US & Canada

‘A major failure’

A round-faced man with dark-rimmed glasses, a moustache and short-trimmed hair, Ismael came to the US when he was only five years old.

Southern California became his home, and as an adult, he qualified for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programme, which offered temporary protection against deportation.

He lost his DACA status, however, in 2015 after a conviction for driving under the influence.

His family remembers him as a caring son and uncle, always willing to buy his niece and nephew new clothes or school supplies.

“Ismael was always looking after his siblings. He just had a big heart,” said his brother, Jose Miguel Ayala. “He was very protective of not just us, but my mum and dad too.”

He was 39 years old when he was brought to the Adelanto ICE Processing Center.

Two weeks after his arrival, Ismael told his family that he developed a high fever and a painful sore on his backside.

On September 18, 2025, workers at Adelanto initiated a Code Blue alert for Ismael, signalling a life-threatening medical emergency. Medical staff rushed him from his dorm to the infirmary in a wheelchair.

ICE documents show that Ismael was given pain medication, an ointment and a fibre supplement.

But according to Physicians for Human Rights’ Cuneo, who reviewed the case, Ismael should have received a physical examination and antibiotics.

“That is a major failure,” Cuneo said.

That weekend, hours after Lucia’s visit, Ismael’s condition worsened. Just after midnight on Sunday, ICE records say he was vomiting, shaking and sweating.

According to ICE documents, he was later sent to an intensive care unit, where he went into cardiac arrest within minutes of his arrival and subsequently died.

“I believe Ismael’s death could have fully been prevented by timely care,” Cuneo said. “It was a simple abscess that was not treated in a timely manner.”

Fault Lines obtained a coroner’s investigation that reveals Ismael was critically ill when he first arrived at the hospital, a fact that was left out of ICE’s public report on his death.

The coroner’s report also contradicts ICE’s timeline for Ismael’s death. It indicates Ismael went into cardiac arrest early on September 21, nearly a full day before he passed away. Medical staff, however, managed to restore his heartbeat after intubating him.

That conflicts with ICE’s report, which only notes his pulse stopping once: shortly before his death was announced on the morning of September 22. ICE described his condition on September 21 as “calm and cooperative”, but it signalled no heart problems.

“If they had given him the medical care and what he needed, maybe he would be here with us,” Lucia said.

In a statement about Ismael’s death, ICE said detainees receive “comprehensive medical care” throughout their time in custody.

But California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta told Fault Lines that his office found “the exact opposite” during its inspections of the state’s detention centres.

“We’ve gone to these facilities. We’ve gone into Adelanto. We have done our own physical inspections,” Bonta explained.

“If what the ICE spokesperson said was true, Mr Ayala-Uribe would be with us today.”

An internal mortality review committee also found that the care provided to Ismael at Adelanto “deviated beyond safe limits of practice”, according to a document obtained by US media earlier this year.

It also suggests that medical staff delayed responding to calls about Ismael’s declining health in the days leading up to his death.

Widespread voter disillusionment and pocketbook anxieties set a volatile stage for the GOP weeks before election night.

Voter sentiment across the United States is increasingly negative towards US President Donald Trump’s domestic and foreign policies, according to a new Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll.

In the closing weeks before the November 3 US congressional midterm elections, 80 percent of Americans polled said the country needs substantial change or “complete and total upheaval” in how it is run, according to the survey of over 1,100 US adults released on Thursday.

Democrats and independents are much more likely than Republicans to want a total overhaul of the country’s direction, the survey found, but even Republican voters are still looking for some change. Slightly fewer than half, 45 percent, want substantial change, while 13 percent are seeking upheaval.

The results point to a pervasive appetite for legislative realignment that poses a risk to the Republican Party’s power as it looks to keep control of both houses of the US Congress.

Fuelled by soaring living costs, everyday economics is driving a majority of the electorate, with 85 percent of respondents saying the economy is one of the most significant issues in weighing their vote in the upcoming election. About eight in 10 registered voters disapprove of how Trump is handling the cost of living, and about three-quarters disapprove of his performance on the economy.

Only about one-third of registered voters overall have a “very” or “somewhat” favourable view of the Republican president, and a similar share approve of his performance as president.

More voters want Democrats to win control of Congress and have a more negative view of Republicans.

Immigration and crime rates are also top concerns for some voters, according to the survey results, with 45 percent of voters identifying them as top priorities, though the two issues are prioritised disproportionately by Republican voters who reference them more frequently than Democrats. Conversely, Democratic voters are more prone to name healthcare as their top priority.

Emerging cultural and technological concerns drew less immediate alarm across the board: 35 percent of voters ranked artificial intelligence as a substantial issue, while transgender issues sit significantly lower at 12 percent.

Healthcare is also considered a top issue for 69 percent of voters, while 64 percent cite the war on Iran as top-of-mind.

Despite their grievances, a majority of voters across both major American parties still value civic engagement.

About two-thirds of registered voters in the survey say it’s “extremely” important to vote in the upcoming election, while about two in 10 say it’s “very” important. Seventy-five percent of Democratic voters view it as “extremely” important, compared to roughly 60 percent of Republican respondents.

The United States has developed plans to strike Iran with the largest non-nuclear bomb in its military arsenal on Iran’s energy infrastructure and nuclear sites if President Donald Trump orders renewed combat operations, according to US officials cited by CNN.

Deploying the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB), nicknamed the “mother of all bombs”, could significantly escalate the ongoing conflict at a time when fighting has lulled, experts say.

Concerns are also being raised, including within the Trump administration itself, over what such a move would even achieve. Officials familiar with military planning discussions told US news outlet CNN and Al Jazeera that deploying the MOAB would be unlikely to help the US achieve its stated strategic goals, including to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Brussels-based military expert Elijah Magnier told Al Jazeera that using the MOAB would not even guarantee the destruction of Iran’s deeply buried underground nuclear installations and that such a strike would likely amount to little more than “political theatre”.

Here’s what we know:

What is the MOAB?

The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) is a massive munition containing about 8,500kg (18,000 pounds or 8.5 tonnes) of high explosives. It weighs 9,800kg (21,605 pounds or nearly 10 tonnes) – about the same as four saloon cars – and is as long as a small yacht at just over 9 metres (about 30 feet).

The MOAB is typically deployed from the Lockheed C-130 Hercules cargo aircraft because it cannot fit in a stealth bomber.

The bomb, which was first manufactured between 2002 and 2003, has undergone 12 detonation tests.

Its name is a reference to former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s comments during the 1991 Gulf War when he invoked the “mother of all battles”.

The US has only deployed the MOAB once before – during its 2017 attacks on an Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP) cave and tunnel complex in Afghanistan. Afghan authorities claimed that while 94 Islamic State-Khorasan Province (ISKP) fighters were killed in the blast, no civilians were hurt. However, there were unconfirmed, local reports of civilian casualties and many homes were destroyed.

