Tag: no-latest

  • Still no suspect in the disappearance of ‘Today’ host Savannah Guthrie’s mother

    Still no suspect in the disappearance of ‘Today’ host Savannah Guthrie’s mother

    TUCSON, Ariz. — The search for Today show host Savannah Guthrie’s mother still had no suspect or person of interest Wednesday, authorities said, four days after she disappeared with signs of forced entry at her home in southern Arizona.

    Investigators believe Nancy Guthrie was taken against her will over the weekend and Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos has said they don’t have credible information indicating Guthrie’s disappearance was targeted. Guthrie has limited mobility, and officials do not believe she left on her own. Nanos said she is of sound mind.

    “Detectives continue to speak with anyone who may have had contact with Mrs. Guthrie,” the sheriff’s department said in a statement on social media Wednesday. “Detectives are working closely with the Guthrie family.”

    Multiple media organizations reported receiving purported ransom notes Tuesday that they handed over to investigators. The sheriff’s department has said it’s taking the notes and other tips seriously but declined to comment further.

    The Pima County sheriff and the Tucson FBI chief urged the public to offer tips during a news conference Tuesday. Nanos has said Guthrie needs daily medication and could die without it. Asked whether officials were looking for her alive, he said, “We hope we are.”

    Authorities say Nancy Guthrie was last seen around 9:30 p.m. Saturday at her home in the Tucson area, where she lived alone, and she was reported missing midday Sunday. Someone at her church called a family member to say she was not there, leading family to search her home and then call 911.

    DNA samples have been gathered and submitted for analysis as part of the investigation. “We’ve gotten some back, but nothing to indicate any suspects,” Nanos said.

    There were signs of forced entry at Guthrie’s home, evidence of a nighttime kidnapping, and several personal items were still there, including Guthrie’s cell phone, wallet and car, according to a person familiar with the investigation, who was not authorized to publicly discuss details of the case and spoke to the Associated Press on condition of an anonymity. Investigators were reviewing surveillance video from nearby homes and information from area license plate cameras and analyzing local cell phone towers data.

    Guthrie’s upscale Catalina Foothills neighborhood is quiet and mostly dark at night, lit mainly by car headlights and homes spaced far apart. Long driveways, front gates and desert plants provide a buffer from the winding streets. Saguaro cacti tower above her home’s roofline, and wispy trees partially block the view of the front door. Decorative streetlamps and prickly pear cacti dot the grassy front yard.

    Jim Mason, longtime commander of a search and rescue posse for the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, said desert terrain can make looking for missing people difficult. Sometimes it’s hard to peer into areas that are dense with mesquite trees, cholla cactus and other brush, he said. His group is based 175 miles (280 kilometers) north of Tucson, and is not involved in the search for Guthrie.

    On the other side of the country, Victory Church in Albany, New York, said it’s offering a $25,000 reward for information that leads to finding Nancy Guthrie.

    “Me and my wife, we watch Savannah every single morning. We’ve heard of her faith. We’ve heard of her mom’s faith. And she’s got such a sweet spirit,” Pastor Charlie Muller said.

    For a third day Wednesday, Today opened with Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, but Savannah Guthrie was not at the anchor’s desk. NBC Sports said Tuesday that Guthrie will not be covering the 2026 Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics “as she focuses on being with her family during this difficult time.”

    The Today host grew up in Tucson, graduated from the University of Arizona and previously worked as a reporter and anchor at Tucson television station KVOA. Her parents settled in Tucson in the 1970s when she was a young child. The youngest of three siblings, she credits her mom with holding their family together after her father died of a heart attack at 49, when Savannah was just 16.

  • Supreme Court allows new California congressional districts that favor Democrats

    Supreme Court allows new California congressional districts that favor Democrats

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed California to use a new voter-approved congressional map that is favorable to Democrats in this year’s elections, rejecting a last-ditch plea from state Republicans and the Trump administration.

    No justices dissented from the brief order denying the appeal without explanation, which is common on the court’s emergency docket.

    The justices had previously allowed Texas’ Republican-friendly map to be used in 2026, despite a lower-court ruling that it likely discriminates on the basis of race.

    Conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote in December that it appeared both states had adopted new maps for political advantage, which the high court has previously ruled cannot be a basis for a federal lawsuit.

    Republicans, joined by the Trump administration, claimed the California map improperly relied on race as well. But a lower court disagreed by a 2-1 vote. The Justice Department and White House did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

    The justices’ unsigned order keeps in place districts that are designed to flip up to five seats now held by Republicans, part of a tit-for-tat nationwide redistricting battle spurred by President Donald Trump, with control of Congress on the line in midterm elections.

    Last year, at Trump’s behest, Texas Republicans redid the state’s congressional districts with an eye on gaining five seats.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is eyeing a 2028 presidential run, pledged to respond in kind, though he had to win over voters, not just lawmakers, to do so.

    Newsom celebrated the court’s decision, saying on social media that Trump had “started this redistricting war” and would end up losing out in the November midterms, when control of Congress is at stake.

    California’s attorney general, Democrat Rob Bonta, said the decision was “good news not only for Californians, but for our democracy.”

    The state Republican Party, which brought the case, vowed to keep fighting against the map’s use in future elections.

    “We will continue to vigorously argue for Equal Protection under the law for all of California’s voters,” Michael Columbo, counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

    One longtime party strategist, Jon Fleishman, a former executive director of the California Republican Party, said in a post on X that the decision means “this year’s elections will take place on the new lines shrinking the already very small Republican delegation from California.”

    Filing for congressional primaries in California begins on Monday.

