Top Stories

April 15 (UPI) — U.S. advertising companies Dentsu, Publicis and WPP settled Wednesday with the Federal Trade Commission, which claimed they colluded over anti-misinformation policies that affected ad money for conservative publishers. The companies did not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement.

In a press release, the FTC said the agencies “distorted America’s modern public square” and worked together to establish “brand safety” policies that limited the ads that could run on sites with content designated as misinformation. This affected ad revenues for conservative political websites and made it more difficult for them to make money from “disfavored political viewpoints,” the FTC release said. The commission filed a complaint Wednesday in the U.S.District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

A court must approve the settlement. The companies agreed not to collude to restrict ad-buying services over “news and political and social commentary content,” the FTC said.

The New York Times reported that a representative for Dentsu said the company was “fully committed to operating transparently, with integrity and in strict compliance with all applicable laws.” A representative for WPP told that Times the agreement “reflects our existing and ongoing commitment to provide our clients with unbiased advice as they decide where to place their media.” The companies own multiple ad agencies and buy digital ads on behalf of advertisers.

FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson said in the release that the agencies’ brand safety policies “turned competition in the market for ad-buying services on its head.” The collusion, he said, “distorted the marketplace of ideas by discriminating against speech and ideas that fell below the unlawfully agreed-on floor.”

This follows a longstanding claim by the Trump administration that the media and websites treat conservatives unfairly. Ferguson and the FTC in 2025 also opened other inquiries into alleged anti-conservative censorship through online content moderation.

April 15 (UPI) — Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday filed articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, leveling serious criticisms of his handling of the Pentagon and the U.S. attacks on Iran.

As Republicans control the House, this move is unlikely to have an effect in 2026. Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., introduced the resolution, which says Hegseth has “demonstrated a willful disregard for the Constitution, abused the powers of his office and acted in a manner grossly incompatible with the rule of law,” CBS News reported.

The six articles of impeachment cite offenses including waging unauthorized war in Iran and reckless endangerment of U.S. service members, as well as breaking the laws of armed conflict and targeting civilians. Civilian casualties in Iran have included more than 160 people killed in an attack on a girls school in February.

They further accuse Hegseth of mishandling sensitive military information, which refers to his use of a Signal group chat on his personal phone to share information on a military operation in Yemen last year.

The resolution also says Hegseth obstructed congressional oversight by withholding information on military operations and abused his power by using it for political retribution.

Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson dismissed the resolution and its claims as “just another Democrat trying to make headlines,” The Hill reported.

“Secretary Hegseth will continue to protect the homeland and project peace through strength,” Wilson said in a statement. “This is just another charade in an attempt to distract the American people from the major successes we have had here at the Department of War.”

Multiple Democrats are cosponsoring the resolution. These include Reps. Dave Min of California, Brittany Petterson of Colorado, Sarah McBride of Delaware, Nikema Williams of Georgia, Shri Thanedar of Michigan, Dina Titus of Nevada, Steve Cohen of Tennessee and Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

April 15 (UPI) — A jury found Wednesday that Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster maintained an illegal monopoly in ticketing.

The case was heard in a Manhattan federal court over five weeks and saw testimony from dozens of witnesses. The jury began deliberations Friday.

The complaint was brought by the Department of Justice and several state attorneys general in 2024. It said that the company engaged in “anticompetitive conduct” and controlled all ticketing, concert booking, venues and promotions.

Because of this, fans paid higher fees, and artists had fewer options for touring and venues.

Live Nation denies acting as a monopoly.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the verdict “a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans and the venues that support them.”

“In the face of dwindling antitrust enforcement by the Trump Administration, this verdict shows just how far states can go to protect our residents from big corporations that are using their power to illegally raise prices and rip-off Americans,” Bonta said in a statement.

The Justice Department struck a settlement deal in March, but states decided to continue with the lawsuit instead.

The Justice Department settlement with Live Nation required Ticketmaster to divest up to 13 amphitheaters, reserve 50% of tickets for nonexclusive venues and cap ticketing service fees at 15%. A senior Justice Department official said it would lower prices by expanding choices.

“This settlement will resolve all remaining matters with the DOJ, without any admission of wrongdoing,” Live Nation said in a statement.

The verdict does not mean prices will drop soon, CNN reported.

Judge Arun Subramanian now must have a second trial to decide on remedies. The states requested a breakup of the company, or he could order a sale of the business.

“It will be an earthquake in the industry in terms of people’s perception in feeling validated,” Scott Grzenczyk, a lawyer with law firm Girard Sharp, told CNN.

“There’s a big difference between people complaining about Goliath and getting a jury verdict that Goliath was a monopolist and doing something wrong,” he said.

Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney for the states, pleaded with jurors during closing arguments to “apply your common sense,” NBC News reported.

“You’re New Yorkers,” he said. “I trust that you know when someone is blowing smoke or being straight with you.”

“It’s time to hold them accountable,” Kessler said.

April 15 (UPI) — President Donald Trump again threatened to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell if he doesn’t step down from his position in May.

“Then I’ll have to fire him,” the president said on Fox Business. “If he’s not leaving on time — I’ve held back firing him. I’ve wanted to fire him, but I hate to be controversial. I want to be uncontroversial.”

Powell’s term as chair ends on May 15 and Trump does not have the authority to fire him without cause. But his nominated replacement, Kevin Warsh, hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate. If he doesn’t get confirmed, Powell could stay on as chair pro tempore.

“That’s what the law calls for. That’s what we’ve done on several occasions,” Powell said.

He said he plans to stay on the board.

“I have no intention of leaving the board until the investigation is well and truly over with transparency and finality,” Powell said.

The Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to have hearings on Warsh’s nomination on April 21.

