trump

Feb. 16 (UPI) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced an agreement with Britain on Monday that will bring $1 billion in investments into his state.

The climate agreement sets a framework for British companies to expand their access to California’s market and for cooperation on decarbonization and clean energy technology.

British energy company Octopus Energy is among the companies that will expand its access in California. It has committed nearly $1 billion to clean energy companies and projects based in California. Newsom announced the partnership after meeting with British Energy Secretary Ed Miliband in London.

“California is the best place in America to invest in a clean economy because we set clear goals and we deliver,” Newsom said in a statement.

“Today, we deepened our partnership with the United Kingdom on climate action and welcomed nearly a billion dollars in clean tech investment from Octopus Energy. California will continue showing the world how we can turn innovation and ambition into climate action.”

Newsom visited Octopus Energy’s headquarters in London during his trip.

California has climate agreements with several countries around the world. During the 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference, it entered new partnerships with Chile, Colombia, Nigeria and Brazil.

President Donald Trump criticized the new agreement between California and Britain on Monday, saying it was “inappropriate” for the two sides to be working with each other.

“The worst thing that the U.K. can do is get involved in Gavin,” Trump told POLITICO. “If they did to the U.K. what he did to California, this will not be a very successful venture.”

The Trump administration has rolled back federal climate-focused initiatives, most recently eliminating greenhouse gas emissions standards.

Reporting from Sacramento — For all of the unprecedented elements of President Trump’s federal budget plans, there’s an item buried in the list of detailed spending cuts that has a familiar, contentious political legacy in California.

Trump has proposed canceling federal government subsidies to states that house prisoners and inmates who are in the U.S. illegally. He’s not the first president to try it, and undoubtedly will get an earful from states like California.

For sheer bravado, the award for defending that subsidy probably goes to former Gov. Pete Wilson. In a letter sent to federal officials in 1995, two days after Christmas, Wilson threatened to drop off one of the state’s undocumented prisoners — in shackles, no less — on the doorstep of a federal jail. (He never actually did it.)

“The intent of federal law is unequivocal,” Wilson wrote about the subsidy program. “The federal government must either reimburse the state at a fair rate for the incarceration of any undocumented inmate which it identifies or… take the burden of incarceration off the state’s hands.”

Wilson had won a second term the year before, with a blistering campaign attacking illegal immigration. His time in office was also marked by persistent state budget problems, and the money mattered. The state never got as much as it wanted, though, and years of squabbles followed over the fate of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, established as part of the sweeping immigration reforms of 1986.

Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger did his fair share of complaining about skimpy SCAAP funding. In 2005, he and a bipartisan group of western U.S. governors demanded a boost in the program to a total of $850 million. That didn’t happen.

The past two presidents, George W. Bush and Barack Obama, offered their own proposals to cancel the program. Trump’s budget scores the possible savings at $210 million. His budget blueprint lampoons SCAAP as “poorly targeted,” and describes it as a program “in which two-thirds of the funding primarily reimburses four states” for housing felons who lack legal immigration status.

Want to take a guess which state gets the most? OK, that’s an easy one.

California’s state government received $44.1 million in the 2015 federal budget year, according to Justice Department data. Add to that another $12.8 million that was paid directly to California counties, with the largest local subsidy being the $3 million paid to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

More than one-third of the entire program went to California. No other state’s share was even close. A win on this issue for the president would be particularly bitter for the state, where political animosity toward Trump is widespread.

Political Road Map: There’s a $368 billion reason that California depends on Washington »

In Gov. Jerry Brown’s budget unveiled last month, he assumed $50.6 million in federal help for prison costs related to felons in the U.S. illegally. A budget spokesman for Brown said the governor will ask for help from the state’s congressional delegation in saving the program. Still, it’s safe to say the estimate is now in doubt.

Roll back the clock, though, and take a look at how this political debate has changed. Wilson’s legacy on illegal immigration cast a long shadow as candidate Trump promised to go after “bad hombres” who are illegally in the country. The president’s official plan, by most estimates, would go even further.

When President Obama tried to nix the subsidy, conservatives warned it would endanger public safety. So far, few are making the same case now that it’s coming from Trump — a curious development, given California’s most famous illegal immigration critic once insisted the program was essential.

john.myers@latimes.com

Follow @johnmyers on Twitter, sign up for our daily Essential Politics newsletter and listen to the weekly California Politics Podcast

ALSO:

Los Angeles County sheriff opposes legislation to create a ‘sanctuary state’ in California

Gov. Jerry Brown projects a $1.6 billion deficit by the summer of 2018

Updates on California politics and state government

President Trump and his allies are questioning ballot security. Democrats are warning of unconstitutional federal intervention. Experts and others are raising concerns about partisan redistricting and federal immigration agents intimidating people at the polls.

Voter trust in the upcoming midterm elections, meanwhile, has dropped off sharply, and across party lines, according to new research by the UC San Diego Center for Transparent and Trusted Elections.

Out of 11,406 eligible voters surveyed between mid-December and mid-January, just 60% said they were confident that midterm votes will be counted fairly — down from 77% who held such confidence in vote counting shortly after the 2024 presidential election.

Shifts in voter confidence are common after elections, with voters in winning parties generally expressing more confidence and voters in losing parties expressing less, said Thad Kousser, one of the center’s co-directors. However, the new survey found double-digit, across-the-board declines in confidence in the last year, he said.

According to voting experts, such drops in confidence and fears about voter intimidation are alarming — and raise serious questions about voter turnout in a pivotal midterm election that could radically reshape American politics.

While 82% of Republicans expressed at least some confidence in vote counting after Trump’s 2024 win, just 65% said they felt that way in the latest survey. Among Democrats, confidence dropped from 77% to 64%, and among independents from 73% to 57%, the survey found.

“Everyone — Democrats, Republicans, independents alike — have become less trusting of elections over the last year,” Kousser said, calling it a “parallel movement in this polarized era.”

Of course, what is causing those declines differs greatly by party, said Kousser’s co-director Lauren Prather, with distrust of mail ballots and noncitizens voting cited by half of Republicans, and concerns about eligible voters being unable to cast ballots because of fear or intimidation cited by nearly a quarter of Democrats.

Trump and other Republicans have repeatedly alleged that mail ballots contribute to widespread fraud and that noncitizen voting is a major problem in U.S. elections, despite neither claim being supported by evidence.

Dean C. Logan, Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk, oversees the registering of voters, maintaining voter files, administering federal, state, local and special elections and verifying initiatives, referenda and recall petitions.

(Gary Coronado / For The Times)

Many Democratic leaders and voting experts have raised concerns about disenfranchisement and intimidation of eligible voters, in part based on Republican efforts to enforce stricter voter ID and proof of citizenship requirements, and Trump suggesting his party should “take over” elections nationwide.

Others in Trump’s orbit have suggested Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents will be deployed to polling stations, and the FBI recently raided and seized ballots from Fulton County, Ga., long a target of Trump’s baseless claims of 2020 election fraud.

Prather said that research has long showed that “elite cues” — or messaging from political leaders — matter in shaping public perception of election security and integrity, so it is no surprise that the concerns being raised by Trump and other party elites are being echoed by voters.

But the survey also identified more bipartisan concerns, she said.

Voters of all backgrounds — including 51% of Democrats, 48% of independents and 34% of Republicans — said they do not trust that congressional districts are drawn to fairly reflect what voters want. They primarily blamed the opposing party for the problem, but nearly a quarter of both Democrats and Republicans also expressed dissatisfaction with their own party leaders, the survey found.

Various states have engaged in unprecedented mid-decade redistricting to win more congressional seats for their party, with Republicans seizing advantage in states such as Texas and Democrats seizing it in states such as California.

Voters of all backgrounds — including 44% of Democrats, 34% of independents and 30% of Republicans — also said they believe it is likely that ICE agents will be present at voting locations in their area, though they did not all agree on the implications.

Half of Democrats said such a presence would make them feel less confident that votes in their area would be counted accurately, compared with fewer than 14% who said it would make them more confident. Among Republicans, 48% said it would make them more confident, and about 8% less confident. Among independents, 19% said more confident, 32% less confident.

Perceptions of ICE at polling locations also varied by race, with 42% of Asian American voters, 38% of Hispanic voters, 29% of white voters and 28% of Black voters saying it would make them feel less confident, while 18% of Asian American voters, 24% of Hispanic voters, 27% of white voters and 21% of Black voters said it would make them feel more confident.

Among both Black and Hispanic voters, 46% said they expect to face intimidation while voting, compared with 35% of Asian American voters and just 10% of white voters. Meanwhile, 31% of Hispanic and Asian American voters, 21% of Black voters and 8% of white voters said they are specifically worried about being questioned by ICE agents at the polls.

A man waits in line to vote at Compton College in November.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

Kousser said voters’ lack of confidence this cycle reflects a remarkable moment in American politics, when political rhetoric has caused widespread distrust not just in the outcome of elections, but in the basic structure and fairness of how votes are collected and counted — despite those structures being tested and proven.

