Category: Wires

  • Margaret Kerry, body and soul of Disney’s Tinker Bell, dies at 97

    Margaret Kerry, body and soul of Disney’s Tinker Bell, dies at 97

    Margaret Kerry, who through months of graceful and poignant pantomime inspired the portrayal of the Peter Pan fairy Tinker Bell that the world knows best, died on June 11 at her home in Wilmington, N.C. She was 97.

    The cause was lung cancer, her family announced on social media.

    Tinker Bell’s origins lie in Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up (1904), a play by the British writer J.M. Barrie later expanded into a novel, Peter and Wendy (1911). Barrie invented “fairy dust” to explain how Tinker Bell could enable children to fly, but in his story, she was “quite a common fairy” who fixes pots and pans. Peter ultimately forgets about her, and in stage performances, she was only a spotlight.

    With Ms. Kerry’s help, Disney’s original animated film adaptation, Peter Pan (1953), produced a version of Tinker Bell that became definitive.

    In the movie, the fairy communicates only through movement and expression; she does not speak.

    To reinvent and animate the character, Marc Davis — the illustrator behind Snow White, Cinderella, and Cruella de Vil — oversaw an industrial equivalent of the modeling demanded by perfectionist painters like Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres or Paul Cézanne. Along with a few prop specialists, a camera operator, a makeup artist, and one or more directors, he spent more than six months having an actor act out everything he wanted Tinker Bell to do.

    “Marc Davis is a man’s man — how does he know how a 3½-inch sprite is going to move, get angry, or stamp her foot?” Ms. Kerry said to the Los Angeles Times in 2002. “And how does he know what kind of emotion would go behind that?”

    Ms. Kerry brought a record player to her audition for Davis and director Gerry Geronimi. With musical backing, she did a pantomime of making breakfast: Peering into a refrigerator, juggling eggs, closing the fridge door with her foot — “as much variety of movement as I could do in the context of a little story,” she said in a 2003 interview with historian Jim Korkis.

    She got the job. The first time she stepped onto Disney’s enormous, empty soundstage, she asked Davis who he wanted her to be — ditsy like Betty Boop? Above it all, like the Queen of the Fairies?

    “He said, very quietly, ‘Margaret, we want her to be you,’” Ms. Kerry recalled in an interview with author and YouTube host Jonathan Rosen.

    “At that moment,” she told Parade in 2016, “Tinker Bell and I became one.”

    One day she was asked, What would it look like if Tinker Bell landed on a mirror and saw herself? Ms. Kerry thought perhaps she would never have seen her reflection, so she began a preening once-over — until she reached her hips, got upset and stormed off. That became a scene in Peter Pan.

    She was asked to fall onto a mattress — which, she soon discovered, was rather thin, causing her to thud on impact. Her look of pained surprise also made it into the film.

    She was asked to pout. She demonstrated a whole menu of pouts and asked, What kind do you want?

    She imagined Tinker Bell as a 13-year-old girl. That helped Davis capture one of the character’s most distinctive traits: Barrie’s idea that fairies are so small that they “have room for one feeling only at a time.” Davis’ Tink is consumed by competitiveness with Wendy, or consumed by fear for Peter — always just one feeling, felt to the utmost.

    Margaret Kerry was born Margaret McCarty on May 11, 1929, in Springfield, Ill. Her mother died in childbirth and her father was unable to take care of his five children, Parade reported. She was adopted at 3 by Frederick and Grace (Lynch) Robb, who lived in Los Angeles.

    Robb was a salesperson for Durametallic Corp., an industrial manufacturer. The couple decided their adoptive daughter was “as cute as Shirley Temple,” Kerry later recalled, and by the time she was 4 she was in Central Casting. She found a lot of work in Hollywood, including appearing in eight of the Our Gang short films about the Little Rascals.

    Her stage name was originally Peggy Lynch. In 1948, she played the daughter of Eddie Cantor’s character in the movie If You Knew Susie. She changed her name to Margaret Kerry at Cantor’s suggestion.

    In later years, she did voice-over work and hosted a weekly Christian talk show on Los Angeles radio.

    She married Dick Brown, a television producer and director, in 1951. They divorced in the 1980s. Her marriage to Jack Willcox, in 1987, ended with his death in 1999. She is survived by three children from her first marriage, Eric Norquist, Christina McCarty, and Ellen Seibel, as well as several grandchildren.

    In 2019, a veteran of D-Day, Robert Boeke, visited Europe to mark its 75th anniversary. He passed a store in Amsterdam called Tinker Bell Toys and said to a travel buddy, “I have been in love with Tinker Bell all my life.”

    He was being literal: Boeke and Kerry dated when he was a college student in Los Angeles. A friend of his promptly found her email address and sent her a note. He assumed she had forgotten him.

    But the email, like a bit of fairy dust, caused something to improbably take flight. Ms. Kerry had saved a piece of jewelry that Boeke gave her all those years ago.

    On Valentine’s Day 2020, they married. They got together just in time to keep each other company through the coronavirus pandemic, and Boeke lived until just 2½ weeks before Kerry’s death. She told Rosen, “It was love at second sight.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Mark Singer, longtime writer for the New Yorker, dies at 75

    Mark Singer, longtime writer for the New Yorker, dies at 75

    Mark Singer, a staff writer at the New Yorker from the age of 23 who extended the magazine’s franchise of rich reporting and witty prose about offbeat, complicated, and quintessentially American characters, died Friday in New York City. He was 75.

    The cause of death, in a hospital, was cancer of the salivary gland, his son Tim said.

    Mr. Singer wrote urbane “Talk of the Town” pieces for the front of the magazine, reflected on serious national matters like the Affordable Care Act, and did a hitch traveling the country as the correspondent for the “U.S. Journal” column.

    But he was best known as a profiler. His subjects included magician Ricky Jay, whom he called “perhaps the most gifted sleight of hand artist alive”; a set of four door attendant brothers in New York; and a braggadocious real estate developer, Donald Trump, years before he ran for office.

    “He came out of the tradition of A.J. Liebling and Joseph Mitchell and Calvin Trillin, which is to say he combined meticulous reporting and a very distinctive comic voice, which is extremely rare,” David Remnick, the magazine’s editor, said in an interview.

    An Oklahoma native, Mr. Singer moved back to the state for an immersive series of articles in 1985 that became a book, Funny Money. It is about a small suburban bank that wildly pumped up its balance sheet during an energy boom, led by a buffoonish cast of executives, including one who wore Mickey Mouse ears to work.

    A 2005 collection of Mr. Singer’s profiles, Character Studies, was subtitled Encounters with the Curiously Obsessed, a description that matched the author himself.

