Bombs explode during Van Buren Co. standoff
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
40 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Iranian mother released from ICE detention after Republican House Majority Leader intervenes
NEW ORLEANS — An Iranian mother detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers has been released this week following advocacy from Republican House Majority Leader Steve Scalise. Mandonna 'Donna' Kashanian, 64, was detained by ICE officers last month as she gardened in the yard of her New Orleans home. She had been living in the United States for 47 years and her husband and daughter are both U.S. citizens.
CNN
41 minutes ago
- CNN
Frustration grows inside the White House after DOJ's Epstein review comes up empty
Many of President Donald Trump's close advisers, both inside and outside the White House, have grown increasingly frustrated with Attorney General Pam Bondi's handling of files related to the Jeffrey Epstein case, following days of intense criticism from some of the president's most devoted supporters. A recently released Justice Department memo finding no evidence that the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender was murdered has become a target of deepening scrutiny from the MAGA-aligned right, leaving many in Trump's orbit unconvinced that the matter has been adequately addressed, according to multiple people briefed on the situation. Much of the scrutiny has fallen on Bondi, who was among many in Trump's orbit who publicly suggested there was more to reveal about Epstein's death, though a senior administration official said Trump was not acutely focused on her. The official said that Trump has been annoyed but not necessarily with Bondi: 'He's annoyed that people still care about Jeffrey Epstein.' Trump on Tuesday attempted to dismiss the controversy, bristling at a question during a televised Cabinet meeting and calling renewed interest in Epstein 'a desecration' compared to what he said were more pressing concerns like the flooding in Texas. But behind the scenes, annoyance among Trump officials and allies with how the investigation was handled has mounted. 'That was him trying to tell his base that it was time to move on,' one prominent Trump ally said of the president's comments. 'We aren't ready to move on.' One Trump administration official argued Bondi 'bungled the case from the start' by overpromising potential bombshell findings. Bondi's own claim, made during a Fox News interview in February, that she had a so-called Epstein client list on her desk and intended to release it exacerbated the perception that she underdelivered. No such list exists, the Justice Department concluded in the memo released Monday. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Bondi on Tuesday. 'President Trump is proud of Attorney General Bondi's efforts to execute his Make America Safe Again agenda, restore the integrity of the Department of Justice, and bring justice to victims of crime. The continued fixation on sowing division in President Trump's Cabinet is baseless and unfounded in reality,' she said in a statement to CNN. Part of the frustration with Bondi stems from how Monday's report, which was first leaked on Sunday during a holiday weekend, was rolled out. 'It wasn't the roll out we would have liked,' one senior administration official told CNN. The DOJ memo contradicted many of the conspiracy theories pulsating on the right surrounding Epstein – including that he was murdered and that authorities were keeping secret a list of high-profile clients possibly involved in wrongdoing. Those findings weren't a surprise to Trump on Monday. FBI Director Kash Patel and Bondi briefed him last Wednesday on the lack of evidence to support those theories, according to two sources familiar with the meeting. During Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, Bondi attempted to clarify her February remarks: 'I did an interview on Fox, and it's been getting a lot of attention because I said I was asked a question about the client list, and my response was, it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed – meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well. That's what I meant by that,' she told reporters. Her explanation, though, did little to appease many MAGA voices who have long been fixated on unearthing potential accomplices to Epstein's many sex crimes against minors. Influential far-right activist Laura Loomer – who met separately in recent months with both Trump and Vice President JD Vance — continued to call for Bondi's dismissal over the episode. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon dedicated much of his Monday 'War Room' show to the memo, questioning the administration's dedication to transparency. Bannon later argued to CNN the federal investigation appears to have been mismanaged. A Trump adviser called the memo's release a 'political nightmare' and suggested it could've been published before the holiday weekend when fewer people might see it – or perhaps even after the 2026 midterm elections. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson argued Bondi is 'covering up crimes, very serious crimes by their own description,' on his podcast. Roseanne Barr took aim at Trump himself. 