“Program costs increased by $347 million after Air Force leadership directed a 1-year extension to LRSO production due to near-term budget constraints,” according to GAO.

“As we previously reported, Office of the Secretary of Defense and Air Force officials continue to work together to resolve a $1.9 billion difference between their production cost estimates for future LRSO production,” the report also says. “While a fully updated estimate is not expected until later in 2026, program officials now agree that OSD’s higher cost estimate provides an appropriate basis for the program’s fiscal year 2027 budget request and future year procurement funding needs.”

Buoyed in part by the successful flight testing it has conducted to date, GAO says the Air Force remains confident that it can meet its goal of starting low-rate initial production of the LRSO next year. Hitting that milestone will be key to staying on schedule to start fielding the missiles in 2030.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

For the next five years, the Environmental Protection Agency has indicated it will not require public water utilities to test for microplastics or pharmaceuticals in drinking water, according to a proposed rule published in the Federal Register.

On Friday, the EPA submitted a list of chemicals it plans to test for under the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule, a mandatory testing program used to collect information about concerning chemicals in drinking water that could be harming human health. It did not include microplastics or pharmaceuticals.

The omissions come after announcements by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin earlier this year that his agency was designating microplastics and pharmaceuticals priority contaminants for testing.

“This is a direct response to the concern of millions of Americans who have long demanded answers about what they and their families are drinking every day,” he said at an April news conference with Health and Human Secretary Robert F. Kennedy at EPA headquarters.

Zeldin’s announcement was seen at the time as a move to placate the increasingly disgruntled Make America Healthy Again contingent of Trump supporters.

Now the agency says it has no validated or standardized method to test for the plastic particles in drinking water, and wouldn’t be able to develop one before December, when testing is required to begin.

Among the 33 chemicals the EPA will require water utilities to test for are seven PFAS, or forever chemicals, and three pesticide residues.

It will be five years before the EPA proposes another list.

The EPA did not respond to a request for comment.

The agency noted in its proposed rule that it will collaborate with other federal agencies to “evaluate risks and exposures” of microplastics for future monitoring.

Environmentalists reacted with frustration and resignation. They pointed out that the European Union has developed methods to test for the tiny plastic particles, which have been found in people’s blood, brains and lung tissue. California has one in the works.

“The California water board has spent a lot of time and money on how to measure in drinking water,” said Judith Enck, a former EPA regional administrator and president of the anti-plastic environmental group Beyond Plastics “EPA should give them a call.”

California was required by a 2018 state law to establish a protocol for local water utilities to test for the particles in drinking water. The state has not yet begun reporting its results, but protocols were established in 2021. Blair Robertson, a spokesman for the State Water Resources Control Board, said it’s not “a fully validated, end-to-end regulatory method” yet.

At the April meeting, Zeldin announced that he would place microplastics on what is known as the Contaminant Candidate List, which acts as a preliminary “watch list” of unregulated, priority contaminants in drinking water. Like the mandatory monitoring list, it is updated only every five years. The most recent list was published on April 2 — the day he made his announcement.

“Americans have been ignored as they sound the alarm about plastics in their drinking water,” Zeldin said at the April announcement. “That ends today by placing microplastics on the contaminant candidate list for the first time ever. EPA will follow the science, will pursue answers and will hold ourselves to the highest standards to protect the health of Americans.”

There appears to be no clear association between these two lists, although the contaminant list is supposed to inform the monitoring list. Seventy-five chemicals and four chemical groups (microplastics, pharmaceuticals, PFAS chemicals, and disinfection byproducts) were listed on the 2026 contaminant list. Only seven of those chemicals were also on the proposed monitoring list (as well as seven PFAS chemicals).

When Zeldin announced microplastics as “‘a priority contaminant for regulation,’ and called it ‘a historic action on microplastics,’ he made it seem like the administration was going to take microplastics seriously,” said Mary Grant, water policy director for the environmental group Food & Water Watch.