    The book included pieces about a group of Texans searching for the missing skull of Pancho Villa and a family of fanatic California farmers, the Chinos, who grew vegetables for chef Alice Waters of Chez Panisse (who happened to be married to Mr. Singer’s brother Stephen).

    “Singer’s voice is pitched perfectly to the register of The New Yorker: cool and intelligent, with a wry and artful skepticism uncorrupted by cynicism,” Jeff Macgregor wrote in The New York Times Book Review. “Neither aloof nor Olympian, he maintains instead an efficient distance from his subjects. He is a terrific reporter, with a receptive ear for dialogue and a painter’s eye for the salient detail.”

    The collection included Mr. Singer’s 1993 profile of Jay, with accounts of his performing mind-boggling card tricks and memory feats, which Mr. Singer witnessed over a two-year acquaintance.

    “He has small hands — just large enough so that a playing card fits within the plane of his palm,” Mr. Singer observed. “There is a slightly raised pad of flesh on the underside of the first joint of each finger.”

    He was much less stoked to be assigned by Tina Brown, then editor of the New Yorker, to profile Trump in 1997.

    Observing him over several months on construction sites, in his Trump Tower office, and on a private plane, Mr. Singer concluded that Trump, in the period before he became a reality TV star, was a man “who had aspired to and achieved the ultimate luxury, an existence unmolested by the rumbling of a soul.”

    “That profile,” Remnick said, “got everything about Trump 20 years before he ran for president: the vanity, the casual cruelty, the outsized selfishness. It was all there.”

    The profile was included in Character Studies, and after the Times review mentioned it, Trump wrote a letter to the editor attacking Mr. Singer as “not born with great writing ability.”

    Mr. Singer sent a mock thank you to Trump for the publicity, which apparently bumped his book higher on the Amazon book charts. He also enclosed a check for $37.82, “a small token of my enormous gratitude,” he wrote.

    Trump returned the letter with an all-caps note at the bottom, reading, in part, “MARK — YOU ARE A TOTAL LOSER.”

    Trump also cashed the $37.82 check, Mr. Singer later said. Singer framed a photocopy of it for his apartment.

    In 1999, Mr. Singer took on the challenge of solving the mystery of Joseph Mitchell, the magazine’s revered, Joycean profiler of New York eccentrics, who came to the office for 32 years without publishing a piece after 1964. Mr. Singer, who never quite solved the reasons for Mitchell’s epic writer’s block, quoted Philip Hamburger, a friend of Mitchell’s: “Why didn’t he write more? Well, he wrote enough.”

    Mark Jay Singer was born Oct. 19, 1950, in Tulsa, Okla., the middle of five children of Alexander and Marjorie (Teller) Singer. His father ran an oil and gas business, Singer Brothers, which had been founded by his own father and an uncle, whose family members were Jewish immigrants from Russia.

    Mr. Singer attended Yale University, where he found a mentor in William Zinsser, a nonfiction writing teacher whose classic guide, On Writing Well, preaches cutting clutter from sentences and choosing the precise word. (He also first introduced Mr. Singer to Mitchell’s work.)

    Mr. Singer received his bachelor’s degree in English in 1972. Two years later, he was hired by the New Yorker, at a time when the magazine offered an on-ramp to promising but inexperienced young writers, who sank or swam by writing unbylined pieces for “The Talk of the Town.”

    Mr. Singer married Rhonda Klein, a lawyer, in 1972. The marriage ended in divorce, as did a second marriage, to Caroline Mailhot.

    Besides his son Tim, from his first marriage, he is survived by his partner, Lisa Brody; his sons Jeb and Reid, also from his first marriage; a son, Paul Mailhot-Singer, from his second marriage; two grandchildren; and his siblings George, Stephen, and Sandra Anderson.

    Singer is also the author of Citizen K: The Deeply Weird American Journey of Brett Kimberlin (1996), an expanded version of a New Yorker profile of a drug smuggler, murder suspect, and media manipulator that was a finalist for a National Magazine Award; and the collection Somewhere in America: Under the Radar with Chicken Warriors, Left-Wing Patriots, Angry Nudists and Others (2004).

    The New Yorker writer Ian Frazier, who shared an office with Singer when both were tyros, recalled that his colleague and friend once buttonholed William Shawn, the magazine’s famously reserved former editor, at a wedding reception. Singer told Shawn a long-winded anecdote about his own first wedding.

    As the editor seemed to recoil, searching the ceiling, Singer itemized an elaborate menu he had requested from a Jewish caterer — bagels, herring, etc. — after which the caterer said, “So far, you’re giving them nothing.”

    Laughter ensued.

    “Mark and I,” Frazier said, “would talk about, What is writing? That’s writing,” he said of Singer’s lengthy tale delivered with confidence to a defensive audience. “When you can sense a real wind and just keep going with it.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Jean Houston, ‘midwife of souls’ who advised Hillary Clinton, dies at 89

    Jean Houston, ‘midwife of souls’ who advised Hillary Clinton, dies at 89

    Jean Houston, a spellbinding figure in the human potential movement of the 1960s who used guided imagery to inspire unmoored suburbanites, burned-out executives, and even Hillary Clinton, helping Clinton conduct imaginary conversations at the White House with Eleanor Roosevelt, died on May 16 at her home in Ashland, Ore. She was 89.

    Her death was confirmed by her friend and business partner, Constance Buffalo.

    The daughter of a gag writer for Bob Hope, George Burns, and Henny Youngman, Ms. Houston rejected any association with the word “guru,” viewing it as an intellectual demotion. She called herself an “evocateur of the possible” and a “midwife of souls.”

    “In my definition, guru is spelled ‘Gee, You Are You,’” she said on the Oprah Winfrey television show Super Soul Sunday. “I seem to be a process. I seem to be a verb of becoming, and held by the lure of becoming that keeps us going on.”

    As the founder of numerous organizations, including the Human Capacities Corp., Mystery School, Social Artistry School, and the Possible Society, Ms. Houston led workshops at empowerment retreats, in corporate boardrooms, at her geodesic-domed house in Oregon, and in far-flung countries with the United Nations.

    “She had a remarkable capacity to be present to others,” Robertson Work, a U.N. policy adviser who accompanied her on trips around the world, said in an interview. “You felt like you were being seen. You could discover: ‘What is my greatness? What is my potential?’”

    Ms. Houston synthesized mythology, the psychology of Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell, and the experiential ethos of Esalen, the California retreat that shaped the human potential movement.

    During her multiday workshops, participants engaged in imaginary conversations with historical figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Pablo Picasso, acted out the stages of evolution while pretending to be a fish or a monkey, and translated their dreams into elaborate dances.

