“The King of Iraq”

Sadr, now 48 years old, first rose to prominence as the son of Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, a historic figure in Iraq who helped lead Shi’ite resistance to Saddam. The senior cleric, and two of his other sons, died from gunshots in a 1999 ambush widely believed to have been orchestrated by Saddam’s government. A prominent young cleric himself at the time, Sadr inherited the allegiance of many of his father’s followers.

After the 2003 U.S. invasion, Iraq’s Shi’ites worked to emerge from the Sunni dominance of Saddam’s dictatorship. Sadr grew cozy with Iran. With aid from Tehran, according to former advisors and diplomats, he successfully positioned himself as a populist fighting to expel Western aggressors. Thousands of insurgents, many of whom still make up the Sadrist militia known as the Peace Brigades, saw him as their leader.

Shi’ites took power in Baghdad starting in 2005, winning a majority in the first parliamentary elections of the U.S. occupation. As Shi’ite parties consolidated their hold in subsequent elections, however, many Iraqis increasingly perceived their administrations as corrupt, focused only on controlling oil wealth and the patronage it enables.

“This political system has failed,” said Mohammed Yasser, a longtime Shi’ite activist in southern Iraq. “They have provided nothing.”

Because most of those governments were allied with Iran, Sadr gradually distanced himself from Tehran. Eager to cast his movement as incorruptible, he encouraged supporters to stage mass demonstrations, preluding those that toppled the last Shi’ite coalition in 2019. He also began currying favor with Middle Eastern governments traditionally at odds with Iran, even Sunni-led powers.

In 2017, Sadr surprised many in the region by meeting with senior officials in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, Persian Gulf neighbors led by Sunni dynasties and allied with the United States. To overcome the historical rift between Sunni and Shi’ite regimes, Sadr played to ethnic ties instead. “We are also Arabs,” he told them, according to one senior Sadrist familiar with the visits.

Sadr made his first public critique of Iran that year, accusing Tehran in a statement of fueling sectarian conflict in Syria, Iraq and across the region. He also stepped up criticism of domestic rivals for Shi’ite influence, including former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a staunch Iran ally.

“Muqtada wants to be Shi’ite leader number one,” one former adviser told Reuters, “the king of Iraq.”

In 2020, two events tilted the landscape upon which Sadr would operate.

First, the United States in a drone strike killed Qassem Soleimani, Ghaani’s predecessor as the head of Iran’s Quds Force and a major player in Iraq. Soleimani had a strong relationship with Sadr, despite the cleric’s critiques of Tehran. Then, the UAE established diplomatic relations with Israel, solidifying a shift in some Arab states toward the West.

Those developments played into Sadr’s hands.

His outreach to Gulf neighbors, for instance, immediately led to help after the election with the task of courting Iraqi Sunnis. Iraqi officials familiar with the process told Reuters that Emirati envoys prodded Sunni parties to work toward an agreement with Sadrists. “For the Gulf countries, Sadr was the best chance to challenge Iranian power,” said Yazan Jabouri, an influential Sunni leader who attended meetings with the Emiratis.

The UAE’s Foreign Ministry didn’t respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.

Sadr had also courted the Kurds, a minority ethnic group with its own regional government in Iraq’s north. Shortly after the election, Sadrists and the Kurdistan Democratic Party, the ruling group in the region, told local media they would team up in a new government. For Iran, the alliance was a double setback, particularly because the ruling Kurd party, too, has friendly relations with Israel.

By January of this year, Sadr’s alliance appeared solidified – Sunnis, Kurds and Sadrists united in a coalition they dubbed “Save the Homeland.” They elected Mohammed Halbousi, a Sunni and ally of Gulf states, as speaker of the parliament, overriding opposition from pro-Iran parties and taking the first step toward the formation of a new administration. Soon, it seemed, they would have enough votes to form a government.

Tehran at first struggled to respond, especially without Soleimani, the Iranian general killed by the U.S. His influence in Iraq dated back to the earliest days of the resistance to American occupation. Two Iranian officials familiar with discussions early this year told Reuters that Tehran asked Ghaani, Soleimani’s successor, to keep pro-Iran militias united and to seek the crucial sitdown with Sadr.