“By not including them, they made it clear they don’t actually have plans to immediately address this crisis by getting the real-world monitoring data that we need right now to really start correcting ourselves,” she said.

Craig Davis, senior director of plastics chemistry at the American Chemistry Council — the nation’s largest trade group for chemical companies — said that while his organization supports microplastic research, it also agrees with the EPA’s decision not to include them in the monitoring list.

“National drinking water monitoring should be based on validated, standardized methods that can produce reliable and comparable data,” said Davis in a statement. He said “limited” national monitoring resources should be focused where data can produce “actionable public health information.”

The public has 60 days to comment once the plan is published in the Federal Register.

The 250th anniversary of America’s liberation from a king kicked off with a campaign-style rally on the National Mall by President Trump, whose face already stares down from banners fluttering from federal buildings across the nation’s capital.

The images illustrate how the president has dominated daily life since returning to power, evoking more the style of a monarch than the leader of the world’s oldest democracy. But more than anything, it is how he has wielded that power that has led to comparisons of an imperial reign.

Since returning to office in January 2025, Trump has nominated one of his personal lawyers to serve as attorney general, ordered the Department of Justice to pursue his political enemies, deployed the U.S. Marines to the nation’s second largest city and leveraged the presidency to enrich himself and his family.

He has demanded that comedians who mock him be fired, has slapped his name on the Kennedy Center, has pushed to seize control of elections, has filed lawsuits against news organizations whose coverage he disliked and has sued his own government seeking $10 billion in taxpayer money.

Trump also is the only convicted felon to hold the presidency, and a separate felony indictment over his attempts to keep himself in power after losing the 2020 election was dismissed only after he was reelected four years later despite those facts.

With the 250th anniversary of the nation’s founding approaching, Trump’s own celebrations have overshadowed the bipartisan, congressionally authorized commission that was supposed to coordinate events commemorating the moment. He plans to return to the National Mall on July Fourth for what he calls a “Trump rally.”

The president’s actions have led to comparisons with King George III, the British monarch whose rule inspired the American Revolution. It is a parallel Trump rejects.

“I’m not a king,” he told CBS’ “60 Minutes” earlier this year. “If I was a king, I wouldn’t be dealing with you.”

A different view of the presidency

There is a long American political traditional of opponents reviling presidents as kings. But Julian Zelizer, a Princeton University historian, said the label fits differently on Trump.

“It’s more about how he imagines who is he and what the presidency is,” Zelizer said. “We’re celebrating founding principles, and that was a driving issue — fears of how a centralized power can be corrupted. And here we are again.”

When King Charles III visited Trump this year, the official White House X account posted an image of the two men with the caption “Two Kings.” At the start of his second term, Trump declared he had ended a New York City transportation program and posted: “LONG LIVE THE KING.” The posts also seemed to indicate a willingness to leverage the label and the reaction it provokes in his critics.

The main resistance movement in Trump’s second term has adopted the slogan “No Kings.” Ezra Levin of the group Indivisible said activists were thinking ahead to 2026 and the America 250 celebration when they chose the label.

“It looks like the same kind of tyranny we were rebelling against 250 years ago, the type of domination of Americans by a secret police force that’s murdering people in the streets like in Minneapolis this year and in Boston in 1770,” Levin said, referring to demonstrations against the administration’s immigration crackdown that led to the fatal shootings of two protesters this year by federal officers.

When asked for comment, the White House referred to Trump’s statements about his use of executive power. The president has weighed in multiple times defending his maximalist approach.

During his first term, he referred to Article II of the Constitution when he told participants in a youth summit, “I have the right to do whatever I want as president,” while declaring that it “gives me all of these rights at a level nobody has ever seen before.” He told the New York Times in an interview this year that the only check on his global power was “my own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”

Yet he also has said that portrayals of his approach as authoritarian were wrong: “I’m not a dictator,” he told reporters last year. In response to a question about whether he was concentrating power in the presidency, Trump told Time in an interview last year, “I don’t think so. I think I’m using it properly, and I’m also using it as per my election.”