What is the ‘mother of all bombs’?

The GBU-43/B, the US’s most powerful non-nuclear bomb, was used once, against Islamic State-Khorasan…

GBU-43/B

Pallet is deployed from rear cargo door of MC-130H or C-17aircraft.

1. Released from the aircraft.

2. Cradle separates; GPS and fins guide it.

3. H6 explosives detonate.

4. A powerful shockwave spreads.

5. Hot gases, smoke and debris rise in a mushroom cloud.

1 of 4

What kind of damage can it cause?

Designed to explode a few feet above the ground, the MOAB sends out lethal waves of fire when it detonates, blasting away buildings, cave openings and other hard-surface structures.

“Its purpose is to generate an exceptionally powerful blast across a surface area,” Magnier said.

Military expert Colonel Nidal Abu Zeid told Al Jazeera the bomb does not require impact in order to detonate and that its massive blast will destroy everything above ground within a 1km (0.6-mile) radius.

It is likely that the US would aim to use the high-explosive MOAB to completely destroy Iran’s ground-force positions above ground, and to reach its underground facilities, including Pickaxe Mountain, which Trump has previously threatened to attack, Abu Zeid said.

However, Magnier said the bomb’s radius and level of destruction would depend greatly on the terrain it is used within and how populated the area is. He added that it may not be particularly effective against targets buried deep underground.

Some of Iran’s nuclear sites which the US may wish to target, such as the Fordow complex and an under-construction site at the Pickaxe Mountain, are heavily fortified and deeply buried.

“Its large explosive charge can produce devastating blast effects against exposed personnel, equipment and vulnerable structures,” Magnier said. “The Afghanistan operation demonstrates its intended application against a cave-and-tunnel position; it does not demonstrate an ability to destroy every kind of underground installation.”

While its blast can reach underground, the MOAB is not especially designed to punch through deep concrete or mountain rock in the way that a “bunker buster” bomb is. The US military’s most powerful bunker buster is the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator. Weighing about 30,000 pounds (13,600kg), including a 2,700kg (6,000 pound) warhead, this precision-guided bomb is made of high-strength steel and built to penetrate up to 200 feet (61 metres) underground before exploding.

Would the US really use an MOAB?

It already has done – in Afghanistan in 2017.

However, besides not being guaranteed to hit underground targets effectively, Magnier told Al Jazeera it could be difficult to deploy the necessary aircraft in the regions of Iran where nuclear sites are located. Stealth bombers which are better suited to this terrain are not able to carry this size of bomb.

Using the bomb could also destroy infrastructure without inducing Iran to make any concessions, he added, noting that its deployment would risk turning “a spectacular event” into one that ultimately delivers few political results for Washington.

“The question I would put to any commander advocating its use is straightforward: What will this weapon accomplish that another available weapon cannot, and how will that result advance an achievable political settlement?,” Magnier said.

“If the answer centres on the spectacle of the explosion, the proposal is stronger as political theatre than as military strategy,” he added.

CNN reported that Trump, in private discussions, has been seeking a “definitive” end to the war that will prove Washington has been undefeated.

How might Iran respond?

A MOAB strike would likely prompt a major reaction from Iran, experts say, warning that Tehran could even invade its neighbours who host US military assets in response.

Iranian security officials have for months made comments regarding a possible invasion of countries like Kuwait to capture US troops and force Washington to surrender.

In May, during a pause in hostilities, Kuwait alleged that sailors from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) infiltrated its Bubiyan Island, leading to an exchange of fire between Iranian and Kuwaiti forces. One Kuwaiti was injured and four Iranian soldiers were captured.

Iran denied that it had invaded the island and said the troops’ navigation system had malfunctioned.

On Tuesday, IRGC security adviser Mohammad Reza Naghdi warned that Iran could capture troops if Washington were to launch ground attacks, although military experts have long dismissed Trump’s earlier threats of an invasion due to Iran’s mountainous terrain.

“If the United States launches a ground attack, so many of its troops will be captured that it will be forced to raise the white flag,” he said.

Experts say Iran has been preparing for another round of war by stockpiling weapons, fortifying key nuclear and defence locations, and rallying its supporters.

In a television broadcast on Sunday, National Security Council chief Mohsen Rezaei threatened that Iran would attack regional digital infrastructure, including communication cables, data centres and artificial intelligence facilities in the United Arab Emirates and others, if American strikes resume.

Football’s global governing body is expected to change a rule that allowed a red card for USA forward Folarin Balogun to be controversially overturned during the World Cup, according to media reports on the agenda for Thursday’s FIFA council meeting in Zurich.

The decision-making body is convening for the first time since this year’s tournament, and a ⁠⁠motion to prohibit such actions in the future will be top of the agenda. Members will also discuss the organisation’s funding, rules and other matters amid a turbulent time in the sport.

During the World Cup’s round-of-32 match, Balogun received a red card for stepping awkwardly on the right ankle of Tarik Muharemovic of Bosnia in a 2-0 win for the home team. It triggered an automatic one-game suspension.

However, United States President Donald Trump urged FIFA President Gianni Infantino to review the case, and Balogun’s red card was overturned, allowing him to play in the USA’s round-of-16 match against Belgium.

The decision to overturn Balogun’s red card ignited one of the tournament’s biggest controversies, with widespread criticism from football federations, former FIFA officials, experts and coaches.

The 37-member FIFA council is expected to vote on whether to prohibit disciplinary committees from overturning automatic match suspensions at the World Cup, but the Balogun controversy is unlikely to go away.

FIFA Vice President Debbie Hewitt is among the sport’s leaders who have asked ‌‌‌‌Infantino to release all documents related to the case.

Thursday’s FIFA council meeting is the first since Infantino came ‌‌‌‌under ‌‌‌‌fire earlier this year for a now-shelved plan to sell a 20 percent stake in the World Cup’s commercial business to private investors.

Infantino has faced calls to resign from the leaders of three regional football confederations – UEFA (Europe), AFC (Asia) ⁠⁠⁠⁠and CONCACAF (North and Central America and the Caribbean) – and their representatives will be present in Zurich for the FIFA meeting.

They will be joined by their counterparts from Africa, South America and Oceania.

On the agenda will be a discussion of the failed FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) scheme, which Infantino was forced to abandon ⁠⁠⁠⁠within days of announcing it in July.

Under the plan, Infantino proposed selling a minority stake in a FIFA commercial subsidiary to private investors, with a company launched by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, identified as the proposed lead investor.

The council will also address FIFA’s governance, with some of the sport’s most powerful figures determined to limit Infantino’s powers if they cannot force him out of office.