“We’re at this moment now where there are people on both sides who are questioning what the objective conditions will be of the election — whether people will be able to freely make it to the polls, what the vote counting mechanisms will be — and that’s true sort of left, right, and center in American politics today,” he said.

Prather said research in other countries has shown that distrust in elections over time can cause voters to stop voting, particularly if they think their vote won’t be fairly counted. She does not think the U.S. has reached that point, as high turnout in recent elections has shown, but it is a longer-term risk.

What could have a more immediate effect are ICE deployments, “especially among groups that have worries about what turning out could mean for them if they expect ICE or federal agents to be there,” Prather said.

Election experts said voters with concerns should take steps to ensure their vote counts, including by double-checking they are registered and making a plan to vote early, by mail or with family and friends if they are worried about intimidation.

What voters should not do if they are worried about election integrity is decide to not vote, they said.

“The No. 1 thing on my list is and always will be: Vote,” said Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights and Elections Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law. “That sounds maybe trite or simple, but the only way we hold on to our democracy is if people continue to participate and continue to trust it and put their faith in it.”

Registrar voter staff members process ballots at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana in November.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

“Now is the time to buckle down and figure out how to fortify our protections for fair elections, and not to give into the chaos and believe it’s somehow overwhelming,” said Rick Hasen, an election law expert and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law.

“I don’t want people to feel like nothing is working, it’s all overwhelming and they are just being paralyzed by all the news of these attacks, these threats,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the Voting Rights Project at the ACLU. “There are a huge range of folks who are working to ensure that these elections go as smoothly as possible, and that if anything comes up, we are ready to respond.”

Mike Madrid, a Republican political consultant in California, said the erosion of confidence in U.S. elections was “a deliberate strategy” pushed by Trump for years to explain away legitimate election losses that embarrassed him, and facilitated by Republicans in Congress unwilling to check Trump’s lies to defend U.S. election integrity.

However, Democrats have added to the problem and become “the monster they are fighting” by gerrymandering blue states through redistricting measures such as California’s Proposition 50, which have further eroded American trust in elections, Madrid said.

Madrid said that he nonetheless expects high turnout in the midterms, because many voters have “the sense that the crisis is existential for the future, that literally everything is on the line,” but that the loss of trust is a serious issue.

“Without that trust, a form of government like democracy — at least the American form of democracy — doesn’t work,” he said.

Trump — who in a post Friday called Democrats “horrible, disingenuous CHEATERS” for opposing voter ID laws that most Americans support — has long called on his supporters to turn out and vote in massive numbers to give him the largest possible margin of victory, as a buffer against any election cheating against him. One of his 2024 campaign slogans was “Too Big to Rig.”

In recent days, some of Trump’s fiercest critics — including Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — have made a similar pitch to Democrats.

In an interview with The Times, Schiff said that he is “deeply concerned” about the midterms given all of Trump’s threats, but that voters should understand that “the remedy here is to become more involved, not less.”

“The very best protection we’ll have is the most massive voter turnout we’ve ever had,” he said. “It’s going to be those with the most important title in our system — the voters — who end up saving this country.”

Feb. 16 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said member states of his newly created Board of Peace have pledged more than $5 billion toward rebuilding Gaza and thousands of personnel to maintain security in the Palestinian enclave.

Trump said in a post on his Truth Social media platform on Sunday that the pledge will be officially announced on Thursday during the inaugural meeting of the board at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C.

“The Board of Peace will prove to be the most consequential International Body in History, and it is my honor to serve as its Chairman,” Trump said.

Specifics such as how much and what each member state pledged were not made public.

More than 20 countries have joined the board, which Trump formally launched last month on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The board is tied to a U.N.-backed Gaza stabilization and reconstruction plan, but questions about its scope have grown because the board’s charter does not mention the Palestinian enclave and critics worry that the initiative might undermine the United Nations.

Scrutiny has also focused on its membership, which includes Belarus, which aided Russia in its war against Ukraine, and Israel, whose leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, is the subject of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant issued in November 2024 alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

More than 50 nations reportedly received invitations to join, but many U.S. and Western allies have declined. Trump said he rescinded an invitation to Canada as relations between Ottawa and Washington have deteriorated during Trump’s second term.

Much of the Palestinian enclave has been damaged or destroyed since the war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel.

United Nations estimates state that more than 81% of all buildings and structures in Gaza have been either damaged or destroyed.

U.N. agencies have said that around $70 billion is needed to reconstruct the enclave, which measures about 25.4 miles long and between 3.7 and 7.5 miles wide along the Mediterranean.

Reporting from Washington — A month after tweeting that he might order FEMA to cut federal disaster funding to California fire victims, President Trump declined to renew that threat and indicated that talks with state officials were going well.

Speaking to The Times and several regional newspapers in the Oval Office, Trump said Wednesday that he and Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke by phone about two weeks ago, after his Jan. 9 tweet that he had ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency not to send more disaster funding to state officials “unless they get their act together, which is unlikely.”

Asked Wednesday if he still thinks the federal government shouldn’t give California any more money until the state changes its forest management practices, Trump refrained from directly repeating the threat, but said something has to be done to keep California from burning year after year.

“I told my people, I said we cannot continue to spend billions of dollars, billions and billions of dollars,” Trump said. “Forest fires are totally preventable. They shouldn’t happen.”

Trump said he was encouraged by his talk with Newsom.

“He was very respectful as to my point of view,” Trump said. “I think he agrees with me. I respect the fact that he called. The forests are, because of whatever reason, … extraordinarily flammable, to put it mildly.”

Newsom’s spokesman Nathan Click said the governor and president had a “respectful conversation about the critical federal-state partnership necessary for emergency preparedness and disaster relief.”

“The governor will continue doing everything in his power to help the survivors of wildfires and make sure the state is prepared for future disasters,” Click said.

Environmental experts say the primary cause of increased fires in California is climate change and drought. The Trump administration has blamed poor forest management, though critics say such claims are misleading and in many cases false.

Thousands of Californians are still recovering from two massive fires this past fall that together killed nearly 90 people and burned thousands of structures.

Trump’s tweeted threat alarmed state and local officials. For weeks the White House and FEMA have provided no clarity about whether such an order would be implemented, and when. Even the California congressional delegation struggled to get information about what might happen.

For months the president has been critical of California’s forest management process, saying state environmental laws are too stringent and keep downed timber and other detritus such as leaves and fallen limbs from being removed before they can catch fire.

“It’s called forest management. You have very poor forest management,” Trump said. “You need good forest management and you will have either no forest fires or very small forest fires that are easily put out.”

Critics accuse the administration of trying to pressure California officials to open the state’s forests to increased logging.

The bulk of California’s forest land is either federal property or private property, and outside the state’s authority to manage, but Trump said California’s strict state environmental laws keep the federal government from managing its lands in the state properly.

“In many cases because of the state environmental rules, the federal government isn’t even allowed to go in and clean them out,” Trump said.

In November, the Camp fire destroyed the town of Paradise in the Sierra Nevada foothills, killing 86 people and destroying more than 13,900 homes in the area; and the Woolsey fire in Los Angeles and Ventura counties left three dead and leveled about 1,500 structures in an unwooded area.

State politicians have implored Trump to remember what he saw when he visited Paradise in November to tour the destroyed area. He spoke at length Wednesday about his shock at the extent of the damage and how quickly the fire moved into and destroyed the town.

“That was a lot of bad luck,” Trump said. “It was dry. You had 80 mile-per-hour winds. It was a very flammable area.”

The latest from Washington »

More stories from Sarah D. Wire »

Caracas, February 15, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – US President Donald Trump is considering a visit to Venezuela, though he did not specify when the trip might take place or what agenda it would entail.

“I’m going to make a visit to Venezuela,” Trump told reporters outside the White House on Friday. 

The US President addressed the press ahead of a trip to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, to meet soldiers who participated in the January 3 military attacks against Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.

Questioned by a journalist, Trump stated that Washington recognizes the Venezuelan government led by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez as the country’s legitimate authority.

“We are dealing with them, and they have done a great job,” he stated. The White House refused comment on whether the recognition was the administration’s official stance.

In 2019, the first Trump administration recognized the self-proclaimed “interim government” headed by Juan Guaidó as the country’s legitimate authority, prompting the Maduro government to sever diplomatic ties. The US later transferred its recognition to the defunct opposition-controlled National Assembly whose term expired in January 2021.

Since the January 3 attacks, Caracas and Washington have fast-tracked a diplomatic rapprochement, with US Chargé d’Affaires Laura Dogu arriving in the Caribbean nation in early February. An official recognition of the Rodríguez acting government could pave the way for the restructuring of Venezuela’s sizable foreign debt.

In his Friday press remarks, Trump further described relations with Venezuelan leaders as being “as good as one could hope for,” and added that “the relationship with Venezuela today is a 10.”

Trump additionally highlighted progress in Venezuela’s oil sector.

