Where is the evidence? If none can be found, charges cannot be pressed.
Top prosecutor Jason Reding Quiñones, tapped for Russiagate conspiracy probe, quits DOJ
Story by Josh Christenson
• 1d
New York Post
Top prosecutor Jason Reding Quiñones, tapped for Russiagate ‘conspiracy’ probe, quits DOJ
on 4 areas, and they include the Trump family’s lucrative
WASHINGTON — Two top federal prosecutors resigned Friday, marking a broader shake-up at the Department of Justice in the wake of Republicans’ drubbing in the 2026 midterm elections.
Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith testifies before the House Judiciary Committee at the Capitol in Washington, Jan. 22, 2026. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File)
POLITICS
Judge blocks release of special counsel Jack Smith’s report on Trump classified documents case
BY Associated Press Washington, D.C.
UPDATED 3:50 PM ET Feb. 23, 2026
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Monday permanently barred the release of a report by special counsel Jack Smith on his investigation into President Donald Trump’s hoarding of classified documents, a prosecution that was once seen as the most perilous of the four criminal cases the Republican faced.
What You Need To Know
A federal judge has permanently barred the release of a report by special counsel Jack Smith on his investigation into President Donald Trump’s hoarding of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, granted a request from the Republican president to keep under wraps the report detailing Smith’s findings in the probe that resulted in criminal charges in 2023 Cannon dismissed the case in 2024 after concluding that Smith was unlawfully appointed She said the release of the report would present a “manifest injustice” to Trump and his two co-defendants
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump, granted a request from the president to keep under wraps the report on an investigation alleging that Trump stored sensitive documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left the White House following his first term and that he obstructed government efforts to get them back.
Smith and his team produced a two-volume report on the classified documents investigation and a separate probe into Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election after he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. Both investigations produced indictments that were abandoned by Smith’s team after Trump’s November 2024 election win in light of longstanding Justice Department legal opinions that say sitting presidents cannot face federal prosecution.
Attorney General Pam Bondi had already determined that the report was “an internal deliberative communication that is privileged and confidential and should not be released” outside the Justice Department, according to court papers. The Trump administration has characterized Smith’s investigation as politically motivated and said in recent court papers that the report belongs in the “dustbin of history.”
Cannon’s order blocking the release also applies to Bondi’s successors at the Justice Department. Cannon, who in 2024 dismissed the case after concluding that Smith was unlawfully appointed after multiple other favorable rulings for Trump, said the release of the report would present a “manifest injustice” to the president and his two co-defendants.
“Special Counsel Smith, acting without lawful authority, obtained an indictment in this action and initiated proceedings that resulted in a final order of dismissal of all charges,” she wrote. “As a result, the former defendants in this case, like any other defendant in this situation, still enjoy the presumption of innocence held sacrosanct in our constitutional order.”
A First Amendment group and a watchdog organization have been pressing for the report’s release.
Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said it “will continue using every tool available to force this information into the open and to defend the public’s right to the truth through the release of this report.”
Scott Wilkens, senior counsel at The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University — another group pushing for the report’s public release — said “there is no legitimate basis for its continued suppression.”
“Judge Cannon’s decision to permanently block the release of this extraordinarily significant report is impossible to square with the First Amendment and the common law,” Wilkens said in an emailed statement.
A lawyer for Trump, Kendra Wharton, praised Cannon’s ruling, saying in a statement that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed and that his report “should never see the light of day.”
Cannon wrote that though it is true that special counsels have historically released reports at the conclusion of their work, they have done so either after electing not to bring charges in a particular case or “after adjudications of guilt by plea or trial.” Though Cannon suggested that an adjudication of guilt typically precedes the release of a special counsel report, there have been instances in which defendants charged by a special counsel have been acquitted at trial and the allegations against them have nonetheless been subsequently rehashed in a publicly released report.
The classified documents case was once considered the most serious of the four criminal cases against him. It accused Trump of repeatedly enlisting aides and lawyers to help him hide records demanded by investigators and cavalierly showing off a Pentagon “plan of attack” and classified map.
The first volume of Smith’s report on Trump’s 2020 election interference case was released last year shortly before Trump returned to the White House. Smith has defended his decision to bring those charges, saying he believes they would have resulted in a conviction had voters not elected Trump in 2024.
Cannon last year granted a defense request to at least temporarily halt the release of the report dealing with the classified documents case. That edict meant that Smith could not discuss the substance of that investigation when he testified last month before the House Judiciary Committee.
Orbits are getting dangerously crowded and collision risks increase rapidly. To have a future in space at all, we must stop adding space debris while we start cleaning up what’s already there.