    “The idea was that it’s possible to cultivate a higher power within yourself,” Marion Goldman, a professor emeritus of sociology and religious studies at the University of Oregon and the author of The American Soul Rush: Esalen and the Rise of Spiritual Privilege (2012), said in an interview. “By making the self a better place, you make the world a better place.”

    In addition to her workshops, Ms. Houston published more than two dozen books, including The Possible Human: A Course in Enhancing Your Physical, Mental and Creative Abilities (1982), which sold more than 400,000 copies.

    “The imaginal realms of inner space proliferate and spill over into the external world in a phenomenal growth of new science, art, music, literature, politics, and above all in a new vision of mankind and world that is the glory of humanism,” she wrote in the book’s introduction.

    There were dissenters.

    Writing in Skeptical Inquirer magazine, Martin Gardner, a critic of pseudoscience, called Ms. Houston’s workshops “bewildering” and judged her “flowery New Age jargon” to be “so vague and murky that it is often difficult to understand.” (Adding insult to injury, the article’s headline labeled her a guru.)

    Still, her pull was gravitational — even at the White House. In 1994, Ms. Houston was among a group of motivational speakers whom President Bill Clinton and the first lady invited to Camp David for a series of pick-me-up conversations after their universal healthcare initiative failed and Republicans took control of Congress.

    She and Hillary Clinton hit it off.

    “Jean wraps herself in brightly colored capes and caftans and dominates the room with her larger-than-life presence and crackling wit,” Hillary Clinton wrote in her memoir Living History (2003). “She is a walking encyclopedia, reciting poems, passages from great works of literature, historical facts and scientific data all in the same breath.”

    Ms. Houston helped Hillary Clinton prepare for a visit to India, Nepal, and Bangladesh in 1995. That year, the first lady invited her to the White House to brainstorm ideas for It Takes a Village, Hillary Clinton’s book about the well-being of children.

    Hillary Clinton was physically and mentally exhausted. Perhaps, Ms. Houston suggested, she should speak with her hero, Eleanor Roosevelt. The idea was for Clinton to talk as herself and then answer back as Roosevelt — the sort of role-playing exercise that Ms. Houston had conducted thousands of times.

    At some point, she described the sessions with Clinton to the Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward, who recounted the details in his 1996 book, The Choice. After an excerpt appeared in the Post, tabloids and Republican opponents of the Clintons accused the first lady of holding seances at the White House.

    Hillary Clinton released a lengthy statement in her defense. “This was an interesting intellectual exercise to help spark my own thoughts,” she said. “It was a brainstorming session for my book — not a spiritual event.”

    In an appearance on the Today show, Ms. Houston told Katie Couric that she was simply helping the first lady focus her mind by imagining “what she would say to Eleanor Roosevelt should she have the occasion to do so.”

    Houston felt that she had been unfairly maligned.

    “I’m not a psychic,” she said. “I’m not a guru.”

    Jean Houston was born on May 10, 1937, in Brooklyn. Her mother, Mary (Todaro) Houston, was an actor, interior designer, and stock analyst. Her father, Jack Houston, was a comedy writer.

    Growing up, she found inspiration in a dummy. When she was 8, she accompanied her father to deliver a script to the ventriloquist Edgar Bergen. Upon arriving, they found Bergen talking to his plastic-and-wood buddy, Charlie McCarthy.

    “Charlie, what is the meaning of life?” Bergen asked the dummy, as Ms. Houston recalled in her memoir, A Mythic Life (1996). “What is the nature of love? Is there any truth to be found?”

    The dummy mumbled some answers.

    “At that moment,” Ms. Houston wrote, “my skin turned to gooseflesh, an electric hand seemed to touch mine, and a fractal wave of my future activities crashed on the shore of my 8-year-old self. For I suddenly knew that we all contain ‘so much more’ than we think we do.”

    Her epiphanies proliferated. On a school trip, she met Helen Keller and marveled at how happy she seemed despite being blind and deaf. She joined an international pen pal club and corresponded about the scriptures of Sikhs, Hindus, and Buddhists. She had long conversations with an old man in Central Park; later, she discovered that she had been talking to philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

    “When you befriend your own brain,” she said, “a great deal becomes possible.”

    At Barnard, she studied religion and theater, acting in off-Broadway plays at night. She attended a doctoral program in religion offered by Columbia University and the Union Theological Seminary, but did not receive a degree. (She later received one in psychology from Union Institute in Cincinnati.)

    During graduate school, while conducting studies on LSD use, she met Robert E.L. Masters Jr., a writer. They married in 1965 and spent their honeymoon writing The Varieties of Psychedelic Experience, which was reviewed on the cover of the New York Times Book Review.

    Also in 1965, the couple founded the Foundation for Mind Research, the first of many organizations that Ms. Houston started to promote and study human potential.

    “We are living at the beginnings of the golden age of brain, mind, and body research,” she told the Washington Post in 1978. “We may well be standing, with regard to these, where Einstein stood in the year 1904 with his discovery of the special theory of relativity.”

    Masters died in 2008. Ms. Houston has no immediate survivors.

    Among her fondest memories was her childhood meeting with Keller, who was then in her late 60s — a story she recounted often.

    Keller put her hand on Jean’s face to read her lips.

    “Why are you so happy?” Jean asked.

    “My child,” Keller responded, “it is because I live my life each day as if it were my last. And life in all its moments is so full of glory.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • James Bradley, co-author of ‘Flags of Our Fathers,’ dies at 72

    James Bradley, co-author of ‘Flags of Our Fathers,’ dies at 72

    James Bradley, who turned his curiosity about his father’s time in the Navy during the Battle of Iwo Jima — and the long-held but ultimately mistaken belief that he was in the iconic photograph of six servicemen raising the American flag on Mount Suribachi — into the bestselling book Flags of Our Fathers (2000), died on June 5. He was 72.

    His daughter Alison Cinnamond confirmed the death but declined to provide further details.

    Flags of Our Fathers, which Mr. Bradley wrote with Ron Powers, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, spent 46 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list, climbing to No. 1, and was adapted into a 2006 film directed by Clint Eastwood. Ryan Phillippe played his father in the movie.

    Flags tells the stories of the six flag-raisers — John (Doc) Bradley and five Marines — through the brutal, five-week-long battle against Japanese forces on Iwo Jima, a tiny volcanic island.

    The battle claimed the lives of some 6,800 American service members, including three of the flag raisers. Bradley’s narrative followed the survivors — his father, Rene Gagnon, and Ira Hayes — on the national war bonds tour that they starred in upon their return to the United States and their sometimes difficult postwar lives.

    Doc Bradley, who became a funeral director in Antigo, Wisc., told his family little about his time in combat, or the fact that he had received the Navy Cross, the branch’s second highest award for valor, for treating and rescuing a wounded Marine while under mortar and machine-gun fire on Iwo Jima.