“Oil is flowing, and other nations are paying a lot of money for it, and we are handling it. We are refining it,” he said. Since January, the White House has imposed control of Venezuelan oil exports, with proceeds deposited in bank accounts in Qatar before being partly rerouted to Caracas under US-set conditions.

Earlier last week, Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez emphasized in an NBC interview that Maduro remains the country’s legitimate president. She also disclosed that she has spoken twice with Trump and has had “more frequent” contact with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and expressed “gratitude” for the “respectful and courteous” nature of the talks.

Venezuela’s acting president went on to announce that she has likewise been invited to visit the US. “We are considering going once we establish cooperation and can move forward with everything,” she said.

The invitation reportedly arose during a recent visit to Caracas by US Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who was hosted by Rodríguez at Miraflores Palace on Wednesday. 

Wright and Rodríguez later toured the Petroindependencia crude upgrader, a mixed venture between Venezuela’s state-owned PDVSA and Chevron, in the Orinoco Oil Belt.

The Trump administration official announced that Chevron would invest US $100 million to modernize operational facilities, with the goal of “doubling [Petroindependencia’s] productive capacity within 12 to 18 months and quintupling it within five years.” Petroindependencia has a current output of 40,000 barrels per day (bpd).

US issues new oil licenses

Following Wright’s Venezuela visit, the US Treasury Department issued two general licenses, 49 and 50, aimed at boosting conditions for Western multinational corporations to operate in Venezuela’s energy sector.

The first license allows for the negotiation and signing of future investment contracts, contingent upon the potential issuance of a specific license. The second waiver authorizes Chevron, BP, Eni, Shell, and Repsol to conduct transactions and operations related to hydrocarbon projects with PDVSA or any other Venezuelan public entity.

Repsol (Spain) and Eni (Italy), like Chevron, participate in oil and gas joint ventures in the South American country, whereas the UK-headquartered Shell and BP are set to lead offshore natural gas projects alongside Trinidad and Tobago’s National Gas Company (NGC) in Venezuelan waters. 

However, GL50 requires that any contracts fall under US jurisdiction and mandates that all payments to “blocked” entities—as sanctions against PDVSA and Venezuela’s banking system remain in place—be made to accounts designated by the US Treasury.

It also explicitly prohibits transactions involving any person or entity linked to Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, or China, as well as vessels sanctioned by Washington.

The Trump administration has loosened restrictions against the Venezuelan energy sector, including allowing the import of US diluents, inputs and technology, following a recent pro-business overhaul of the country’s Hydrocarbon Law. The reform granted expanded benefits for private corporations, including reduced fiscal responsibilities and expanded control over operations and sales.

Upon leaving Caracas, Energy Secretary Wright claimed that “structural reforms” would continue in Venezuela, with changes to “labor laws, the court system and the banking system.”

Edited and with additional reporting by Ricardo Vaz from Caracas.

The Republican Party currently controls the White House and both houses of Congress in the United States. But will that change in November?

Among Republican voters, US President Donald Trump is still wildly popular, despite criticism over uneven economic conditions and brutal anti-immigration tactics. And within the Democratic Party establishment, there is no sign of a desire to shift towards a more progressive, less centrist platform – even as left-leaning Democratic Socialists make gains.

Host Steve Clemons asks Republican strategist John Feehery and Amy Dacey, former chair of the Democratic National Committee, about Trumpism and the election prospects of both parties.

CAREFREE, Ariz. — Elizabeth H. paused recently outside the post office in this small, high-desert community, not far from where Easy Street meets Nonchalant Avenue.

She felt neither easy nor nonchalant.

“I think the climate imposed by the Trump administration is really sad and scary,” said Elizabeth, who asked to withhold her last name to avoid being attacked for the views she expressed.

“I don’t like the way that ICE is being used to bully citizens and even just people who are brown,” she continued. “And I don’t like that governors of blue states are being shut out while governors of red states are being welcomed. I just don’t think he treats us like we’re all Americans.”

For his part, Anthony D. finds little not to like about President Trump. He, too, asked not to use his last name, as did several others who agreed to talk politics.

“We finally don’t have a— in office that are destroying our country and worrying about everybody else in the world,” said Anthony, 66, a plumbing contractor and proudly blunt-spoken New York native. (Just like Trump, he pointed out.) “I mean, his tariffs are working. The negotiations are working. I just see a lot of positive coming out of that office.”

Even so, there’s something that bothers him: The way so many fellow citizens view the president and his America First agenda.

“Most people don’t like what he says, but look what he’s doing,” Anthony said as the late-morning crowd trickled into an upscale North Scottsdale shopping center. “You can hate the person, but don’t hate the message. He’s trying to do the right thing.”

Here in central Arizona, a prime battleground in November’s midterm election, there is precious little agreement about Trump, his policies and motivations.

Supporters see the president turning things around after four disastrous years of Joe Biden. Critics see him turning the country into a place they barely recognize.

There is puzzlement on both sides.

Over what others believe. Over how others can possibly believe what they believe, see the things they see and perceive Trump the way they perceive him.

And although some are eager for the midterm elections as a way to corral the president — “I don’t think they should only impeach, I think they should imprison,” Brent Bond, a 59-year-old Scottsdale artist, said of his hopes for a Democratic Congress — others fear an end to Trump’s nearly unfettered reign.

Or that nothing will change, regardless of what happens at the polls in November.

“The fact is, Trump is going to keep Trumping until he’s done,” said Elizabeth H., who’s semiretired at age 55 after a career in financial services. “My only relief is that he’s an old, old man and he’s not going to be here forever.”

Brent Bond would like to see Trump imprisoned, not just impeached.

(Mark Z. Barabak / Los Angeles Times)

Arizona’s 1st Congressional District climbs from northeastern Phoenix to the mountainous heart of the Sonoran Desert. It takes in the affluent enclaves of Scottsdale and Paradise Valley and — where the urban sprawl finally yields to cactus, palo verde and other flora — Carefree and the Old West-themed Cave Creek.

It is the whitest, wealthiest and best-educated of Arizona’s nine congressional districts, home to numerous upscale resorts, major medical campuses and a large population of retirees comfortably settled in one of many gated communities.

Affordability, as in struggling just to get by, is not a pressing issue here.

In 2020, Biden carried the district 50% to 49%. Four years later, Trump beat Kamala Harris 51% to 48%.

(The Down Ballot, which crunches election data, rated Arizona’s 1st District the median of 435 congressional districts nationwide, meaning in 2024 half were redder on the presidential level and half were bluer.)

For more than a decade, the area has been represented by Republican Dave Schweikert, a local political fixture since the 1990s.

He’s had to fight hard for reelection in recent years as the district, like the whole of Arizona, has grown more competitive. Rather than run again, Schweikert announced he would give up his seat to try for governor. The result is a free-for-all and one of the relatively few toss-up House races anywhere in the country.

A passel of candidates is running and the result will help determine whether Democrats, who need to flip three seats, will seize control of the House in November.

Despite those high stakes, however, the race doesn’t seem to have generated much voter interest, at least not yet. In dozens of interviews across the district, it was the relentless Trump who drew the most attention, admiration and exasperation.

Moe Modjeski, a supporter, allowed as how the president “is no altar boy.”

Even so, “I’ll take his policies over someone that might be nice and polite,” said the 69-year-old Scottsdale resident, a financial advisor who cited the sky-scraping stock market as one example of Trump’s success. “I mean, gas is about half the price it was a year or two ago.”

But for Liz R., who’s “never been a sky-is-falling type,” it certainly feels that way. The 75-year-old cited “everything from tariffs to ICE to destroying the healthcare system and controls for pollution.”

“I lived through the ‘60s and 70s and can’t remember a time when I feared so much for the future of our country,” said Liz, a retired medical technologist.

She’ll vote for a Democrat in November — to put a check on Trump, not because the Carefree resident has great faith in the party or its direction.

“I wish the Dems would get it together and maybe we could get more of a centrist that could unite and not get hung up on some of these social issues,” she said. “There’s a lot of economic issues, bread-and-butter issues, and I think that’s why the Republicans won [in 2024], because of the problems with immigration and inflation.”

As a border state, Arizona has long been at the forefront of the political fight over immigration. It was here lawmakers passed — and opponents spent years battling — legislation that effectively turned police into immigration officers, requiring them to demand the papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally

Thomas Campbell, with Keegan and Guinness, blamed blue-state politicians for any overreach by ICE agents.

(Mark Z. Barabak / Los Angeles Times)

Now that aggressive approach has become national policy, which is fine by Thomas Campbell, a retired architect and staunch Trump backer. He blamed any enforcement overreach on blue-state lawmakers.

“For some reason, the Democrats have decided they want to side with the criminals, so they don’t allow their police departments to cooperate,” said Campbell, 72, who stopped outside Paradise Valley’s town hall while running errands with his Irish setters, Guinness and Keegan. “If that wasn’t the case, there wouldn’t be any” controversy over ICE’s tactics.

Martha Cornelison agreed the border with Mexico needed to be secured and that serious lawbreakers should be deported.