'Mr. President- Yes, we still care about Epstein. Is there a time to not care about child sex trafficking? Read the damn room,' she posted on X. The search for explosive deep-state secrets hidden inside the federal Epstein investigation began coming apart weeks into the second Trump administration. By mid-March, as hundreds of FBI agents were ordered to work overnights and weekends to review thousands of pages and hours of video from the investigation, there were no bombshells in the files. It became clear that officials had no reason to change the conclusion reached under Attorney General William Barr, who had himself reviewed some of the materials, that the sex offender had died by suicide, according to people familiar with the matter. The Epstein case has long been the focus of conspiracy theories, fueled by his death inside a federal prison in 2019 while he awaited trial. The financier's association with prominent and powerful figures, ranging from former President Bill Clinton to Trump, fed suspicions that other high-profile people were involved in his crimes and someone might be covering up their identities. It was amid that swirl of intrigue that officials embarked on their quest to once and for all release documents to answer many of the questions that have grown into a cottage industry on the internet. But a major problem soon emerged: Most of the material still being held by investigators could not be released under federal law, which protects the privacy of Epstein victims and people not charged with crimes. FBI and Justice officials realized that releasing thousands of pages blacked out by redactions wouldn't help resolve the issue on right-wing social media, where Trump allies have fanned conspiracy theories about Epstein. The overall goal – transparency promised by the president – has been accomplished, a Justice official said. But the slow-rolling fiasco could have been avoided, some officials acknowledge. The first public signs of trouble came in late February when Bondi helped orchestrate a scoop for MAGA social media influencers called to the White House, presenting them with binders of documents. But those binders contained hundreds of pages that mostly had been public for years. The episode landed with a thud among many longtime followers of conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein, and some who had once championed the effort turned on Bondi, accusing her online of withholding damaging information. Loomer told CNN that a White House adviser urged her and other prominent Trump supporters earlier this year to soften their criticism. She did not identify the adviser. 'We were told to leave her alone,' Loomer said. 'But it's gotten to a point where it's unsustainable.' The lack of substantive revelations in the binders wasn't only a surprise to the MAGA faithful who lashed out immediately, but also to the attorney general and other Justice and White House officials. Bondi's embarrassment showed in a sharply worded memo to Patel, who had recently been confirmed and who had played only a minimal role in the White House Epstein file debacle, according to people familiar with the matter. 'I repeatedly questioned whether this was the full set of documents,' Bondi wrote, adding that she was surprised to later learn that there were thousands of documents held by the FBI's New York office, which had led the Epstein investigation. She ordered the additional documents produced to her office by 8 a.m. the next day, saying, 'I am directing you to conduct an immediate investigation into why my order to the FBI was not followed.' But Bondi, Patel and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino found themselves under attack online from so-called Epstein truthers. And every time they posted on social media, they were barraged by erstwhile supporters demanding the Epstein files. Bongino and Patel are aware of the disappointment from the right-wing media stars among whom they were formerly major players, a person familiar with the matter said. 'There's the world of social media and then there's the real world,' a person familiar with their thinking said. 'Ultimately, some people aren't going to like how it is.' By May, Bongino and Patel had begun trying to manage expectations. In Fox News interviews, they said plainly that Epstein had committed suicide. 'The evidence we have in our files clearly indicates it was in fact a suicide,' Bongino said in an interview on Fox's 'Hannity,' promising again that they were preparing to release more investigative materials. On Monday, Justice and FBI officials conceded there would be no more releases of information from the Epstein files, attempting to squelch the flames they had fanned for months.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Frustrated Judge Struggles In The Quicksand Of The Abrego Garcia Case
GREENBELT, MARYLAND—I suppose it was inevitable that in a case over whether the Trump administration can defy federal court orders without consequence, a trial judge would emerge as a main character. In the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland is all of us: baffled, frustrated, annoyed, and at times outraged by the Trump administration's conduct. It has flouted her orders, given her the run-around on facts, advanced contradictory legal arguments, and stonewalled discovery. The lingering image across multiple hearings in her courtroom is Xinis hunched over the bench, head in hands, imploring DOJ lawyers to provide her with straight answers to her questions. In another hearing Monday that stretched for more than two hours, Xinis waded through the latest round of Kafkaesque circularity from the Trump administration as it urged her to dismiss the original Abrego Garcia case now that he is back in the United States, albeit to face trumped-up federal charges in Tennessee. In the end, after very little progress was made, Xinis scheduled another hearing for Thursday, when she wants the Trump administration to put on the witness stand a yet-to-be-determined official who can give first-hand testimony as to the plans for deporting Abrego Garcia to a third country if he is released from custody in his criminal case. It's seems almost inevitable that no new government witness will provide any clearer answers than have been given so far in a case that Xinis described today from the bench as 'like trying to nail Jello to the wall.' Before we descend into the miasma of Monday's hearing, a reminder that the historic implications of this case don't concern the fate of Abrego Garcia himself, Trump administration deportation policies, or the practice of rendition to CECOT in El Salvador. The core of the case is whether the executive branch can defy the judicial branch with impunity, upsetting the Constitution's carefully calibrated balance of power. The top-line news from the hearing today, for those deep in the procedural weeds of the case, was that Xinis denied