Supreme Court has sided with him

With a deferential, Republican-controlled Congress, courts have become the last check on Trump. The president has harshly criticized judges who have ruled against him, and his administration has sometimes defied their orders.

Yet his quest to expand presidential power has been aided by the conservative majority — including three of his appointees — on the U.S. Supreme Court, which has sided with Trump numerous times after lower court rulings hampered him.

In the middle of his 2024 campaign, the high court ruled that presidents have broad immunity from prosecution. The decision derailed multiple investigations stemming from Trump’s first term, including the one focused on his attempts to overturn his loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

Trump has argued the courts cannot constrain the president on key issues, including his claims that he has the ability to fire members of independent agencies. The most notorious example was in 2024, when a judge asked during the immunity case whether a president could be prosecuted for ordering the assassination of a political rival. Trump’s lawyer, D. John Sauer, answered with a “qualified yes.”

Sauer is now solicitor general, the administration official who oversees arguments before the high court. He has continued to insist that courts cannot review presidential acts.

“Once the president has made a determination … at that point, there’s no work for the reviewing court to do,” Sauer said during Supreme Court arguments in a case over whether Trump could fire Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor.

But the Supreme Court has allowed Cook to remain on the board while it considers the case. The majority also slapped down his global tariffs, finding that only Congress had the authority to impose them.

Such rulings demonstrate that presidential power does have its limits, according to John Yoo, a conservative law professor at UC Berkeley who served in the George W. Bush administration.

“The presidency today, even when colored by President Trump’s worst excesses, is not a monarchy,” he said.

Direct financial enrichment

Trump was the richest man to ever become president. During his first term, he was criticized for owning properties where foreign dignitaries and others hoping to curry his favor spent lavishly. The conflicts of interest have escalated in his second term.

Trump launched cryptocurrencies before and after returning to office. By conservative estimates, one has pulled in $320 million this year alone, while another sold $550 million worth of tokens. A third received a $2-billion investment from a foreign wealth fund.

Trump took a new step earlier this year, filing a private $10-billion lawsuit against the IRS for the leak of his tax returns during his first term. His Department of Justice directed the IRS to settle the litigation to create a $1.776-billion fund to pay damages to people who claimed the federal government unfairly prosecuted them.

The administration pulled back the settlement amid an outcry from congressional Democrats and some Republicans. But Todd Blanche, a former personal lawyer for Trump who is now acting attorney general, said at least one provision remains — a ban on the IRS auditing Trump.

Zelizer said Trump’s financial entanglements might be the most monarchical part of his administration.

“We have not seen a person who has a business operation of this scale and scope benefiting directly from the decisions he makes,” Zelizer said.

Targeting political rivals

The Justice Department’s role in the IRS lawsuit is one example of how Trump has decreed that executive branch employees should act as agents of his will.

In breaching what is supposed to be a firewall between the White House and Justice Department, Trump has demanded that federal prosecutors target his foes. In one social media post last year, he called out by name Pam Bondi, who was attorney general at the time, in pushing her to prosecute several of his political opponents: “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” Trump wrote.

Indictments followed shortly after, including against former FBI Director James B. Comey and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James. The charges against both eventually were dismissed, but the department under Blanche filed new charges against Comey.

The pursuit is not limited to Trump enemies of the past.

For his 80th birthday this month, the president hosted a fight held by UFC — a company he invested in — on the White House lawn. The event was broadcast on a network owned by the son of one of the president’s major donors. The spectacle drew a rebuke from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a persistent critic and potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender.

“The White House was built to serve the American people. Tonight it was used to promote a company the President owns stock in, sell subscriptions, promote corporate sponsors, push Trump crypto, and enrich the President and his family,” Newsom wrote on X. “The founders warned us about kings enriching themselves from public office.”