But why, she wondered, are immigration agents scooping up honest taxpayers, parents with children born in the U.S. and others keeping on the straight and narrow?

“I think they’re going after the wrong people,” said the 76-year-old Scottsdale retiree as a friend, Lily, nodded in agreement. The two were sharing a bench in Scottsdale’s pueblo-inspired civic plaza, a nearby fountain burbling in the 80-degree sunshine.

“I think we need to look at our county jails, look at our city jails,” said Cornelison, who made her living selling large appliances. “How many illegal immigrants are, say, in Florence, which is our state prison? Send them back. Don’t go after Mr. Gonzalez who’s doing my lawn. Empty out our prisons.”

Back at the North Scottsdale shopping center, Denise F. was walking Chase, her Shih Tzu, past a parking lot brimming with Teslas, Mercedes and Cadillac SUVs.

The 73-year-old voted for Trump because she couldn’t abide Harris. But she’s disgusted with the president.

“I don’t like the division in the country. I think Trump thinks he’s a king,” said Denise, a retired banker. “He’s poking the bear with Venezuela and Greenland, Iran” — she poked the air as she named each country — “to see who he can engage in a possible war, which is not the way I think the United States should be.”

As Denise was finishing up, Anthony D., her friend and neighbor, strolled up and joined the conversation, offering his laudatory view of the president. “Trump’s a businessman and he’s running the country like a business,” Anthony said, as Denise looked on impassively.

“How did I do?” he asked after saying his piece.

“Great,” Denise replied amiably and the two walked off together, Chase between them.

Limits to pardon powers

But there are limits to presidential clemency, and already, Trump has brushed against them.

In December, Trump announced that he would pardon Tina Peters, a former county clerk in Colorado who supported Trump’s false claims of voter fraud during the 2020 election.

Peters, however, was also convicted of state-level crimes, after she used her office to allow an unauthorised person to access her county’s election software.

A president may only pardon federal charges, not state ones. Peters continues to serve a nine-year prison sentence. Still, Trump has sought to pressure Colorado officials to release her.

“She did nothing wrong,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “If she is not released, I am going to take harsh measures!!!”

While Trump has argued that presidents have the “complete power to pardon”, legal experts have repeatedly affirmed that clemency is not without bounds.

Pardons, for example, cannot be used to avoid impeachment or to undercut the Constitution, nor can they be used to absolve future crimes.

Still, the question remains how to enforce those limits — and whether new bulwarks should be created to prevent abuse.

Love points to the state pardon systems as models to emulate. Delaware, for example, has a Board of Pardons that hears petitions in public meetings and makes recommendations to the governor. More than half of the petitions are granted.

Like other successful clemency systems, Love said it offers public accountability.

She measures that accountability by certain standards: “Can people see what’s going on? Do they know what the standards are, and is the decider a respected and responsible decision-maker?”

Trump’s sweeping actions, however, have prompted calls for presidential pardons to be limited or eliminated altogether.

Osler cautions against doing so: It would be a “permanent solution to a temporary problem”.

“If we constrain clemency, we’ll lose all the good things that come from it,” Osler said.

Feb. 13 (UPI) — The U.S. military is sending the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, to the Middle East as tensions with Tehran over its nuclear program ratchet up, President Donald Trump confirmed Friday.

Trump told reporters he’s sending the vessel because if the United States and Iran doesn’t “make a deal, we’ll need it,” The Hill reported.

The vessel and its supporting warships, which are in the Caribbean, will join the USS Abraham Lincoln in a trek that’s expected to take about three to four weeks, The Guardian reported.

“We have an armada that is heading there and another one might be going,” Trump said in an interview with Axios on Tuesday.

An unnamed official said Trump made the decision to send the USS Gerald R. Ford to the Middle East after his Thursday meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The U.S. Southern Command said in a statement to The Hill that it was carrying out “mission-focused operations to counter illicit activities and malign actors in the Western Hemisphere.”

“While force posture evolves, our operational capability does not. SOUTHCOM forces remain fully ready to project power, defend themselves, and protect U.S. interests in the region.”

U.S. and Iranian leaders have been involved in negotiations over Iran’s nuclear arms program. Tehran has shown willingness to scale back its nuclear program in exchange for a lifting of economic sanctions, but has declined to consider requests to scale back its ballistic missile arsenal.

It’s one thing most everyone agrees on: federal funding cuts have left the Los Angeles County health system teetering toward financial collapse.

But the supervisors’ chosen antidote — a half-cent sales tax to replenish county coffers — is being condemned by a slew of cities as its own form of financial catastrophe.

“I heard from every city in my district,” said Kathryn Barger, the only supervisor who voted against putting the sales tax on the June ballot.

The resounding reaction? “Absolutely not,” she says.

“People are fatigued,” Barger said. “I’m not convinced that it’s going to pass.”

Observers wouldn’t have sensed that fatigue from the rowdy crowd of supporters that filled the board meeting Tuesday, along with seldom-used overflow rooms. The supervisors voted 4-1 at the meeting to put the tax on the ballot.

“There really are no other viable and timely options,” said Supervisor Holly Mitchell, who introduced the measure along with Supervisor Hilda Solis. “Trust me, I looked high and low.”

The goal, supervisors say, is to generate $1 billion per year to backfill the dwindling budgets of local hospitals and clinics battered by federal funding cuts.

The county’s already bracing for impact. The Department of Public Health announced Friday it would shutter seven clinics. Officials say it’s just the beginning, with the county poised to lose more than $2 billion in funding for health services over the next three years. Hospitals could be down the road, they warn.

But many cities, some of which could have local sales tax hit more than 11%, are revolting on the plan.

“I have been getting calls and texts and letters like honestly I have not gotten in a long time,” Supervisor Janice Hahn told the audience as a message from Jeff Wood — the vice mayor of Lakewood — pinged on her phone. “They are really diving in on this one.”

In a series of opposition letters, the cities unleashed a torrent of criticism. Norwalk called the tax “rushed.” Palmdale said it had “significant flaws.” Glendale found it “deeply troubling and fundamentally unfair.”

Some bristled at the cost to consumers. Palmdale and Lancaster — some of the poorest cities in the county — could wind up with some of the highest sales tax rates in the state if the measure passes.

Some cities say the bigger issue is they don’t trust the county. They point to its checkered history of pushing ballot measures that don’t live up to their promises.

Measure B, a special parcel tax, was passed in 2002 to fund the county’s trauma center network. An audit more than a decade later found the county couldn’t prove it used the money for emergency medical services.

Measure H, the homelessness services tax measure, was passed in 2017 as a temporary tax. Voters agreed in 2024 to make the tax permanent and to double the rate — though some cities insist they’ve never gotten their fair share of the funds.

“It’s a historical issue,” said Glendora mayor David Fredendall, whose city opposes the sales tax. “We don’t trust it.”

The county decided to put the sales tax on the ballot as a general tax, meaning the money goes into the general fund. Legally, supervisors could use the money for whatever services they desire.

“They say ‘No, this is our plan’, but we’re going to expand from five to nine supervisors over the next few years before this tax expires,” said Marcel Rodarte, the head of the California Contract Cities Assn., a coalition of cities inside the county. “They may say we need to use these funds for something else.”

A general tax also is easier to pass, since it needs only a majority vote. Special taxes — levies earmarked for a specific purpose — need two-thirds of the vote.

The measure also asks voters to approve the creation of an oversight group that would monitor where the money goes. The supervisors also voted on a spending plan for the tax money, which would dedicate the largest portion of funds for uninsured residents over the next five years.

Some opponents predict the tax will stick around longer than advertised.

“A temporary tax is like Bigfoot,” said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., a group that advocates for lower taxes. “It exists in fantasy.”

State of play

— FRIENDLY FIRE: Three hours before the filing deadline, L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman jumped into the race for mayor, challenging her former ally Karen Bass. Her candidacy will be Bass’ most serious threat.

— DEFUND DETOUR: Shortly after, Raman staked out her position on cops, saying she doesn’t want the LAPD to lose more police. Raman called for department downsizing when she first ran for city council in 2020.

— LOYAL LABOR: The head of the AFL-CIO, the county’s powerful labor federation, blasted Raman as an “opportunist.” Federation president Yvonne Wheeler said her organization will “use every tool” at its disposal to get Bass reelected.

— PETITION PUSH: Scores of candidates for L.A. city offices picked up their petitions Feb. 7, launching their effort to collect the signatures they need to qualify for the ballot. The first to turn in a petition was Councilmember Traci Park, who is facing two challengers while running for reelection in a coastal district.

— EYES ON ICE: Los Angeles police officers must turn on their body cameras if they’re at the scene of federal immigration enforcement operations, according to a new executive directive issued by Bass. LAPD officers also must document the name and badge number of the agents’ on-scene supervisor.

— CONTESTING CLEANUPS: A federal judge ruled this week that the city of L.A. violated the constitutional rights of homeless people by seizing and destroying their personal property during encampment cleanups. Lawyers for the plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge Dale S. Fischer to issue an injunction requiring the city to give homeless people the opportunity to contest the seizure of their property.