“Things were about to get really tough”

Before Sadr and Ghaani could meet, some of Iran’s allies decided to make clear their displeasure with any move away from Tehran. On February 2, a little-known Shi’ite militia based in southern Iraq launched drone strikes on Abu Dhabi, the Emirati capital. The militia, known as the “True Promise Brigades,” said the strikes were in response to the UAE’s meddling in Iraq and Yemen, where a festering civil war has pitted regional proxies, led by Saudi Arabia and Iran, against one another.

The UAE said at the time that it intercepted the strikes.

But the attack spooked the Emiratis, according to an Iraqi government official, a Western diplomat and two Iraqi Sunni leaders who had worked with the UAE’s envoys in the coalition talks. The UAE sent officials to Tehran and Baghdad to quell tensions. “Their commitment to Sadr wavered,” Jabouri, the Sunni leader who participated in the efforts to form a government, said of the Emiratis.

Sadr and Ghaani met the following week.

Three days after their strained encounter, Sadr summoned aides to his home, several of his advisors told Reuters. He was visibly frustrated by the mounting tension, they said, and had even resumed smoking, an old habit he had quit and never done in public.

“He told us we weren’t just in confrontation with Iraqi rivals, but with the Islamic Republic,” said one advisor, whose account of the meeting was corroborated by two other senior Sadrists with knowledge of the meeting. “That things were about to get really tough.”

Iran got an assist from Iraq’s judiciary, controlled in large part by judges appointed by pro-Tehran parties. Days before parliament was to vote on a new president, Iraq’s Supreme Court decreed that a two-thirds majority was needed for the chamber even to meet. The ruling ruined the planned vote by “Save the Homeland,” whose simple majority was no longer enough to convene the assembly.

A flurry of other rulings by the court followed.

One barred Hoshyar Zebari, the coalition’s preferred candidate for the presidency, because of old corruption allegations. Zebari, a Kurdish politician and former finance and foreign minister, has denied any wrongdoing and hasn’t been convicted of any crime.

Another ruling slowed graft investigations that Sadrists were conducting against pro-Iran officials. A third banned the regional government in Kurdistan from dealing directly with foreign oil companies, targeting a crucial source of revenue for the important coalition partner.

Iraqi law experts and political insiders said the rulings, while legally sound, were strategically timed. “It was no coincidence,” said Sajad Jiyad, the Baghdad-based director of the Shia Politics Working Group at The Century Foundation, a U.S. think tank. “At the same time that there’s a government formation deadlock and Sadr has the upper hand, four to six rulings come out.”

Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council, which oversees the country’s courts, in a statement to Reuters said the rulings weren’t political. Other Supreme Court rulings, including its ratifications of the parliamentary election results and the speaker voted upon by the coalition in January, benefited the Sadrists, it noted.

Iran’s ire then grew explicit.

On March 13, the Revolutionary Guards fired 12 missiles at the Kurdish regional capital of Erbil. Kurdish officials reported limited damage to a neighborhood outside the city center and no injuries. In a statement, the Revolutionary Guards said they launched the missiles because Israeli military operations were being conducted from Kurdistan. Tehran didn’t elaborate or provide any proof of Israeli operations.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry and Defense Ministry didn’t respond to requests from Reuters for comment.

The Kurdish government denied the accusation and saw the strikes as yet more retaliation for choosing sides among Shi’ites. “They wanted us to ally ourselves with the whole Shi’ite community, not one part against another,” said a senior Kurdish official, who was involved in talks with Iranian envoys around the time of the strikes.

Iran and its allies began pressuring Sadr’s Sunni partners, too.

In April, Maliki, the former prime minister and one of Sadr’s foremost Shi’ite rivals, helped repatriate and absolve two influential Sunnis who had fled Iraq because of terrorism charges, according to five lawyers and three government officials familiar with the effort. They told Reuters that Maliki himself helped convince a Baghdad court to drop those charges. As soon as the two Sunnis were cleared, they began denouncing the leadership of Halbousi, the Sunni parliament speaker elected by Sadrists and their allies, saying other Sunni leaders were better options.