Infantino, 56, will stand for re-election in March 2027, with a ‌‌‌‌November 18 deadline looming for potential candidates to submit their nominations.

Americans can rest easy – for the moment, at least. The fine folks at the Federal Bureau of Investigation have thwarted a major national security threat.

On October 9, the FBI arrested 35-year-old engineer Abdulrahman Alfozan, a Saudi citizen employed at the California-based artificial intelligence company OpenAI, the maker of the chatbot ChatGPT, and a firm that describes its mission as ensuring that “artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity”.

A press release from the United States Department of Justice said that Alfozan was accused of installing a “surreptitious audio recording device” in an executive conference room at the OpenAI offices in San Francisco.

The statement quoted Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton’s assessment that “this serious situation underscores why winning the global super intelligence race is a national security prerogative”. (For those who have not yet got the memo, US President Donald Trump recently decreed that the term “artificial intelligence” be changed to “super intelligence” or “SI.”)

FBI director Kash Patel concurred that “protecting American SI innovation is essential to safeguarding our nation’s economic strength and national security”, and assured everyone that the FBI would continue doing its part “to ensure our country maintains its competitive edge”.

So much for the separation of corporation and state in the world’s self-appointed greatest democracy.

The covert device was reported to have been concealed in toilet paper and attached to the back of a television monitor. The Gizmodo website has noted with amusement that, despite being cast as a “sophisticated” spying apparatus, the device in question can in fact be easily ordered online “for the low low price of $13.99”.

If convicted, Alfozan faces up to five years in jail and a fine of $250,000.

Now, some of you may still be asking what the big deal is – and why the US government is acting like it’s 1950 and the Soviets are stealing our nuclear secrets.

The spectacle becomes all the more curious when we consider that the company up in arms over the alleged attempted theft of its technology owes much of its existence – and massive valuation – to stealing stuff from people.

The day before Alfozan’s arrest, USA Today and several other newspapers sued OpenAI in a Manhattan federal court for copyright infringement and the unauthorised use of hundreds of thousands of news articles and other materials to develop ChatGPT.

And back in July, various US media outlets including the New York Times and the New York Daily News requested that a federal judge impose sanctions on OpenAI for “hiding and destroying evidence showing how ChatGPT was trained on stolen journalism”, as attorney Steven Lieberman put it.

The moral of the story, perhaps, is that when OpenAI steals things it’s to “benefit all of humanity” – but when a 35-year-old Saudi engineer does it, it’s a national security crisis.

In case we were not already bored to tears hearing about national security, US Attorney General Todd Blanche took to X on Tuesday to preach that the “theft of intellectual property involving cutting-edge super intelligence technology poses a serious threat to our national security”, necessitating continued “swift action … to protect American innovation and safeguard our nation”.

Of course, many Americans might wonder why “innovation” gets such special treatment when they themselves are so often on the receiving end of government abuse. The frequency with which US police officers murder unarmed Black people, for instance, would seem to indicate that there are far more literal threats to the nation’s security than a $14 device hidden in toilet paper.

But human security is of no interest to a corporatocracy increasingly dominated by AI, an industry that thrives on putting people out of jobs and that is deeply entwined in a number of sordid developments at home and abroad. Among them is mass surveillance, which combines AI-assisted violations of civil liberties and constitutional protections with good old police state “innovation”.

To that end, a bunch of US cops have taken advantage of new AI-powered technology, such as automated licence plate readers, to stalk their exes. Then there is the matter of the FBI and other government agencies buying up data en masse from tech companies in a bid to keep tabs, Big Brother-style, on everyone’s personal information at all times.

It makes you think twice about the sudden concern for “spying” in the Alfozan case.

As for threats to other people’s national security, OpenAI and like-minded tech companies that do business with the Pentagon have been complicit in recent US aggression – from Venezuela to Iran – as the US pursues its strategy for “Accelerating America’s Military AI Dominance” (concocted before Trump mandated the renaming of AI as SI).

Israel, too, has exploited OpenAI technology, among other US-made goodies, to conduct its contemporary apocalyptic exercises in the Middle East. Last year, the Associated Press news agency (AP) revealed that US tech giants had “quietly empowered Israel to track and kill many more alleged militants more quickly in Gaza and Lebanon through a sharp spike in artificial intelligence and computing services”.

The AP report went on to note that “the number of civilians killed has also soared, fueling fears that these tools are contributing to the deaths of innocent people”.

But while it might be news to the AP, that is unfortunately how a genocide works.

And as the US goes to war for AI dominance while the tech giants bank on a post-human world, one can’t help but feel that the toilet paper was a nice touch, indeed.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Coworker alerted police after receiving disturbing messages from 19-year-old suspect.

A ‌teenager arrested in a Chicago suburb had shared a document expressing ⁠white supremacist ⁠views and outlined an alleged plan to carry out a mass shooting, potentially targeting a Hindu place of worship, police in the US state of Illinois have said.

Alexandros Paporakis, 19, of Palatine, was arrested on Sunday after an individual reported receiving concerning electronic communications from him, Palatine police said on Wednesday. It was not ⁠immediately clear whether he had legal representation.

Detectives searched Paporakis’s home and recovered a rifle, multiple loaded rifle magazines and hundreds of additional rounds of rifle ammunition.

“Among the recovered items was a tactical vest containing body armor and a patch displaying imagery associated with white supremacist extremism,” a police statement said.

Paporakis’s coworker reportedly told police that he openly identified himself as a white supremacist at work and said he “couldn’t wait” to kill Indian people, according to prosecutors from the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office.

Detectives recovered a document called “Why I fought: A.K.A.: (Aurora Shooter’s Manifesto)” which had sentiments expressing white supremacist and extremist ideologies, referencing violence towards South Asians, specifically Indians.

Authorities believed Paporakis was planning to carry out his attack on Sunday, possibly targeting a Hindu temple in Aurora, 40 miles (65km) southwest of Palatine.

“However, the specific intended location has not been confirmed and remains under ⁠investigation,” the police said, adding the FBI was assisting in the probe.

Police said Paporakis is facing felony charges of “making a terrorist threat” and possessing an unlawful weapon.

The suspect appeared for a detention hearing on Wednesday and his next court appearance is scheduled for the end of October.

Human rights advocates said hate against South Asians has surged in the United States in recent years due to rising anti-immigration policies and a rise in white supremacist ideology.

The G20 finance ministers and central bank governors are gathering in Bangkok, Thailand, on Thursday amid an uncertain global outlook shaped by the US-Israel war on Iran.

The meetings are being held in conjunction with the annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, taking place in the Thai capital from October 12 to October 18.

Here are some of the key details about the meetings:

What are the G20, the IMF and the World Bank?