    But after his death in 1994, his family rummaged through boxes he had left behind. One of the items was a letter to his parents, postmarked Feb. 26, 1945, three days after the flag-raising photo was taken by Joe Rosenthal of the Associated Press. An image of the Pulitzer-winning photo appeared on the 3-cent stamp and on millions of war-bond drive posters. The picture also inspired the design of the Marine Corps War Memorial in Arlington, Va.

    In his letter, Doc Bradley wrote, “I had a little thing to do with the raising of the American flag and it was the happiest moment of my life.”

    The letter stunned his family.

    “If that was the happiest moment of his life,” James Bradley told the Times in 2000, “why had he never talked about it?”

    For nearly 70 years, there was little, if any, dispute that Doc Bradley was in Rosenthal’s brilliantly composed picture. The Marine Corps had, after all, named the six participants. James Bradley had no doubt of his father’s role, describing in Flags how he had dropped a handful of bandages before joining the other five men at the flagpole where he “gripped the pole in the cluster’s center.”

    But in 2014, an article in the Omaha World Herald described serious doubts raised by amateur historians that Doc Bradley was in the photograph. James Bradley was, at first, dubious.

    “Listen, I wrote a book based on facts, told to me by guys who had actually been there,” he told the newspaper. “That’s my research. That’s what I trust. At the end of the day, the truth is the truth. Everything is possible. But really?”

    He eventually took a deeper look at the paper’s findings and became convinced that his father had not been in Rosenthal’s picture but had been in a less dramatic one, with a smaller flag, taken earlier in the day on Feb. 23 by a Marine photographer, which the service branch confirmed.

    In 2016, a Marine Corps investigation — prompted by findings in a documentary, The Unknown Flag Raiser of Iwo Jima — concluded that Harold Schultz, a private first class, was the man in the image long identified as Doc Bradley.

    Cinnamond, James Bradley’s daughter, said in an interview that her father didn’t feel that the book was diminished by the finding, but that he wanted the Marine Corps to get its facts straight about who was actually in the photo.

    Indeed, it was not the only misidentification in the photo. In 1947, the Marine Corps said it had credited Henry Hansen for being in the photo when it had actually been Harlon Block. In 2019, the Marines determined that Gagnon, one of the Marines featured in Bradley’s book, had “contributed to the flag-raising,” but that Harold Keller was actually in the photo.

    James Joseph Bradley was born on Feb. 18, 1954, in Antigo. He was one of eight children of John and Elizabeth (Van Gorp) Bradley. James received a bachelor’s degree in East Asian history from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1977.

    Mr. Bradley was, at first, a traveling cookware salesperson, then built a career as a corporate events and video producer. Without training as a writer or researcher, he began writing Flags on his own, but his proposal was rejected by 27 publishers, one of whom told Mr. Bradley that “no one wants to read a book about old men weeping into the telephone.”

    One of his agents then brought Powers on as a collaborator; he had won the 1973 Pulitzer for criticism while writing for the Chicago Sun-Times. Bantam Books soon acquired the book.

    The book was one of several successful works during a decade that detailed the bravery of American soldiers during World War II, among them Stephen Ambrose’s D-Day: June 6, 1944 (1994); Tom Brokaw’s The Greatest Generation (1998); Steven Spielberg’s film Saving Private Ryan (1998); and the HBO miniseries Band of Brothers.

    In his review of Flags of Our Fathers in the Times, journalist Richard Bernstein called it “most affecting not because of its graphic portrayal of men at war, although its portrayal rivals Saving Private Ryan in its shocking, unvarnished immediacy.”

    Mr. Bradley continued to write about Asia in three subsequent nonfiction books. In Flyboys: A True Story of Courage (2003), he told the stories of nine American pilots, including the future President George H.W. Bush, who were shot down by the Japanese near the island of Chichijima during World War II. While Bush was rescued by an American submarine, the other eight were captured and executed by the Japanese.

    In The Imperial Cruise: A Secret History of Empire and War (2009), Mr. Bradley wrote critically about what he saw as President Theodore Roosevelt’s diplomatic mistakes in Asia.

    “Bradley explores the racist underpinnings of Roosevelt’s policies and paradoxical embrace of the Japanese as ‘honorary Aryans,’” Publishers Weekly wrote in its review, but added, “Bradley’s critique of Rooseveltian imperialism is compelling but unbalanced.”

    And in The China Mirage: The Hidden History of American Disaster in Asia (2015), Mr. Bradley described what he viewed as America’s long-running misunderstanding of China, dating to the early 1800s.

    He also wrote a novel, Precious Freedom (2025), set during the Vietnam War.

    Mr. Bradley’s three marriages ended in divorce. He is survived by two daughters, Cinnamond and Michelle Bradley, from his marriage to Eileen Heywood; two more children, Jack Bradley and Ava Bradley, from his marriage to Laura Shuler; two sisters, Kathleen and Barbara Bradley; five brothers, Steven, Mark, Patrick, Joseph and Thomas; and two grandchildren. He was also married to Shelley Tupper.

    In 1998, Mr. Bradley, his mother, and three of his brothers traveled to Iwo Jima at the invitation of Gen. Charles C. Krulak, the Marine Corps commandant. After climbing to the spot on Mount Suribachi where the celebrated Rosenthal photo was taken, Mr. Bradley asked that everyone, including the Marines in attendance, sing the only songs that Doc Bradley said he knew: “Home on the Range” and “I’ve Been Working on the Railroad.”

    “I knew, without looking up, that everyone standing on the mountaintop — Marines young and old, women and men; my family — was weeping,” Mr. Bradley wrote in Flags. “Tears were streaming down my own face. Behind me, I could hear the hoarse sobs coming from my brother Joe.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Trump, claiming vandalism, says Reflecting Pool will be drained

    Trump, claiming vandalism, says Reflecting Pool will be drained

    WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said on Saturday that “multiple individuals” had been arrested for vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, and that problems with a more than $14 million renovation project had become so severe that the pool would have to be at least partly drained for “necessary repairs.”

    The president’s announcement late Saturday, made on social media, was his starkest acknowledgment of the pool’s rapid deterioration in recent days. The water this week became covered by clouds of blooming algae, which were obscuring a floor that had just been painted a shade that Trump has called “American flag blue.” The paint then began to peel off, making it a tourist destination for unusual reasons.

    Among those accused of vandalism was David Carter Hearn, 67, a cyclist and three-time Olympian as a canoeist who says he stopped at the site Friday just to have a look, then reached down to touch a strip of peeling blue paint mixed with the algae.

    The U.S. Park Police arrested Hearn shortly after, accusing him of destroying government property, a crime that can carry up to a 10-year prison sentence. Hearn denies the charge.