Days later, Newsom disclosed that Trump’s Department of Justice was investigating him and his wife.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Lindsay Whitehurst and Fatima Hussein contributed to this report.

Hezbollah calls the deal a surrender as Israeli forces stay put and continue striking the south.

Israel has resumed air strikes on southern Lebanon, only days after signing a US-brokered agreement meant to end its war with the country.

The strikes came on Sunday, two days after the framework was signed in Washington following five rounds of talks.

Each side is presenting the same document as a victory on its own terms, and the deal has been rejected by Hezbollah and by far-right Israelis, raising immediate doubts over whether it can hold.

Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency (NNA) reported a series of attacks in the south on Sunday, a day after the Lebanese Ministry of Health said one person was killed in an Israeli attack there, the first death since the deal was signed.

Israeli aircraft were also active, with NNA reporting drones flying over the northeastern city of Baalbek and warplanes staging what residents described as a mock raid over nearby highlands.

Israel said its forces were targeting members of Hezbollah, the Lebanese armed group, near the buffer zone its troops occupy inside the country.

The Israeli military also announced that one of its soldiers had been killed in combat in the south. It named him as Captain David Hazutt, 21, a platoon commander in the Golani Brigade, an elite infantry unit, and said a second soldier was lightly wounded.

Israel’s military chief approved continued operations in the zone, saying they were in line with the ceasefire.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday called the agreement “historic” and “a massive blow to Iran and Hezbollah”.

An agreement was struck between Lebanon and Israel on Friday in Washington, which was described cautiously by United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio as “the beginning of the beginning”.

At the time, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said that the agreement “aims to achieve Israel’s withdrawal from all Lebanese territories”.

The text appears not to require Israel to unconditionally withdraw from Lebanon, instead linking any pullback to the disarmament of Hezbollah.

Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Saturday that Israeli forces were preparing for an extended stay in the buffer zone, and would remain as long as the group held on to its weapons.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected the deal in a statement on Saturday, calling it “humiliating” and “a surrender of sovereignty” and saying his fighters would not leave the battlefield.

Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah member of parliament, said on Sunday that any move by the Lebanese army to enforce the agreement would push the country towards internal conflict, as supporters of the group protested across the capital against the deal.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister, said the deal handed Hezbollah a “lifeline” and dismissed the idea that Lebanon’s army could disarm the group. He said he had opposed the agreement in cabinet for weeks and would continue to do so.

The war began on March 2, when Hezbollah fired rockets at Israel in response to the killing of Iran’s supreme leader in US-Israeli strikes.

Israel answered with heavy air raids and a ground invasion. More than 4,200 people have been killed in Lebanon since then, according to the country’s Health Ministry.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Sunday that Washington should force Israel to stop its strikes and pull out of the areas it occupies in Lebanon, citing a separate understanding he said was binding on both Israel and the United States.

A newly emerged video offers what appears to be a first look at China’s R6000 uncrewed tiltrotor aircraft in free flight, marking a significant step beyond the tethered hover tests that had been seen previously. The design has attracted interest on account of its similarities to Bell’s MV-75A Cheyenne II, America’s crewed second-generation tiltrotor. More broadly, the development of this aircraft could have very significant implications for the People’s Liberation Army as well as civilian operators.

The footage, which first appeared on Chinese social media, shows the large drone in vertical flight, making a pedal turn (rotating around its vertical axis in the hover), and in sustained forward flight with its twin proprotors fully tilted. Previous imagery was limited to tethered evaluations that demonstrated basic hover capability. Now, with flight testing advancing, more could be revealed about the aircraft’s performance envelope.

As in the previous imagery, the aircraft’s engines are unshrouded, with their streamlined fairings removed. Like the MV-75, the R6000 features fixed engine nacelles with hinged proprotors, in contrast to the first-generation tiltrotor design found on the V-22 Osprey, in which the entire nacelle pivots up and down as a complete unit.

Previous imagery showing the R6000 conducting a tethered hover test had begun to circulate last November, as we discussed at the time.