The G20 is an economic forum comprising 19 large economies, including the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Australia, Brazil, India, Japan, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, as well as the European Union and the African Union.

The grouping has an annually rotating presidency, currently held by the US.

Together, the G20 countries account for about 85 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP) and three-quarters of global trade.

The G20 was established in 1999 as a forum for finance ministers and central bank governors to address shared economic concerns in the wake of the Asian Financial Crisis, before expanding into a broader forum for national leaders.

The IMF, based in Washington, DC, is an international financial institution that promotes international cooperation on monetary policy, trade and economic growth.

Its membership includes all but a handful of the world’s sovereign states, including North Korea, Cuba, the Vatican City and Monaco.

The World Bank, also based in Washington, DC, primarily serves as a provider of loans and grants to developing countries. It has 189 member countries.

The IMF and the World Bank were created at the 1944 Bretton Woods conference in the US, convened by the Allied Powers to establish the contours of the post-World War II international financial order.

Who will be attending the meetings?

Most finance ministers and central bank governors of the G20 will be in Bangkok, along with IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva and World Bank Group President Ajay Banga.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will be a notable absence from the gatherings, as the top economic official of the world’s biggest economy and G20 chair.

US officials have cited “domestic engagements” for Bessent’s decision to skip the events, at which Washington will be represented by Deputy Secretary Francis Brooke and Undersecretary for International Affairs Erin Browne.

The G20 meeting, one of several gatherings of the group’s finance ministers each year, will help shape the agenda for the headline leaders’ summit in Miami, Florida, taking place on December 14-15.

What is on the agenda?

The economic fallout from the US-Israel war on Iran is expected to dominate discussions.

Attacks across the Middle East have upended economic activity across the region, while disruption to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz has driven a surge in energy prices worldwide.

Crude oil prices have exceeded $100 a barrel for much of the past eight months, placing a strain on government coffers and household budgets, particularly in the Gulf region and the rest of Asia.

In advance of the meeting, Australia’s Treasurer Jim Chalmers MP said he would use the discussions to call for an end to the conflicts in the Middle East and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz “because that’s what the global economy desperately needs”.

“The war in the Middle East is having a devastating economic impact and is pushing up fuel prices, inflation and interest rates around the world,” Chalmers said in a statement.

Other issues likely to feature on the agenda include the ballooning debt levels of many countries, which exceed 100 percent of GDP in the US, Canada, Japan, Italy and France.

In a speech on Wednesday, Georgieva warned that mounting debt posed a threat to the global economy and that there was no “magic” formula that would allow governments to avoid tax hikes or spending cuts.

G20 members will also bring more specific individual concerns to the table based on their economic and geopolitical priorities.

The US, for example, has repeatedly expressed concern about “global imbalances”, a veiled reference to China’s state-driven industrial model that has allowed Chinese exporters to flood overseas markets with cheap goods.

US President Donald Trump has long claimed that China’s large trade surplus, which stood at a cumulative $938bn in September, proves that international trade is stacked against US manufacturers.

In a statement addressed to the IMF on Wednesday, Bessent called for action to address mismatched trade balances.

“This especially includes strengthening its analysis and engagement on the role non-market policies and practices and exchange rates play in driving external imbalances,” Bessent said.

“Policymakers around the world are having difficult discussions about how to sustain market-based systems amid distortionary policies from some economies that skew competition and hurt employment.”

Divisions and competing interests cloud the prospects for coordination, however.

At the last meeting of G20 finance ministers in Asheville, North Carolina, US, held on August 31 and September 1, member countries failed to issue a joint communique after China objected to language to do with trade.

The US president has long been unhappy with inside information about his administration being leaked to the media.

United States President Donald Trump has suggested that those who leak information to the news media should be shot as punishment.

Trump made the remarks at a campaign rally in Bullhead City, Arizona, as he urged supporters to vote in the November 3 midterm elections.

“In my opinion, leakers should be shot,” Trump told the crowd. “In the old days, we used to shoot leakers, you know, when they leak what time you’re going to attack a country.”

Trump made the statement in an apparent reference to Operation Midnight Hammer, which saw the US launch a surprise attack on Iran in June 2025 during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran.

In the aftermath of the attack, several media outlets published findings from a preliminary report by the US Defense Intelligence Agency.

That report – which had not yet been released to the public – indicated that Iran was able to move some of its enriched uranium away from the sites the US had bombed.

It also suggested that the extent of the damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities was more modest than what Trump had asserted.

Trump, however, appeared to signal that the timing of the US attacks was among the leaked information. He accused the news media of putting military members in danger, calling out The New York Times and CNN in particular.

“They leaked the time we were leaving, the time we were arriving,” Trump said, claiming he had to reschedule the bombing campaign two days later as a result.

“Somebody leaked. Some sleaze-bag, they ought to go to jail or be shot. For the rest of their life, they should be in jail.”

Trump has long had an adversarial relationship with the news media, and he has previously called for harsh punishment against any official who passes on confidential information to news outlets.

After parts of the Defense Intelligence Agency report became public, he blamed lawmakers in the Democratic Party for its release.

“The Democrats are the ones who leaked the information on the PERFECT FLIGHT to the Nuclear Sites in Iran,” Trump wrote on social media at the time. “They should be prosecuted!”

Under Trump, the White House has taken aggressive action to track down the source of leaks.

Staff in his administration, as well as officers in the military, have also been asked to take polygraph tests.

Journalists at several news outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, have also received subpoenas aimed at determining the sources of internal information made public.

The newspapers had reported on stories such as a botched Navy SEALs raid in North Korea and how Trump ignored internal Pentagon warnings against launching the Iran war.

Last year, the Department of Defense demanded that journalists who wished to access the Pentagon sign an agreement not to publish unauthorised material.

Much of the Pentagon press corps refused to agree, and a federal court struck down many of the new demands made on journalists at the department.

Trump has long raged against leakers, going back to his first term as president from 2017 to 2021.

Former White House official Alyssa Farah Griffin told a podcast in 2024 that Trump had called for leakers to be executed, after media outlets reported that he had taken shelter in a White House bunker during racial justice protests in 2020.

Trump appeared to reprise that sentiment in his speech to Arizona voters on Wednesday, less than three weeks before the November 3 midterms.

“Leakers should be dealt with very, very strongly,” Trump said. “To me, they are the scum of the earth.”

Katie Zacharia, the new White House press secretary under United States President Donald Trump, has drawn increasing criticism over claims about her professional background.

On Wednesday, a public accountability nonprofit filed a complaint with the State Bar of California over Zacharia’s repeated claims that she was a lawyer.

