Category: Wires

  • Senate panel advances Jay Clayton’s nomination to lead U.S. intelligence agencies

    Senate panel advances Jay Clayton’s nomination to lead U.S. intelligence agencies

    WASHINGTON — The Senate Intelligence Committee has advanced the nomination of Jay Clayton, President Donald Trump’s pick to head the nation’s intelligence agencies, along party lines.

    The 9-8 vote came after some Democrats had praised Clayton and indicated that they might vote for him. But that shifted after a contentious hearing last week in which Clayton repeatedly refused to say that former President Joe Biden won the 2020 election.

    Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the panel, said during the hearing that he was “bitterly disappointed” in Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and a former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, even though he had worked with him in the past.

    The committee’s approval sets up a floor vote on Clayton’s nomination, potentially early next week. The vote took place behind closed doors, as is customary for the panel, and all Democrats voted against Clayton, according to a person familiar with the vote who requested anonymity to disclose it.

    Democrats are unlikely to allow Republicans to speed up a vote on the nomination after the hearing, at which Clayton said many times that the election was “certified” for Biden, declining to say outright that the Democrat won.

    But Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said after the hearing that he thought Clayton’s performance was “abysmal,” and that “makes it much less likely that he will get Democratic votes.”

    Democrats push back as Trump focuses on 2020

    The Democratic pushback on Clayton comes as Trump has made revisiting the 2020 election, which he lost, a primary focus. On Thursday evening, he delivered a speech from the White House in which he again tried to cast doubts on that election and amplified debunked theories about Biden’s win. Clayton told senators that he had no involvement with that speech.

    Senators in both parties have expressed concerns about the interim director, Bill Pulte, who took over when Tulsi Gabbard resigned last month. Pulte has no known intelligence experience and investigated the president’s perceived enemies in his previous post as a federal housing regulator.

    Republicans were hoping to confirm Clayton in June so he could replace Gabbard without Pulte serving as interim. But Trump delayed Clayton’s nomination before the Senate left for a two-week recess, allowing Pulte to take the job temporarily.

    Clayton did not mention Pulte in the hearing. But he emphasized his own government and national security experience, attempting to assuage senators in both parties.

    “I saw firsthand how a strong national security apparatus depends on decisive judgment, discipline, integrity, and effective communication and cooperation across different branches of the government,” Clayton said in his opening statement. “If confirmed as Director of National Intelligence, I will commit to upholding these principles every day.”

    Arkansas Republican Tom Cotton, who expressed frustration last month when the hearing was delayed, said that Clayton has a reputation for operating with “morality, decency, and integrity” in his previous positions.

    “Jay Clayton is a highly qualified nominee with a deep experience combating a wide range of national security threats. I’m pleased that the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to advance his nomination to be Director of National Intelligence,” Cotton said in a statement on Tuesday.

  • Ukraine’s Zelensky fires military chief after protests and names a replacement

    Ukraine’s Zelensky fires military chief after protests and names a replacement

    KYIV, Ukraine — President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday fired Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi as commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces following days of mass protests in Kyiv and other cities nationwide demanding his removal.

    Zelensky appointed Mykhailo Drapatyi as the new army chief, according to a statement on social media. “Our shared wish is one — victory over the enemy and conditions at the front and in pressure on Russia that would force Russia toward peace,” Zelensky said.

    The Ukrainian leader said he made the decision after a series of meetings with military commanders. They began shortly after protests broke out demanding the reinstatement of former Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, seen by demonstrators as a driver of military modernization, and the removal of Syrskyi, who they said embodied the army’s old, Soviet-style command culture.

    Zelensky thanked Syrskyi for his achievements in Ukraine’s fight against Russia and praised him for the defense of Kyiv and for operations in Kharkiv and Kursk. “I am grateful to Oleksandr Syrskyi and to every one of our warriors for Ukraine’s strong front-line positions,” he said. “I am grateful to Mykhailo Drapatyi for holding that same view.”

    On Tuesday, Zelensky separately met with Fedorov and offered him what he called a respected position in government that would unify the country’s technology sector. But it wasn’t clear if Fedorov accepted the offer and whether the latest moves would satisfy protesters and bring peace to the streets.

  • Democrat set to replace Platner in Maine led state Senate with a temper

    Democrat set to replace Platner in Maine led state Senate with a temper

    Troy Jackson, a powerful Maine legislator now running for Senate, once angrily threw a water bottle in a meeting after he couldn’t persuade a lawmaker to vote his way.

    He yelled at another lawmaker, prompting her to post on social media that straight men were “too emotional” to be in politics. And he cursed and shouted in a meeting with the speaker of Maine’s state House, until she kicked him out of his office.

    During the six years Jackson presided over Maine’s Senate, until 2024, his temper was a feature of his leadership, and one that Democratic lawmakers discussed among themselves as a problem and even raised with the governor.

    That’s according to a portrait of his leadership drawn from interviews with more than two dozen people who spoke to the Washington Post, some on the condition of anonymity to avoid alienating Jackson — now the presumptive Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate — or to avoid being seen as damaging Democrats’ chances of winning the seat.