In a television appearance, Maliki denied he had assisted the two men, but said he had asked the court about their charges and helped one of them get from the airport to an audience with the judge. Critics found his comments contradictory. Maliki’s office didn’t respond to requests from Reuters for comment about any role he played in the return of the two Sunnis.

Halbousi was rattled, according to an official close to the speaker.

Amid growing criticism about his leadership from other Sunnis, he flew to Tehran, where he sought to ensure he could still have a working relationship with Iran even if the coalition that elected him failed to form a government. “Halbousi wanted assurances that if Sadr failed, he would have support from Iran,” the official said.

A spokesperson for Halbousi said the speaker had traveled to Iran on official business at the request of the Iranian parliament. She declined to discuss the visit further.

By May, Sadr’s push to form a government stalled. No other coalition emerged to form its own government.

In June, Sadr ordered the Sadrist lawmakers to resign, ceding further control of the chamber to rivals. Sadr’s office released a statement citing the impasse, the Supreme Court rulings, and disagreements with “some countries,” without elaborating, as reasons for the withdrawal. Days later, in a video online, Sadr addressed his former legislators and urged them to reject any alliance “unless God provides an opening and the corrupt are swept aside.”

Sadrists increasingly express exasperation about their inability to form a government. Some call for renewed unrest. “This time the methods of reform will be different,” Abu Mustafa al-Hamidawi, the head of Sadr’s militia, recently told an Iraqi news site. Reuters was unable to reach al-Hamidawi for further comment.

Sadr now calls for new elections, which some believe will only delay a reckoning with political rivals.

Recently, Sadrists marched toward parliament to join colleagues there occupying the chamber to protest the impasse with other parties. Sadr’s old rival Maliki patrolled with bodyguards outside his home, brandishing an assault rifle. Pro-Iran groups staged their own demonstrations, stoking fears of armed clashes.

During six months of war in Ukraine, Associated Press photographers have captured images that are both succinct and eloquent. The click of a shutter is brief, but the stories they tell are deep.

Sometimes they show a life that ended in a moment — the body of a Russian soldier lying face down in the snow near a ruined tank. Others record a life ending, in agony and terror — medics carrying a mortally wounded pregnant woman on a stretcher through the ruins of a bomb-ravaged hospital in Mariupol.

There are moments of bold energy, such as a rifle-carrying woman waving a Ukrainian flag in the intensely blue sky as a Kyiv monastery’s tower rises in the background.

Some portray lives that are just about to change, heading into the unknown. A father stands outside a railroad car in Kyiv, his hands pressed against the window framing the face of his young daughter as the train prepares to depart the besieged city for far-away but peaceful Lviv. Hundreds of people crowd under a destroyed bridge in the Kyiv suburb of Irpin, wondering if gunfire will abate long enough to even give them a chance to escape into the unknown.

A woman walks her dog in Kyiv, an event from daily life. Her attentive gaze at her pet turns her face away from the ruins of a rocket-destroyed shopping center just behind her.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sits on a staircase in his office, seemingly casually, his legs crossed and his chin resting in a hand. By his posture, he could be a man waiting for a romantic interest who’s late. But the piles of sandbags behind him tell of the war’s constancy. He is waiting, but not for a date — instead, to see how and when the war will end.

___

Full coverage of the war in Ukraine: https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine

The Gang of 8 includes the top two congressional leaders in each chamber — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy — as well as the top Democrat and Republican on the House and Senate intelligence committees.

A spokesperson for the Senate Intelligence Committee declined to comment. A representative for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence also declined to comment. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for a Gang of 8 member indicated that a specific request hadn’t been signed onto by all eight lawmakers, but acknowledged that congressional oversight is ongoing. (The Gang of 8 and its staff routinely ask the intelligence community for specific information in ways that don’t always require sign-off from all eight members.)

Privately, Capitol Hill aides have expressed frustration about the fact that Congress has learned little about the investigation into the former president, especially since it reportedly involves matters of national security. The executive branch has historically resisted congressional inquiries about ongoing law-enforcement actions, arguing that it could compromise the investigation.