If made falsely, such a claim is a crime in the state. According to Zacharia’s LinkedIn profile, she received a degree from the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law in 2011, but critics have questioned whether she received a licence to practise law, as she has suggested.

“Ms. Zacharia has represented herself as a lawyer repeatedly to buttress her reputation and credibility as a television legal commentator and now as the White House spokesperson,” Michelle Kuppersmith, the head of the Washington, DC-based Campaign for Accountability, said in a statement. “Yet it seems it was all a lie.”

Her organisation filed the complaint with California’s bar office, a regulatory agency that oversees the licensing of lawyers.

“In California, calling yourself a lawyer without a license isn’t puffery; it’s a crime,” Kuppersmith said.

“The State Bar should investigate whether Ms. Zacharia has misled the public about her credentials and hold her accountable if she has.”

Zacharia, a commentator who has appeared frequently on Fox News and Newsmax, began her term as White House press secretary on Tuesday.

In a news briefing that day, she seemed to falter and speak haltingly, sometimes having to repeat herself.

Her appearance was brief, lasting under 15 minutes. She spent much of her time at the podium thanking Trump for the opportunity and reading from a prepared statement.

“I have wanted to work for him for a very long time,” Zacharia said.

Later, she joined Trump outside the White House to speak further with reporters. When asked where she had passed the bar exam, Zacharia replied, “When I moved to China.”

The response was an apparent reference to a three-year stint in which she claims she worked at a law firm in Beijing.

A biography on the website for the pro-Trump women’s organisation Trumpettes USA Inc says she “served as outside counsel” for the World Bank and International Finance Corporation while in Beijing.

Her LinkedIn profile, meanwhile, indicates Zacharia served as an associate at the Zhong Lun Law Firm in Beijing from 2011 to 2013. More recently, from 2024 to 2025, it lists her as general counsel for Fix California, a voter rights group started by a Trump administration official.

On her Instagram profile, Zacharia describes herself as a “Wife, Mom, & Lawyer”.

But Zacharia’s assertion that she passed the bar in China has fuelled media scrutiny. China’s equivalent of the bar exam, the notoriously difficult National Unified Legal Professional Qualification Examination, can only be taken by Chinese citizens.

China has, on rare occasion, allowed foreigners to practise law in the country if they have several years of experience in their home countries first.

But that does not appear to be the case for Zacharia. According to media reports, Zacharia has not been found to be licensed as a lawyer in any state in the US.

In a statement to The Associated Press, Zacharia responded to the scrutiny by saying, “I practice international transaction law, with all the appropriate credentials.”

Since Trump’s return to office for a second term, Zacharia has spent several months as a communications adviser at the Department of Homeland Security.

Since June, she has also worked as the senior communications adviser at the Trump Media and Technology Group, which owns the Truth Social platform.

The immigration agency has rejected a report from a government watchdog, making suggestions for improved body camera policy.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a United States agency that has taken a central role in President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign, has rejected a government report calling for its agents to wear body cameras that automatically activate.

On Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan agency that provides research to Congress, released a report recommending an update to ICE guidelines for camera usage.

It suggested that “automated camera activation” would be helpful in situations where “unexpected and unplanned incidents, unrelated to sensitive operations, result in use of force by or against personnel”.

“Given the important role of body-worn cameras in law enforcement activities, we maintain that additional controls are needed to help ensure that ICE personnel capture footage in accordance with policy,” the report said.

Automatic activation, it added, would address difficulties ICE agents face in manually turning on their cameras during enforcement operations.

But ICE has rejected the recommendation for automatic activation, which could be triggered by an agent pulling a gun or turning on a car siren. The agency cited privacy concerns.

But the Trump administration faces public pressure to improve transparency during its immigration raids.

Agents from ICE and other agencies such as Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have faced accusations of excessive force and civil liberties violations.

In January, two US citizens – Renee Good and Alex Pretti – were shot to death in separate shootings in Minneapolis, Minnesota, during immigration operations.

The New York Times estimated in July that immigration agents had opened fire on at least 25 people since the start of Trump’s second term. A CBS News review updated this week counts at least 30 shootings, with nine people killed and 13 others wounded.

ICE has often blamed such incidents on aggression against its agents, and it has argued that its officers have opened fire to defend themselves from danger.

But in several cases, that rationale has come under scrutiny.

Critics argued that video footage in Good’s fatal shooting disproved government statements alleging that she had weaponised her vehicle against agents. Her car, according to observers, appeared to be turning away from agents, not towards them.

In another case, ICE agent Christian Castro was accused of making false statements about a shooting that resulted in injury to Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, a Venezuelan man living in Minneapolis.

Castro faces federal charges for allegedly lying about being attacked with a snow shovel and broom before the shooting, after video footage contradicted his account. Castro pleaded not guilty last month.

More recently, on October 8, immigration agents shot a man named Oscar Belgal in New York City while his five-year-old son was in the backseat of his car. ICE stated that Belgal appeared to be “going towards officers” in his car when they opened fire.

On Tuesday, a judge rejected the government’s effort to have Belgal deported.

Activists say better recording procedures for body camera footage could help clarify what happened in such incidents.

But the Trump administration has largely refused to implement reforms to ICE protocol.

Earlier this year, Democrats in Congress delayed funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, on the basis that significant changes needed to be made to reduce incidents of excessive force.

The department said on Wednesday that automatically recording cameras could result in “the unauthorised recording of sensitive interactions with informants or victims”.

The agency added that all ICE offices had received body cameras as of August 5, but that training in their use was still ongoing and would be finished “soon”.

Recent US-Greenland-Denmark agreement excludes mining or drilling rights while reinforcing Greenland’s sovereignty.

Denmark has demanded that US resource exploration in Greenland respect the island’s laws amid President Donald Trump’s claim that oil, gas and mineral extraction will soon begin there.

The Danish Foreign Ministry reaffirmed on Wednesday that last month’s agreement between Denmark, Greenland and the US did not alter the rules for extraction.

The agreement “does not grant investors from the US any preferential treatment” over investors from other NATO and EU countries when it comes to access to natural resources in Greenland, the ministry said.

In a post on Truth Social, US President Trump called the semi-autonomous Danish territory “our new and beautiful Greenland”.

“Massive Oil, Gas, and Mineral Exploration is getting ready to begin,” he wrote, without providing details.

What the deal covers

Trump, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen signed the 10-page agreement on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York on September 22, ending months of tensions over Trump’s threats to control Greenland.

The deal allows the US to “modernise and expand” its activities at the Pituffik Space Base, a remote US military installation in northwest Greenland.

It also paved the way for two new military bases and Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defence system, while reaffirming Danish sovereignty and Greenlanders’ right to self-determination.

It did not allocate any rights for mining or drilling.

Greenland’s ban

Greenland banned uranium mining and all future oil exploration in 2021.