— HOTEL HIKE: Voters in the June 2 election will be asked to hike the city’s tax on nightly hotel stays — increasing it to 16% from 14% — for the next three years. The tax would then drop to 15% in 2029.

— PAYDAY POLITICS: The county is considering a proposal that would remove supervisors’ final decision-making power in contract disputes involving sheriff’s deputies and firefighters. Supporters say it’ll take politics out of labor negotiations while opponents warn of bloated labor costs.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature homelessness program went to Los Angeles City Council District 13, bringing 50 unhoused Angelenos indoors from an encampment.
• On the docket next week: The county’s back to its marathon budget briefings. Tune in Tuesday for presentations from the sheriff, district attorney and probation department.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to LAontheRecord@latimes.com. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

History is once again unfolding at the Milan-Cortina Winter Games as Team USA members break records and score dominant triumphs.

But as the Games move into their second week, a different and more provocative history is starting to repeat itself, casting a politically charged shadow over the event.

Champion skier Mikaela Shiffrin, snowboarder Chloe Kim, and freestyle skiers Hunter Hess and Chris Lillas are among the top athletes who have been vocal about their uneasiness in representing their home country during a period of deep political crisis revolving several volatile issues, including the violent federal crackdown in Minnesota by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and the Trump administration’s attacks nationwide on immigrants and the LGBTQ+ community.

“It brings up mixed emotions to represent the U.S. right now,” Hess said at a press conference last week. “Just because I’m wearing the flag doesn’t mean I represent everything that’s going on in the U.S.”

Trump blasted Hess’ comments in a Truth Social post, calling him “a real Loser,” adding, “He says he doesn’t represent his Country … If that’s the case, he shouldn’t have tried out for the Team, and it’s too bad he’s on it. Very hard to root for someone like this.”

Commenting on the athletes in an interview with CNN, Vice President JD Vance, who was attending the Games, said the athletes who are critical should expect “some pushback.”

Vance, who was booed when he was shown on a large screen during the opening ceremonies, added, “You’re there to play a sport, you’re there to represent the country and hopefully win a medal. Most Olympic athletes, whatever their politics, are doing a great job, certainly enjoy the support of the entire country, and I think recognize that the way to bring the country together is not to show up in a foreign country and attack the president of the United States, but it’s to play your sport and to represent the country well.”

Vice President JD Vance and his wife Usha at the Winter Olympics opening ceremony in Milan on Feb. 6. Vance said athletes should expect pushback if they criticize the country.

(Natacha Pisarenko/AP)

The outspokenness of the Winter Olympic athletes echoes a dramatic protest by Olympians Tommie Smith and John Carlos which electrified the 1968 Summer Games in Mexico City. The sprinters, who placed first and third respectively in the 200 meter race, spoke not with words but with black-gloved raised fists on the victory stand, producing one of the most iconic images in Olympic history.

As the national anthem played following their victories, Smith and Carlos expressed their anger about racial injustice in America by bowing their heads and raising their fists. The gesture provoked a seismic reaction internationally while infuriating Olympic officials who claimed Smith and Carlos used the world stage to humiliate their home country.

Smith and Carlos’ salute to Black Power is explored in HBO Max’s documentary “Fists of Freedom: The Story of the ’68 Summer Games.” The 1999 Peabody Award-winning film chronicles the fiery moment and its aftermath for Smith and Carlos, who earned both heroic praise and pointed condemnation.

George Roy, who produced and directed “Fists of Freedom,” said “there are similarities between what happened in 1968 and what’s going on now. The similarities are it’s the Olympics and the United States, and in both cases there are athletes saying they wish they could be a little prouder given the current state of things.”

U.S. athletes Tommie Smith, center, and John Carlos, right, hold their fists up in protest after winning medals at the 1968 Summer Olympic games.

(AP)

However, Roy, who has won multiple Emmys and is the founder of Jersey Line Films, added that there are marked differences.

“What Smith and Carlos did was so consequential because it affected them directly,” he said. “They were protesting along with millions in their community. Their point was that they were good enough to represent their country. But when they got back to the real world, they would have trouble getting into restaurants or finding an apartment.”

He added, “It was just more personal than what is happening now.”

In an interview included in the documentary, Smith said the gesture by him and Carlos was often misinterpreted.

“As soon as the national anthem was playing, my glove is going toward God,” said Smith. “The Black fist in the air was only in recognition of those who had gone. It was a prayer of solidarity. It was a cry for help by my fellow brothers and sisters in the country who had been shot, who had been bitten by dogs … It was a cry for freedom.”

He added, “I don’t like the idea of people looking at it as negative. It was nothing but a raised fist in the air and a bowed head to the American flag. Not symbolizing a hatred for it.”

Though he heard cheers, he also heard boos and jeers.

“Fists of Freedom” contains several interviews from sports and media figures who were present or covered the proceedings and had strong opinions about the gesture.

Bob Paul, who was the press secretary for the United States Olympic Committee in 1968, said, “[Smith and Carlos] were wrong. You are supposed to observe due order and decorum to the nth degree at every victory ceremony.”

Veteran TV sportscaster Brent Musburger, who at the time was a columnist with the Chicago American newspaper, wrote: “Airing one’s dirty laundry before the entire world during a fun and games tournament was no more than a juvenile gesture. Smith and Carlos looked like a couple of Black-skinned storm troopers.”

Incensed, Olympic committee head Avery Brundage ordered the sprinters to be expelled from the Games.

Despite the uproar, experts said the salute by Smith and Carlos was a defining moment for Black people, galvanizing the Civil Rights Movement. However, the two men encountered personal and professional difficulties when they returned home.

Both Smith and Carlos have participated in speaking engagements in recent years. They could not be reached for comment.

“We’re not Antichrists,” said Smith in “Fists of Freedom.” “We’re just human beings who saw a need to be recognized.”

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has addressed European leaders at the Munich Security Conference (MSC) in an address seen as more conciliatory than in previous years.

Rubio on Saturday said Washington and Europe “belong together”, adding: “We want Europe to be strong. We believe that Europe must survive.”

He also said the US under Trump wants to lead global “renewal and restoration … and that while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe”.

Rubio’s speech on Saturday was seen as more conciliatory than remarks made by US Vice President JD Vance last year, who used his appearance at the event to attack European policies on immigration and free speech, shocking European allies.

Despite the softer tone, Rubio still criticised Europe on migration. He warned of “civilisational erasure” caused by mass migration and said it is “destabilising” the West – a line that has been frequently repeated by US officials, including the president.

Other divisions remain between the once-ironclad allies. European leaders remain bruised by Trump’s desire to take control of Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO-member Denmark.

European leaders have used the MSC as an opportunity to pledge to shoulder more of the burden of shared NATO defences. Leaders said this is essential for Europe to counter a hostile Russia, with NATO chief Mark Rutte saying “a strong Europe in a strong NATO means that the transatlantic bond will be stronger than ever.”

“This is the right time for a strong Europe,” said French President Emmanuel Macron, who stressed on Friday that the continent was “clear in the support of Ukraine” and “building its own architecture of security”.

“This Europe will be a good ally and partner for the United States of America,” the French leader said.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told the conference that Europe “must be ready to fight, to do whatever it takes to protect our people, our values and our way of life,” and added that the continent should focus on decreasing “some dependencies” and focus on creating a “more European NATO”.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz acknowledged a “rift” had opened up between Europe and the US, prompted by culture wars, but issued an appeal to Washington: “Let’s repair and revive transatlantic trust together.

“In the era of great power rivalry, even the United States will not be powerful enough to go it alone,” said the conservative leader, who has ramped up defence spending in the top European Union economy.

Russia’s full-scale war on Ukraine is set to enter its fifth gruelling year.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has been in Munich since Friday and meeting multiple allies, was expected to address the meeting on Saturday.

No Russian officials have been invited, but Foreign Minister Wang Yi of China has been invited and will deliver a key speech.

A US official said Rubio will meet with Zelenskyy at the conference. US officials have worked for months to try to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, with little success.

At the White House on Friday, Trump urged Zelenskyy to “get moving” to end the war. “Russia wants to make a deal… He has to move,” the US leader said.

Speaking at the MSC, however, Rubio said he did not know if Russia was serious about ending its war against Ukraine.

A German government source said Merz and Rubio met at the conference on Friday and discussed “Ukraine, the status of negotiations with Russia and further support for the country, particularly in terms of military aid”.

They also discussed Europe’s role in NATO, and “Rubio praised Germany’s steps to strengthen the alliance,” the source added.

Macron said a new framework was needed to deal with “an aggressive Russia” once the fighting in Ukraine ends.

At the conference, the US secretary of state also touched on issues outside Europe.

On China, he said the US owes it to the world to manage its relations with China, even when the national interests of the two superpowers do not align. Speaking about Iran, he said President Trump’s preference is to reach a deal with Tehran, but said that’s “very hard to do”.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has determined it is safe for Yemenis to return to their country, despite ongoing conflict.