    “I was just a curious, concerned citizen,” he said in an interview. “I guess I was there at the wrong place, wrong time.”

    The administration has not released the names of others accused of vandalizing the pool, a crime that Trump said Saturday could lead to “years in jail.” In a later post, he said without evidence that vandals had “poured corrosive and destructive chemicals into the Pool.”

    The project, one of many Trump is undertaking around the capital as the United States nears its 250th birthday, has faced intense scrutiny, including from engineers and other experts who warned that the hastily undertaken project was unlikely to undo the problems that have plagued the pool for decades. A construction company tied to Trump was awarded a no-bid contract and painted the bottom of the pool.

    Trump said Saturday that he had met with contractors earlier in the day to discuss the state of the pool.

    The Interior Department said this week that agency workers had “killed the algae” that had expanded with heat and humidity. But on Friday afternoon, the water was stained by clumps of algae where National Park Service staff members had scrubbed away bright green blooms along the bottom of the basin. The pool’s new coating was also missing large sections, including a gap roughly the size of a park bench. Underneath appeared to be the original concrete basin.

    Hearn, of Bethesda, Md., said that he was on a 50-mile bike ride before stopping at the pool, and that Park Police officers detained him for more than four hours Friday at a facility south of the National Mall without allowing a phone call. They also did not say more about why he had been arrested, he added. The White House and Park Police did not respond to requests for comment.

    Late Friday, Trump claimed on social media that the “inside surface that was just installed” had been damaged by vandals.

    Hearn said that he had “reached into the water to feel the characteristics” of a dislodged paint piece “still attached to the bottom.” He compared his actions to those of Jonathan Karl, an ABC News reporter who lifted a detached piece of paint at the pool Thursday in a video the news organization published.

    “I didn’t remove anything,” Hearn said. “I was bending and feeling this 2-millimeter-thick, rubbery flap.”

    Until his retirement 18 months ago, Hearn ran a company selling special materials for building canoes. That, he said, made him particularly interested in the materials contractors had used before the paint at the base of the pool began peeling.

    Hearn said that he had already received offers of pro bono representation following his arrest.

    “I’m getting a lot of support from my community,” he added.

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • A diocese tries to protect its 29-foot Jesus from Trump’s border wall

    A diocese tries to protect its 29-foot Jesus from Trump’s border wall

    LAS CRUCES, N.M. — At sunrise, when the day’s first golden glow washes over the 29-foot-tall limestone Jesus atop Mount Cristo Rey, Lourdes Castañon feels the presence of the divine. “The rays catch it,” he said, “and, oh man, I think I’m touching the face of God.”

    Countless pilgrims from around the world journey to the sacred site just on New Mexico’s side of the southwestern border, but Castañon fears for its future. At the mountain’s base, President Donald Trump wants to build his border wall, and the small Catholic diocese that owns the land is trying to stop it.

    The Department of Homeland Security is attempting to use eminent domain to seize 14 acres of desert from the diocese, based in Las Cruces, N.M., so it can raise about 1.5 miles of new wall. The church claims a towering steel barrier would desecrate a holy landmark and violate the religious liberties of those who wish to worship there.

    “It will look like a scar on Mother Earth,” said Castañon, 74, a volunteer with the Mount Cristo Rey Restoration Committee, an independent group that works to keep the site clean and accessible.

    Homeland Security sued to wrest control of the land from the diocese last month, offering about $180,000 as compensation. The diocese, which had pleaded with the Trump administration to consider alternatives to a wall, countered in court, arguing that the lawsuit flouted the First Amendment and laws to further protect religious freedom.

    “The wall is a physical manifestation of this government’s attitude toward migrants,” the diocese said Friday in a legal brief that detailed its arguments and included testimony from local bishops and others. “Nothing could be less Catholic.”

    The ongoing federal case is the latest example of opposition to a border wall Trump wants to extend across the entire southern frontier. Since Trump’s first term, aggrieved landowners, environmentalists, and Native American tribes have fought the president’s barrier-building, tying up government lawyers in court.

    The Trump administration has claimed broad authority over wall construction, but opponents have secured a few tentative wins, including this year in Texas’ Big Bend National Park, where U.S. Customs and Border Protection had to change plans after a bipartisan outcry.

    Now, an administration that holds itself up as a defender of the devout is facing off with Catholics asserting their freedom of religion.

    “This is not a battle between the church and the government; it’s a battle between symbols,” said Deacon Jim Winder, the chancellor of the diocese. “One is a 29-foot statue of Christ the King, which is meant to symbolize unity and hope, and the other is a 30-foot iron monstrosity that symbolizes exclusion and division. Our symbol was there first. The wall is an in-your-face insult.”

    Customs and Border Protection has acknowledged Mount Cristo Rey’s significance, but the agency has argued that the site is also popular for drug smugglers and human traffickers. The mountain is the only stretch of land in the area not fortified with tall fencing — Cristo Rey was long considered a natural barrier — and the federal government now sees the gap as a security problem.

    Part of the new segment will be built on federal land and the rest “will have no adverse impact” on Mount Cristo Rey, the government has said, because it won’t block the trail leading up to the Christ sculpture. Construction will occur several hundred feet below the statue.

    “Anyone who spent 30 seconds examining a map of Mount Cristo Rey and the southern border would realize how ludicrous these claims are,” John B. Mennell, an agency spokesperson, said in a statement, referring to the church’s arguments.

    Mount Cristo Rey, known also as Sierra de Cristo Rey, near El Paso, Texas, and the suburbs of Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez, saw its first pilgrim in the early 1930s, after a local priest, Father Lourdes Costa, gazed out his window at the distant peak and envisioned a soaring crucifix at its summit.

    Costa made the challenging trek and shared his premonition with the Diocese of El Paso, which purchased the land from the state of New Mexico. In the nearly 90 years since the sculpture was completed, hundreds of thousands of faithful have traveled to the top, some on their knees and others barefoot, over rough ground studded with yucca and creosote.

    It also attracted those looking to cross into the United States illegally. As migrant apprehensions soared, members of the restoration committee, among the mountain’s most frequent visitors, noticed an uptick in vandalism and crime at the site.

    Not all of Mount Cristo Rey’s devotees oppose the wall. Ruben Escandon, whose parents and grandparents preceded him as Cristo Rey caretakers, worried that border-related safety concerns have held the site back from being considered one of the world’s premier Catholic attractions, like the statue of Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro.

    He is opposed to Trump’s immigration agenda, he said, but the surrounding segments of the border wall are funneling migrants onto his cherished mountain. The barrier needs to be completed, he said.

    “It has nothing to do with immigration policies; it has to do with keeping Mount Cristo Rey safe,” said Escandon, a former police officer who specializes in performing cross-border marriages. “Hopefully it will allow the traditional visitor to come without fear.”