Its government is reviewing whether a Texas firm, Greenland Energy, can use permits that predate the ban.

The company said in August it planned to drill for oil in 2027 at an untested basin on Greenland’s east coast, although it lacked its own permit.

Danish security policy adviser Jacob Kaarsbo said Trump’s comments could signal that his desire to control Greenland remains unchanged.

“It is extremely dangerous to view this agreement between the Trump administration and Denmark as something that has altered Trump’s intentions,” he said.

Mikkel Olesen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies, told Al Jazeera that details regarding mining and exploration rights remained unclear and that information coming mostly from the US side should be taken “with a grain of salt”.

Richard Weitz, a fellow at the NATO Defense College in Rome, said Trump “backed down and settled for less” than he sought, but still “got pretty much everything he wanted, except formal annexation”.

Economists divided on Fed rate hike as inflation creates uncertainty in run-up to US midterm elections in a tense market.

United States consumer prices jumped in September in the final inflation report before the midterm elections, increasing chances of an interest rate hike later this month.

Annual inflation accelerated to 3.7 percent, up from 3.4 percent in August. On a monthly basis, prices rose by 0.6 percent, according to the Consumer Price Index report released by the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Wednesday.

Petrol prices led the surge as tensions between the US and Iran, as well as Russia and Ukraine, weighed on global energy prices. Petrol prices rose 9.1 percent in September, accounting for more than half of the CPI monthly increase, according to the BLS. They were up 34.2 percent from the same time a year ago.

“The directionless war in Iran continues to disrupt global supply chains, driving up the prices of food and fuel,” Kyle Moore, chief economist at The Century Foundation, an economic think tank, said in a statement provided to Al Jazeera.

Petrol prices have continued to climb. The average price for a gallon of petrol is $4.33 ($1.14 per litre), compared with $4.31 a month ago, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA), which tracks daily petrol prices. Diesel prices are higher, at $6.29 per gallon (1.66 per litre), compared with $6.23 a month ago.

In a post on X, Patrick DeHaan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, said, “2026 has now seen more days with average gas prices over $4/gal than any year before: 158 days.”

Shelter costs also jumped 0.4 percent from the previous month, following a 0.3 percent increase in August. Food costs were a bright spot in the report, remaining unchanged overall.

Food away from home, including restaurant meals, rose 0.2 percent, but that increase was offset by a 0.1 percent decline in food-at-home prices, which track grocery costs.

At the grocery store, poultry prices jumped 0.7 percent, fruit and vegetable prices rose 0.5 percent, and juice prices increased 1.1 percent. However, milk prices dropped 2.1 percent and beef prices fell 0.9 percent.

Amid heavy investment in AI infrastructure, prices for computer software and accessories have jumped 28 percent from the same time last year.

“The AI boom is playing a huge part, and we have all read about the hundreds of billions being poured into data centers, AI firms, and models,” Rami Cassis, principal of Parabellum Investment, said in comments provided to Al Jazeera.

Fed pressures

The inflation data comes days before the US Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision later this month. Last month, the US central bank raised rates by 25 basis points, bringing the target range to 3.75–4.00 percent, the first hike in three years.

Economists are divided over whether the Fed will raise rates again or hold them steady. According to CME FedWatch, which tracks the likelihood of monetary policy decisions, there is a 52.9 percent chance that rates will remain in the 3.75–4.00 percent range, while a 47.1 percent chance of a quarter of a percentage point hike that would bring them to 4.00–4.25 percent.

The inflation data puts pressure on Republicans before the midterm elections on November 3. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that about 78 percent of Americans blamed US President Donald Trump’s policies for price increases.

US markets trended downward following the inflation report. The Nasdaq fell 0.8 percent and the S&P 500 dropped 0.6 percent, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average was roughly flat in midday trading.

United States federal agents have arrested a Saudi national and charged him with planting a hidden audio recording device in a conference room at the California offices of OpenAI, where he was working as an engineer.

Abdulrahman Alfozan, 35, had been working at the AI company since ⁠July 2025, the US Department of Justice said in a statement on Tuesday.

OpenAI discovered the device plugged into a USB port behind a television in an executive conference room at one of its San Francisco buildings on September 30, according to a criminal complaint filed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Following the discovery, the company placed a camera in the room, which captured Alfozan entering last week and checking behind the television where the listening device had been installed, the FBI alleges.

The case highlights growing security concerns around sensitive AI research as companies and governments compete for the best talent and technology with the potential to alter regional economic and strategic dynamics.

Who is Abdulrahman Alfozan and what is he charged with?

Alfozan has been a legal permanent resident of the US since September 2020.

According to a LinkedIn profile in his name, he studied at ⁠the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of California, Berkeley. He previously worked at Meta and Microsoft, it said.

Before he joined OpenAI, he was a venture partner at Raed Ventures, headquartered in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia, which invested “in seed and early-stage startups in Saudi Arabia and MENA”.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the details mentioned in this LinkedIn profile.

Alfozan made his first court appearance on Tuesday on a charge of “using or endeavouring to use an electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept oral communications”.

It was not immediately clear if he has legal representation. He is expected to return to court on October 19.

If convicted, Alfozan faces up to five years in prison, a $250,000 ⁠fine, and three years of supervised release.

What happened at OpenAI?

The FBI says a thumb-sized device with a microphone, and which ‌could connect to a camera, had been concealed in toilet paper and placed behind a television set in the conference room. It was installed around September 28, the FBI said. Its stored data was encrypted and inaccessible. Investigators later found a similar device in Alfozan’s personal bag.

In a post on X, OpenAI said it had evidence that the employee intended to place other listening devices throughout sensitive areas of its offices to secretly record meetings.

“At this time, we have no indications of this individual inappropriately accessing or exfiltrating model weights, source code, or customer data. The employee was ⁠terminated,” the company said.

The FBI complaint also alleges that Alfozan used an AI productivity tool to make multiple inquiries about the company’s building addresses, meeting rooms, meeting-room capacities and calendars, despite not having the authority to access these spaces or participate in meetings there.

“This alleged attempt by a Saudi national to steal sensitive communications from OpenAI was taken extremely seriously. Theft of intellectual property involving cutting-edge super intelligence technology poses a serious threat to our national security,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement on X.

Hasn’t OpenAI been accused of helping to spy on civilians?

In an X post by OpenAI explaining how its own systems were used to trap Alfozan, the company said: “Our security program is designed to protect against a wide range of threat actors, from insider risks to cybercriminals to nation states, and this case is an example of how AI can help address these sophisticated security threats.”

But AI technology is used not only to catch spying, but conversely, to engage in it as well.