The United States government has ended the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for Yemen, ordering the more than 1,000 Yemeni refugees and asylum seekers living in the country to leave within 60 days or face arrest and deportation.

The action on Friday came as part of US President Donald Trump’s broad immigration crackdown, which is impacting those who fled perilous lives in war-torn countries.

It will terminate TPS for roughly 1,400 Yemeni nationals who have had access to the legal status since September 2015 because of armed conflict in their country, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced on Friday.

“After reviewing conditions in the country and consulting with appropriate US government agencies, I determined that Yemen no longer meets the law’s requirements to be designated for Temporary Protected Status,” Noem said in a statement.

“Allowing TPS Yemen beneficiaries to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to our national interest,” she said, describing the revocation as an act of “putting America first.”

Contrary to Noem’s determination, Yemen continues to be riven by years-long conflict in one of the world’s poorest nations.

The State Department currently advises against travel to Yemen, citing “terrorism, unrest, crime, health risks, kidnapping, and landmines”.

TPS allows narrow groups of people in the US to live and work in the country if they’re deemed to be in danger if they return to their home nations, because of war, natural disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

While the protections are technically temporary, historically, presidents have continued to renew TPS statuses for refugees and asylum seekers rather than revoking them and rendering them undocumented.

The TPS for Yemen was last extended in 2024 and was set to expire on March 3 of this year.

Yemeni beneficiaries with no other lawful basis for remaining in the US have 60 days to voluntarily depart the country or face arrest, the statement said, offering a complimentary plane ticket and a $2,600 “exit bonus” for those who “self-deport”.

Since coming to office last year, Trump has ended the status for Venezuelans, Hondurans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, Somalis, Ukrainians and thousands of others.

The Trump administration has also expanded its travel restrictions since returning to power, imposing a total ban on citizens of 19 countries from entering the US, primarily targeting Muslim-majority and African nations, including Yemen, Somalia and South Sudan.

Citizens from a further 29 countries, including Nigeria and Senegal, are subject to partial bans.

New opinion poll finds seven in 10 US adults disapprove of President Donald Trump’s handling of Greenland issue.

Denmark’s prime minister and Greenland’s premier met ⁠with United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio and agreed that talks would be pursued on the running of Greenland, the semi-autonomous Danish territory that President Donald Trump has threatened to take over.

Rubio held a 15-minute meeting with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference on Friday.

Greenland’s leader Nielsen said in a post on social media that during the meeting with Rubio, “it was emphasised that the conversations being made are the right way forward and the interests of Greenland were once again clearly highlighted”.

Prime Minister Frederiksen said on X after the meeting: “Constructive talk with Secretary of State Marco Rubio together with Jens-Frederik Nielsen, Chairman of Naalakkersuisut, at the Munich Security Conference.”

“Work will continue as agreed in the high-level working group,” she said.

The meeting between the Danish and Greenlandic leaders and the US state secretary comes amid severely strained ties between Europe and Washington, and NATO allies, amid President Trump’s repeated threats to take over Greenland and criticism of European nations as “decaying” and “weak”.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump said, “We’re negotiating ‌right ‌now for Greenland.”

“I ‌think Greenland’s going to want us, but we get along very well with Europe. We’ll see how it all works out,” he said.

After months of bellicose language regarding the US’s necessity to acquire Greenland, Trump abruptly stepped back from his threats last month, saying that he had reached an understanding with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte that would give the US greater influence in the mineral-rich Arctic territory.

Late last month, the US, Denmark and Greenland also launched talks to find a diplomatic path out of the crisis.

Poll finds most US adults disapprove of Trump’s Greenland plan

The US administration has cited key national security concerns related to Russia and China to justify its demand to take control over Greenland and has accused Denmark, and Europe more broadly, of being unable to defend the strategic territory.

But, according to a new opinion poll conducted by The Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, Trump’s push to seize control of Greenland has gone down badly with the US public and members of his own party.

The survey, conducted between February 5-8, found that about seven in 10 US adults disapprove of how Trump is handling the Greenland issue – a higher disapproval rating than the share of those who dislike how he is handling foreign policy generally.

Even among Republican supporters, about half disapprove of his attempt to turn Greenland into US territory, according to the poll.

Sweden said on Thursday that it would send fighter jets to patrol Greenland as part of a newly launched NATO mission in the Arctic aimed at placating Trump’s concerns over the threats posed by Moscow and Beijing.

The government said in a statement that Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets would patrol Greenland as part of the newly-launched NATO mission, Arctic Sentry.

“As a NATO ally, Sweden has a responsibility to contribute to the security of the entire territory of the Alliance. The Arctic region is becoming increasingly important from a strategic perspective,” Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said.

In a separate statement, the Swedish Armed Forces said the fighter jets would be based out of Iceland, where six aircraft have been stationed since early February as part of the rotating incident response force, NATO Air Policing.

Swedish special forces would also be sent to Greenland to take part in training exercises for a couple of weeks, the military said.

Trump says he believes negotiations with Iran will be ‘successful’ as he confirms USS Gerald R Ford deployment.

President Donald Trump says that he is sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East as the United States increases pressure on Iran over its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.

Speaking at the White House on Friday, Trump confirmed that the USS Gerald R Ford would be leaving the Caribbean for the Middle East “very soon” as tensions remain high following indirect talks in Oman last week.

“If we need it, we’ll have it ready, a very big force,” said Trump, adding that he believed negotiations would be “successful” while warning it would be a “bad day for Iran” if the country failed to make a deal.

Later, Trump said a change of government in Iran would be the “best thing that could happen”.

“For 47 years, they’ve been talking and talking and talking. In the meantime, we’ve lost a lot of lives,” he said, in an apparent reference to Tehran’s crackdown on recent antigovernment protests that left thousands dead.

The imminent departure of the Gerald R Ford is part of an ongoing buildup of military hardware in the region, with the Abraham Lincoln carrier, several guided-missile destroyers, fighter jets and surveillance aircraft sent in recent weeks.

Trump’s comments come days after he met Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington, with the latter saying a “good deal” was expected while voicing reservations if any agreement did not also curb Iran’s ballistic missile programme. Tehran has publicly rejected US pressure to discuss the missiles.

Netanyahu has repeatedly called for further military action since Israel’s 12-day war against Iran in June, which the US briefly joined by attacking three Iranian nuclear sites, in a military operation dubbed “Midnight Hammer”.

Trump at the time said the US attacks had “totally obliterated” the nuclear facilities.

The indirect US-Iran talks were the first to be held since the June conflict, which halted previous rounds of negotiations between Tehran and Washington over potentially replacing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump ditched during his first term in office.

Risk of escalation

The JCPOA, a deal reached between Iran, the US and several European powers, saw Tehran curtail its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief.

Following Trump’s unilateral withdrawal in 2018, Tehran subsequently began enriching uranium beyond the limits set out in the agreement, though it has repeatedly denied Western claims it is seeking a nuclear weapon.

Upon taking office for a second time in January, Trump initially sought a new nuclear deal with Iran, but soon adopted a zero-enrichment policy long dismissed by Iranian negotiators as a non-starter.

As the latest attempts at negotiations continue, United Nations nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi has had trouble getting Iran to agree on inspections of sites targeted in the 12-day war.

Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the Munich Security Conference that inspectors had returned to Iran after the 12-day war but had not been able to visit any of the sites targeted.

Grossi said dialogue with Iran since the inspectors’ return last year had been “imperfect and complicated and extremely difficult, but it’s there”.

The US president’s comments on Friday confirm his earlier indication that he was considering sending the Gerald R Ford, which has a nuclear reactor on board and can hold more than 75 military aircraft, to the region.

Gulf Arab nations have warned any attack could escalate into another regional conflict in a region still reeling from Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom told world leaders Friday that President Trump’s retreat from efforts to combat climate change would decimate the U.S. automobile industry and surrender the future economic viability to China and other nations embracing the transition to renewable energy.

Newsom, appearing at the Munich Security Conference in Germany, urged diplomats, business leaders and policy advocates to forcefully stand up to Trump’s global bullying and loyalty to the oil and coal industry. The California governor said the Trump administration’s massive rollbacks on environmental protection will be short-lived.

“Donald Trump is temporary. He’ll be gone in three years,” Newsom said during a Friday morning panel discussion on climate action. “California is a stable and reliable partner in this space.”

Newsom’s comments came in the wake of the Trump administration’s repeal of the endangerment finding and all federal vehicle emissions regulations. The endangerment finding is the U.S. government’s 2009 affirmation that planet-heating pollution poses a threat to human health and the environment.

Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin said the finding has been regulatory overreach, placing heavy burdens on auto manufacturers, restricting consumer choice and resulting in higher costs for Americans. Its repeal marked the “single largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States of America,” he said.

Scientists and experts were quick to condemn the action, saying it contradicts established science and will put more people in harm’s way. Independent researchers around the world have long concluded that greenhouse gases released by the burning of gasoline, diesel and other fossil fuels are warming the planet and worsening weather disasters.