    But environmental and migrant rights groups say the new wall would disrupt a fragile desert ecosystem and make an already dangerous journey over the border more deadly.

    The diocese said it respects the Trump administration’s authority to secure the area. When Border Patrol officials asked in recent years to carve a roadway through Cristo Rey property, the diocese agreed and charged the government nothing. The church has not objected to the agency’s use of sensors and cameras around the mountain.

    But a wall is too far, Winder said.

    Barrier construction elsewhere has threatened or destroyed other cultural sites, including a 1,000-year-old Native American etching that federal contractors mistakenly bulldozed in Arizona this year. And the blasting involved in building near Cristo Rey could damage the statue, he said.

    Lawyers for the Justice Department have been pushing to accelerate the case, filing motions to condemn the property and take possession of it in quick succession. “Time is of the essence,” they argued, because the government has already contracted with construction companies and could be fined if the project is delayed.

    “We’re just getting run over,” Winder said.

    A Justice Department spokesperson, Natalie Baldassarre, said “the taking is authorized by law” and that it “will not impact activity or use of the shrine.”

    Kathryn Brack Morrow, an attorney for the diocese, said the government’s urgency was not justified.

    “This is a self-inflicted emergency,” Morrow said. “The diocese has raised weighty religious liberty concerns that warrant deliberate consideration.”

    Contractors have already begun working at the base of Cristo Rey. On a recent morning, 15-year-old Fernanda Vazquez hiked up the winding trail with her family and looked down at the ribbon of dirt where the wall may soon be built.

    “It just breaks my heart,” she said. “It just doesn’t seem right.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Ukrainian attacks prompt Russian-held Crimea to halt civilian gasoline sales

    Ukrainian attacks prompt Russian-held Crimea to halt civilian gasoline sales

    Officials in Russia-occupied Crimea suspended civilian gasoline sales Sunday as Ukraine ramped up attacks on fuel supplies on the Black Sea peninsula.

    Gov. Sergey Aksyonov, the Kremlin-appointed head of Crimea, said that overnight Ukrainian strikes killed four people and wounded 28 others. He did not specify the target of the attack.

    He later wrote on social media that local gas stations would halt all sales to nonstate companies and individuals for an undefined period.

    “Fuel will be sold only to government agencies that ensure the functioning and security of the Republic of Crimea,” Aksyonov said. “I ask everyone to remain calm and to only trust official sources of information.”

    Ukrainian forces have repeatedly targeted fuel supplies to Crimea in recent weeks, triggering the worst energy crisis in the region since it was illegally annexed by Russia in 2014.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a statement Sunday that a Crimean oil depot as well as an oil transport facility in Russia’s southern Krasnodar region were among the targets. He described the attacks as part of Ukraine’s “long-range sanctions” against Russia’s energy infrastructure.

    “Russia understands only strength, and our long-range strength is certainly working for peace,” he wrote.

    Russian officials in Krasnodar reported earlier Sunday that a drone strike sparked a fire at a Black Sea oil terminal in the village of Chushka. They said that Ukrainian attacks struck a ferry, killing one person.

    Motorists struggle to find fuel

    The Crimean peninsula has had periodic fuel shortages from Ukrainian strikes before, but the current crisis is the worst since its 2014 annexation.

    At the end of May, authorities restricted the sale of gas to 20 liters (5⅓ gallons) per vehicle owner per week, using prepaid coupons. Those were snapped up immediately following their release on an official messaging app channel, and motorists lined up for hours, waiting to refuel.

    Social networks have been abuzz with requests and advice on where to find fuel, and authorities launched a hotline for tourists in the area who have found themselves trapped.

    Some motorists bring their own gas from Krasnodar and elsewhere via the Kerch bridge, but they are restricted to carrying 100 liters (about 26½ gallons) per vehicle. Some speculators are selling gas at double the market price.

    In a rare public acknowledgment, the Kremlin has recognized the scope of the problem and promised to address the issue quickly.

    However, Ukraine’s successes have highlighted its ability to inflict painful damage on Russia and change the course of the conflict while Moscow’s advances recently have ground to a near halt. On June 11, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine reached its 1,569th day, surpassing the duration of World War I.

  • For cash-strapped farmers, deal to end Iran fighting comes too late

    For cash-strapped farmers, deal to end Iran fighting comes too late

    NASHVILLE, N.C. – The possible end of the Iran war will not cure the drought that has stunted the wheat crop. It won’t secure soybean export orders caught in the U.S.-China trade war. And it will do nothing to promote competition in agriculture, which would help farmers like Jeff Tyson earn a living.

    Like other growers, Tyson, 55, has seen costs outrun sales this year as the rain grew scarce and government policies added to his burdens.

    Now, the U.S.-Iran agreement to reopen the vital Strait of Hormuz and pursue a lasting peace offers some relief to farmers who have seen their fuel and fertilizer bills soar because of combat in the Persian Gulf. Diesel has not been cheaper since mid-March. Urea fertilizer in recent days sold for less than it did before the fighting began.

    But the financial damage has been done.

    President Donald Trump’s February decision to join Israel in attacking Iran aggravated the farm economy’s struggles. Soybean growers, who were already suffering from the president’s tariffs, are expected to lose money in 2026 for the fourth straight year.

    “There’s no joy left in this farm. When you work 16-hour days and get to the end of the year, and you have to borrow money to pay your taxes, there’s no fun in it. It’s just not worth it anymore,” said Tyson, a fourth-generation farmer, who long ago advised his daughters to look elsewhere for a good life.

    Tough times on the farm are souring some of the president’s most loyal supporters little more than four months before November’s congressional elections. Rural voters backed Trump’s economic policies by a 45% to 43% margin early last year but now disapprove of them 61% to 31%, according to a Reuters-Ipsos poll released this month.

    A separate Purdue University-CME Group survey this month showed that agricultural producers in particular have grown more downbeat. From a high of 75% in December, the percentage of those surveyed saying the country is headed in the right direction fell to 52% in May.

    Farmers represent a key constituency in states that could decide control of the U.S. Senate, including Iowa, Texas, Ohio, and Michigan, as well as North Carolina.

    The president’s signing Wednesday of an agreement that extends the ceasefire with Iran for 60 days follows a lengthy interruption to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, which curtailed exports from three of the world’s top 10 producers of urea and anhydrous ammonia fertilizer: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Iran.

    “We’re not going to solve that just because we open the strait. There is still a very big wound there that is going to take time to heal,” said Josh Linville, vice president of financial services firm StoneX, who expects prices to remain higher than usual through next spring.