ESA’s ambitious Zero Debris approach aims to stop creating new debris by 2030, with stringent standards and policies for its future missions that help stimulate technology development.
Clean space technologies go beyond debris prevention. The Ecostars missions demonstrate ecodesign technologies in space to prevent negative impacts on the Earth environment.
The end-goal of sustainable spaceflight is creating a true Circular Economy in space. Satellites should no longer be single-use, discarded after running low on fuel, a failure or outdated equipment. In-orbit services are the way forward.
First-of-its-kind national mission to clear up space junk orbiting earth which threatens key services from GPS to weather forecasts – keeping Brits safe and boosting growth.
Government backs new spacecraft with more than £60m to remove two defunct satellites from orbit by 2032.
Builds on UK strengths in the repair, refuelling and removal of satellites – predicted to grow into billion dollar industry.
Britain is taking on space junk with a world-first mission that will use giant robotic claws to grab dead satellites threatening the GPS, weather forecasts and communications we rely on every day.
Hazardous old satellites and their remnants threaten the thousands of active satellites which underpin national security and everyday services. Hundreds of thousands of tracked debris objects – travelling at speeds exceeding 17,000 miles an hour – are large enough to damage vital space infrastructure, with swift action now needed to tackle the problem.
The UK’s Active Debris Removal mission (UK ADR) is a world-first – being launched to remove two satellites and releasing them lower into our atmosphere where they will naturally burn up. The mission marks the first time a spacecraft has disposed of more than one satellite in this way.
The refuellable spacecraft will be designed with future-use in mind, so that it can help make a difference and sweep space for years to come.
The spacecraft will launch in 2029 from Saxavord Spaceport in Scotland, which recently received £30m Government funding to ensure the UK’s sovereign launch capability.
A competition will also begin today to name the UK ADR spacecraft, welcoming submissions from the public.
Space Minister Liz Lloyd said:
Space junk and debris pose an immense and growing challenge but with our homegrown expertise, the UK is determined to lead the global effort to clean up space.
By backing this world first mission, we will protect the satellites that underpin modern life from keeping us connected with loved ones and delivering accurate weather forecasts to keeping our country safe.
This is our Space Strategy in action: giving British firms the support and clear direction they need to turn bold ideas into cutting-edge innovation, strengthen our world-class satellite sector and drive economic growth across the country.
UK ADR is part of the nascent In-orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing (ISAM) sector, predicted to grow into a billion-dollar industry within the next decade. Currently, satellites are single use. When they run out of fuel or suffer a fault, they are discarded. Developing the technology to repair, refuel and protect our orbital assets – and take advantage of the unique conditions in space to make useful products – is now a priority for the UK under the recently published Space Strategy.
UK ADR develops key technologies which will support this, building on Britain’s strong early foothold in the market. Protecting the space environment is critical for the future of the UK’s flourishing space sector more broadly; worth £18.6 billion, and supporting over 55,000 skilled jobs.
The UK Space Agency (UKSA) is working with ClearSpace UK as its industry delivery partner, building domestic expertise in spacecraft servicing and robotic capture. It will strengthen British supply chains and investment from Southampton to Newcastle, and marks the first time a company has been asked to deliver a significant new national capability.
ISAM was one of the 4 priority areas identified by the Government’s recently launched National Space Strategy, which combines UK’s plans for growth, defence, and national security to reindustrialise the country over the coming years.
Dr Alice Bunn, Co-Director UK Space Agency, said:
This mission is about much more than removing debris. It is about developing the capabilities that will enable future servicing, assembly and manufacturing in orbit.
The technologies being developed through ADR will help establish the UK’s position at the forefront of a new generation of space services while supporting a sustainable future for activities in space.
Rob Atchison, Managing Director of ClearSpace UK, said:
UK ADR will be delivered here in the UK. Our team brings together engineers and specialists from across Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as well as allies and partners, and as the programme progresses we will create more highly specialised roles in rendezvous and proximity operations, guidance, navigation and control, robotics, spacecraft systems and mission operations.
Our next step is to design, build and test a spacecraft that can get close, safely, to an object never designed to be caught, and take control of it. We will do that with partners across the UK supply chain, working towards operations in 2029.
A Starlink satellite unexpectedly broke up on March 29, 2026, while in orbit about 350 miles (560 km) above Earth. The satellite – numbered 34343 – had been in orbit for less than a year. It launched from Vandenberg Space Force Base in California on May 27, 2025.
LeoLabs, a company that uses global radar to track satellites and space debris in low-Earth orbit, detected what it called:
… tens of objects in the vicinity of the satellite after the event.
Some debris from the Starlink breakup should fall back to Earth over the next few weeks. But large, remaining pieces would not return for a few years yet.