The move will also threaten the U.S.’s position as a leader in the global clean energy transition, with nations such as China pulling ahead on electric vehicle production and investments in renewables such as solar, batteries and wind, experts said.

Newsom’s trip to Germany is just his latest international jaunt in recent months as he positions himself to lead the Democratic Party’s opposition to Trump and the Republican-led Congress, and to seed a possible run for the White House in 2028. Last month Newsom traveled to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and in November to the U.N. climate summit in Belém, Brazil — mocking and condemning Trump’s policies on Greenland, international trade and the environment.

When asked how he would restore the world’s confidence in the United States if he were to become president, Newsom sidestepped. Instead he offered a campaign-like soliloquy on California’s success on fostering Tesla and the nation’s other top electric vehicle manufactures as well as being a magnet for industries spending billions of dollars on research and development for the global transition away from carbon-based economies.

The purpose of the Munich conference was to open a dialogue among world leaders on global security, military, economic and environmental. Along with Friday’s discussion on climate action, Newsom is scheduled to appear at a livestreamed forum on transatlantic cooperation Saturday.

Andrew Forrest, executive chairman of the Australia-based mining company giant Fortescue, said during a panel Friday his company is proof that even the largest energy-consuming companies in the world can thrive without relying on the carbon-based fuels that have driven industries for more than a century. Fortescue, which buys diesel fuel from countries across the world, will transition to a “green grid” this decade, saving the company a billion dollars a year, he said.

“The science is absolutely clear, but so is the economics. I am, and my company Fortescue is, the industrial-grade proof that going renewable is great economics, great business, and if you desert it, then in the end, you’ll be sorted out by your shareholders or by your voters at the ballot box,” Forrest said.

Newsom said California has also shown the world what can be done with innovative government policies that embrace electric vehicles and the transition to a non-carbon-based economy, and continues to do so despite the attacks and regressive mandates being imposed by the Trump administration.

“This is about economic prosperity and competitiveness, and that’s why I’m so infuriated with what Donald Trump has done,” Newsom said. “Remember, Tesla exists for one reason — California’s regulatory market, which created the incentives and the structure and the certainty that allowed Elon Musk and others to invest and build that capacity. We are not walking away from that.”

California has led the nation in the push toward EVs. For more than 50 years, the state enjoyed unique authority from the EPA to set stricter tailpipe emission standards than the federal government, considered critical to the state’s efforts to address its notorious smog and air-quality issues. The authority, which the Trump administration has moved to rescind, was also the basis for California’s plan to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035.

The administration again targeted electric vehicles in its announcement on Thursday.

“The forced transition to electric vehicles is eliminated,” Zeldin said. “No longer will automakers be pressured to shift their fleets toward electric vehicles, vehicles that are still sitting unsold on dealer lots all across America.”

But the efforts to shut down the energy transition may be too little, too late, said Hannah Safford, former director of transportation and resilience at the White House Climate Policy Office under the Biden administration.

“Electric cars make more economic sense for people, more models are becoming available, and the administration can’t necessarily stop that from happening,” said Safford, who is now associate director for climate and environment at the Federation of American Scientists.

Still, some automakers and trade groups supported the EPA’s decision, as did fossil fuel industry groups and those geared toward free markets and regulatory reform. Among them were the Independent Petroleum Assn. of America, which praised the administration for its “efforts to reform and streamline regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions.”

Ford, which has invested in electric vehicles and recently completed a prototype of a $30,000 electric truck, said in a statement to The Times that it appreciated EPA’s move “to address the imbalance between current emissions standards and consumer choice.”

Toyota, meanwhile, deferred to a statement from Alliance for Automotive Innovation president John Bozzella, who said similarly that “automotive emissions regulations finalized in the previous administration are extremely challenging for automakers to achieve given the current marketplace demand for EVs.”

A United States court has ordered the administration of President Donald Trump to facilitate the return of a Babson College student, Any Lucia Lopez Belloza, who was wrongfully deported last year.

In his ruling on Tuesday, US District Judge Richard Stearns gave the government two weeks to take steps to bring Lopez Belloza back.

He framed the order as an opportunity to correct a “mistake” – but he did not rule out holding the government in contempt if it failed to take the necessary actions.

“Wisdom counsels that redemption may be found by acknowledging and fixing our own errors,” Stearns wrote.

“In this unfortunate case, the government commendably admits that it did wrong. Now it is time for the government to make amends.”

A surprise trip turned deportation

Lopez Belloza, 19, was arrested on November 20 by immigration agents at Boston’s Logan airport.

The college freshman had been preparing to board a flight home to her family in Texas to surprise them for the Thanksgiving holiday.

She has since told The Associated Press news agency that she was denied access to a lawyer after her initial detention at the airport. The immigration agent told her she would need to sign a deportation document first, according to Lopez Belloza, who said she denied the offer.

For the next two nights, she said she was kept by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in a holding room with 17 other women, without enough room to lie down.

Then, she was loaded onto a deportation flight, which took her to Texas, then to her native Honduras, on November 22.

“I was numb the whole plane ride,” Lopez Belloza told the AP. “I just kept questioning myself. Why is it happening to me?”

Her lawyers, however, had obtained during that time a court order barring her removal from Massachusetts for 72 hours. Lopez Belloza’s deportation violated that court order.

She has remained in Honduras for the last two and a half months, while legal challenges over her case proceeded.

A legal battle

In court, the Trump administration has apologised for the error in Lopez Belloza’s case, acknowledging that a mistake was indeed made.

“On behalf of the government, we want to sincerely apologise,” prosecutor Mark Sauter told the court.

But Sauter rejected accusations that the government wilfully defied the 72-hour court order, saying that Lopez Belloza’s deportation was the mistake of one ICE agent and not an act of judicial defiance.

The government has also argued that Lopez Belloza was subject to a removal order before her November 20 arrest and therefore should not be returned to the US.

Lopez Belloza was brought to the US from Honduras when she was eight years old, and in 2016, she and her mother were ordered to be deported.

But the college freshman said she had no knowledge of any deportation order and has told the media that her previous legal representation had assured her there was no removal order against her.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has rejected efforts to bring Lopez Belloza back to the country, even on a student visa.

In a February 6 court filing, US Attorney Leah B Foley wrote that a student visa “is unfeasible as the Secretary of State lacks authority to adjudicate visa applications and issue visas”.

“In any event,” Foley added, “Petitioner appears ineligible for a student visa.” She explained that Lopez Belloza “would remain subject to detention and removal if returned to the United States”.

The filing ended with a warning to the court to “refrain from ordering Respondents to return Petitioner to the status quo because this Court lacks authority”.

The Trump administration has questioned the authority of federal courts to intervene in immigration-related matters.

A series of mistakes

Critics, meanwhile, have accused the Trump administration of repeatedly failing to heed court orders it disagrees with.

Lopez Belloza’s case is not the first instance of an immigrant being wrongfully deported since the start of Trump’s second term.

Trump had campaigned on a pledge of mass deportation, and he has followed through with that promise, leading a series of controversial immigration crackdowns that have been accused of violating due process rights.

One of the most high-profile cases came in March 2025, when his administration wrongfully deported a Salvadoran father named Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who lived in Maryland with his wife, a US citizen.

Abrego Garcia had been subject to a 2019 court order barring his removal from the US on the basis that he could face gang violence in El Salvador.

But he was nevertheless sent back to the country and was briefly held in El Salvador’s Center for Terrorism Confinement (CECOT), a maximum-security prison.

On April 10, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return, largely upholding a lower court’s decision.

But the Trump administration initially argued Abrego Garcia was outside of its power. Then, on June 6, it abruptly announced Abrego Garcia had been returned, only to file criminal charges against him and seek his deportation a second time.

Another case involved a Guatemalan man, identified only by his initials OCG.

He had been under a court protection order that barred him from being returned to Guatemala, for fear that his identity as a gay man would subject him to persecution.

But the Trump administration detained and deported him instead to Mexico, which in turn sent him back to Guatemala. He subsequently went into hiding for his safety.

In June, OCG was returned to the US after a court ordered the Trump administration to facilitate his return. It also noted that OCG’s deportation “lacked any semblance of due process”.

Lopez Belloza continues her studies at Babson College remotely from Honduras as she awaits the outcome of her legal proceedings.

WASHINGTON — A dispute over whether federal immigration agents should be allowed to wear masks during enforcement operations has become one of the biggest obstacles to keeping the Department of Homeland Security funded, pushing the government toward a partial shutdown early Saturday.

Democrats have described the practice as corrosive to public trust, arguing that masked agents create the appearance of a “secret police” force. Republican lawmakers, President Trump and his top advisors, meanwhile, have drawn a hard line against requiring officers to remove their face coverings, insisting that doing so would expose them to harassment, threats and online doxxing.

“They want our law enforcement to be totally vulnerable and put them in a lot of danger,” Trump said at a White House event Thursday. He added that it would be “very, very hard to approve” Democrats’ demands, such as unmasking federal officers.