While no details have been released about the scope of the current trials, the ability to conduct sustained untethered flight is a key milestone for any tiltrotor program, given the complexity of the aircraft’s aerodynamics and flight-control systems. Tiltrotor designs are especially challenging, as evidenced by the V-22’s checkered record through the years. 

In October 2024, a photo emerged showing the first completed prototype of the R6000 at the Wuhu United Aircraft Production Workshop in China’s eastern Anhui province. United Aircraft had unveiled the design, also referred to as the UR6000 and Zhang Ying (or Steel Shadow), at the 2024 Singapore Airshow.

Developed by the Chinese firm United Aircraft, the R6000 is one of the largest uncrewed tiltrotor designs currently in development anywhere in the world. Combining the vertical takeoff and landing capabilities of a helicopter with the speed and range advantages of a fixed-wing aircraft, it is — officially, at least — aimed at logistics, disaster relief, offshore support, and other missions requiring access to areas without prepared runways. United Aircraft has presented both crewed and uncrewed versions of the R6000 in the past.

As we have outlined previously, a crewed or uncrewed tiltrotor in the R6000 class could fulfill various military applications for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

The aircraft would be particularly valuable for sustaining PLA island bases in the South China Sea, as well as isolated installations elsewhere in the Pacific and along China’s remote border regions, where conventional airfield infrastructure is limited.

This kind of aircraft could support overseas deployments and regional contingencies, including a potential operation against Taiwan, by moving troops, supplies, and equipment between dispersed locations without relying on prepared runways.

In particular, the R6000 would be well suited to operating from the Type 076 amphibious assault ship and other large People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) amphibious ships, greatly extending their reach for logistics, reconnaissance, and other missions.

As well as logistics, a fully developed R6000 has clear potential as a multi-mission platform. Its payload capacity could also accommodate intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) equipment, electronic warfare payloads, communications relay systems, or potentially even precision-strike weapons. It is worth noting at this point that a special operations version of the MV-75 is already in the works, with a gunship variant likely, and a sea control concept has been displayed, too. China is likely to at least explore similar development paths for its tiltrotors.

In this respect, the R6000 also makes for an interesting comparison with Bell’s V-247 Vigilant, which was originally pitched to meet the U.S. Marine Corps multirole, VTOL-capable drone program, known as MUX. The V-247 has also been pitched to the U.S. Navy, while Bell has presented renderings showing V-247s operating together with the crewed V-280 Valor tiltrotor design, which the U.S. Army’s MV-75 is based on.

When it comes to advanced uncrewed aviation, this is an area that China has invested heavily in over the past decade. Its projects span everything from smaller tactical drones to high-altitude reconnaissance platforms and increasingly sophisticated combat drones. The R6000 fits squarely within Chinese efforts to develop a range of uncrewed transport aircraft, including developing large autonomous logistics aircraft capable of operating in challenging environments.

In the vertical-lift segment, China is also busily exploring crewed tiltrotor designs.

Earlier this month, new footage emerged showing what is understood to be China’s first crewed tiltrotor aircraft during flight trials. That aircraft had first broken cover in August of last year, as we wrote about at the time.

Although the R6000 has, in the past, been pitched primarily for civilian applications, the technology has obvious military relevance. Large autonomous tiltrotors could provide rapid resupply to dispersed forces, support operations in remote regions, or deliver cargo to ships and austere bases without the need for conventional runways. Tiltrotors have huge potential for the PLA, which has major littoral mission demands and a growing fleet of amphibious warships to which these kinds of aircraft are especially well suited.

As such, the R6000 is worth watching as another indicator of the Chinese military’s increasingly ambitious vertical-lift programs, as well as its diverse and growing series of uncrewed aircraft.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Dodgers and Rams head team physician Neal ElAttrache was questioned by Major League Baseball investigators Friday following a detailed report by the New York Times that the renowned surgeon and sports medicine expert supported the therapeutic use of performance-enhancing drugs by UFC star Conor McGregor.

MLB spoke with ElAttrache, according to a person familiar with the matter but not authorized to comment publicly. The league considered the interview informational, not an investigation. The NFL, Rams and Dodgers declined comment.

“I have spoken with MLB and I am very comfortable with the process that the league and I will complete to assure the public that I have followed every rule and regulation in my medical treatment of athletes without exception,” ElAttrache said in a statement to the Los Angeles Times. “My record is completely clean, including in this case. I will leave it to MLB officials to provide any further comment as they see fit.“

ElAttrache performed surgery on McGregor in July 2021, inserting a rod, plates and screws into his left leg after the fighter broke his tibia and fibula during a bout against Dustin Poirier in Las Vegas.

McGregor’s recovery was lengthy and arduous. ElAttrache told the New York Times that while he did not prescribe steroids for McGregor, he referred him to a specialist who did. Furthermore, ElAttrache wrote a letter supporting McGregor’s request for a therapeutic use exemption from UFC drug policies.

“I felt it would be appropriate to consult other physicians with expertise in bone healing/bone metabolism,” ElAttrache told the paper via text. “I recommended the consultations but not the course of treatment.”

ElAttrache said he told McGregor to check with UFC drug testers about prescriptions the consultant gave him. “I purposely wasn’t involved with his evaluation by the consultant nor with prescribing medication,” ElAttrache said.

The exemption request was denied by USADA (the drug testing organization the UFC used then), triggering a split between the two organizations. McGregor withdrew from the UFC anti-doping program shortly thereafter and was no longer required to undergo testing for banned substances.

ElAttrache, operating primarily out of the Cedars-Sinai Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic in Los Angeles, has performed elbow or shoulder surgeries on prominent current and former Dodgers including Shohei Ohtani, Clayton Kershaw, Tony Gonsolin and Walker Buehler as well as former Rams stars Cooper Kupp and Cam Akers.

Among the hundreds of surgeries performed over three decades by ElAttrache, his patients included the four 2024 MLB Most Valuable Player and Cy Young Award winners — Ohtani, Aaron Judge, Chris Sale and Tarik Skubal. ElAttrache’s patients include 18 of 29 players who won the MVP or Cy Young awards over the last 10 years.

Other prominent athletes who became his patients include former Lakers legend Kobe Bryant and star NFL quarterbacks Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers and Joe Burrow.

ElAttrache was a boxer long before he became a renowned surgeon and team physician. He attended Notre Dame, where organized boxing was first introduced by Knute Rockne as a conditioning program in the 1930s. An intramural tournament known as the Bengal Bouts was formed and decades later ElAttrache became a champion, winning the 185-pound division in 1978.

Before world lightweight boxing champion Vasiliy Lomachenko returned from shoulder surgery to defend his title in 2019, ElAttrache counseled him against using his left hook because he wasn’t mentally ready to do so.

“When that arm goes into that position, the brain remembers that was the position where that dislocation occurred,” ElAttrache told the Los Angeles Times at the time. “It takes time to overcome that apprehension.”

It has taken McGregor five years since his injury to return to the octagon. He is scheduled to do so July 11 in a welterweight bout against Max Holloway at UFC 329 in Las Vegas as the main event of International Fight Week.

His recovery and startling physical transformation hardly a year after his injury became a frequent topic on social media. Fellow UFC fighter Anthony Smith said on Michael Bisping’s “Believe You Me” podcast in November 2022 that the reason McGregor pulled out of the UFC drug testing pool was obvious.

“There’s only one reason you would do that,” Smith said. “He’s looking jacked as s—. You keep seeing videos of him flexing in front of mirrors and screaming and he’s huge. He healed really fast. Like, really fast.”

On his show in December 2022, podcast host Joe Rogan noted McGregor’s impressive physique and the USADA testing loophole.

ElAttrache told the New York Times that he stopped treating McGregor after steering the fighter to someone who could obtain banned substances.