SpaceX said it is investigating the cause of the so-called rapid unscheduled disassembly (RUD). It also claimed:
Melania Trump meets with Russian and Ukrainian representatives at the White House
November 5, 2026, 4:45 pm
Source: Meduza
U.S. first lady Melania Trump met with representatives of Russia and Ukraine at the White House.
Ombudsman Yana Lantratova and presidential special envoy Kirill Dmitriev represented Russia at the meeting. Ombudsman Dmytro Lubinets and Davyd Arakhamia, head of the Servant of the People faction in the Verkhovna Rada, represented Ukraine.
Officials announced the meeting after a humanitarian operation in Oleshky, in the Kherson region, during which Lantratova and Lubinets helped evacuate several hundred people. Both sides said Melania Trump played the key mediating role in organizing the mission.
A temporary ceasefire was declared for the duration of the humanitarian operation and held for several days, marking the first such pause since the full-scale war in Ukraine began.
Member of the State Duma of Russia who voted in favour of Federal Law No. 75577-8 “On the ratification of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the Russian Federation and the Luhansk People’s Republic” and/or Federal Law No. 75578-8 “On the ratification of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the Russian Federation and the Donetsk People’s Republic”. In so doing, the member endorsed President Putin’s decision to recognise the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic as independent states, thereby providing support for policies and/or actions which destabilise Ukraine and/or undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty or independence of Ukraine. The trust services sanctions were imposed on 21/03/2023.
Yana Lantratova, suspected in Ukraine of involvement in the deportation of Ukrainian children from the occupied Kherson region, has become the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia, according to the decision by the State Duma on May 14, 2026.
Russia is using Ukraine’s children to win its occupation – and the wider war
Published: October 5, 2026 3.27pm BST
A year or so after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the city of Murmansk in Russia’s Arctic north-west marked its annual regional day with a celebration for children. Alongside the sons and daughters of Russian soldiers stood children taken from the occupied Prymorskyi district of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia region.
Ukraine’s authorities have verified 20,651 cases of children deported or forcibly displaced to Russia and Belarus since 2022. Some estimates, including figures shared by Russian officials themselves, run as high as 744,000. As of September 2026, just 2,644 Ukrainian children have been returned.
The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, and his children’s commissioner, Maria Lvova-Belova, in March 2023 for their roles in this campaign.
But the Where Are Our People? project, which I work alongside, has identified at least 47 Russian and Belarusian individuals directly involved in the deportations. These people range from regional governors to business executives. Only some of them are under western sanctions.
Born on 25 October 1984, Commissioner for Children’s Rights
in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation.
Accused LastName
Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova
Accused FirstName
Maria
Charges
Allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation (under articles 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute). The crimes were allegedly committed in Ukrainian occupied territory at least from 24 February 2022. There are reasonable grounds to believe that Ms Lvova-Belova bears individual criminal responsibility for the aforementioned crimes, for having committed the acts directly, jointly with others and/or through others (article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute).
Inessa hugs her son Vitaly after the bus delivering him and more than a dozen other children back from Russian-held territory arrived in Kyiv on March 22, 2023. Photo: SERGEI CHUZAVKOV / AFP via Getty Images
US unveils sanctions on ICC in move court condemns as ‘assault on rule of law’
Image caption,The ICC said it would not be “deterred” by the sanctions
By Tom Bateman, State department correspondent, Anna Holligan, Reporting from in The Hague, and Florence Freeman
Published9 October 2026
The Trump administration has unveiled sweeping sanctions on the International Criminal Court (ICC) in a significant acceleration of its attempt to “dismantle” what it sees as a “rogue” institution.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the measures – which include a ban on US entities making transactions with the ICC – were intended to “defend US sovereignty” and accused the court of seeking to prosecute Americans.
The ICC said the measures were an assault on the rule of law and the foundations of the international legal order.
The announcement came just hours after former ICC judge Navi Pillay was awarded the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts to promote peace and international law.
The US has already sanctioned 17 of the ICC’s judges and officials, but this move sanctions the court itself as an institution and is intended to collapse its ability to operate financially.
However, the US has provided a six month grace period before some of these latest sanctions kick in, meaning member states can keep paying for its operations – a move Washington says is to allow countries time to negotiate a “solution to address” US concerns.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called the US decision “a serious blow to our collective pursuit of international criminal justice, of which the ICC is a key pillar”.
But White House spokesperson Steven Cheung called him a “Trump OG” in a post on X.
“There is no bigger advocate for the Trump agenda than Stephen, and he will help the Administration deliver on monumental victories for the rest of this historic second term,” he said.
An adviser to the president since his first term, Miller has garnered a reputation as a fierce political operator willing to push the boundaries of the law to enact Trump’s sweeping agenda.