The standoff over masking stalled negotiations as lawmakers raced to meet a funding deadline for the Department of Homeland Security at midnight Friday. Without a deal, key agency functions — from airport security to disaster relief coordination — could be affected if the shutdown drags on.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) rides the Senate subway Thursday ahead of the latest partial government shutdown.

(Graeme Sloan / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

As with every shutdown, the agency’s essential functions will continue to operate, Tricia McLaughlin, assistant Homeland Security secretary for public affairs, said in a statement. But employees performing those functions at agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, and the Transportation Security Administration could go without pay if the shutdown stretches for weeks.

The heads of those agencies told the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee on Wednesday that the shutdown is expected to create severe and lasting challenges.

Vice Adm. Thomas Allan, the acting vice commandant of the Coast Guard, said a shutdown would delay maintenance for boats and aircraft, and halt pay for 56,000 active-duty reserve and civilian personnel. Ha Nguyen McNeill, acting administrator of TSA, recounted how the last government shutdown affected her workers and spiked wait times at airports.

“We heard reports of officers sleeping in their cars at airports to save money on gas, selling their blood and plasma and taking on second jobs to make ends meet,” she said, adding that some are still recovering from the financial impact.

Operations within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection — the agencies that are central to the budget impasse — are likely to be the least affected. That’s because both agencies still have access to $75 billion in funding approved last year as part of Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.”

By midday Friday, it remained unclear when the partial shutdown would end, as lawmakers left Washington for a security conference in Munich and progress between Democratic and White House negotiators remained nebulous.

“We’ll see what happens,” Trump told reporters on Friday when asked about cutting a deal. “We always have to protect our law enforcement.”

The partial government shutdown comes at a moment of acute public anger at the agency’s approach to immigration enforcement, which has included the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, in Minneapolis.

Since the shootings, the Trump administration has tried to quell tensions. Border policy advisor Tom Homan said Thursday that the administration was ending its immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced earlier this month that the agency would be acquiring and issuing body cameras to federal agents. Trump also said he wants to employ a “softer touch” to immigration enforcement after the killings of Good and Pretti.

But Democrats maintain that they need reforms written into law. Among their demands is requiring officers to wear and turn on body cameras, banning them from wearing masks, and ending the practice of “roving patrols” and instead requiring that they carry out only targeted operations.

“We will not support an extension of the status quo, a status quo that permits masked secret police to barge into people’s homes without warrants, no guardrails and zero oversight from independent authorities,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor Thursday.

Todd M. Lyons, the acting director of ICE, told a Senate panel Thursday that he does not want to see federal agents masked either, but said he is hesitant to bar face coverings because the threats to agents are too severe.

“I would work with this committee and any committee to work with holding individuals accountable that doxx ICE agents, because ICE agents don’t want to be masked,” Lyons said. “They’re honorable men and women, but the threats against their family are real.”

Federal immigration officials are more supportive of body cameras.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott told a House committee on Tuesday that he supports expanding the use of body cameras, but said more funding is needed to hire personnel to oversee the rollout.

“Fund the entire program so that we can be transparent and that we can make sure America knows what we’re doing, because that trust is critically important,” he said.

Ben Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., said that while the White House has made some “tweaks around oversight,” its actions continue to fall short.

The association, which represents 18,000 immigration attorneys, has urged Congress to refuse more funding for ICE and CBP before implementing reforms.

“The American public wants and deserves real, meaningful guardrails that are written into law that ensure this administration — and, quite frankly, any administration — will abide by the Constitution and respect fundamental principles of due process,” Johnson said Wednesday on a call with reporters.

“Congress has a critical opportunity right now to meet that demand,” he added.

Republican Sens. James Lankford of Oklahoma, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paul of Kentucky talk during a hearing Thursday on oversight of federal immigration agencies.

(Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images)

So far, Democrats maintain they will continue to bock funding bills without accountability measures in place.

California’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, were among the Senate Democrats who helped block passage of funding bills Thursday that would have averted a shutdown because they lacked accountability measures.

“I will not support more funding for ICE until there are new guardrails to rein in its lawless conduct,” Schiff wrote on X. “I’m a no on anything but real reform.”

Padilla said he would be a “firm no” until lawmakers agree that federal immigration officers need to be held accountable.

“Donald Trump and Republicans want Americans to forget about their lawless immigration roundup, but we won’t,” Padilla said.

Trump did not give a timeline for trip, which would make him the first US president to visit the country since 1997.

Donald Trump has said he plans to become the first sitting United States president to visit Venezuela in nearly three decades.

Trump made the statement to reporters on Friday as he departed White House for the Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina, where he met soldiers involved in the US abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on January 3.

“I’m going to make a visit to Venezuela,” Trump said. He offered few details on the planned visit, telling reporters “we haven’t decided” on a date.

Still, the trip would make Trump the first sitting US president since Bill Clinton in 1997 to visit the South American country, which Trump had targeted with crippling sanctions from his first term of 2017 to 2021.

Earlier this week, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright became the first member of Trump’s cabinet to visit Venezuela and meet the government led by Maduro’s replacement, Delcy Rodriguez.

Trump has repeatedly praised Rodriguez, Maduro’s former deputy, while downplaying the prospect of supporting an opposition figure in the wake of Maduro’s abduction.

“They’ve done a great job,” Trump again said on Friday. “The oil is coming out, and a lot of money is being paid.”

For her part, Rodriguez has overseen several concessions to the US, including freezing oil shipments to Cuba, supporting a law to open the state-controlled oil industry to foreign companies, and releasing hundreds of political prisoners.

On Thursday, lawmakers in Venezuela’s parliament debated a bill that would grant amnesty to political prisoners, although it had not passed by Friday.

Easing of sanctions

Also on Friday, the US Department of the Treasury announced it was easing some sanctions on Venezuela’s energy sector, the largest reprieve since Maduro’s abduction.

The department issued two general licences, including one that allows Chevron, BP, Eni, Shell, and Repsol to conduct further oil and gas operations in Venezuela. The companies identified already have offices in the country and are among the main partners of state-run oil company PDVSA.

The second licence allows foreign companies to enter new oil and gas investment contracts with PDVSA in Venezuela.

Any contracts would be contingent on separate approval from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and do not extend to Russia, Iran, China or entities owned by nationals of those countries.

Trump has said he is seeking $100bn in foreign investments in Venezuela, while Energy Secretary Wright said early this week that Venezuelan oil sales since Maduro’s capture had hit $1bn ⁠and would reach $5bn in months.

Wright said the US will control the proceeds ⁠from the sales until a “representative government” in Venezuela is established.

UN experts have criticised US influence over the country’s natural resources as a violation of citizens’ right to self-determination.

Speaking during his address on Fort Bragg, Trump also took time to praise the operation to abduct Maduro.

Legal experts have called it a flagrant violation of international law and Venezuela’s sovereignty, regardless of whether Washington viewed Maduro as the country’s legitimate elected leader following disputed elections in 2024.

“Everybody was running for the hills,” Trump said of the January 3 attack, which killed more than 100 Cuban and Venezuelan security personnel, “and that’s what we have. We have the strongest military in the world by far.”

US President Donald Trump says a second aircraft carrier strike group will deploy to the Middle East, increasing pressure on Iran as negotiations over its nuclear programme continue.

PRESIDENT Donald Trump has revealed why the FBI hasn’t taken over the search for Nancy Guthrie as the investigation approaches the two week mark.

He confirmed the reason the federal agency was pushed to the backburner when asked about the missing 84-year-old on Friday.

On Friday, Fox News reporter Jacqui Heinrich asked Trump, “Why hasn’t the FBI taken over the Nancy Guthrie case as the lead investigator?

“Do you have any updates on how it’s going?”

Trump responded, “Well, they took it over originally. You know, it was a local case originally, and, they didn’t want to let go of it, which is fine.

“It’s up to them. It’s really up to the communities. But ultimately, when the FBI got involved, I think, you know, progress has been made.”

In the past few days, several reports have claimed the Pima County Sheriff’s Department in Tucson, Arizona, is at odds with federal authorities over the investigation.

Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos was accused of bypassing federal analysts by an anonymous FBI source who spoke with Reuters.

However, Nanos dismissed the concerns and vowed he was collaborating with other agencies to find the truth.

He responded to reports claiming that he sent DNA evidence and gloves recovered at the scene to a lab in Florida without keeping the FBI in the loop.

“Actually, the FBI just wanted to send [to their own lab] the one or two [gloves] they found by the crime scene, closest to it, mile, mile and a half,” he told NBC affiliate KVOA.

“I said, ‘No, why do that? Let’s just send them all to where all the DNA exist, all the profiles and the markers exist.’ They agreed, makes sense.”

More to follow… For the latest news on this story, keep checking back at The U.S. Sun, your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, sports news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures, and must-see videos.

Like us on Facebook at TheSunUS and follow us on X at @TheUSSun