    On Saturday, conditions in the strait remained fluid. Iranian authorities declared the channel once again closed in response to Israeli attacks in Lebanon — underscoring the fragility of the agreement signed last week. U.S. Central Command denied there was a closure, and said that shipping had increased, with 55 merchant ships and 17 million gallons of oil reaching global markets. U.S.-Iran peace talks were planned for Sunday in Switzerland.

    About an hour’s drive east of Raleigh, Tyson raises soybeans, cotton, sweet potatoes, tobacco, corn, and sunflowers. He runs the operation from a small white house adjacent to a two-lane road. Several buildings and grain silos dot the property.

    With shoulder-length brown hair and a full beard, Tyson is profoundly disillusioned by Washington. Well-funded business lobbyists and entrenched government bureaucrats thwart the will of the people, necessitating a disruptive figure like Trump, he said.

    “I was involved with the [American] Soybean Association for 16 years. I thought I could make a difference,” he said. “I spent a lot of time in Washington and realized that it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter what you say out here or what you do out here.”

    Tyson remains supportive of Trump’s drain-the-swamp brio, though he objects to the double whammy of import tariffs and income taxes.

    Farmers have been among the biggest losers of the president’s trade wars. After China responded to Trump’s first-term tariffs by purchasing soybeans from Brazil rather than the U.S., he gave farmers $23 billion to offset lost export sales.

    Last year, his April decision to raise U.S. tariffs to their highest mark since the 1930s caused China to again retaliate by halting purchases of American soybeans. Annual sales slumped to just $3 billion from a 2022 peak of nearly $18 billion. Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum also translated into higher prices for tractors, combines, and harvesters as well as replacement parts. Separate levies first imposed in 2020 on phosphate fertilizer from Morocco were another irritant.

    Under pressure from larger harvests in South America, soybean prices are down by roughly one-third from their 2022 levels. The combination of higher input costs and lower sales prices leave many soybean farmers needing to borrow money.

    For loans in excess of $100,000, farmers face interest rates of nearly 7%, more than twice the figure from four years ago, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

    “The returns for farmers have been really tough on the soybean side the past few years. They just generally haven’t been making much money,” said Scott Gerlt, chief economist for the American Soybean Association.

    Earlier this month, the administration reduced tariffs on agricultural equipment made of steel or aluminum, such as harvesters and combines, to 15% from 25%.

    The president also sought to reassure farmers by staging a White House event in March, where he promised easier environmental regulations and small-business loan guarantees. By then, $12 billion in farm aid designed to counter what the administration called “four years of disastrous Biden Administration policies” and other nations’ “unfair trade practices” was landing in farmers’ bank accounts.

    “We’re going to prove that the golden age of American agriculture is right here and right now,” Trump said.

    But the most consequential move came last fall when Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping reached a truce in their trade war. In return for lower U.S. tariffs, Xi agreed to resume purchases of American soybeans.

    Almost 100 miles west of Tyson’s farm, Michael McPherson stood in a wheat field where his son-in-law and grandson baled straw. This plot sits among 1,000 acres of soybeans, corn, cattle, and hay that he and his family cultivate.

    McPherson, 57, was another financial casualty of the Iran war. The price of diesel, which powers tractors, jumped by nearly 50% in the weeks before his scheduled April 1 corn planting. Fertilizer costs rose as well. He waited a few days, hoping the market would reset. But crops are not patient. Eventually he had to swallow the extra expense.

    “It’s been a tough year, a tough season so far. Among everything else that’s going on, we’re in the worst drought we’ve ever had this time of year. That’s really putting us in a bind right now. None of our crops are where they’re supposed to be this time of year,” said McPherson, who expects to realize about half his usual harvest from this field.

    Though reluctant to talk politics, he applauds the Trump administration’s efforts to secure better trade terms for U.S. farmers even as he voices frustration with the Iran war.

    Before attacking, he said, the administration should have stockpiled fertilizer to spare farmers crippling price increases. Instead, the war’s costs have eroded profits and forced him to tap his financial reserves.

    “I don’t want to say we’re at crisis levels yet. But something’s got to change,” he said.

    Gary Hendrix, working with his wife and two sons, tills 7,000 acres of corn, cotton, soybeans, peanuts, and wheat in Raeford, about 100 miles east of Charlotte. He failed to turn a profit last year and continues to operate in the red.

    Production costs, including seed and fertilizer, are up about 20% or $100 per acre compared with last year. His last tank of diesel cost $32,000, versus roughly $19,000 in December.

    The Iran war’s end should mean less-expensive fertilizer. But Hendrix worries that the small number of suppliers will use their market power to keep prices high. One of his biggest complaints is the agribusiness consolidation of recent years.

    “It doesn’t really matter whether I’m buying or selling. If I’m trying to buy a tractor or if I’m trying to sell a load of soybeans. You know, I don’t have many places to go,” he said. “They can reserve a four-seat table at any restaurant and decide what my [profit] margin’s going to be.”

    Two companies — Nutrien and Mosaic — account for at least 86% of the phosphate and potash fertilizer market. In March, Bloomberg News reported that the Justice Department was investigating Nutrien, Mosaic, and three other producers for potential antitrust violations. The Federal Trade Commission last month said it had launched a related probe.

    In a statement, Mosaic said fertilizer prices are determined by “a wide range of well‑documented market factors,” not individual companies. Nutrien did not respond to a request for comment.

    Hendrix, a registered independent, said he voted for Trump in 2024. He is undecided about which party he will back in November’s congressional elections. But as the midterms draw near, he sounds lukewarm on the president.

    “He’s done some things that have really been a benefit to ag,” Hendrix said. “And he’s tried some other things that haven’t quite worked.”

  • Trump post seems to push Starmer to resign

    Trump post seems to push Starmer to resign

    LONDON — President Donald Trump appeared to scoop Downing Street on Sunday, announcing that Prime Minister Keir Starmer would resign before any public statement from Starmer himself.

    “Keir Starmer will resign as Prime Minister of The United Kingdom,” proclaimed in a social media post, in which he also asserted that Starmer had “failed badly” on immigration and energy policy.

    Then, Trump added: “I wish him well!”

    Doubts about Starmer’s political future have swirled for weeks since his Labour Party suffered staggering losses in local elections in May, and prospects of a leadership challenge increased markedly on Friday after his most formidable rival, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, won a special election for an open seat in parliament.

    Earlier on Sunday, British media had reported that Starmer was considering resigning. Still, Trump’s intervention represented an extraordinary foray into British domestic politics that left some veteran political observers stunned.

    “There is literally no boundary this American president will not bulldoze through,” ITV’s Robert Peston wrote on X.

    Peston also cited a cabinet minister who said that, despite Trump’s “scoop,” Starmer had “genuinely not made a decision to quit.”