He was a driving force behind the White House’s aggressive immigration policy, including the administration’s deadly enforcement surge into American cities that saw federal agents kill two US citizens in Minnesota early this year.
Miller has also been a driving force behind efforts at the White House to crack down on what the Trump administration has framed as left-wing political extremism. He was a chief architect behind a presidential national security memo known as NSPM-7, which laid out the groundwork to designate left-leaning groups as domestic terrorists.
Source: Huffington Post 7 Nov 2026
Some background to Katie Miller:
Katie’s career spans from her first role as press assistant to the National Republican Senatorial Committee to press secretary for the former U.S. Senator from Montana Steve Daines, according to her LinkedIn.
She was deputy press secretary for the Department of Homeland Security from 2017 to 2019, affiliating herself with controversial DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who implemented Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy and family separation at the border. Katie then became communications director for the former U.S. Senator from Arizona Martha McSally.
Katie began her role as press secretary for Pence in the fall of 2019, before transitioning to communications director the following year — a position that she held until 2021, after falling out with Pence over disagreements, per an X post.
In December 2024, Katie was one of the first advisers named to Trump’s Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a statement to The New York Times, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt praised her role in the initiative, saying that Katie was “a critical reason DOGE was able to get off the ground.”
She held the position with DOGE until May 2025, when she left the advisory position to work full-time in the private sector for Musk — who left DOGE around the same time — CNN reported.
They met through work and mutual friends
………..
Stephen and Katie were introduced when they were both working at the White House in the spring of 2018; Stephen was Trump’s senior policy adviser and Katie was press secretary for the Department of Homeland Security.
At the time, ICE and DHS were working on a “zero tolerance” policy at the border — leading to widespread family separation — and Stephen and Katie often spoke over the phone about their work, but never met in person, per The New York Times.
One former DHS official told Vanity Fair in August 2020 that Stephen often tried to get involved in communications with DHS, and “He had this thing about calling everyone and trying to get the answer he wanted,” which is how he reportedly met Katie.
“It was very on brand, the relationship,” Stephen told Lara Trump, Trump’s daughter-in-law, on Fox News in May 2025. “We were on conference calls every day on border security.”
They later met in person through mutual friends in the spring of 2018, per The New York Times, and were engaged just over a year later in the fall of 2019.
They married in 2020 at a Trump hotel in Washington, D.C.
The Democratic perspective on this choice of Stephen Miller to Chief of Staff:
“In a way, the president did a great favor to Democrats, as now they know there is little value to extending an olive branch to the White House next January,” he said. “If Trump wants to pass things, this is a terrible choice. If he wants to engage in combat with Congress, then Stephen Miller fits the bill.”
Republican strategist Matt Klink told Newsweek the choice reveals that Trump “plans to fight.”
Melania Was Reportedly Upset Her Friends Got Deported, and Turned Trump Against Miller
The First Lady complained her friends were being caught in the administration’s deportation dragnet, leading Trump to say Stephen Miller was going “too far.”
WARSAW — The battle over who rules Poland is being fought in front of a cream-colored palace in central Warsaw — surrounded by police and protesters — that houses the country’s top constitutional court.
Liberal, pro-EU Prime Minister Donald Tusk wants to roll back changes to the Constitutional Tribunal made by the previous nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party government, while President Karol Nawrocki is fighting — even physically — to keep the PiS-aligned judges in charge.
The government insists the court must be overhauled to restore rule of law and conform with EU norms on impartiality, while Nawrocki’s supporters accuse Tusk of backing a coup.
Police deployed during stand-off over control of top Poland court
Image caption,Officers were faced down by critics of the move outside the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw
ByAdam Easton
Warsaw
Published30 October 2026
Updated 31 October 2026
Riot police have been deployed at Poland’s Constitutional Court amid an escalating stand-off between the government and the court’s top judges.
The row pits the government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk against his predecessors from the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS).
The police intervention came after Justice Minister Waldemar Żurek said he had requested stripping the court’s President Bogdan Święczkowski and Vice-President Bartłomiej Sochański of their immunity from prosecution to bring criminal charges against them.
Tusk has vowed to depoliticise the judiciary, and on Friday defended the move as PiS supporters gathered outside the court premises in Warsaw in protest.
With Donald Tusk’s coalition vulnerable, Poland could swing sharply right in 2027. But the fragmented far-right is trapped between bashing Brussels, and having a coherent enough EU policy to be taken seriously by voters.
Polish nationalists demonstrating against European Union in Warsaw on May 1, 2019. (Alamy/Szymon Mucha)
ARPACZ, Poland — Across the European Union, far-right parties such as France’s National Rally and Germany’s Alternative for Deutschland are coalescing and building strength, as they aim to win elections and enter governments this year or next.