Powell’s term as a Fed governor goes until 2028, but he said he hasn’t decided if he’ll serve out that term.

Complicating matters, the Trump administration has been trying to prosecute Powell for his role in the $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed headquarters. The building went far over budget, and Trump has implied that something illegal is happening.

U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro tried to subpoena Powell over the renovation, but a judge denied it. Pirro admitted she had no evidence.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-S.C., who is on the Senate Banking Committee, said he will continue to block Warsh’s confirmation until the investigation into Powell ends.

But Trump said he isn’t worried about Tillis.

Tillis “is an American; he knows what to do,” he said.

Trump said the investigation must happen.

“What they’ve done to that, so it is probably corrupt, but what it really is is incompetent, and we have to show the incompetence of that,” he said.

Trump has wanted Powell out of the Fed since he was elected to office for the second term. He has said he wants interest rates dropped, but Powell has taken a more conservative approach. Powell has lowered the rates, but not fast enough for the president.

“Does that mean we stop a probe of a building that I would have done for $25 million that’s going to cost maybe $4 billion? Don’t you think we have to find out what happened there?” Trump said in the interview at the White House. “I have to find out.”

He called Powell “a disaster.”

“Here’s a man who took this little, tiny building and a couple of other little, tiny complex, and he’s spending more than $3 billion. I want to know who the contractor is, because that contractor is making billions of dollars, perhaps.”

The Fed said the building’s cost overruns are due to “unforeseen conditions” requiring more spending, including “more asbestos than anticipated, toxic contamination in soil, and a higher-than-expected water table.”

Trump has also tried to oust Fed governor Lisa Cook on the allegation that she committed mortgage fraud.

April 14 (UPI) — A budget resolution to fund federal immigration enforcement could hit the Senate floor by next week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday, as Republicans seek to bypass Democratic demands for reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol.

Federal funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol lapsed on Feb. 14 after Republicans agreed with the Democrats to remove the Department of Homeland Security from a larger spending package and avert a government shutdown.

Neither agency has been funded through regular DHS appropriations since, though they continue operating through other, emergency funding.

Democrats began demanding reforms to the federal immigration enforcement agencies before agreeing to restore funding after two U.S. citizens were killed by federal immigration officers amid President Donald Trump‘s aggressive immigration crackdown.

Amid a stalemate in negotiations, Republicans are considering passing three years of funding for the agencies through a complicated legislative mechanism called a budget reconciliation bill that permits certain spending legislation to pass with a simple majority rather than 60 votes, Thune told reporters Tuesday in the Capitol.

“Republicans are going to stand with our Border Patrol, with our law enforcement agencies and we’re going to ensure that they are funded, not only today but well into the future,” Thune, R-S.D., said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is preparing the resolution to fund the agencies that will be followed by the reconciliation bill “to ensure the job gets done,” he said.

Democrats have blocked funding for ICE and Border Patrol until reforms — including requiring judicial warrants and banning officers from wearing masks — are made, but the reconciliation bill tactic could ensure funding without any votes from Democratic lawmakers.

The same tactic was used last year to pass Trump’s sweeping spending and tax cut bill, which provided $75 billion for ICE.

“All of the things that the Democrats made this about, which was supposed to be about reforms to the way that ICE and Border Patrol operate — they get none of that,” Thune said.

“And now, we’re going to fund those agencies for three years into the future. The only thing the Democrats got out of this was they now own the issue of open borders and defund law enforcement.”

Republicans hold a narrow 53-47 majority in the Senate, with two independents caucusing with the Democrats, as well as a 218-213 majority in the House.

The Senate has twice passed bipartisan bills to fund DHS aside from ICE and Border Patrol, which the House has balked at. Democrats blame the Trump administration’s influence on the lower chamber.

“Republicans are dragging the Senate through a partisan circus just to avoid basic accountability for ICE and Border Patrol,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told reporters at the Capitol during a separate press conference on Tuesday.

He said Democrats will continue to push for immigration enforcement reforms.

“So, the pattern, unfortunately, with this administration is clearer and clearer,” the veteran New York Democrat said. “Chaos abroad — the war; chaos at home with not funding DHS with reforms. A failed war overseas, a manufactured crisis here in Washington — in both cases Republicans aren’t leading, they are following orders.”

April 14 (UPI) — The Justice Department on Tuesday asked a federal court to dismiss the convictions of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers members who were found guilty of leading and organizing the Jan. 6, 2021, riot and attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The request includes 12 former members of the groups, all of whom prosecutors said were ringleaders of the attack. After his return to office in 2025, President Donald Trump pardoned most of those who were convicted for their parts in the riot, a move affecting more than 1,000 people. However, the sentences of some, including these 12, were commuted to time served instead, freeing them from prison though the convictions remained.

The group involved in the Justice Department request on Tuesday includes Stewart Rhodes, a leader of the Oath Keepers who was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other charges. Prosecutors said Rhodes and other Oath Keepers “began plotting to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power” after the 2020 election, CBS News reported.

Others whose sentences were commuted are Proud Boys leaders Ethan Nordean, Zachary Rehl, Dominic Pezzola and Joseph Biggs, who were also convicted of seditious conspiracy for their role.

Appeals involving this group have continued, and the Justice Department requested Tuesday that federal appeals panels vacate the earlier convictions and drop the cases in whole.

“The United States has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Lenerz in the filing, Politico reported.

Greg Rosen, former chief of the Justice Department’s Capitol Siege Section, criticized the move, CBS News reported.

“It’s a reminder of what drove the pardons in the first place-the political violence is acceptable as long as your politics align,” he told CBS News. “And it’s a continuing and sad commentary on the current state of the department.”