    His temperament is coming up as he is on the verge of replacing Democratic candidate Graham Platner, who dropped out after a sexual assault allegation he denied. The trail of scandals following Platner, including past inflammatory social media comments, a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol, and allegations of volatile romantic relationships, made Democrats question whether he had been sufficiently vetted to run in the race, which is crucial to retaking a Senate majority. Jackson is set to clinch the nomination this weekend after his supporters swept elections to serve as delegates to the nominating convention and his opponents dropped out.

    Jackson declined to be interviewed about his temperament and clashes. BJ McCollister, a campaign adviser, acknowledged “moments when he let his frustration get the better of him” but said Jackson took responsibility and apologized when it happened.

    “Troy regrets the moments when disagreements became too heated,” McCollister said, “but passion for the issues he advocates for should not be confused with physical intimidation or bullying.”

    Jackson, a populist and supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) who unsuccessfully ran for governor, is seen by many as the candidate best positioned to inherit and remotivate Platner’s left-leaning, grassroots supporters because he is a fighter for many of the same causes that animated the former nominee’s rise. But some Democrats fear that Jackson’s history of conflicts with women lawmakers could hurt him in the general election against Republican Sen. Susan Collins, given that she has won past elections in the consistently blue state by appealing to independent and left-leaning women.

    Jackson and his allies have acknowledged that he can lose his cool, but they have painted this quality as a byproduct of his passion for policies to improve the lives of people in Maine. Jackson has also picked up endorsements from dozens of former colleagues, including some who have described his temper or had heated arguments with him.

    “There needs to be more passion when you are making the decisions we are making up there,” said Charlotte Warren, a former state representative who wrote the post about straight men not being suited for politics after she clashed with Jackson in 2021. She now supports his Senate run.

    Jackson led the state Senate with a confrontational style, at times berating colleagues who disagreed with him, former colleagues said. And his intensity often veered into behavior that people working in Maine politics at the time characterized as bullying, given that he was the most powerful Democrat in the state Senate.

    Jackson worked with numerous women and frequently clashed with them. The five other top leaders of the state House and Senate were women at the end of his tenure, as was Democratic Gov. Janet Mills.

    One person who participated in meetings with Jackson at the time said that they felt “nervous” and worried to be in the room with him, because his outbursts could escalate so quickly.

    “It was very aggressive,” the person said. “It’s one thing to be screaming when you’re just mad about the world or sad about the world. But his screaming felt like intentional intimidation. So you would feel like then, what else is he going to do?”

    McCollister, the Jackson adviser, said the former Senate president had “heated, often two-way disputes” over legislation he viewed as crucial for the state of Maine.

    “Troy Jackson is passionate and deeply invested in the people and policies he advocates for,” McCollister said.

    In 2024, Jackson quickly became enraged in a meeting in then-House Speaker Rachel Talbot Ross’ office, when the two Democrats disagreed about tactics to pass a gun control measure, two people with knowledge of the meeting said. The fight came about a year after 18 people were killed in a mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine.

    Jackson banged on the table, cursed, and then got close to Talbot Ross’ face after he said he was done talking to the leader, according to two of the people. Talbot Ross, a civil rights advocate and the first Black woman elected to the Maine legislature, kicked him out of her office.

    Another person in the room, connected to the Post by the Jackson campaign, disputed that the former Senate president was face to face with Talbot Ross or that he slammed his hand on a table and cursed. The person acknowledged that the leaders had “a heated argument” over the best way to pass a red-flag law, which would allow relatives to petition a court to temporarily confiscate weapons from someone in their household deemed a risk to themselves or others.

    Despite Democratic majorities in both chambers of the legislature and a Democratic governor, several people said, Democrats in the capital, Augusta, were dismayed that they were not able to accomplish as much as they could have because the leaders did not get along and it was hard to even get them all in a room together.

    “It was so difficult to maneuver because none of them would even speak to each other,” a top Democratic operative in Maine said. “On paper, we had these great majorities, but it was inept. It was very messy.”

    The red flag legislation at the heart of Jackson and Talbot Ross’ disagreement did not become law that session, for example, despite intense pressure from Democratic voters to respond to the 2023 mass shooting at a bowling alley and a bar in Lewiston.

    “When he has an issue that’s important to him, he’ll do whatever it takes to get things to a better place,” said Maureen Terry, who was the second-highest ranking Democrat in the House during the dispute. “I had about 100 meetings [with Jackson], some were really benign and some were a little more volatile, for sure,” she said. “We got some good work done. We also had some misses, for sure.”

    Terry declined to comment on the meeting where Jackson clashed with the speaker. Talbot Ross and the other top leaders in the room — Kristen Cloutier, Mattie Daughtry, and Eloise Vitelli — declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment.

    Jackson’s supporters tout his work to provide Maine children with universal school meals and to establish paid family and medical leave.

    Jackson, who first ran for office as a Republican before joining the Democratic Party in 2004, was seen as particularly powerful because of his influence over the state budget. Lawmakers did not want to cross him and risk losing out on funding for their projects, three people said.

    Democrats chose him as their leader in part because of his ability to win in rural northern Maine, where their party has struggled. They generally forgave him for his personal opposition to abortion and slightly slower evolution on gay rights because they knew he had a different background and district.

    His 2021 argument with a member of his caucus, then-state Sen. Heather Sanborn, became legend in Augusta, where lawmakers of both parties gossiped about Jackson’s enraged confrontation with her. References to the incidents with sparse details circulated online early in Jackson’s Senate bid.