“I purposely wasn’t involved with his evaluation by the consultant nor with prescribing medication,” ElAttrache told the Times. He said “expert opinions” could help McGregor and “optimize his chance of solid union and healing of his fractures.”

Seeking the exemption, however, was viewed by USADA and some UFC officials as McGregor trying to find a way to use banned drugs. McGregor re-entered the drug-testing pool on Oct. 8, 2023, the same day UFC notified USADA that it would end the partnership.

Because McGregor had long been suspected of taking banned substances to revive his career, the mixed martial arts community reacted to the New York Times investigation with a measure of closure.

“OK, it’s confirmed now,” co-host Conner Burks on the popular MMA podcast “The Boys in the Back” said. “None of this came as a massive shock to me.”

“It seemed like the worst kept secret in combat sports,” co-host Eric Jackman said.

In a written response to a question posed by the New York Times, McGregor’s manager, Audie Attar, did not say whether McGregor had used banned substances. He said that “even with surgery there was a real risk Conor might not walk again, a high likelihood he would face numerous lifelong side effects that would limit his mobility and serious doubts he would ever return to the octagon.”

Attar said McGregor withdrew from the UFC drug-testing pool “to focus fully on his recovery” under the care of “his team of world-renowned physicians.”

“They oversaw a combination of a gruesome surgery, intense physical therapy and appropriately prescribed medicines,” Attar said. “It is an unfathomable breach of health and privacy protections that my client’s purported personal medical records would be disclosed.”

McGregor attempted to return to fighting in June 2024, but a scheduled bout against Michael Chandler was canceled because McGregor broke a toe during training.

Combat Sports Anti-Doping officials were unable to locate McGregor for testing on the day the fight was canceled, and he missed tests on two subsequent occasions. Under the UFC Whereabouts Policy, the three failures constituted an anti-doping violation equivalent to a failed drug test.

The UFC suspended McGregor in October 2025 for 18 months because of testing violations. The suspension expired in June, clearing him to compete.

Times staff writers Bill Shaikin, Sam Farmer and Gary Klein contributed to this report.

A HOLIDAY park with glamping pods and lodges could be built on an old torpedo site in Scotland.

The former testing area for missiles has been derelict for 40 years, but could soon be completely transformed and become a go-to staycation spot.

Follow The Sun’s award-winning travel team on Instagram and Tiktok for top holiday tips and inspiration @thesuntravel.

On the shores of Loch Long in Argyll & Bute is an old Ministry of Defence site that was used been 1912 and 1986.

It was predominantly used during World War Two, and as many as 12,000 torpedoes were fired down Loch Long.

Since its closure 40 years ago, the site in Arrochar has been abandoned and left derelict.

TRAVEL TIP

The £2.99 SIM hack that can save Brits HUNDREDS abroad

TOP PARKS

The MEGA UK holiday parks with water worlds, Wetherspoons and more – from £3 pp

A planning application to redevelop the area was first submitted in 2023.

Three years on, Loch Lomond & The Trossachs National Park Authority has approved a mixed-use tourism development by Ardnagal Estates.

Former proposals for the site included 14 holiday homes, 34 holiday lodges, and a 34-bedroom budget hotel.

Also included in the initial plans was a cafe, shop, a 40-bed bunkhouse, six motorhome pitches and 20 glamping pods as well as parking, composting toilets and shower block.

Another proposed feature was to revitalise the pier so that the public and community could access the loch.

Leisure on the site would include a play park that will add “family-friendly amenity for residents and visitors”.

Previous plans were to build a 130-bedroom hotel although it isn’t clear if this is part of the current plans.

Claire Chapman, the park authority’s planning and access committee chairwoman, said: “The approval of this long-standing derelict site’s redevelopment is a significant step forward in addressing what has been a blight on both the local community and the environment.

“The site has been identified in both the existing local development plan, which guides new development in the National Park, and in the community’s local place plan.”