two different government motions to dismiss Abrego Garcia's case. The first motion to dismiss advanced three different bases for dismissal, and she rejected all three of them without even hearing arguments from Abrego Garcia's lawyers: 'I don't need to hear from plaintiff on this motion. This is an easy one.' The government's second motion to dismiss argued that the case is now moot because the Trump administration had satisfied Xinis' preliminary injunction by returning Abrego Garcia to the United States. Xinis, not convinced that the government had yet complied in full, denied that motion, too. For his part, Abrego Garcia's lawyers were asking Xinis to order Abrego Garcia returned to Maryland if and when he is released from custody in the criminal case the Trump administration drummed up against him in Tennessee. Xinis didn't rule on that motion and likely won't until she hears the testimony slated for Thursday. While that is the top-line news, it hardly does justice to the absurdity of some of the Trump administration's arguments. Continuing the cavalcade of DOJ lawyers involved in the case, the bulk of the argument for the Trump administration was carried on Monday by Bridget K. O'Hickey, who until May was working in the Florida Attorney General's Office. Swapping out DOJ attorneys in the most controversial cases has been a common practice in Trump II, a clear effort to avoid accountability for prior misrepresentations, missteps, and assurances. O'Hickey wasn't even at the Justice Department for the first several weeks of the Abrego Garcia case — a point Xinis made openly. O'Hickey struggled in court to recite the factual and legal history of the case, a deficiency called out by an incredulous Xinis. 'This is your argument!' Xinis exclaimed at one tense moment as O'Hickey stumbled to make the government's case. 'You are taking up my time with this argument.' On several occasions, questions from Xinis were followed by painfully long silences while O'Hickey conferred at the counsel table with Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Guynn, who joined DOJ in April. After O'Hickey said the Trump administration has no intention of repeating its error and removing Abrego Garcia to El Salvador again, Xinis interjected that the government has not acknowledged it was an error: 'For three months, your clients told the world they weren't going to do anything to bring him back. … Am I really supposed to ignore all that?' In a subsequent exchange, Xinis came close to losing her cool when O'Hickey said the administration has acknowledged the removal was an administrative error. Xinis pointedly traced the arc of DOJ attorneys first telling her that it was an error (that attorney, Erez Reuveni, was subsequently fired from the Justice Department), then telling her that it wasn't and now, on Monday, telling her that it was after all. Xinis poked and prodded throughout the hearing. She called out the Trump DOJ for telling her for months that it didn't have the power to produce Abrego Garcia because he was in the custody of El Salvador, then proceeding to produce him to face criminal indictment in Tennessee. She demanded to know when the DOJ lawyers in the civil case knew about the machinations of the criminal case. She pressed DOJ lawyers about whether the indictment of Abrego Garcia played a role in his return to the United States. The answers from the DOJ attorneys were mostly non-responsive. Once she dispensed with the government's motions to dismiss, Xinis turned to the issue of what happens to Abrego Garcia if he is released from custody while the criminal case is pending. While a magistrate in Tennessee was prepared to release Abrego Garcia under strict conditions, his lawyers last week took the highly unusual step of asking her to pause his release for fear the government would immediately detain and deport him. In Monday's hearing, DOJ's Guynn confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security plans to detain Abrego Garcia if he is released and deport him to an unnamed third country. But Guynn left open the possibility that the government might instead challenge the original immigration judge order that bars Abrego Garcia's removal to El Salvador, the order the government violated on March 15 when it shipped him to CECOT. Abrego Garcia's attorneys want him returned to Maryland and given notice and hearing before he is deported to a third country. The Trump administration is taking the position that Xinis can't order Abrego Garcia's return to Maryland because he was no longer in Maryland when the case before her was filed. A stunned Xinis called that position 'remarkable' since Abrego Garcia was unlawfully removed and at the time the lawsuit was filed he was 'in CECOT at your hand.' For her part, Xinis was adamant about getting information from the Trump administration about the specifics of its plans for deporting Abrego Garcia to a third country. 'Given the history of this case and a series of unlawful actions, I believes it's in my authority to at least get the information,' Xinis said. Today's proceedings come against the backdrop of months of stonewalling from the Trump administration that Xinis is still considering treating as contempt of court. Also pending is a motion from Abrego Garcia to sanction the government for discovery violations. But as with so many Trump-era confrontations, the brazenness of the defiance isn't matched by a proportional or speedy response. I don't mean to paint Xinis as helpless or hapless. She is a longtime litigator who spent most of her legal career as a federal public defender before President Obama appointed her to the bench in 2016. With nearly a decade as a judge, Xinis is no noob. But by the luck of the draw, Xinis wound up among the first wave of judges to confront the compromised DOJ of the Trump II presidency. Things are not how they used to be. Correction: The original version of this article incorrectly suggested that Pam Bondi was still Florida attorney general when President Trump appointed her as U.S. attorney general. Bondi's term as Florida AG ended in 2019.