But the situation on the right in Poland is different. Instead of aligning around a single message to take on the political mainstream, four different right-wing parties are in an all-out turf war over the future of the Polish right.
The issue that’s dividing them the most — and could be the greatest electoral liability come 2027 — is the European Union. The furthest right parties are calling for Polexit, while right parties closer to the center are choosing to critique specific EU policies without calls to leave the bloc.
That tension has put the Polish right in a difficult position — carry an anti-EU position that shows it is not part of the mainstream and is ready to protect Polish national interests, such as refusing to comply with EU climate or migration laws, but one serious enough that other parties would still be willing to form a coalition with them.
“You start having this kind of a very awkward choice in Poland between a mainstream, which you kind of despise, and lunatics, which you are simply afraid of,” Spasimir Domaradzki, a political scientist at the University of Warsaw, said. “Parties will be searching to find this balance between frustration with the government and pretending to be a bit more reasonable.”
Horrific mass shooting in Krakow after gunman kills six
Story by Sam Brookes
7 Oct 2026
A gunman killed six people and wounded 15 more when he opened fire in a busy market square in Krakow, Poland, on Saturday afternoon, authorities said.
The attack unfolded in the Main Square, a major tourist destination in the centre of the city, according to Krakow police.
The gunman, a Polish citizen, aimed at random people as he drove into the square, police said.
Four women and two men were killed, while police officers were among those wounded.
Source: The Independent
Gunman ‘influenced by far-right ideology’, interior minister says
Poland’s interior minister has been giving some more detail about the gunman.
Marcin Kierwinski said “everything points to the fact that the gunman was influenced by far-right ideology”.
The matter will be subject to an investigation, he said.
“Police officers are on-site, as are agents from the Internal Security Agency, both here at the scene and at the individual’s family home,” he added.
Source: Sky News
Looking back to 1999:
he introductory chapter in Anne Applebaum’s book Twilight of Democracy describes a new year’s party Applebaum and her husband organised in 1999. It took place in their house in the Polish countryside and gathered many of the country’s leading liberals and conservatives. The spirits were high, the future was bright — a highway towards freedom and open markets.
Two decades later, that dream has shrivelled like a dried apple. Poland is ruled by the right-wing nationalists of the Law and Justice Party and liberals of the Applebaum brand are their anathema. Half of the friends at the 1999 party no longer talk to her or her husband. The book is a melancholic ode to a lost world and an attempt to understand what happened to it.
Twilight of Democracy is well written and interesting in the parts that deal with friendships lost. Yet it is surprising that one of the world’s most renowned intellectuals can get away with an analysis so weak when it comes to explaining the rise of populism and authoritarianism.
It’s important to acknowledge when you’ve been wrong, and I’ve probably never been so wrong as I was in an op-ed published on April 13, 2010. At the time, I was stunned by a terrible tragedy: the crash of a plane that had carried the Polish president, Lech Kaczynski. He had been flying to the Russian city of Smolensk to visit the memorial at Katyn, where Stalin murdered 20,000 Polish officers in 1940. Several dozen senior military figures and politicians were also on the plane, many of them friends of mine and colleagues of my husband, who was then the Polish foreign minister. Among them was his deputy, Andrzej Kremer, a wonderful man and brilliant diplomat.
In the sweep of emotion that followed the crash, comparing the event to Katyn, I wrote this sentence: “This time around, nobody suspects a conspiracy.” As an excuse, I offer the fact that the tragedy initially seemed to bring people together. Politicians of all parties, from right to left, had been on the plane. Widely attended funerals were held across the country. Even Vladimir Putin, then the Russian prime minister, seemed moved. He arranged for the broadcast of “Katyn” — an emotional and very anti-Soviet Polish film — on Russian state television as a kind of memorial. Nothing like it has ever been shown so widely in Russia, before or since.
But my optimism was premature. The president’s brother, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, then the unpopular leader of the parliamentary opposition, seems to have initially believed, as all the evidence has always shown, that the crash was an accident. Then he changed his mind. Perhaps he could not accept that his beloved twin had died randomly, in a pointless crash. Perhaps he was maddened by grief. Perhaps he felt guilty: He had helped plan the trip. Or perhaps, like Donald Trump, he saw that a conspiracy theory could help bring him to power.
Much as Trump used birtherism to inspire his core voters, Kaczynski, in the years that followed, used the Smolensk crash to motivate his supporters, that minority of the Polish population that remains convinced that unnamed secret forces control the country, that the “elite” is manipulated by foreigners and that everything that has happened in the country since 1989 is part of a sinister plot. And it worked. Last year, thanks to flukes of the electoral system, less than 40 percent of the vote — reflecting 18 percent of the adult population — proved sufficient for his nationalist-populist party, Law and Justice, to win a slim parliamentary majority.