    Broadcaster Piers Morgan called it “the final humiliation.”

    Downing Street told the Washington Post on Sunday evening that Starmer and Trump had not spoken over the weekend, raising questions about how the U.S. president came to make such a definitive prediction.

    But it also didn’t mean Trump was wrong about Starmer’s plans. A senior Labour Party MP told the Post on Sunday evening that some Labour Party lawmakers were “being briefed that he will step down tomorrow and that he realizes his position is untenable.”

    Speaking on the condition of anonymity because she wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly, she added that Starmer “no longer has the confidence” of his peers and that it was “only right that he now steps aside.”

    However Trump reached his conclusion, the president’s ties with close European allies are increasingly strained. In recent days, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni accused Trump of lying after he claimed she had “begged” to have her photograph taken with him.

    Relations between Starmer and Trump have been rocky for months.

    Earlier this year, Trump branded Starmer “no Winston Churchill” during a dispute over Britain’s support for U.S. strikes on Iran, and the two leaders did not hold a bilateral meeting at the Group of Seven summit in France last week.

    Starmer led the Labour Party to a landslide election victory just two years ago, but has faced increasing pressure from within his own party and growing calls for him to step aside since the local elections in which Labour and the Conservatives lost badly to Reform UK, the populist party led by Nigel Farage, one of the key architects of Brexit, the U.K.’s departure from the European Union.

    Starmer on Friday vowed to fight any leadership challenge. He has not commented publicly on the matter since then, but briefings from senior lawmakers have suggested that he spent the weekend weighing his position.

    Some commentators have suggested that the question is no longer if Starmer will leave, but how, and when.

    The focus, they say, has shifted to choreography — whether Labour will stage a full leadership contest, with figures such as Wes Streeting, the former health secretary, also entering the race — or rally around a single successor.

    British politics have been remarkably unstable since the 2016 Brexit referendum. If Starmer does announce his resignation, it would usher in Britain’s seventh prime minister in a decade.

    In the special election last week, Burnham won a decisive victory against a Reform UK opponent — a win that for many Labour lawmakers provided a test case of whether Burnham could help reverse Labour’s dire poll ratings of late.

    Starmer, for his part, took to social media on Sunday only to comment on Father’s Day. “Being a dad is my great joy,” he wrote.

  • Can Trump sway another Latin American election? Here’s what to know.

    Can Trump sway another Latin American election? Here’s what to know.

    BOGOTÁ, Colombia — Colombians headed to the polls Sunday in the most polarized election in years, with voters choosing between the country’s governing leftist political movement and a President Donald Trump-endorsed right-wing outsider.

    The vote pits Sen. Iván Cepeda, a longtime human rights activist and ally of President Gustavo Petro, the country’s first leftist president, against Abelardo De La Espriella, a former criminal defense lawyer who vows a sweeping crackdown on guerrilla groups and drug-trafficking gangs.

    The high-stakes contest has drawn international attention following De La Espriella’s endorsement by Trump, who called Cepeda a “Radical Left Marxist.”

    The move marks the latest instance of Trump endorsing right-wing candidates in Latin American elections as the region increasingly shifts toward the right, driven in part by concerns over rising insecurity.

    Who are the candidates?

    Cepeda, 63, is a senator and well-known advocate for victims of Colombia’s decades-long armed conflict. He was also part of the negotiations that led to Colombia’s landmark 2016 peace deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia that was meant to help end that conflict.

    Running as the candidate of Petro’s party, he has pledged to preserve many of his policies, including anti-poverty programs, land redistribution efforts, and negotiations with armed groups.

    De La Espriella, 47, is a former high-profile criminal defense lawyer and businessperson with no previous political experience and who spent years living in Florida.

    Nicknamed “El Tigre,” or “the tiger,” he has campaigned as an antiestablishment outsider, though he has long been close to Colombia’s right-wing political power elites as a lawyer.

    Why has the vote spurred controversy in the U. S.?

    Some of De La Espriella’s campaign promises echo policies pursued by other Latin American right-wing leaders, such as Nayib Bukele of El Salvador and Javier Milei of Argentina. His platform includes building 10 megaprisons, shrinking the state, and collaborating with the United States to combat drug trafficking.

    He has also been known to legally pursue his opponents — including journalists. After he received Trump’s endorsement and the support of some Republican lawmakers, De La Espriella, a naturalized U.S. citizen, began warning that he would go after anyone who challenged him, with the assistance of the United States.

    Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a memo saying that the presence of a progressive activist living in Arizona, Beto Coral, interfered with U.S. foreign policy after the activist criticized De La Espriella. Coral, 40, was detained by U.S. immigration authorities Tuesday, a move decried by Democrats in Congress and by rights groups.

    What are voters focused on?

    Along with complaints about Petro’s rocky four-year-term, voters cite concerns over crime and extortion and the growing power of armed groups in rural areas.

    Violence surged even during the campaign, which saw a presidential hopeful assassinated, two De La Espriella campaign workers killed, and Cepeda’s running mate briefly kidnapped.

    Critics say Petro’s flagship “Total Peace” strategy, which sought negotiated settlements with multiple armed groups, allowed those groups to grow stronger during ceasefires.

    Humanitarian organizations say violence has reached its highest level since the 2016 peace accord, but Colombia remains far safer than it was during the height of the conflict in the 1980s and 1990s.

    While De La Espriella says he will completely abandon peace talks and crush narcotrafficking groups within 90 days, Cepeda has said he will continue his own version of peace negotiations.

    The election is also seen as a referendum on Petro’s presidency. Supporters credit his government with expanding social programs, and increasing the political visibility of historically marginalized groups.

    But critics say his tenure has been marked not only by deteriorating security, but by a troubled state takeover of the health system and runaway spending that has left Colombia with a public debt that is at pandemic levels.

    Why the first round of voting was a surprise

    De La Espriella finished first in the opening round with 43.7% of the vote, compared with 40.9% for Cepeda.

    The result surprised many analysts. Despite complaints, Petro has maintained approval ratings above 50% and has created a broad coalition of movements that support the left. Cepeda enjoyed a comfortable lead in the polls into last month.

    Yet many voters instead turned to De La Espriella, a political newcomer who promised a clean break not only with the left, but with traditional parties and the “same ones as always.”

    Since the first round, most polls have shown De La Espriella holding the lead. However, analysts note that the right-wing candidate’s increasingly strident language has worried more middle-of-the-road Colombians, making it harder to predict whom undecided voters will support.

    After May’s first round, Petro claimed electoral fraud without evidence, raising concerns that he could refuse to accept the results of Sunday’s election or call for protests.

    When are results expected?

    Polls were open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. local time. Preliminary results were expected within hours of the polls closing.

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.