  • Democrats demand ‘dramatic changes’ for ICE, including masks, cameras and judicial warrants

    Democrats demand ‘dramatic changes’ for ICE, including masks, cameras and judicial warrants

    WASHINGTON — Democrats are threatening to block funding for the Homeland Security Department when it expires in two weeks unless there are “dramatic changes” and “real accountability” for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other law enforcement agencies who are carrying out President Donald Trump’s campaign of federal immigration enforcement in Minnesota and across the country.

    Congress is discussing potential new rules for ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection after officers shot and killed two Minneapolis protesters in January. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries reiterated their party’s demands on Wednesday, with Schumer telling reporters that Congress must “rein in ICE in very serious ways, and end the violence.”

    Democrats are “drawing a line in the sand” as Republicans need their votes to continue the funding, Jeffries said.

    The negotiations come amid some bipartisan sentiment that Congress should step in to de-escalate tensions over the enforcement operations that have rocked Minnesota and other states. But finding real agreement in such a short time will be difficult, if not “an impossibility,” as Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R., S.D.) said Tuesday.

    President Donald Trump last week agreed to a Democratic request that funding for the DHS be separated from a larger spending bill and extended at current levels for two weeks while the two parties discuss possible requirements for the federal agents. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) said this weekend that he was at the White House when Trump spoke with Schumer and that they were “on the path to get agreement.”

    But it’s unclear if the president or enough congressional Republicans will agree to any of the Democrats’ larger demands that the officers unmask and identify themselves, obtain judicial warrants in certain cases and work with local authorities, among other asks. Republicans have already pushed back.

    And House GOP lawmakers are demanding that some of their own priorities be added to the Homeland Security spending bill, including legislation that would require proof of citizenship before Americans register to vote. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and other Republican senators are pushing for restrictions on sanctuary cities that they say don’t do enough to crack down on illegal immigration. There’s no clear definition of sanctuary jurisdictions, but the term is generally applied to state and local governments that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

    It’s also uncertain if Democrats who are furious over the Trump administration’s increasingly aggressive immigration enforcement operations would be willing to compromise.

    “Republicans need to get serious,” said Schumer, a New York Democrat, adding that they will propose “tough, strong legislation” in the next day.

    A look at Democrats’ demands and what Republicans are saying about them:

    Agreement on body cameras

    Republicans say they are open to officer-worn body cameras, a change that was already in the underlying homeland security spending bill. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem backed that up on Monday when she ordered body-worn cameras to be issued to every DHS officer on the ground in Minneapolis, including those from ICE. She said the policy would expand nationwide as funding becomes available.

    The bill already directed $20 million to outfit immigration enforcement agents with body-worn cameras.

    Gil Kerlikowske, who served as commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2014 to 2017, said that most agents are “very supportive” of cameras because they could help exonerate officers. But he added that complex questions remain, including when footage should be released and when cameras must be activated.

    “When do you turn it on? And if you got into a problem and didn’t have it on, are you going to be disciplined? It’s really pretty complex,” he said.

    Schumer said Tuesday that the body cameras “need to stay on.”

    Disagreement on masking

    As videos and photos of aggressive immigration tactics and high-profile shootings circulate nationwide, agents covering their faces with masks has become a flashpoint. Democrats argue that removing the masks would increase accountability. Republicans warn it could expose agents to harassment and threats.

    “State law enforcement, local folks don’t do it,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson, the top Democrat on the Committee for Homeland Security. ”I mean, what’s so special about an ICE law enforcement agency that they have to wear a mask?”

    But Republicans appear unlikely to agree.

    “Unlike your local law enforcement in your hometown, ICE agents are being doxed and targeted. We have evidence of that,” Johnson said on Tuesday. He added that if you “unmask them and you put all their identifying information on their uniform, they will obviously be targeted.”

    Immigration officers are already required to identify themselves “as soon as it is practical and safe to do so,” according to federal regulations. ICE officials insist those rules are being followed.

    Critics, however, question how closely officers adhere to the regulations.

    “We just see routinely that that’s not happening,” said Nithya Nathan Pineau, a policy attorney with the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.

    Judicial vs. administrative warrants

    Democrats have also demanded stricter use of judicial warrants and an end to roving patrols of agents who are targeting people in the streets and in their homes. Schumer said Tuesday that they want “arrest warrants and an end to racial profiling.”

    Most immigration arrests are carried out under administrative warrants, internal documents issued by immigration authorities that authorize the arrest of a specific person but do not permit officers to forcibly enter private homes or other non-public spaces without consent. Traditionally, only warrants signed by judges carry that authority.

    But an internal ICE memo obtained by The Associated Press last month authorizes ICE officers to use force to enter a residence based solely on a more narrow administrative warrant to arrest someone with a final order of removal, a move that advocates say collides with Fourth Amendment protections.

    Democrats have not made clear how broadly they want judicial warrants used. Jeffries of New York said that Democrats want to see “an end to the targeting of sensitive locations like houses of worship, schools and hospitals.”

    Johnson said Tuesday that Democrats are trying to “add an entirely new layer” by seeking warrants signed by a judge rather than the administrative warrants that are signed by the department. “We can’t do that,” he said.

    The speaker has said that an end to roving patrols is a potential area of agreement, but he did not give details.

    Code of conduct, more accountability

    Democrats have also called for a uniform code of conduct for all ICE and federal agents similar to that for state and local law enforcement officers.

    Federal officials blocked state investigators from accessing evidence after protester Renee Good was shot and killed by an ICE agent on Jan. 7. Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, demanded that the state be allowed to take part, saying that it would be “very difficult for Minnesotans” to accept that an investigation excluding the state could be fair.