Readers familiar with my recent op-eds will know that I am not shy about pointing out Russian plots when I see them. But there is just no evidence of one at Smolensk. Within hours of the crash, Polish forensic experts were on the ground. They immediately obtained the black boxes and transcribed them meticulously. The cockpit tape can be heard online, and it makes the circumstances painfully clear. The president was late; he had planned a live broadcast from Katyn. When Russian air traffic controllers wanted to divert the plane because of heavy fog, he did not agree. The chief of the air force sat in the cockpit during the final minutes of the flight and pushed the pilots to land: “Be bold, you’ll make it,” he told them. According to the official report, written by the country’s top aviation experts, the plane hit a tree, then the ground, and then broke up.
In the wake of Trump’s grudging renouncement of birtherism, the insidious, racist theory that gave rise to his political career, it’s worth pondering what happened when Law and Justice came to power. Within days of taking office, the new government removed the official report from its website. (It’s still available online.) More recently, police and prosecutors entered the homes of the aviation experts who testified in the original investigation, interrogated them and confiscated their computers
Typhoons batter East Asia as El Niño makes Pacific ‘burn with fever’
Image caption,Fishermen return to sea under a crimson sky in August after China’s Jiangsu province is hit by Super Typhoon Dolphin
ByJoel Guinto, Reporting fromSingapore, Kurumi Mori, Tokyo correspondent and Darren Bett, Lead weather presenter
Published4 November 2026
Wild weather is a way of life for people living along the coast in the Philippines, Taiwan, China and Japan. But the last few months have been extraordinary.
A wave of intense and, at times, unpredictable storms exacerbated by the El Niño weather pattern has killed dozens, shuttered major airports and wiped out crops and infrastructure across a swathe of East Asia.
In October, nearly all of Taiwan shut down as a monster storm big enough to engulf the island of 23 million roared towards its north-eastern coast. Equivalent to a category five hurricane, Typhoon Champi’s 295km/h (193mph) winds had the power to flatten homes and whip up destructive waves.
Thankfully it did not make landfall in Taiwan, skirting past the island while dousing it in rain. But it had far-reaching impacts: hundreds of flights were cancelled in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan. In the Philippines’ Batanes archipelago, seaside highways shut as huge waves crashed onto the shore, and in southern Japan’s Okinawa islands, power was cut to 15,000 homes.
El Niño is a naturally occurring climate phenomenon in which warm waters pooling in the eastern Pacific and altered wind patterns drive extreme weather events around the world.
It happens around every two to seven years, lasting for around a year. This year’s El Niño, which the UK Met Office has forecast to be the “strongest in living memory”, is likely to last until February or March.
In June, Japan watched two storms – Typhoon Mekkhala and Severe Tropical Storm Higos – race towards its eastern coast simultaneously, forcing one million people to evacuate. In July, Tropical Storm Narra grazed China’s southern coast along Guangxi, submerging villages and displacing tens of thousands.
Somalia faces an increased risk of severe flooding as El Niño conditions are expected to bring above-normal rainfall. According to IOM and DRC’s joint projections, more than 800,000 people are at risk of displacement by flooding between October 2026 and January 2027, with an impact on their lives, homes, livelihoods and access to essential services.
IOM is working with the Somali Disaster Management Agency (SoDMA), local authorities and communities to strengthen flood preparedness and early response. Efforts include flood risk assessments, early warning messages, community awareness, evacuation planning, disaster risk reduction training and pre-positioning emergency supplies.
With communities already affected by drought and displacement, urgent support is needed to scale up preparedness, protect vulnerable families and ensure people can move to safety before flooding strikes. Early action is critical to saving lives, protecting livelihoods and reducing the humanitarian impact of El Niño in Somalia.
Assessment of IDP site-level risks and household level readiness ahead of the anticipated 2026 EL NINO
The New York Times reports that just 20 donors — roughly 0.00001 percent of adults, i.e. one ten-millionth of the population — have already pumped about $2 billion into this election, or about 15 percent of total campaign spending.
These donors are overwhelmingly supporting Republicans. Here’s a graphical representation of the megadonors and their contributions:
How did such a small group — which happens to include some truly terrible people — gain so much power? Part of the answer is that the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens’ United decision opened the floodgates for vast sums of money to flow into politics. The larger part of the answer is that the vast power of the extremely wealthy stems from the vast concentration of wealth in their hands, which is literally more than an order of magnitude greater than their share of wealth a few decades ago. Here is Realtime inequality’s estimate of the share of total wealth held by the top 0.00001% of the population, roughly corresponding to the megadonor class:
Paul Krugman,Substack, Nov 2nd 2026
‘Texas isn’t for sale’: James Talarico takes on Elon Musk after Ken Paxton’s defeat
American trading billionaire Jeff Yass gives $110 million to Republicans for midterms
Trading billionaire and early ByteDance investor Jeff Yass has become one of the biggest donors of the U.S. midterms, giving Republicans about $110 million.
One Nation is the issue advocacy arm of the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC associated with Republican leadership in the U.S. Senate. 1 Formerly known as the Alliance for America’s Future, One Nation claims to advocate for right-of-center policy towards the economy and defense spending. 2
In 2024, Singer, an 81-year-old with a net worth of $6.7 billion, donated $5 million to Make America Great Again Inc., Trump’s Super PAC. Singer donated tens of millions more in the 2024 cycle to support Trump’s allies, including $37 million to support the election of Republicans to Congress. He also donated an undisclosed amount to fund Trump’s second transition.
Singer is also a major pro-Israel donor, with his foundation having donated more than $3.3 million to groups like the Birthright Israel Foundation, the Israel America Academic Exchange, Boundless Israel, and others in 2021, according to tax filings.
In November 2025, less than two months before Trump’s operation to take over Venezuela, Singer’s investment firm, Elliott Investment Management, inked a highly fortuitous deal.
Three previously unknown donors gave $26 million to Trump-aligned dark money group
Feb 26, 2026
Media Contact
Georgia Lyon
Media Relations Manage
An Issue One examination of tax filings has revealed three previously unknown donors who gave more than $26 million to Securing American Greatness, a dark money group that supported President Donald Trump’s election in 2024 and has since helped advance his policy agenda. One of these donors is connected to the cryptocurrency industry while the other two are dark money groups that do not disclose their donors.
“Dark money groups like Securing American Greatness allow wealthy donors and special interests to buy influence with politicians through huge contributions and to do so anonymously,” said Issue One Director of Money in Politics Reform Michael Beckel. “When money flows into secretive dark money groups from other secretive dark money groups, the public is left with no meaningful information whatsoever regarding who is working behind the scenes to influence elections and gain favorable policy outcomes. It’s long past time for these shell games to stop and for the public to be able to fully and transparently follow the money in politics.”
Securing American Greatness was launched in March 2024 by Trump allies including Taylor Budowich — who, for most of last year, worked in Trump’s White House as deputy chief of staff. It raised $275 million in 2024, as previously reported by news outlets including Bloomberg and the New York Times. This massive war chest was bankrolled by fewer than 100 donors and donor organizations, which each gave sums ranging in size from $2,500 to $35 million.
The Bitcoin Advocacy Project formed in 2022 to educate lawmakers and the public about the cryptocurrency Bitcoin and grow a pro-crypto coalition of voters. The American Prosperity Alliance and MAGA Action Inc. are both Trump-aligned conservative advocacy organizations that also formed in 2022. As nonprofits registered under Sec. 501(c)(4) of the tax code, they are not required to disclose their donors. Like Securing American Greatness, MAGA Action Inc. was also founded by Taylor Budowich.
The only other known donor to Securing American Greatness is telecommunications company Qualcomm, which voluntarily reported that it gave $1 million sometime between September 30, 2024, and March 30, 2025, as first reported by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Securing American Greatness invested more than $67 million into pro-Trump super PACs, including more than $52 million into the Make America Great Again Inc super PAC, a sum that represented about $1 of every $8 the super PAC raised.
The Art of Influence: Koch Brothers and Political Funding
The Koch brothers’ foray into political funding began in earnest in the 1980s. Motivated by a libertarian ideology grounded in free-market capitalism, they sought to promote policies aligned with their beliefs. Initially, their contributions were modest, primarily supporting candidates who championed deregulation and tax cuts. However, as their wealth grew—Koch Industries, founded in 1940 by their father Fred Koch, grew into one of the largest privately held companies in the U.S.—so did their political ambitions. By the early 2000s, the Koch brothers were making significant donations to both Republican candidates and organizations, establishing themselves as key players in the political arena. One pivotal moment in their political journey was their involvement in the 2010 midterm elections, coinciding with the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Citizens United v. FEC. This decision allowed for unlimited independent expenditures in political campaigns, effectively unleashing a torrent of corporate money into American politics. The Koch brothers seized this opportunity, launching the “Koch Network,” a vast web of donors and organizations aimed at influencing political outcomes and policy discussions.
Funding Political Campaigns
The Koch brothers have been strategic in their political contributions, focusing on candidates who align with their vision of limited government and free-market principles. They have funded a range of political campaigns, from local races to presidential elections. Notably, they supported candidates like Scott Walker in Wisconsin and Marco Rubio during the 2016 Republican primaries, seeking to advance their agenda through the election of like-minded officials. Their financial influence extends beyond direct contributions. The Koch brothers have invested heavily in super PACs and dark money groups, which can operate without disclosing their donors. Organizations like Americans for Prosperity (AFP), founded by the Koch brothers, have played a crucial role in mobilizing grassroots support for various political initiatives and candidates. AFP has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising, voter outreach, and lobbying efforts, making it one of the most influential political entities in the United States.
Crypto Investor Twins Gave MAGA Inc. PAC $10 Million After Regulatory Win
The donations came after the Trump administration moved to vacate an enforcement action against their crypto exchange.By Freddy Brewster & Katya Schwenk , TheLeverPublishedJuly 23, 2026
At a time when the American public is expressing unprecedented levels of distrust in the Israeli government, Congress just proposed tying the U.S. to the Israeli military more than ever before.
Buried in the House’s version of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) released on Tuesday, is section 224, entitled “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative.” The provision would arguably do more to intertwine the U.S. military with the Israeli military than the more than $200 billion (inflation adjusted) in military assistance Israel has received from the U.S. since its founding in 1948.
WASHINGTON, Nov 3 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump on Tuesday said he made a deal with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Washington would stop $4 billion in funding to Israel after the end of this year.
On November 3, 2026—Election Day—President Donald Trump told Fox & Friends that he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had agreed months earlier to end roughly $4 billion in annual U.S. funding by the close of the year. He described Israel as “a very thriving country” that no longer needed the money, framed the change as removing a “bad talking point” used by critics, and noted that Israel could still purchase American weapons, with further help available “if they need it.”
Netanyahu’s office responded on November 6 without denying the claim. It cast the shift as a deliberate move “from aid to partnership” and “mutual investment,” emphasizing Israel’s strong economy and the relationship’s adaptability. A PMO spokesman said Netanyahu had been working with Trump on the transition.
The existing 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (signed in 2016, running fiscal years 2019–2028) provides about $3.8 billion annually—$3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing (mostly for U.S. weapons purchases) plus $500 million for cooperative missile defense. It formally expires at the end of September 2028. Israeli President Isaac Herzog and some defense and finance officials reportedly described Trump’s timeline as a surprise (“like a bolt from the blue”), and public statements indicate the precise legal mechanics of any early cutoff remain under discussion. Formal talks on a successor framework began in June 2026; the stated direction is expanded joint research, development, co-production, and reciprocal investment rather than unrestricted grants.
How Military Integration Is Positioned as an Offset
The integration is not presented as a pure dollar-for-dollar cash substitute for the $3.8 billion grants. Instead, both sides describe it as the mechanism that sustains (and in some respects deepens) the security relationship after pure aid ends. Key elements include:
Cooperative missile defense programs: Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow systems have long involved U.S. co-development and co-production requirements. Portions of interceptors and components are produced in the United States (with Israeli matching funds in some cases). These programs continue to receive dedicated funding in defense bills even as broader FMF is targeted for phase-out. Co-production keeps U.S. industry involved and creates mutual technical dependencies.
FY2027 NDAA provisions (including the U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, often referenced as Section 219 in the House version): The House-passed bill authorized roughly $750 million for U.S.-Israel cooperative programs (an increase over the prior year), covering missile defense, counter-unmanned systems, subterranean operations, and emerging technologies. It directs the Pentagon to designate an executive agent to coordinate bilateral RDT&E, identify Israeli-origin technologies for potential integration into U.S. systems, support joint ventures and licensing, and establish frameworks for U.S.-based co-production and manufacturing. Covered areas explicitly include AI, autonomous systems, quantum technology, directed energy, cyber/electronic warfare, biotechnology, and defense industrial base cooperation. Similar language has appeared in prior years; this version formalizes coordination and expands the scope.
Broader industrial and technology ties: Israeli firms and co-developed systems already feed into U.S. programs. Advocates argue this gives the U.S. access to proven technologies (e.g., in missile defense, counter-tunneling, or counter-drone capabilities) while supporting American manufacturing jobs through co-production. Critics note that once systems are co-developed or co-produced, supply chains, data-sharing arrangements, and industrial partnerships create lasting entanglements that are harder to unwind than annual appropriations.
In short, the planned model redirects resources into joint projects that both countries can describe as mutually beneficial investment. Cash grants shrink or end; shared R&D, co-production lines, technology insertion, and industrial partnerships expand. This is the explicit offset path described in reporting on the post-MOU talks
You must be logged in to post a comment.