In February 2025, an investigation by The Associated Press found that US tech giants had enabled Israel to track and kill people in Gaza and Lebanon through AI and computing services. The AP reported that the Israeli military had bought advanced AI tools from tech companies including OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, through Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform, to assist with surveillance.

OpenAI denies having a relationship with the Israeli military.
But OpenAI also faced criticism when it signed a deal with the US Department of Defense in February this year to supply its technology to the US military for use in classified settings, including intelligence gathering. OpenAI’s competitor, Anthropic, refused to sign the same deal unless the Pentagon barred mass surveillance of Americans.

There have been several incidents in which OpenAI models have gone “rogue” by independently breaking out of a testing environment and then hacking into other organisations and even government sites, leading to calls for stronger regulations against unchecked AI surveillance.

The Caribbean country of Jamaica has received its first third-country deportations from the United States, as part of an expanding set of international agreements under President Donald Trump.

On Tuesday, 22 deportees from the US arrived at Norman Manley International Airport in Kingston, Jamaica.

Media reports indicate they were subsequently boarded onto a bus and taken to an undisclosed location.

Such deportations – which often involve non-citizens who have no ties to their destinations – have faced widespread condemnation from human rights groups and advocates who have questioned their legality.

But Jamaica is among a growing number of countries to accept third-country deportations, as part of Trump’s effort to implement the largest mass deportation campaign in US history.

At least 35 countries have entered into third-country deportation agreements with the US, according to Third Country Deportation Watch, an advocacy project affiliated with the groups Refugees International and Human Rights First.

The Washington Post reported last month that the Trump administration has earmarked roughly $410m to support such efforts.

Jamaica signed a bilateral memorandum of understanding in June to receive third-country deportations. Under the plan, Jamaica will transfer any deportees to their home countries or other destinations after their arrival.

The country’s government has also pledged not to accept any deportees with criminal records.

“The government reiterates that this is a transit arrangement intended to facilitate the return of Third Country Nationals to their country of origin or other receiving countries,” Jamaica’s Ministry of National Security and Peace and its Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade said in a joint statement.

It added that care for the deportees will be supported by the International Organization for Migration, a United Nations organisation.

“The arrangement will not be funded by the Government of Jamaica,” the joint statement added.

Opposition leaders in Jamaica, however, spoke out against the deportation, framing the deal as a threat to the island’s security. They also questioned why the agreement had not been debated publicly.

“Jamaicans are being asked to trust a secret document that touches their security, their communities and their public services,” said Fitz Jackson, the opposition spokesperson on national security.

In response to Jackson’s statement, Foreign Minister Kamina Johnson Smith argued that any questions about the deportation deal “have all been answered”. She also indicated that the US has not agreed to make the deal public.

“As I explained before, some countries have agreed to receive criminals, we have not,” she wrote on social media.

“Some countries have had their agreements made public, but our partner has not agreed for this one to be.”

Legal challenges against the third-country deportations are ongoing in the US, where advocates have argued that deportees are being removed from the country without due process of law, the constitutional right to a fair hearing.

Critics have also argued that third-country deportations sometimes send immigrants to countries where they may face danger.

Some of the recipient countries, such as South Sudan, are in the midst of ongoing conflict or have faced accusations of serious human rights abuses.

Opponents have even said the third-country deportations are being used as a backdoor method for circumventing court protection orders.

Such orders may prohibit the US government from returning certain immigrants to their home countries, for fear of violence and persecution.

But by sending immigrants to third countries, critics say the Trump administration avoids violating such protection orders – though in some cases, the third country has then returned the deportee to the country identified in the US protection order.

In a February report by Democrats on the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, one official said anonymously that the purpose of such far-flung deportations was to instil fear.

“The point is that the administration can threaten people that they will literally be dropped in the middle of nowhere,” the official said. “The point is to scare people.”

The call comes as polls cast doubt on political leaders’ ability to manage AI risks amid US midterm elections.

A group of more than 300 scientists from around the world is calling for urgent changes to how artificial intelligence is developed and deployed amid growing concerns about its unpredictable behaviour.

The letter, released on Tuesday and signed by researchers representing universities and research institutes in 32 countries, warned that failures to follow basic cybersecurity practices could lead to damage to critical infrastructure.

Many recent incidents in which AI models escaped secure environments could have been prevented with stronger security systems, the scientists said.

They recommended that organisations developing and testing advanced AI systems capable of carrying out cyberattacks do so in more tightly controlled environments, including “air-gapped” systems that are not connected to the internet.

Growing concerns

The letter comes amid growing concerns about AI’s capabilities and its potential impact on everyday users. On Monday, Anthropic warned that its AI models could soon be capable of creating self-spreading malware that could affect everyday internet-connected devices, including smart TVs, security cameras and smart appliances such as ovens.

The report found that AI systems could identify unfamiliar devices without human intervention. The company, led by Dario Amodei, warned that smaller AI models could be capable of carrying out autonomous attacks by the end of the year.

The malware could also be difficult to contain because it might take days to infect a device and could spread across multiple machines rather than remain concentrated in a single, controlled location.

Taking control of internet-connected devices can have immediate consequences. In France, for example, hackers compromised cooling systems across hundreds of supermarkets, raising temperatures and causing more than $220,000 in damage.

Meanwhile, Axios news organisation reported on Friday that Anthropic, OpenAI and other major AI company executives are privately preparing for the possibility of a catastrophic AI-related incident that could disrupt access to major financial services, the internet and potentially critical infrastructure such as water and power systems. Several industry insiders believe a major incident could occur within the next six months to a year, it said.

The scientists also called for more safeguards, including the creation of an international organisation to establish a set of best practices for AI alignment and containment along with timely reporting of incidents.

One of the signatories, David Lie, a professor at the University of Toronto’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, said his concerns began after OpenAI’s AI agents bypassed controls and hacked into servers at the tech company Hugging Face.

“One is that OpenAI, in setting up its test environment, didn’t appreciate how capable its agents were,” Lie said.

“These were the AI agents that they were designing. Second is that the AI agents independently found each other and chose to collaborate on this attack, and third is that they also intentionally tried to deceive and mislead their human creators.”

Political pressures

The letter underscores growing public concern about AI, including in the lead-up to the US congressional midterm elections. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 57 percent of voters said President Donald Trump’s administration was not taking AI risks seriously enough, while 54 percent said the same of Congress.

An AP-NORC poll echoed those findings, with about 80 percent of respondents saying the government should keep AI under human control. Respondents also expressed little confidence in either party’s ability to manage the technology: 39 percent said neither Republicans nor Democrats could be trusted to do a good job of reining it in, while 23 percent expressed greater confidence in Democrats and 21 percent in Republicans.

Some called the 2024 US presidential election the “podcast election”. Two years on, the label looks less like hyperbole and more like a preview.