    Hoping for a miracle

    Any deal Democrats strike on the Department of Homeland Security is unlikely to satisfy everyone in the party. Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts said she would never support an agreement that didn’t require unmasking.

    “I ran for Congress in 2018 on abolish ICE,” Pressley said. “My position has not changed.”

    Thune, of South Dakota, has repeatedly said it’s an “impossibility” to negotiate and pass something so complicated in two weeks. He said any talks should be between Democrats and Trump.

    “I don’t think it’s very realistic,” Thune said Tuesday about finding quick agreement. “But there’s always miracles, right?”

  • Iran and the U.S. will hold nuclear talks Friday in Oman, Iranian foreign minister says

    Iran and the U.S. will hold nuclear talks Friday in Oman, Iranian foreign minister says

    DUBAI — Nuclear talks between Iran and the United States will take place Friday in Oman, the Iranian foreign minister said, as tensions between the countries remain high following Tehran’s bloody crackdown on nationwide protests last month.

    The announcement by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Wednesday came after hours of indications that the anticipated talks were faltering over changes in the format and content of the talks.

    ”I’m grateful to our Omani brothers for making all necessary arrangements,” Araghchi wrote on X on Wednesday evening.

    Earlier Wednesday, a regional official said Iran was seeking a “different” type of meeting than that what had been proposed by Turkey, one focused exclusively on the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, with participation limited to Iran and the United States. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief the media.

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said U.S. officials were working on maintaining a meeting with Iran this week.

    Tensions between the countries have spiked after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested the U.S. might use force against Iran in response to its crackdown on protesters. Trump also has been pushing Tehran for a deal to constrain its nuclear program.

    Rubio hopes talks will go beyond nuclear ones

    Iran’s reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian on Tuesday said he had instructed the foreign minister to “pursue fair and equitable negotiations” with the U.S., in the first clear sign from Tehran it wants to try to negotiate. That signaled the move is supported by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final say on all matters of state and previously dismissed any negotiations.

    Rubio said the U.S. hoped to discuss a number of concerns beyond the nuclear issue, including discussions on Iran’s ballistic missiles, support for proxy networks across the region and the “treatment of their own people.”

    “The leadership of Iran at the clerical level does not reflect the people of Iran. I know of no other country where there’s a bigger difference between the people who lead the country and the people who live there,” he told reporters.

    Vice President JD Vance told The Megyn Kelly Show that diplomatic talks with Iran are challenging because of Tehran’s political system, overseen by Khamenei.

    “It’s a very weird country to conduct diplomacy with when you can’t even talk to the person who’s in charge of the country. That makes all of this much more complicated, and it makes the whole situation much more absurd,” Vance said, noting that Trump could speak directly by phone with the leaders of Russia, China or North Korea.

    Vance said Trump’s bottom line is that Iran cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, asserting that other states in the region would quickly do the same.

    Iran long has insisted its nuclear program is peaceful. However, Iranian officials in recent years have increasingly threatened to pursue the bomb.

    Vance said he believed Trump would work to “accomplish what he can through non-military means. And if he feels like the military is the only option, then he’s ultimately going to choose that option.”

    Talks expected even after U.S. shot down Iranian drone

    On Tuesday, a U.S. Navy fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone that approached an American aircraft carrier. Iranian fast boats from its paramilitary Revolutionary Guard also tried to stop a U.S.-flagged ship in the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, the Navy said.

    Iran did not immediately acknowledge either incident, which strained but apparently did not derail hopes for talks with the U.S.

    On Wednesday, Iranian military chiefs visited a missile base in an attempt to highlight its military readiness after a 12-day war with Israel in June devastated Iran’s air defenses. The base holds the Khorramshahr missile, which has a range of more than 1,250 miles and was launched towards Israel during the war last year.

    Turkey urges diplomacy

    Also Wednesday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated Turkey’s opposition to foreign intervention in neighboring Iran, calling for the resolution of issues through dialogue.

    Turkey has been urgently working for the past week to bring the U.S. and Iran to the negotiating table, and was previously expected to host the talks.

    “We believe that external interventions involving our neighbor Iran would pose significant risks for the entire region,” Erdogan said during a visit to Cairo. “Resolving issues with Iran, including the nuclear file, through diplomatic means is the most appropriate approach.”

  • The former Prince Andrew moves to King Charles III’s private estate after Epstein document uproar

    The former Prince Andrew moves to King Charles III’s private estate after Epstein document uproar

    LONDON — The former Prince Andrew has moved out of his longtime home on crown-owned land near Windsor Castle earlier than expected after the latest release of documents from the U.S. investigation of Jeffrey Epstein revived questions about his friendship with the convicted sex offender.

    The 65-year-old brother of King Charles III, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, left the Royal Lodge in Windsor on Monday and is now living on the king’s Sandringham estate in eastern England, Britain’s Press Association reported. British media reported that Mountbatten-Windsor will live temporarily at Wood Farm Cottage while his permanent home on the estate undergoes repairs.

    Mountbatten-Windsor’s move to Sandringham was announced in October when Charles stripped him of his royal titles amid continuing revelations about his links to Epstein. But the former prince was expected to remain at Royal Lodge, where he has lived for more than 20 years, until the spring.

    The expedited departure came as Thames Valley Police announced they were investigating allegations that Epstein flew a second woman to Britain to have sex with Mountbatten-Windsor. A lawyer for the alleged victim told the BBC that the encounter took place in 2010 at Royal Lodge.

    The allegations are separate from those made by Virginia Giuffre, who claimed she had been trafficked to Britain to have sex with Andrew in 2001, when she was just 17. Giuffre died by suicide last year.

    Mountbatten-Windsor has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in his relationship with Epstein. He hasn’t responded publicly to the new trafficking allegation.

    Mountbatten-Windsor features a number of times in the 3 million pages of documents the U.S. Department of Justice released on Friday.

    In an email dated March 23, 2011, the lawyer for an exotic dancer said Epstein and Mountbatten-Windsor asked her to take part in a threesome at the sex offenders’ Florida home.

    The woman’s legal representatives accused the pair of having “prevailed upon her to engage in various sex acts” during the alleged encounter in early 2006 after initially hiring her to dance for them. The woman was only paid $2,000, not the $10,000 she was promised, her lawyer said.

    The lawyer offered to settle the matter confidentially for $250,000.

    “My client has not pursued her claims against your client until this time because she is not proud of the circumstances of that night,” the lawyer wrote. “She was working as an exotic dancer, but she was treated like a prostitute.”

    In other correspondence between Epstein and someone believed to be Mountbatten-Windsor shows Epstein offering to arrange a date between the man and a 26-year-old Russian woman. The man, who signs off simply as “A,” later suggests that he and Epstein have dinner in London, either at a restaurant or Buckingham Palace.

    The documents do not show wrongdoing by many of those named. The appearance of famous people in the files often reflect Epstein’s extremely wide reach.

    The former prince’s residence at Royal Lodge has long been a point of contention between the king and his brother.

    After Charles became king in 2022, he tried to force his brother to move into a smaller house on the Windsor Castle estate. Mountbatten-Windsor refused, citing a lease on the property that ran through 2078.

    But the pressure for him to leave became irresistible in October as lawmakers and the public raised questions about the favorable terms of Mountbatten-Windsor’s lease on the 30-room house and surrounding estate, which is managed by the Crown Estate.

    The Crown Estate controls properties throughout the country that are technically owned by the monarchy but are managed for the benefit of British taxpayers.

    By contrast, the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk is the personal property of the king.

    Art museum official bails

    Art museum curator and director David A. Ross has left his post at the School of Visual Arts in New York after the latest release of documents about Epstein revealed his friendship with him.

    Ross, who was chair of the MFA art practice program, resigned Tuesday, the school said in a statement, adding that it was “aware of correspondence” between him and Epstein. Ross’ online page at the school was offline Wednesday.

    The resignation was first reported by ARTnews.

    In emails dating from 2009, Ross banters with, reaches out to meet and consoles Epstein, calling him “incredible” and “I’m still proud to call you a friend.”

    In one exchange in 2009, Epstein suggests an exhibition called “Statutory” that would feature “girls and boys ages 14-25 ”where they look nothing like their true ages.” Replied Ross: “You are incredible” and noted that Brooke Shields posed nude at age 10.

    Also that year, Ross wrote to console Epstein after the financier had been deposed. “Damn, this was not what you needed or deserved,” Ross wrote. “I know how tough you are, and in fact, it probably bothers me as your friend more than it does you.”

  • Lee Hamilton, foreign policy leader in Congress, has died at 94

    Lee Hamilton, foreign policy leader in Congress, has died at 94

    Lee H. Hamilton, a deliberative, soft-spoken Indiana Democrat who won bipartisan respect for his integrity and foreign policy expertise during 34 years in the U.S. House of Representatives, and who later helped steer high-profile inquiries into the 9/11 terrorist attacks and Iraq War strategy, died Feb. 3. He was 94.

    His son, Douglas Hamilton, confirmed the death but did not cite a specific cause.

    Mr. Hamilton, who was first elected to the House in 1964, became a prominent voice in some of the most contentious foreign policy debates of his era.

    The son of a pacifist Methodist minister, he helped lead an unsuccessful effort in 1991 to block President George H.W. Bush’s use of the military to drive Iraq from Kuwait. During the Reagan administration, the congressman had forcefully opposed military aid for the anti-communist Contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua’s left-wing Sandinista government.

    An all-state Hoosier high school basketball star, he maintained the lanky build and crew cut of his youth into his senior years. He also maintained a middle-of-the-road voting record that reflected the largely rural, small-town slice of southern Indiana he represented.

    He was measured in tone and language, almost professorial in manner — the antithesis of the stereotypical backslapping, lectern-thumping politician.

    “Lee Hamilton is a thinker, which makes him a little different,” political commentator Chris Matthews, then an aide to Speaker Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill Jr. (D., Mass.), told the New York Times in 1984. “He makes his case logically, deductively. He’s not the kind of visceral politician you see around here.”

    At the time, Mr. Hamilton chaired the Europe and Middle East subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and was O’Neill’s point man in pushing the Reagan administration to withdraw U.S. peacekeepers from Lebanon after the terrorist bombing in Beirut that killed 241 American service members. He later chaired the full Foreign Affairs and Intelligence committees.

    Mr. Hamilton advocated an activist role for Congress in shaping foreign policy and cautioned lawmakers against ceding all responsibility for military intervention to the president.

    The proper boundary between the executive and legislative branches was at the heart of the Iran-Contra affair, which raised Mr. Hamilton’s profile somewhat beyond Capitol Hill.

    After disclosures that the Reagan administration had diverted profits from the secret sale of weapons to Iran to fund the Nicaraguan rebels, then-Speaker Jim Wright (D., Texas) appointed Mr. Hamilton to head a special House committee to investigate the clandestine arrangement, which was designed to circumvent Congress’ ban on funding of the Contras.

    In 1987, Mr. Hamilton’s committee and a Senate panel chaired by Democrat Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii held 41 days of televised hearings. The two key players, Vice Admiral John Poindexter, Reagan’s national security adviser, and an aide, Lt. Col. Oliver North, were unrepentant when they appeared, insisting that the covert program was in the national interest.

    Blaming the scandal at least in part on Congress’ “fickle, vacillating, unpredictable, on-again-off-again policy” toward the Contras, North told the committees: “The Congress of the United States left soldiers in the field unsupported and vulnerable to their communist enemies. . . . I am proud of the efforts that we made, and I am proud of the fight that we fought.”

    Mr. Hamilton’s reply was polite and stern. “I cannot agree,” he said, “that the end has justified these means, that the threat in Central America was so great that we had to do something even if it meant disregarding constitutional processes [and] deceiving the Congress and the American people.”

    He concluded: “Democracy has its frustrations. You’ve experienced some of them, but we — you and I — know of no better system of government. And when that democratic process is subverted, we risk all that we cherish.”

    In the end, the two committees found no conclusive evidence that Reagan was aware of the diversion. But their majority report concluded that laws had been disregarded and that the president “created or at least tolerated an environment where those who did know of the diversion believed with certainty that they were carrying out the President’s policies.”

    North and Poindexter were later found guilty of criminal charges stemming from the Iran-Contra affair, but their convictions were overturned on appeal.

    In an interview for this obituary in 2016, Norman Ornstein, a political scientist at the American Enterprise Institute, called Mr. Hamilton “one of the premier legislators of his time.”

    At least two Democratic presidential candidates, Michael Dukakis in 1988 and Bill Clinton in 1992, considered Mr. Hamilton as a running mate. His less-than-lively style and his record on some social issues — most noticeably, his opposition to federal funding of abortions except in cases of rape, incest or a threat to the mother’s life — may have hurt his chances.

    Mr. Hamilton did not seek reelection in 1998, but his career in elective politics proved to be only a first act. The second was a run of leadership roles in public policy and academic undertakings that cemented his standing as one of Washington’s elder statesmen.

    In 2002, he was named vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission, an independent, bipartisan panel created by Congress and the White House to examine the terrorist attacks a year earlier on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    Chaired by former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, a Republican, the 10-member group issued a unanimous report in 2004 identifying a raft of government shortcomings that contributed to the 9/11 disaster and 41 recommendations to prevent a recurrence. The report led to a number of changes in national security policies and organization, including the creation of a new position — director of national intelligence — to unify the intelligence community.

    Though the commission was not without critics, Kean and Mr. Hamilton, who worked essentially as co-chairs, got high marks for steering the investigation through a political minefield and producing a document that had the backing of all commission members, Republicans and Democrats.

    Mr. Hamilton returned to the limelight in 2006 as co-chair, with former secretary of state James A. Baker III, of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel organized by the U.S. Institute of Peace to propose strategies to stabilize Iraq, where sectarian violence was taking an increasing toll in American and Iraqi lives three years after the U.S.-led invasion.

    Among its 79 recommendations, the 10-member group called for boosting diplomatic efforts in the region, including engaging Syria and Iran, and increasing the number of American troops embedded in Iraqi units for training purposes while gradually decreasing the strength of U.S. combat forces.

    In part because of Baker’s close connection to the Bush family, the panel’s work drew significant media attention. But in January 2007 — in what then-Vice President Dick Cheney later described as a “repudiation of the Baker-Hamilton report” — President George W. Bush announced the deployment of more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq to provide security, mainly in Baghdad. The surge would buy time for the Iraqi government to strengthen its military capacity, the administration argued.

    In 2015, President Barack Obama awarded Mr. Hamilton the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. The White House announcement called him “one of the most influential voices on international relations and American national security over the course of his more than 40-year career.”

    Lee Herbert Hamilton was born in Daytona Beach, Fla., on April 20, 1931, and as a child, he moved with his family to Evansville, Ind., where his father had a church assignment.

    He graduated in 1952 from DePauw University and completed a law degree at Indiana University in 1956. He was a lawyer in Columbus, Indiana, when he got involved in politics, and in 1964, he rode President Lyndon Johnson’s coattails to victory over an incumbent GOP congressman. Except for a close call in the GOP landslide of 1994, he repeatedly won reelection by comfortable margins.

    His wife of 57 years, Nancy Nelson, died in a car accident in 2012. In addition to his son, Douglas, survivors include two daughters, Tracy Souza and Deborah Kremer; five grandchildren; and a great-granddaughter.

    After leaving Congress, Mr. Hamilton was president for more than a decade of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington. He also directed what is now the Center on Representative Government at Indiana University in Bloomington and wrote books on Congress and international affairs.

    When Mr. Hamilton left the Wilson Center in 2010 and was preparing to move back to Indiana, an NPR interviewer asked him what he had learned over his many years in public life.

    “I think that you come filled with ambition and drive and energy and wanting to accomplish great things, and you find the system is very hard to move, to make it work,” Mr. Hamilton replied. “I think what has impressed me over the years is the sheer complexity and difficulty of governing this country.”

  • Government lawyer yanked from immigration detail in Minnesota after telling judge ‘this job sucks’

    Government lawyer yanked from immigration detail in Minnesota after telling judge ‘this job sucks’

    WASHINGTON — A government lawyer who told a judge that her job “sucks” during a court hearing stemming from the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota has been removed from her Justice Department post, according to a person familiar with the matter.

    Julie Le had been working for the Justice Department on a detail, but the U.S. attorney in Minnesota ended her assignment after her comments in court on Tuesday, the person said. The person spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter. She had been working for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement before the temporary assignment.

    At a hearing Tuesday in St. Paul, Minn., for several immigration cases, Le told U.S. District Judge Jerry Blackwell that she wishes he could hold her in contempt of court “so that I can have a full 24 hours of sleep.”

    “What do you want me to do? The system sucks. This job sucks. And I am trying every breath that I have so that I can get you what you need,” Le said, according to a transcript.

    Le’s extraordinary remarks reflect the intense strain that has been placed on the federal court system since President Donald Trump returned to the White House a year ago with a promise to carry out mass deportations. ICE officials have said the surge in Minnesota has become its largest-ever immigration operation since ramping up in early January.

    Several prosecutors have left the U.S. Attorney’s office in Minnesota amid frustration with the immigration enforcement surge and the Justice Department’s response to fatal shootings of two civilians by federal agents. Le was assigned at least 88 cases in less than a month, according to online court records.

    Blackwell told Le that the volume of cases isn’t an excuse for disregarding court orders. He expressed concern that people arrested in immigration enforcement operations are routinely jailed for days after judges have ordered their release from custody.

    “And I hear the concerns about all the energy that this is causing the DOJ to expend, but, with respect, some of it is of your own making by not complying with orders,” the judge told Le.

    Le said she was working for the Department of Homeland Security as an ICE attorney in immigration court before she “stupidly” volunteered to work the detail in Minnesota. Le told the judge that she wasn’t properly trained for the assignment. She said she wanted to resign from the job but couldn’t get a replacement.

    “Fixing a system, a broken system, I don’t have a magic button to do it. I don’t have the power or the voice to do it,” she said.

    Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said Le was a probationary attorney.

    “This conduct is unprofessional and unbecoming of an ICE attorney in abandoning her obligation to act with commitment, dedication, and zeal to the interests of the United States Government,” McLaughlin said in a statement.

    Le and the U.S. Attorney’s office in Minnesota didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment.

    Kira Kelley, an attorney who represented two petitioners at the hearing, said the flood of immigration petitions is necessary because “so many people being detained without any semblance of a lawful basis.”

    “And there’s no indication here that any new systems or bolded e-mails or any instructions to ICE are going to fix any of this,” she added.

  • Judge appears skeptical of Trump’s latest bid to nix his hush money conviction

    Judge appears skeptical of Trump’s latest bid to nix his hush money conviction

    NEW YORK — A federal judge appeared poised to again reject President Donald Trump’s bid to erase his hush money conviction, slamming his lawyers Wednesday for legal maneuvers he said amounted to taking “two bites at the apple.”

    Directed by an appeals court to take a fresh look at the matter, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein was at turns inquisitive and incredulous in nearly three hours of arguments in Manhattan federal court. Sparring with Trump lawyer Jeffrey Wall throughout, he suggested the whole exercise was moot because the president’s legal team had waited too long after the historic verdict to seek federal court relief.

    The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in November ordered Judge Hellerstein to reconsider his earlier decision to keep the New York case in state court instead of moving it to federal court, where Trump can seek to have it thrown out on presidential immunity grounds.

    A three-judge panel ruled Hellerstein erred in his September 2025 ruling by failing to consider “important issues relevant” to Trump’s request to move the case to federal court. But they expressed no view on how he should rule.

    Trump, a Republican, did not attend Wednesday’s arguments.

    Hellerstein heard from Wall and Steven Wu, a lawyer from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case and wants it to remain in state court.

    Hellerstein thanked both men for their “very provocative arguments” and said he would issue a ruling at a later date.

    Trump was convicted in state court

    Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels, whose allegations of an affair with Trump threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign. He was sentenced to an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction intact but sparing him any punishment.

    Trump denies Daniels’ claim and said he did nothing wrong. He has asked a state appellate court to overturn the conviction.

    Hellerstein interrupted Wall almost as soon as Wednesday’s arguments began, injecting his thoughts and questions and telling the lawyer “I think I have to quarrel with you a bit” about the sequence of events that followed Trump’s conviction in May 2024.

    The judge took issue with the Trump legal team’s decision making after the verdict and a subsequent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that presidents and former presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts.

    Instead of immediately seeking to move the case to federal court, Trump’s lawyers first asked the trial judge, Juan Merchan, to throw out the verdict on immunity grounds.

    Wall argued that Trump’s lawyers were in a time crunch after the Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024, ruling because Trump’s sentencing was scheduled for just 10 days later. Had Trump’s lawyers sought to bring the case to federal court at that point, the district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case, may have criticized that as premature, Wall said.

    Trump’s lawyers did not ask Hellerstein to intervene until nearly two months later. The judge on Wednesday called that a “strategic decision” and suggested that by going to the state court first, Trump’s lawyers cost him the right to pursue remedies in federal court.

    “No, your honor,” Wall said. “It is what any sensible litigant would do” in that situation.

    “Not so,” Hellerstein replied.

    “That is a decision on your part,” the judge added. “You didn’t have to do that. You could have come right to the federal court. Just by filing a notice of removal, there would be no sentencing.”

    Trump’s lawyers “made a choice,” Hellerstein said, ”and you sought two bites at the apple.”

    Normally, such a request must be made within 30 days of an arraignment, but a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. has ruled that exceptions can be made if “good cause” is shown.

    Wu concurred that Wall’s argument “confirms this was a strategic choice by the defendants.”

    He also said Trump’s lawyers knew they could have simultaneously submitted arguments or a letter to Merchan and still sought to transfer the case to federal court. Past rulings have made clear that “you cannot go to state court and when you’re unhappy, then go to federal court,” Wu said.

    Previous requests to move the case were denied

    Hellerstein, who was nominated by Democratic President Bill Clinton, has twice denied Trump’s requests to move the case. The first was after Trump’s March 2023 indictment; the second was the post-verdict ruling at issue at Wednesday’s hearing.

    In that ruling, Hellerstein said Trump’s lawyers had failed to meet the high burden of proof for changing jurisdiction and that Trump’s conviction for falsifying business records involved his personal life, not official actions that the Supreme Court ruled are immune from prosecution.

    The 2nd Circuit panel said Hellerstein’s ruling, which echoed his pre-trial denial, “did not consider whether certain evidence admitted during the state court trial relates to immunized official acts or, if so, whether evidentiary immunity transformed” the hush money case into one that relates to official acts.

    The three judges said Hellerstein should closely review evidence Trump claims relate to official acts.

    If Hellerstein finds the prosecution relied on evidence of official acts, the judges said, he should weigh whether Trump can argue those actions were taken as part of his White House duties, whether Trump “diligently sought” to have the case moved to federal court and whether the case can even be moved to federal court now that Trump has been convicted and sentenced in state court.

  • Legal fight escalates over Georgia voting records as Trump says he wants to ‘take over’ elections

    Legal fight escalates over Georgia voting records as Trump says he wants to ‘take over’ elections

    ATLANTA — Officials in Georgia’s Fulton County said Wednesday they have asked a federal court to order the FBI to return ballots and other documents from the 2020 election that it seized last week, escalating a voting battle as President Donald Trump says he wants to “take over” elections from Democratic-run areas with the November midterms on the horizon.

    The FBI had searched a warehouse near Atlanta where those records were stored, a move taken after Trump’s persistent demands for retribution over claims, without evidence, that fraud cost him victory in Georgia. Trump’s election comment came in an interview Monday with a conservative podcaster and the Republican president reaffirmed his position in Oval Office remarks the next day, citing fraud allegations that numerous audits, investigations and courts have debunked.

    Officials in heavily Democratic Fulton County referenced those statements in announcing their legal action at a time of increasing anxiety over Trump’s plans for the fall elections that will determine control of Congress.

    “This case is not only about Fulton County,” said the county chairman, Robb Pitts. “This is about elections across Georgia and across the nation.”

    In a sign of that broader concern, Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.) said this week that he once doubted Trump would intervene in the midterms but now “the notional idea that he will ask his loyalists to do something inappropriate, beyond the Constitution, scares the heck out of me.”

    The White House has scoffed at such fears, noting that Trump did not intervene in the 2025 off-year elections despite some Democratic predictions he would. But the president’s party usually loses ground in midterm elections and Trump has already tried to tilt the fall races in his direction.

    Democratic state election officials have reacted to Trump’s statements, the seizure of the Georgia election materials and his aggressive deployment of federal officers into Democratic-leaning cities by planning for a wide range of possible scenarios this fall. That includes how they would respond if Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers were stationed outside polling places.

    They also have raised concerns about U.S. Department of Justice lawsuits, mostly targeting Democratic states, seeking detailed voter data that includes dates of birth and partial Social Security numbers. Secretaries of state have raised concerns that the administration is building a database it can use to potentially disenfranchise voters in future elections.

    Trump and his allies have long fixated on Fulton County, Georgia’s most populous, since he narrowly lost the state to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. In the weeks after that election, Trump called Georgia’s secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, urged him to help “find” the 11,780 ballots that would enable Trump to be declared the Georgia winner of the state and raised the prospect of a “criminal offense” if the official failed to comply.

    Raffensperger did not change the vote tally, and Biden won Georgia’s 16 electoral votes. Days later, rioters swarmed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and tried to prevent the official certification of Biden’s victory. When Trump returned to the presidency in January 2025, he pardoned more than 1,000 charged in that siege.

    “The president himself and his allies, they refuse to accept the fact that they lost,” Pitts said. “And even if he had won Georgia, he would still have lost the presidency.”

    Pitts defended the county’s election practices and said Fulton has conducted 17 elections since 2020 without any issues.

    A warrant cover sheet provided to the county includes a list of items that the agents were seeking related to the 2020 general election: all ballots, tabulator tapes from the scanners that tally the votes, electronic ballot images created when the ballots were counted and then recounted, and all voter rolls.

    The FBI drove away with hundreds of boxes of ballots and other documents. County officials say they were not told why the federal government wanted the documents.

    The county is also asking the court to unseal the sworn statement from a law enforcement agent that was presented to the judge who approved the search warrant.

    The Justice Department declined to comment on the county’s motion.

    “What they’re doing with the ballots that they have now, we don’t know, but if they’re counted fairly and honestly, the results will be the same,” Pitts said.

    Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s director of national intelligence, was at the Fulton search last week, and Democrats in Congress have questioned the propriety of her presence because the search was a law enforcement, not intelligence, action.

    In a letter to top Democrats on the House and Senate Intelligence committees Monday, Gabbard said Trump asked her to be there “under my broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate, and analyze intelligence related to election security.”

    White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that the president’s “take over” remarks, which included a vague reference to “15 places” that should be targeted, were a reference to the SAVE Act, legislation that would tighten proof of citizenship requirements. Republicans want to bring it up for a vote in Congress.