    Jackson and Sanborn were on opposing sides of a bill aimed at lowering prescription drug prices — Jackson supported the bill, while Sanborn argued it was unconstitutional and would be struck down by the courts. As one meeting wrapped up, Jackson grew angry with Sanborn and confronted her, said three people in the room that day and multiple people briefed on the fight. At one point, he threw a water bottle in anger.

    “He was an inch from her nose, screaming and hollering and haranguing her,” said one of Jackson’s former legislative colleagues who was in the room and did not see any physical contact.

    Multiple former lawmakers recalled that Sanborn left the Senate that day and did not return for several days.

    “It was pretty intense,” the person said. “I haven’t seen anything like that before or since.”

    Sanborn, who is now the Maine public advocate for utility ratepayers, declined to comment.

    Jackson’s campaign adviser acknowledged that the candidate threw a plastic water bottle but said he was not targeting anyone. The campaign offered two witnesses, both of whom endorsed his Senate run, to support his account.

    State Sen. Mark Lawrence, who was present for the confrontation, said the bottle hit a desk before bouncing to the floor. He compared Jackson to a softball player throwing a mitt down or a tennis player throwing a racket.

    Susan Deschambault, a former state senator and Jackson supporter who was in the meeting, did not see the bottle but said that Jackson took a “reprimanding” tone while yelling at Sanborn and disputed that he came close to her face.

    Multiple former colleagues recalled that Jackson angrily left the room after the clash, but that he later apologized to the caucus. Word of the incident traveled quickly through Augusta, because of both that apology and Sanborn’s absence.

    “The next day, of course, the other senators had heard about the incident, and he very much apologized, and I could tell it hurt him a lot,” Deschambault said.

    Jackson, in a 2021 speech on the Senate floor, acknowledged that he would get “emotional” about prescription drug pricing. Sanborn, speaking right after Jackson, said she agreed with the need to lower prices but disagreed with the policy, calling it “not within our power, as a state.”

    “It was unfortunate, the way it happened, but these things happen in a legislature all the time. It is not an indication of Troy’s character,” Lawrence said.

    On the campaign trail, Jackson has said his comfort with challenging people is a strength. At a Friday speech in Portland, the Senate candidate said that to achieve anything, you have “to make the people in charge so uncomfortable that they can’t ignore you anymore.”

    “And that’s something I actually have become pretty good at,” Jackson said.

    Asked by reporters after the event if he had been fully vetted, Jackson said that people “know I wear my heart on my sleeve” and that he is “passionate about the issues,” but that there “isn’t going to be anything” that will come out and sink his campaign.

    Other people Jackson has argued with are supporting his Senate bid. Warren, then a state representative, was so angry at Jackson after a 2021 confrontation in his office that she posted on social media shortly afterward that straight, white men “are too emotional to be in politics.”

    Their dispute, Warren said, began when she went with other women lawmakers to Jackson’s office to try to persuade him to take up a drug decriminalization bill the House had passed. A fight ensued, and Jackson and Warren both cursed and yelled at each other, she recalled.

    “There was nothing physical,” she said. “But we were very forcefully trying to win our way. It is what you do in politics. It wasn’t my finest hour. It wasn’t Troy’s finest hour.”

    Warren said the two “hugged it out,” cried, and made up in Jackson’s office a few weeks later. Now, she says, she’s more focused on how Jackson’s passion could help the state of Maine.

    “Is this guy going to fight for us? Yes, he is,” she said.

  • Hegseth estimates Iran war has cost $37.5B so far

    Hegseth estimates Iran war has cost $37.5B so far

    WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced questions and protests Tuesday over the U.S. war with Iran, which he estimated has cost $37.5 billion so far, as Republicans prepare a $95 billion GOP budget package to fund the military, along with other White House priorities.

    Hegseth provided the new estimate, up from earlier assessments, during a fiery hearing at the Senate Appropriations Committee. Several times, protesters interrupted Hegseth’s opening remarks, which came days after the Pentagon announced that three more American service members have died in the conflict, bringing the death toll to 17, and that more than 100 have been injured since early July.

    Hegseth said the supplemental war funding is an “urgent, necessary” injection of money, and with President Donald Trump’s proposed $1.5 trillion defense budget a generational investment in the military.

    “Without these funds, we face critical shortfalls,” Hegseth testified.

    But Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the panel, warned of “another forever war.”

    “This war is now spiraling out of control again,” Murray said in her opening remarks.

    Trump “has told us over 40 times now that a deal is near, and the war will be over soon,” she said. ”But now, he’s asking for $70 billion more — and for us to just trust him it’ll all work out fine.”

    Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins were also testifying before the panel. The proposed budget package includes $60 billion and $12 billion for other national security needs, along with $10 billion for farm aid and $10 billion for voting law changes.

    Before the hearing, the White House issued a statement urging support of the budget resolution, “without modification—immediately.”

    War funds make up the bulk of the GOP budget plan

    War funding makes up the bulk of the GOP’s new budget proposal, one last priority package the Republicans hope to launch before lawmakers recess to campaign for the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. The package aims to help farmers struggling under Trump’s tariffs and to pay for voter law changes that are likely to include new ID requirements, none of it paid for with offsets.