Host Josh Rushing is joined by Cenk Uygur, founder of The Young Turks, and Emily Jashinsky, host of After Party and an anchor at Breaking Points, to ask whether podcasts are genuinely widening political discourse – or simply letting candidates pick friendly rooms and dodge the scrutiny that comes with real journalism.

Presenter: Josh Rushing

Contributors:
Cenk Uygur – Founder, The Young Turks
Emily Jashinsky – Host of After Party and co-host of Breaking Points

The Trump administration argues that DOGE is exempt from freedom of information requirements.

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a watchdog’s lawsuit seeking public records about trillionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

The high court is intervening on Tuesday for a second time in Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) in Washington’s case, which seeks access to DOGE records from its operations in the early days of US President Donald Trump’s second term. The Trump administration asked the court to hear the case.

Last year, the high court reined in a district court’s order for the government to produce DOGE-related records to CREW. The high court’s conservative majority concluded in June 2025 that US District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled too broadly in ordering documents to be turned over to the group.

CREW claims DOGE is a federal agency and therefore is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The Trump administration argues that DOGE is exempt from FOIA’s requirements as a presidential advisory body.

Cooper ruled in CREW’s favour and ordered expedited processing of the group’s records request. An appeals court panel also sided with CREW.

The Trump administration claims the panel ignored the Supreme Court’s direction to consider separation-of-powers concerns and intruded on the “autonomy and confidentiality” of presidential advisers.

“Subjecting advisory bodies to intrusive discovery triggers the very concerns that Congress sought to avoid by excluding presidential advisory bodies from FOIA’s reach,” US Department of Justice lawyers wrote.

The administration also says the appeals court impermissibly authorised the plaintiffs to take a sworn deposition of DOGE acting administrator Amy Gleason.

CREW says the appeals court fully complied with the Supreme Court’s previous order. The group also asserts that the public has a right to know how DOGE helped the administration carry out a sweeping overhaul of government operations in 2025.

“Undisputed facts in the public record — including the President’s statements — confirmed that (DOGE) was wielding enormous independent authority across the federal government,” CREW lawyers wrote.

In a statement Tuesday, CREW lawyer Nikhel Sus said the lower courts have uniformly ruled that it is entitled to records that could help the court determine whether DOGE wields the type of authority that would make it subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

“We will continue to pursue transparency for the American people, who deserve to know the details of the Trump Administration’s efforts to unilaterally remake the federal government,” Sus said in the statement.

DOGE said it had slashed tens of billions of dollars in expenditures, but its claims were difficult for outside financial experts to verify.

Federal auditors found that some of DOGE’s reported savings across contract, grant and ⁠lease terminations were incorrect, lacked supporting evidence or included terminations that were already under way when DOGE was established, according to ⁠a report by the Government Accountability Office.

A majority of US adults say President Trump and his family have inappropriately profited from presidency.

Most US adults believe President Donald Trump has placed his personal financial interests and those of his inner circle ahead of the country’s since returning to the White House in 2025, according to a new nationwide poll.

The poll, conducted by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and released on Tuesday, suggests that public perception of the Republican president leans heavily critical: Over half of surveyed adults view Trump’s second term as self-serving by investing in his own business and commercial pursuits “a lot”. Roughly one quarter believe he focuses on national interests, but only 11 percent feel Trump represents regular Americans. Fifty-five percent of Republicans surveyed said that Trump has prioritised his personal business interests “a lot” or “some”.

Half of the respondents report that Trump has placed zero priority on people “like them”.

As Trump’s family business pulls in record funds from new ventures helped by his policies, the poll results suggest that most US adults think growing his own finances has been the north star of Trump’s presidency, at least to some extent.

Trump’s June financial disclosure revealed massive post-election influxes of foreign and corporate capital into his business empire, stemming primarily from over $1bn in cryptocurrency ventures after he loosened regulation on the industry, as well as from international real estate.

During his first year as president, the Trump Organisation – Trump’s multinational family-owned enterprise dedicated to property development and global brand licensing – made eight real estate deals with authoritarian or one-party foreign states. Some speculate these countries were highly motivated to maintain favourable relations with the US to keep Trump happy on fronts like trade tariffs, military protection and private business dealings.

The administration, meanwhile, has repeatedly dismissed concerns over Trump’s business conflicts of interest, maintaining that he acts solely in the interest of Americans.

In late September, a separate Reuters/Ipsos poll found that Trump’s approval rating has fallen to 32 percent – the lowest of his ⁠political career – as his fellow Republicans soured on his handling of the cost of living crisis amid the deeply unpopular Iran war.

The dip in performance and approval ratings follows a high point in January 2025, when the newly inaugurated president boasted a 47 percent approval rating right after taking office.

According to the AP-NORC poll, which surveyed more than 2,000 US adults in late September, general sentiment around the administration’s ethical conduct is highly polarised, with far more citizens feeling that the president has neither prioritised the country as a whole nor everyday Americans.

Just over 40 percent of respondents believe Trump has “done something illegal” vis-a-vis allegations of personal enrichment while in office, with another 18 percent viewing his financial dealings as “unethical but not illegal”.

Opinions surrounding the lawfulness of the president’s financial practices split sharply along party lines, with Democrats overwhelmingly viewing the actions as illegal, compared with about three in 10 independents and about one in 10 Republicans, who largely see his behaviour as justified.

Kimberly Guilfoyle has faced mounting allegations, including offering access to Trump officials in exchange for money.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the US ambassador to Greece, Kimberly Guilfoyle, to resign following a series of allegations of misconduct, including claims that she offered a political donor access to senior administration officials in exchange for money.

“We have asked Ambassador Guilfoyle to resign,” White House press secretary Katie Zacharia told reporters on Tuesday. “She has been a wonderful asset to the team, and we wish her well.”

The announcement comes after weeks of damaging reports about Guilfoyle’s conduct.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Guilfoyle asked a Trump donor to cover a $100,000 credit card bill shortly before her congressional confirmation hearing, promising him access to administration officials in return.

The newspaper also reported that she told guests at a reception that she could use US influence to undermine the Greek government, promoted the interests of a Greek construction and energy company and allowed one of its lobbyists to attend private diplomatic meetings.

Guilfoyle’s lawyers have denied any wrongdoing, saying the money she sought was payment for previous speaking engagements and public appearances that she had not received.

Trump had signalled on Monday that he was considering removing her from the post.

“Well, we’re looking at it,” he told reporters. “We’re not happy.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio initially defended Guilfoyle, calling her a “strong ambassador,” but later declined to comment on the allegations and criticised reporters for asking about them.

Guilfoyle is a former Fox News host and California prosecutor. She is the former wife of California Governor Gavin Newsom and was previously engaged to Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr.