Denver ICE raids targeting 100+ gang members yielded one alleged gang member: Sources
ICE previously said on Wednesday that "100+ members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua were targeted for arrest and detention" in raids that day. However, the operation ultimately produced far fewer than that number.
The arrest and detentions are separate from a DEA operation ABC News also observed in Denver that day while accompanying ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents. The DEA operation resulted in at least two-drug related arrests that were not related to immigration status, sources told ABC News.
ABC News interviewed and obtained Ring doorbell footage from one person that revealed agents on Wednesday going door-to-door asking residents at one apartment complex for identification, travel documents, and permission to enter the units to look around. In many cases, agents did not present a warrant or explain why they were there, according to ABC News interviews with residents and examination of obtained footage.
A DEA official on scene told ABC News that they executed two targeted drug trafficking warrants at the apartment complex at the same time as the ICE raid.
MORE: With ICE agents going door-to-door in Colorado, residents are on edge: Reporter's notebook
After the operation, Tim Lenzen, the acting special agent in charge of HSI's Denver office, told reporters that they did not have the total numbers of detainments or how many of those were for alleged immigration-related offenses, though he did say that one arrest was a fugitive from Chile and "a known [Tren de Aragua] member." Lenzen said that member was wanted for kidnapping and extortion in another country.
President Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, said Wednesday on Fox News that the ICE "operation was leaked," which compromised its effectiveness.
"This is not a game," Homan said, adding that "people who want to game this ... need to stop or we'll prosecute them through the Department of Justice."
Denver ICE raids targeting 100+ gang members yielded one alleged gang member: Sources originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
4 minutes ago
Smithsonian removes references to Trump's impeachments from 'Limits of Presidential Power' exhibit -- for now
The Smithsonian's National Museum of American History removed references to President Donald Trump's two impeachment proceedings from an exhibit on the "Limits of Presidential Power," a Smithsonian spokesperson confirmed to ABC News. The spokesperson said a future exhibit will include all presidential impeachments. The museum decided to "restore" the section of a permanent exhibition to its "2008 appearance" because various topics had not been updated since that year and therefore they removed references to Trump, the Smithsonian spokesperson told ABC News on Thursday. Trump is the only U.S. president to have been impeached twice. "In reviewing our legacy content recently, it became clear that the 'Limits of Presidential Power' section in The American Presidency: A Glorious Burden exhibition needed to be addressed. The section of this exhibition covers Congress, The Supreme Court, Impeachment, and Public Opinion," the spokesperson said. The exhibit now only includes references to the impeachment proceedings against Presidents Andrew Johnson in 1868, Richard Nixon in 1973 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Nixon is the only U.S. president to resign following the commencement of impeachment proceedings. While serving as the 45th President of the United States, Trump was first impeached twice by Congress during his first term – with the first proceeding beginning on Dec. 18, 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction in connection with an alleged quid pro quo call with the Ukrainian president. Trump was acquitted when the trial concluded in the Senate on Feb. 5, 2020. Following the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, Trump was impeached for a second time on Jan. 13, 2021, on the charge of incitement of insurrection, but was again acquitted on Feb. 13, 2021, days after he left office after losing the 2020 election to President Joe Biden. Trump denied all wrongdoing in both of his impeachment cases. Following Trump's first impeachment proceeding, the Smithsonian released a statement on Jan. 21, 2020, about the collection of objects regarding Trump's impeachment. The statement said that as the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History "actively engages," with history, curators are following Trump's impeachment trial and will determine "which objects best represent these historic events for inclusion in the national collection." The Smithsonian spokesperson on Thursday said the museum "installed a temporary label on content concerning the impeachments of Donald J. Trump" in Sept. 2021, which was "intended to be a short-term measure to address current events at the time, however, the label remained in place until July 2025." "A large permanent gallery like The American Presidency that opened in 2000, requires a significant amount of time and funding to update and renew. A future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments," the spokesperson added, in explaining the removal of Trump references. An online description of the exhibit of the Smithsonian's website still referenced Trump's two impeachments as of Friday morning. The removal of references of Trump's impeachments was first reported by The Washington Post on Thursday. The report cited "a person familiar with the exhibit plans, who was not authorized to discuss them publicly," who told the Post that "the change came about as part of a content review that the Smithsonian agreed to undertake following pressure from the White House to remove an art museum director." Asked by ABC News about this claim, the Smithsonian spokesperson did not immediately comment. The Smithsonian affirmed its autonomy from outside influences in a June 9 statement after President Trump announced that he fired National Portrait Gallery head Kim Sajet for allegedly being a "highly partisan person." Sajet resigned on June 13, a Smithsonian spokesperson confirmed to ABC News. "Throughout its history, the Smithsonian has been governed and administered by a Board of Regents and a Secretary. The board is entrusted with the governance and independence of the Institution, and the board appoints a Secretary to manage the Institution. All personnel decisions are made by and subject to the direction of the Secretary, with oversight by the Board. Lonnie G. Bunch, the Secretary, has the support of the Board of Regents in his authority and management of the Smithsonian," the statement said. "The Board of Regents is committed to ensuring that the Smithsonian is a beacon of scholarship free from political or partisan influence, and we recognize that our institution can and must do more to further these foundational values," the Smithsonian added. Trump signed an executive order in March placing Vice President J.D. Vance in charge of supervising efforts to "remove improper ideology" from all areas of the Smithsonian and targeted funding for programs that advance "divisive narratives" and "improper ideology."
Atlantic
4 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Mystery of the Strong Economy Has Finally Been Solved
The Trump economy doesn't look so hot after all. This morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released revised data showing that, over the past three months, the U.S. labor market had experienced its worst quarter since 2010, other than during the first year of the coronavirus pandemic. The timing was awkward. Hours earlier, President Donald Trump had announced a huge new slate of tariffs, set to take effect next week. He was emboldened by the fact that the economy had remained strong until now despite economists' warnings—a fact that turned out not to be a fact at all. After Trump announced his first sweeping round of 'Liberation Day' tariffs, in April, the country appeared to be on the verge of economic catastrophe. The stock market plunged, the bond market nearly melted down, expectations of future inflation skyrocketed, and experts predicted a recession. But the crisis never came. Trump walked back or delayed his most extreme threats, and those that he kept didn't seem to inflict much economic damage. Month after month, economists predicted that evidence of the negative impact of tariffs in the economic data was just around the corner. Instead, according to the available numbers, inflation remained stable, job growth remained strong, and the stock market set new records. The Trump administration took the opportunity to run a victory lap. 'Lots of folks predicted that it would end the world, there would be some sort of disastrous outcome,' Stephen Miran, the chair of Trump's council of economic advisers, said of Trump's tariffs in an interview with ABC News in early July. 'And once again, tariff revenue is pouring in. There's no sign of any economically significant inflation whatsoever, and job creation remains healthy.' A July 9 White House press release declared, 'President Trump was right (again),' touting strong jobs numbers and mild inflation. 'President Trump is overseeing another economic boom,' it concluded. The seemingly strong data spurred soul-searching among journalists and economists. 'The Economy Seems Healthy. Were the Warnings About Tariffs Overblown?' read a representative New York Times headline. Commentators scrambled to explain how the experts could have gotten things so wrong. Maybe it was because companies had stocked up on imported goods before the tariffs had come into effect; maybe the economy was simply so strong that it was impervious to Trump's machinations; maybe economists were suffering from 'tariff derangement syndrome.' Either way, the possibility that Trump had been right, and the economists wrong, had to be taken seriously. Annie Lowrey: Start budgeting now The sky's refusal to fall likely influenced the Trump administration's decision to press ahead with more tariffs. In recent months, Trump has imposed 25 percent tariffs on car parts and 50 percent tariffs on copper, steel, and aluminum. He has threatened 200 percent tariffs on pharmaceuticals. Over the past week, Trump announced trade deals under which the European Union, Japan, and South Korea agreed to accept a 15 percent tariff on exports to the U.S. Finally, this morning, he announced a sweeping set of new tariffs, a sort of Liberation Day redux, including a 39 percent levy on Switzerland, 25 percent on India, and 20 percent on Vietnam. These are scheduled to take effect on August 7 unless those countries can negotiate a deal. Then came the new economic data. This morning, the BLS released its monthly jobs report, showing that the economy added just 73,000 new jobs in July, well below the 104,000 that forecasters had expected, and unemployment rose slightly, to 4.2 percent. More importantly, the new report showed that jobs numbers for the previous two months had been revised down considerably after the agency received a more complete set of responses from the businesses it surveys monthly. What had been reported as a strong two-month gain of 291,000 jobs was revised down to a paltry 33,000. What had once looked like a massive jobs boom ended up being a historically weak quarter of growth. Even that might be too rosy a picture. All the net gains of the past three months came from a single sector, health care, without which the labor market would have lost nearly 100,000 jobs. That's concerning because health care is one of the few sectors that is mostly insulated from broader economic conditions: People always need it, even during bad times. (The manufacturing sector, which tariffs are supposed to be boosting, has shed jobs for three straight months.) Moreover, the new numbers followed an inflation report released by the Commerce Department yesterday that found that the Federal Reserve's preferred measure of price growth had picked up in June and remained well above the central bank's 2 percent target. (The prior month's inflation report was also revised upward to show a slight increase in May.) Economic growth and consumer spending also turned out to have fallen considerably compared with the first half of 2024. Taken together, these economic reports are consistent with the stagflationary environment that economists were predicting a few months ago: mediocre growth, a weakening labor market, and rising prices. The striking thing about these trends is how heavily they diverge from how the economy was projected to perform before Trump took office. As the economist Jason Furman recently pointed out, the actual economic growth rate in the first six months of 2025 was barely more than half what the Bureau of Economic Analysis had projected in November 2024, while core inflation came in at about a third higher than projections. Rogé Karma: Meddling with the Fed could backfire on Trump The worst might be yet to come. Many companies did in fact stock up on imported goods before the tariffs kicked in; others have been eating the cost of tariffs to avoid raising prices in the hopes that the duties would soon go away. Now that tariffs seem to be here to stay, more and more companies will likely be forced to either raise prices or slash their costs—including labor costs. A return to the 1970s-style combination of rising inflation and unemployment is looking a lot more likely. The Trump administration has found itself caught between deflecting blame for the weak economic numbers and denying the numbers' validity. In an interview with CNN this morning, Miran admitted that the new jobs report 'isn't ideal,' but went on to attribute it to various 'anomalous factors,' including data quirks and reduced immigration. (Someone should ask Miran why immigration is down.) And this afternoon, Trump posted a rant on Truth Social accusing the BLS commissioner of cooking the books to make him look bad. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' he wrote. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' He then went on to argue, not for the first time, that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell should be fired for hamstringing the economy with high interest rates. These defenses are, of course, mutually exclusive: If the bad numbers are fake, why should Trump be mad at Powell? In these confused denials, one detects a shade of desperation on Trump's part. Of course, everything could end up being fine. Maybe economists will be wrong and the economy will rebound with newfound strength in the second half of the year. But that's looking like a far worse bet than it did just 24 hours ago.
Hamilton Spectator
17 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Appeals judges order ICC prosecutor to recuse himself from Venezuela investigation
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Appeals judges at the International Criminal Court on Friday ordered chief prosecutor Karim Khan to recuse himself from an investigation into Venezuela, citing a conflict of interest. Khan's sister-in-law, international criminal lawyer Venkateswari Alagendra, has been part of a team representing the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and the five-judge appeals panel at the ICC says her involvement creates an issue of 'bias' for the prosecutor. The British barrister, who is currently on leave from the court , stepped down temporarily pending an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct. Alagendra and Khan worked together previously on cases, including as defense counsel for Kenyan President William Ruto and for Seif al-Islam Gadhafi, the son of the late Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Alagendra is the sister of Khan's wife, human rights lawyer Shyamala Alagendra. The Washington-based Arcadia Foundation, which focuses on human rights issues in Venezuela, filed a complaint with the court in 2024, asking for Khan to be removed from the case over a conflict of interest. The court dismissed the initial complaint in February. In written filings, Khan told the court he could not 'recall' any discussion with his sister-in-law about the facts of the case and did not attend any meetings where she was present. The ICC has an ongoing investigation into violence that followed Venezuela's 2017 election but has so far not sought any arrest warrants. Khan announced in late 2021 that he was opening the investigation after a lengthy preliminary probe and an official referral — a request to investigate — in 2018 from Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay and Peru. However, the full-scale investigation was put on hold when Venezuelan authorities said they wanted to take over the case. The ICC is a court of last resort that only takes on cases when national authorities are unwilling or unable to investigate, a system known as complementarity. Khan pressed ahead with efforts to continue the court's first investigation in Latin America. ICC judges agreed with Khan and authorized him to resume investigations in Venezuela in 2023 . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