    Most Americans continue to disapprove of how Trump is handling Iran, according to an AP-NORC poll. Gas prices have spiked as Iran works to control oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. munitions are running low from the onslaught of American missile strikes and Trump has shifted away from his own campaign promise not to draw the U.S. into prolonged military conflicts.

    Nevertheless, Trump has showed no signs of backing off the war, and the Republicans have largely refused to confront his strategy, question his objectives, or use Congress’ power of the purse or war powers authority to halt the conflict.

    “The commander in chief and the whole Department of War are working very hard to bring this to a resolution,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson at his weekly news conference Tuesday.

    Trump, in a social media post at the start of the week, asked all House Republicans to vote for the budget resolution.

    Hegseth faces questions over war and his own leadership

    Hegseth appeared before the panel facing a torrent of questions about not only the war, but his own leadership of the department.

    Sen. Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the committee, opened the hearing saying it’s “deeply troubling” that the Pentagon has blocked or denied promotions to various officers, particularly women and minorities.

    “This is likely to discourage well-qualified women and individuals of color from joining our armed forces, thus depriving us of their talent, dedication, and patriotism,” Collins said.

    Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire questioned why Hegseth is asking for more money when the department has not yet spent about half the $150 billion Republicans provided the Pentagon in last year’s big budget bill.

    “If you still have $75 billion available, why are you asking the American people to absorb the cost of a war they don’t support?” asked Shaheen, who is also the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.

    When Hegseth started describing the “historic nature” of Trump’s military strategy, she cut him off.

    Hegseth later explained that the rest of last year’s budget package would be spent by September, which is the end of this fiscal year.

    Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana was among several senators demanding answers over the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, asking if Iran will impose tolls on what historically has been an open waterway vital to the flow of oil.

    Caine said, “That’s a hypothetical question, and I don’t know the answer to that.”

    But Kennedy retorted: “Guys, we need straight answers.”

    This week, the Senate will consider another war powers resolution, having voted nearly a dozen times to try to halt the conflict. The House has approved a war powers resolution limiting Trump’s ability to wage war, with a few Republicans joining the Democrats to pass the measure, but no resolution has cleared both chambers to be sent to the president’s desk.

    Republicans work to pass budget over Democratic objections

    The GOP budget proposal is expected to flow through the reconciliation process, which enables the majority to approve the plan on its own, over the objections of Democrats in the minority.

    It’s the same lengthy process Republicans used to approve Trump’s big tax cuts bill last summer, as well as Homeland Security money earlier this year.

    The proposal is headed toward a House vote this week, which would start the process by instructing various committees to begin drafting the legislation. Johnson can afford only a few defectors from his slim majority.

    So far one Republican, Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio, has objected to the budget plan, warning it will pile on to deficits because the new funding is not being offset with spending reductions elsewhere. Other conservative Republicans share those concerns.

    GOP senators have so far panned the House budget plan, but are waiting to see if Johnson can kickstart the process with this week’s voting.

  • Trump administration says it’s deferring $1B in Medicaid payments to California and Minnesota

    Trump administration says it’s deferring $1B in Medicaid payments to California and Minnesota

    The Trump administration on Tuesday said it was deferring more than $1 billion in Medicaid payments to Minnesota and California because of “suspected fraud and noncompliance,” the latest in a series of punitive steps it has linked to allegations of fraud in mostly Democratic-led states.

    Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the new actions — which come after previously announced Medicaid funding deferrals in those states — are part of the administration’s strategy to “stop the fraud before it happens” rather than claw back problematic spending after bad actors are prosecuted, as previous administrations had done.

    “We have a duty to stop the payments, demand answers, and then follow the evidence wherever it leads,” Kennedy told a news conference.

    The tactic is part of the administration’s sweeping campaign to show it’s cracking down on fraud and saving taxpayers money when rising healthcare costs and other economic stressors have made affordability a top voter concern in November’s midterm elections.

    In March, Vice President JD Vance launched a new anti-fraud task force at the request of President Donald Trump, bringing together officials from various departments to use data and technology to identify and investigate suspected wrongful use of federal dollars.

    But the federal government hasn’t provided “data or explanation on how the deferral amount was calculated or what it was based on” to Minnesota, said John Connolly, the temporary commissioner and state Medicaid director for Minnesota’s Department of Human Services.

    “Today’s actions show that the federal government is acting again in unprecedented and punitive ways as part of their war on Medicaid and its recipients,” he said in a statement. “Partnership — not politics — is required to stop criminals and protect services for the people who need them.”

    Minnesota’s Democratic Gov. Tim Walz suggested the Republican administration was deferring the funds to pay for Trump’s tax cuts to wealthy Americans. California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom accused the administration of targeting it for political reasons.

    The Trump administration intensified anti-immigration efforts in Minnesota earlier this year, sending in a robust force of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers whose actions there caused weeks of counterprotests and included the shooting deaths of two civilians. Trump himself has frequently denounced California as a badly governed state.

    States are facing obstacles because of the actions

    The strategy has led to some false starts and headaches for states.

    In April, for example, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services acknowledged to the Associated Press it made a significant error in figures it used to help justify a fraud probe in New York. Last month, California’s Medicaid director told a congressional committee that CMS had not yet provided “any instances of fraud, waste, or abuse” to the state in its justification of a $1.3 billion Medicaid funding deferral announced in May.