    But in his remarks that day, Trump did not cite the proposal. Instead, he claimed that Democratic-controlled places such as Atlanta, which falls mainly in Fulton County, have “horrible corruption on elections. And the federal government should not allow that.”

    The Constitution vests states with the ability to administer elections. Congress can add rules for federal races. One of Trump’s earliest second-term actions was an executive order that tried to rewrite voting rules nationwide. Judges have largely blocked it because it violates the Constitution.

    Trump contended that states were “agents of the federal government to count the votes. If they can’t count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.”

    Sen. Thom Tillis (R., N.C.) said Wednesday said he supported the SAVE Act but not Trump’s desire for a federal takeover. “Nationalizing elections and picking 15 states seems a little off strategy,” Tillis told reporters.

  • U.S. wants to create a critical minerals trading bloc with its allies to counter China

    U.S. wants to create a critical minerals trading bloc with its allies to counter China

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration announced Wednesday that it wants to create a critical minerals trading bloc with its allies and partners, using tariffs to maintain minimum prices and defend against China’s stranglehold on the key elements needed for everything from fighter jets to smartphones.

    Vice President JD Vance said the U.S.-China trade war over the past year exposed how dependent most countries are on the critical minerals that Beijing largely dominates, so collective action is needed now to give the West self-reliance.

    “We want members to form a trading bloc among allies and partners, one that guarantees American access to American industrial might while also expanding production across the entire zone,” Vance said at the opening of a meeting that Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted with officials from several dozen European, Asian, and African nations.

    The Republican administration is making bold moves to shore up supplies of critical minerals needed for electric vehicles, missiles and other high-tech products after China choked off their flow in response to President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs last year. While the two global powers reached a truce to pull back on the high import taxes and stepped-up rare earth restrictions, China’s limits remain tighter than they were before Trump took office.

    The critical minerals meeting comes at a time of significant tensions between Washington and major allies over President Donald Trump’s territorial ambitions, including Greenland, and his moves to exert control over Venezuela and other nations. His bellicose and insulting rhetoric directed at U.S. partners has led to frustration and anger.

    The conference, however, is an indication that the United States is seeking to build relationships when it comes to issues it deems key national security priorities.

    While major allies like France and the United Kingdom attended the meeting in Washington, Greenland and Denmark, the NATO ally with oversight of the mineral-rich Arctic island, did not.

    A new approach to countering China on critical minerals

    Vance said some countries have signed on to the trading bloc, which is designed to ensure stable prices and will provide members access to financing and the critical minerals. Administration officials said the plan will help the West move beyond complaining about the problem of access to critical minerals to actually solving it.

    “Everyone here has a role to play, and that’s why we’re so grateful for you coming and being a part of this gathering that I hope will lead to not just more gatherings, but action,” Rubio said.

    Vance said that for too long, China has used the tactic of unloading materials at cheap prices to undermine potential competitors, then ratcheting up prices later after keeping new mines from being built in other countries.

    Prices within the preferential trade zone will remain consistent over time, the vice president said.

    “Our goal within that zone is to create diverse centers of production, stable investment conditions and supply chains that are immune to the kind of external disruptions that we’ve already talked about,” he said.

    To make the new trading group work, it will be important to have ways to keep countries from buying cheap Chinese materials on the side and to encourage companies from getting the critical minerals they need from China, said Ian Lange, an economics professor who focuses on rare earths at the Colorado School of Mines.

    “Let’s just say it’s standard economics or standard behavior. If I can cheat and get away with it, I will,” he said.

    At least for defense contractors, Lange said the Pentagon can enforce where those companies get their critical minerals, but it may be harder with electric vehicle makers and other manufacturers.

    U.S. turns to a strategic stockpile and investments

    Trump this week also announced Project Vault, a plan for a strategic U.S. stockpile of rare earth elements to be funded with a $10 billion loan from the U.S. Export-Import Bank and nearly $1.67 billion in private capital.

    In addition, the government recently made its fourth direct investment in an American critical minerals producer, extending $1.6 billion to USA Rare Earth in exchange for stock and a repayment deal. The Pentagon has shelled out nearly $5 billion over the past year to spur mining.

    The administration has prioritized the moves because China controls 70% of the world’s rare earths mining and 90% of the processing. Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke by phone Wednesday, including about trade. A social media post from Trump did not specifically mention critical minerals.

    Heidi Crebo-Rediker, a senior fellow in the Center for Geoeconomic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the meeting was “the most ambitious multilateral gathering of the Trump administration.”

    “The rocks are where the rocks are, so when it comes to securing supply chains for both defense and commercial industries, we need trusted partners,” she said.

    Japan’s minister of state for foreign affairs, Iwao Horii, said Tokyo was fully on board with the U.S. initiative and would work with as many countries as possible to ensure its success.

    “Critical minerals and (their) stable supply is indispensable to the sustainable development of the global economy,” he said.

    How the strategic reserve would work

    The Export-Import Bank’s board this week approved the largest loan in its history to help finance the setup of the U.S. Strategic Critical Minerals Reserve, which is tasked with ensuring access to critical minerals and related products for manufacturers.

    The bank’s president and chairman, John Jovanovic, told CNBC that manufacturers, which benefit the most from the reserve, are making a long-term financial commitment, while the government loan spurs private investments.

    David Abraham, a rare earths expert who has followed the industry for decades and is author of “The Elements of Power,” said that while the Trump administration has focused on reinvigorating critical minerals production, it also is important to encourage development of manufacturing that will use those minerals.

    He noted that Trump’s decisions to cut incentives for electric vehicles and wind turbines have undercut demand for these elements in America.