    And in Minnesota, state officials have been executing a thorough corrective action plan to defray CMS concerns that have led the agency to defer some $260 million in federal money and to threaten future cuts.

    “We have cooperated in good faith and proactively engaged the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to first raise the alarm on fraud in Minnesota’s Medicaid program, to effectively investigate fraud, and to institute further safeguards against future misuse of funds,” Connolly said.

    Kennedy didn’t specify in Tuesday’s announcement whether the new deferrals — $867.5 million in federal Medicaid payments to California and $199 million to Minnesota — are in addition to, or overlap with, earlier deferrals announced this year.

    CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz didn’t provide concrete examples of fraud in the two states in justifying the deferrals. He did mention some patterns the agency noticed that it found questionable, including that some providers were billing for four or more patients at the same time, or billing after the date of a Medicaid beneficiary’s death.

    Oz also highlighted a fast rate of growth in California’s home care program as a reason for concern. California officials have disputed that idea, explaining that the state’s home care program has grown because of an intentional strategy to keep people out of more expensive nursing homes.

    Flow of money could be restored — with documentation

    Kennedy and Oz said states could restart the flow of federal funding by providing documentation proving the payments in question were legitimate.

    A representative for California’s Medicaid program didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Officials in the state have previously acknowledged they are working with the federal government to provide the requested information.

    Oz said Minnesota had already returned documents to the federal government and they were being “reevaluated very carefully.”

    Kennedy also suggested Tuesday that he would extend the power to exclude providers from Medicaid, Medicare, and other federal health programs to CMS. In the past, that authority has rested solely with his department’s Office of the Inspector General.

    “This is going to be a full force multiplier,” HHS Inspector General Thomas March Bell told a news conference. “It’s going to create additional momentum, and it’s going to exclude additional bad actors.”

  • Alaska wants to seize a pilot’s plane over a 6-pack of beer. The Supreme Court will hear his case

    Alaska wants to seize a pilot’s plane over a 6-pack of beer. The Supreme Court will hear his case

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to review an Alaska bush pilot’s claims that state authorities have tried to illegally seize his $95,000 airplane after a passenger brought a six-pack of beer on a flight bound for a dry village.

    The pilot, Kenneth Jouppi, sued to block his plane’s seizure after he was convicted of an alcohol-related misdemeanor charge. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled in the state’s favor that Jouppi’s plane was subject to criminal forfeiture laws.

    On Monday, however, the nation’s highest court agreed to hear Jouppi’s case. He argues that taking his 1969 Cessna would violate the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause. Arguments are expected in the fall.

    “I’m in my 80s now, and I’ve been fighting this for over a decade because I see it as my duty to ensure that the Bill of Rights actually means something in protecting against government overreach,” Jouppi said in a statement released by his attorneys at the Institute for Justice.

    In April 2012, Jouppi was preparing to fly a passenger from Fairbanks to a remote village, Beaver, where alcohol was banned. The passenger had packed beer with other groceries in her luggage. State Police troopers searched Jouppi’s plane before it departed and spotted a six-pack of Budweiser in a shopping bag.

    Jouppi, his company, and the passenger were charged with a misdemeanor offense of knowingly transporting an alcoholic beverage into a dry community. The passenger pleaded guilty. A jury convicted Jouppi and the company after a trial. A judge sentenced him to three days in jail.

    Jouppi’s attorneys say Alaska’s high court examined his conduct “purely in abstract terms” and didn’t evaluate whether it was part of a broader pattern of criminal activity. And they say it wasn’t.

    “Few excessive fines cases will present the issue so sharply; a decision upholding the forfeiture of an airplane for a six-pack is a self-recommending candidate for review,” lawyers from the Institute for Justice wrote in their appeal.

    In response, lawyers from the Alaska Attorney General’s office argued that the state Supreme Court’s “fact-bound decision” should be allowed to stand.

    “Courts across the country apply a multifactor test to determine whether a fine or forfeiture is grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense,” they wrote. “Jouppi does not claim that the four-part standard applied by the Alaska Supreme Court is wrong, only that the court misapplied settled law by giving too much weight to some factors and not enough weight to others.”

    Jouppi’s attorneys argue that the ruling from the state’s highest court conflicts with case law established in other courts, including U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

    “The Excessive Fines Clause was built for cases like this,” they said.

    Alaska’s attorneys said Jouppi hasn’t shown how punishing him with forfeiture of his plane is “grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense.”

    “Alcohol abuse is a serious problem in rural Alaska, and airplanes are sometimes the only realistic means to commit the crime of alcohol importation,” they wrote.

  • Smithsonian history museum chief rejects White House criticism of its leaders as radical activists

    Smithsonian history museum chief rejects White House criticism of its leaders as radical activists

    WASHINGTON — The director of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History pushed back Tuesday against a recent White House report that branded the institution’s leadership as radical activists who cannot be trusted.

    The testimony from Anthea M. Hartig came as President Donald Trump has engaged in a broad national effort to reshape the stories of America told by cultural institutions controlled or influenced by the federal government and, in particular, to purge diversity, equity, and inclusion elements from those narratives. Many historians are alarmed by the revisionism.

    “As we continue to fact check the report, we unwaveringly attest that it does not fairly or accurately characterize the full body of work at the museum,” Hartig told a House Oversight subcommittee. “There is always room for improvement. But I also know the beauty and the inspiration and the expertise that lies in our collections, our exhibits, and our programming.”

    Coinciding with the 250th anniversary of American independence, the White House Domestic Policy Council released a report on July Fourth arguing that the museum, a centerpiece of the sprawling Smithsonian complex on the National Mall, doesn’t tell history “in a way that is inspiring, unifying, and worthy of our great republic.”

    Republicans on the panel reiterated some of those concerns on Tuesday.

    “In the museum’s current telling, history is just an ongoing power struggle between oppressors and the oppressed,” said Rep. Tim Burchett (R., Tenn.). “The report makes clear that the museum’s woke exhibits and materials reflect a broader vision held by the museum leadership.”

    Hartig, the first woman to serve as director of the National Museum of American History, said the institution “does not take sides in America’s political debates.” She described the museum’s presentation of the nation’s story as an evolution intended to add voices, not erase history as detractors sometimes argue.

    “When historians talk about reframing a traditional narrative, we don’t mean erasing it,” she said. “We mean adding the evidence, the voices, the objects, that earlier tellings left out, so that more Americans can see themselves reflected in the national story.”

    The White House report argued that the museum “has refused to celebrate the Nation and its history.”

    “It has not created any exhibit dedicated to presenting a general narrative of American history or telling the story of any of our Founding Fathers, the Second Continental Congress, the Declaration of Independence, the American Revolutionary War, or the achievement of independence and the establishment of the constitutional rule of law,” the report said.

    But the museum opened an exhibit in May dubbed “In Pursuit of Life, Liberty, and Happiness” that displays 250 objects throughout the building to celebrate America’s 250th anniversary. The artifacts include the desk used by Thomas Jefferson to draft the Declaration of Independence, a Revolutionary War-era gunboat, and the Star Spangled Banner.

    Some Republicans on the panel on Tuesday acknowledged that the museum displays important material related to the anniversary but argued it was challenging to navigate. Rep. Michael Cloud (R., Texas) said he expected references to the Declaration of Independence to be more prominent during a recent visit.

    “I’m not saying it’s not there, but it’s hard to find,” he said.

    Hartig faced particular scrutiny from Republicans over an exhibit entitled “Girlhood (It’s Complicated),” which included a diary from a 13-year-old exploring issues including gender identity. The museum director said the exhibit, which ran from 2020 through 2023, included a label making clear it was not designed for children.

    Hartig’s future as the museum’s director hung over the hearing. Trump last year said he was firing the longtime leader of the National Portrait Gallery, another Smithsonian museum that, like the National Museum of American History, operates independently of the executive branch. The National Portrait Gallery’s director, Kim Sajet, nonetheless stepped down from the museum in the face of the White House pressure.

    At one point, Burchett asked Hartig why she should continue in her job. She responded simply that overseeing the museum is “the honor of my career.”

  • A tech innovator and an old guard general are the focus of Ukraine’s political crisis

    A tech innovator and an old guard general are the focus of Ukraine’s political crisis

    KYIV, Ukraine — One is a tech-savvy drone innovator with no military experience who became Ukraine’s youngest defense minister six months ago and was credited with contributing to successes in defending against Russia’s 4-year-old invasion.

    The other is a seasoned, Soviet-trained general more at home with traditional top-down command culture who led Ukraine’s armed forces.

    When their personalities and policies clashed, President Volodymyr Zelensky decided one of them had to go as part of a wider government reshuffle. He dismissed the popular young upstart, sparking protests across the country.

    A look at the contrasting careers of Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov and commander of Ukraine’s armed forces, Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi.

    The youthful face of Ukraine’s drone war

    The 35-year-old Fedorov was credited with modernizing Ukraine’s drone program and changed military procurement rules in a crackdown on corruption. He argued that the military establishment was resisting changes demanded by the evolving war with Russia.

    The former tech entrepreneur drove forward Ukraine’s innovative drone technology that has recently reshaped the battlefield and has earned the interest of other countries, including the United States, as well as those in Europe and the Middle East.

    “We transformed Ukraine into a global tech leader and a defense powerhouse,” he said on social media after he lost his job last week in Zelensky’s government shake-up.

    Fedorov also took credit for restricting Russian military access to Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite internet services.

    Before becoming defense minister in January, Fedorov headed Ukraine’s digital transformation policies and introduced successful e-government platforms.

    Fedorov got that job after running the digital operations of Zelensky’s presidential election campaign in 2019. Before that, he ran a digital marketing company.

    After his dismissal, Fedorov publicly accused Syrskyi of blocking military reforms and insisting on a traditional command culture. That criticism echoed complaints from soldiers and veterans over heavy casualties in costly front-line assaults.

    Appearing at a news conference in a dark T-shirt and jeans, Fedorov accused Syrskyi of blocking reforms needed because “the war has changed completely” due to new technology.

    The Soviet-trained general dubbed ‘the Butcher’

    Protesters framed Fedorov’s removal as an example of Zelensky siding in the feud with an entrenched military old guard over a modernizer.

    Syrskyi, 60, was born when Ukraine was still part of the USSR. He attended Moscow Higher Military Command School and served in the Soviet Artillery Corps. He has long been associated with a Soviet-style, top-down command culture.

    He played a key role in some of Ukraine’s biggest victories in its war, overseeing the successful defense of Kyiv in the early days of the invasion in February 2022. Seven months later, Syrskyi was credited with orchestrating the counteroffensive in the Kharkiv region, one of the most significant Ukrainian victories in the war.

    “I’m not fighting the (defense) ministry. I’m fighting Russia,” Syrskyi said in a column published Monday in the Ukrainian military outlet Militarnyi that defended his conduct.

    “The General Staff has never opposed the ministry — we have cooperated and will keep cooperating with whichever minister the state appoints. Because in the army, you don’t get to choose who you serve with. In the army, you follow orders and do your job,” he said.

    Within the military, Syrskyi earned the nickname of “Butcher,” a label that gained wider currency during his command of the ill-fated defense of Bakhmut, one of the war’s longest battles that killed tens of thousands of people.

    His reputation took another hit after the Ukrainian outlet Babel published an investigation last month detailing allegations of abuse within the Skelia assault regiment, a unit closely associated with Syrskyi. It reportedly has suffered higher-than-average losses. The investigation documented dozens of deaths among recruits.

    The ouster brings protests in Ukraine, glee in Russia

    The protests of Fedorov’s ouster and the backlash against Syrskyi reached into the military, with the air force’s deputy commander resigning and warning it would weaken Ukraine’s air defenses. Veterans and soldiers on leave joined the protests. Many demonstrators said they wanted a new generation of generals who would prioritize preserving soldiers’ lives.

    The stakes are high for Zelensky. The outcry appeared to leave him open to accusations that by ousting Fedorov, he was trying to get rid of a possible political rival. The episode threatened to undermine his authority.

    Ukrainian political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko called Syrskyi “a more convenient and more comfortable” choice for Zelensky to keep in his government, adding that it turned out to be a “major miscalculation.”

    Zelensky “underestimated the extent to which part of Ukrainian society had come to see Fedorov as perhaps the main driver of the positive changes in Ukraine’s war against Russia,” added Fesenko, head of the Penta Center think tank.

    Russian war bloggers responded to Fedorov’s dismissal with glee, noting his role in masterminding long-range drone strikes on oil facilities that have caused a fuel crisis and midrange attacks that disrupted military logistics.

    Syrskyi, some noted with grudging respect, has built a string of defenses that have stalled Russian advances.

    Many Moscow commentators voiced hope that the controversy would fuel political infighting in Ukraine and weaken its military.

  • Israel is building a miles-long earthen barrier inside Gaza, entrenching its division

    Israel is building a miles-long earthen barrier inside Gaza, entrenching its division

    CAIRO — The Israeli military is quietly but quickly building a giant earthen barrier separating the over 50% of the Gaza Strip it controls from the rest of the territory, according to satellite imagery, further entrenching the division of the tiny Palestinian enclave.

    More than 14 miles have been constructed in recent months, running through Palestinian communities demolished by the military. That is equivalent to more than half the length of the coastal strip, which is some 25 miles long and 7 miles wide, and home to over 2 million Palestinians.

    When presented with the satellite images, Israel’s military confirmed to the Associated Press it has built a physical barrier in the area of the so-called yellow line, the boundary to which Israeli troops withdrew under the October ceasefire deal with Hamas. The line was envisioned in the U.S.-backed agreement as a temporary division of the territory pending a fuller Israeli withdrawal.

    But as the truce stagnates, it appears Israel is digging in, heightening Palestinian fears that the line is morphing into a border. Neither U.S. Central Command, which is tasked with monitoring the ceasefire, nor the Board of Peace, the body led by U.S. President Donald Trump meant to eventually oversee Gaza, would comment on the barrier.

    Along with the barrier, the military told AP it has developed a “security zone” around the line, equipped with intelligence and technological assets. It declined to give details on the route of the barrier when asked how far it would be extended. It said the barrier aimed to prevent infiltration and protect Israeli troops and Israeli communities near Gaza.

    Construction of the barrier is proceeding rapidly

    Since the ceasefire deal took hold, Palestinians in Gaza have feared Israel would not return the area of Gaza it controls. But few appear to be aware of the berms now being built around them — because of the danger of even approaching that area.

    A portion of the berm network in southern Gaza was extended by more than 1.2 miles in two weeks this month, according to the satellite images provided by Planet Labs PBC.

    The berm was about 0.3 miles long on July 1. By July 15, it was about 1.5 miles, splicing the Israel-controlled ruins of the city of Rafah from Muwasi, site of some of the largest Palestinian tent camps.

    If construction continues in its current direction, it will join up with the longest stretch of the barrier, which runs nearly unbroken for around 10 miles from the southern city of Khan Younis to near Gaza City, in the north.

    Construction began on that stretch in February, and it appears work to extend it further south is continuing, according to the satellite images. More than 0.6 miles was added between June 21 and July 7, running close to an Israeli military base built on the ruins of the town of Bani Suheila, near Khan Younis.

    In the far north of Gaza, several unconnected stretches of berms run just outside the largely leveled town of Beit Lahia.

    The height of the berms in each place remains unclear. In some places, the barriers appear to run outside the yellow line.

    Israel has mostly destroyed and depopulated the half of Gaza it controls

    Gaza’s population has been crowded into the coastal area west of the yellow line, most living in squalid tent camps and dependent on aid.

    On the other side of the line, satellite imagery shows that Israeli forces have leveled the vast majority of buildings using bulldozers and explosives, virtually erasing several towns and Rafah, once home to more than a quarter million people.

    They have carved new road networks and erected new bases on the ruins of Palestinian towns. Agricultural land has also been destroyed. The Israeli military says it is demolishing infrastructure used by Hamas.

    The yellow line was never precisely defined, whether in the ceasefire deal or by Israeli or U.S. officials, and it has been inconsistently marked on the ground. The military told AP it is working to clearly mark the route of the yellow line to “reduce friction and prevent harm to uninvolved individuals.”

    Israeli forces have killed Palestinians who came close to the line or crossed it. The Israeli military says it fires on those believed to be militants threatening its troops. But those killed have included children and other civilians seemingly unaware of the line. Some soldiers have said they don’t always know who they are firing on and have orders to kill anyone crossing the boundary.

    Israeli strikes have killed hundreds of Palestinians since ceasefire

    Israeli forces have killed more than 1,100 Palestinians since the ceasefire began, most in airstrikes and drone strikes around Gaza. Militant attacks have killed five Israeli soldiers in the same period.

    Early on Tuesday, an Israeli strike in Gaza City killed Firas al-Masri, his wife, and their four children, ages 6 to 13, according to Shifa Hospital. Israel’s military only said that they conducted a strike on Hamas militants in the area at that time.

    Firas’ brother, Ahmad al-Masri, lives nearby and said he heard the children’s voices at the moment of the blast.

    “They were calling out to me, ‘Uncle! Uncle!’” he said. “But the fire was raging, and we couldn’t do anything.”

    Under the ceasefire deal, Israel is eventually supposed to withdraw its troops further to the very edges of Gaza, to be replaced by an international security force. But implementation of the deal has been stalled for months.

    A former U.N. diplomat now in charge of coordinating the ceasefire has blamed Hamas’ failure to disarm. Sporadic talks to reach a formula for decommissioning its weapons appear to have made little progress, and Hamas accuses Israel in turn of violating the ceasefire.

    The war began after Hamas-led militants attacked Israeli communities on Oct. 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking 251 others hostage. Israel responded with a punishing military offensive that has killed more than 73,000 people, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.

    The ministry, which was part of the recently dissolved Hamas-run government, maintains detailed records viewed as generally reliable by U.N. agencies and international organizations. It does not distinguish between civilians and militants but says women and children make up around half of all fatalities.

  • Appeals court rejects Biden’s bid to block release of recordings of ghostwriter interviews

    Appeals court rejects Biden’s bid to block release of recordings of ghostwriter interviews

    WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has rejected a request by former President Joe Biden to block the release of audio recordings and transcripts of his interviews with a memoir ghostwriter before he was elected president.

    A divided three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit suspended its decision until Aug. 3 to allow more time for Biden to consider another appeal.

    The panel’s 2-1 ruling late Monday found there is a “substantial” public interest in disclosing the material that Biden wants to keep under wraps. Redactions to the recordings would help protect Biden’s privacy, the majority noted.

    “We conclude that any remaining incursion on personal privacy from disclosure of the now-redacted materials likely does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure,” the ruling says.

    Judge Florence Pan, who was nominated by Biden, a Democrat, wrote a dissenting opinion in which she said Biden has shown a “substantial privacy interest” in keeping the material hidden.

    “The conversations at issue took place in Biden’s home, and the recordings of them were obtained by the government in the course of a criminal investigation that did not lead to an indictment,” she wrote.

    The appeal also was heard by D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judge Gregory Katsas. Srinivasan was nominated by President Barack Obama, a Democrat who chose Biden as his vice president. Katsas was nominated by President Donald Trump, a Republican who as president lost to Biden in 2020 but was elected again to the White House in 2024.

    Mark Zwonitzer, who worked with Biden on two memoirs, 2007’s Promises to Keep and 2017’s Promise Me, Dad, interviewed him at his home in 2016 and 2017. Biden’s lawyers say the conversations were candid, personal, and intended to remain private.

    Biden spokesperson T.J. Ducklo said the former president disagrees with the ruling but “respects the courts and the vital role an independent judiciary plays in a healthy democracy.”

    “President Biden’s conversations for a book a decade ago that discussed his late son are private, and were provided to the Department of Justice on the express condition they stay that way,” Ducklo said in a statement. “Reversing course and making them public is just the latest example of this administration weaponizing the (Justice Department) for political retribution.”

    The recordings were obtained by special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents from his time as a senator from Delaware and as Obama’s vice president. Republicans in Congress demanded the material after Hur declined to file charges against the then-president.

    Biden sued and sought an injunction to prevent the Justice Department under Trump from releasing the recordings to Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation. The department previously argued that the recordings were exempt from disclosure under public records law.

    Biden appealed after U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, who was nominated by Trump, ruled in June that the public interest in the material outweighed whatever privacy rights Biden had.

    Pan noted that the majority is effectively ruling in favor of immediately disclosing the material by denying Biden’s request for an injunction pending appeal.

    “That, of course, will moot this case,” she wrote.