The FBI search warrant unsealed earlier this month revealed that the Justice Department was investigating potential violations of the Espionage Act, the Presidential Records Act and obstruction of justice in relation to Trump’s storage of White House materials at his home.

At a hearing last week in south Florida, the Justice Department’s top counterintelligence official, Jay Bratt, said the investigation is still in its “early stages.”

It is possible that the public could learn even more about the probe in the coming days. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, who signed off on the Mar-a-Lago search warrant, has told the Justice Department to propose redactions to the FBI’s affidavit of probable cause that could subsequently be released publicly.

A group of media organizations filed a motion asking the judge to unseal the affidavit, citing substantial public interest. Reinhart indicated during last week’s hearing that he was skeptical of the Justice Department’s efforts to keep the affidavit under seal. The document would reveal the government’s justification for requesting Reinhart’s approval of a search warrant. Earlier Monday, Reinhart wrote that the facts contained in the affidavit are “reliable.”

“Given the intense public and historical interest in an unprecedented search of a former President’s residence, the Government has not yet shown that these administrative concerns are sufficient to justify sealing,” Reinhart wrote.

Some lawmakers have also requested access to the affidavit, but that would likely require Reinhart’s signoff.

Dr. Anthony Fauci announced Monday that he will resign as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) after spending more than a half-century in government, prompting Republican detractors to question his timing following his perceived double-talk during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In December, Fauci will also forfeit his roles as chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation and President Joe Biden‘s chief medical adviser, saying he wants “to pursue the next chapter of my career.” Republicans believe Fauci is leaving government due to the possibility that the GOP will take control of the House in November.

“Dr. Fauci is conveniently resigning from his position in December before House Republicans have an opportunity to hold him accountable for destroying our country over these past three years,” Republican Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona tweeted, adding that Fauci will be held accountable whether or not he remains in public office. “This guy is a coward.”

Fauci gained national attention during the COVID-19 pandemic, including acknowledging having to “stand up” to former President Donald Trump‘s COVID-related claims to benefit the public and “for the sake of preserving my own integrity.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies during the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies hearing to examine proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2023 for the National Institutes of Health on Capitol Hill on May 17, 2022, in Washington, D.C. Fauci announced his impending retirement on August 22, 2022, scheduled for December.
Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images

Emails from Fauci uncovered via the Freedom of Information Act showed that he said “the typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out virus,” even as mask mandates were commonplace nationwide for long periods of time.

Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has had multiple public squabbles with Fauci, pledged Monday to conduct “a full-throated investigation into the origins of the pandemic” regardless of Fauci’s impending departure.

“[Fauci] will be asked to testify under oath regarding any discussions he participated in concerning the lab leak,” Paul tweeted.

Former White House counsel Kellyanne Conway has claimed that Fauci, who has said that COVID-19 will not be fully eliminated, did not wear a mask in private White House meetings.

Mercedes Schlapp, former White House communications director under Trump, tweeted that it is “no coincidence” Fauci chose a December retirement date “right after Republicans will take back the House and immediately plan oversight into our pandemic response and his funding of gain of function research at the Wuhan Lab.”

Fauci has spent the past 38 years as NIAID director, first serving during President Ronald Reagan’s administration and ultimately seven presidents in total on infectious diseases including HIV/AIDS, West Nile virus, the anthrax attacks, pandemic influenza, various bird influenza threats, Ebola and Zika.

“It has been the honor of a lifetime to have led the NIAID, an extraordinary institution, for so many years and through so many scientific and public health challenges,” Fauci said in a statement released Monday, adding that he is not retiring but will continue to advance science and public health and mentor the next generation.

“I am very proud of our many accomplishments. I have worked with—and learned from—countless talented and dedicated people in my own laboratory, at NIAID, at NIH and beyond. To them I express my abiding respect and gratitude.”

In a statement, Biden said he first worked closely with Fauci as vice president on Zika and Ebola response, finding Fauci to be “a dedicated public servant, and a steady hand with wisdom and insight honed over decades at the forefront of some of our most dangerous and challenging public health crises.”

“When it came time to build a team to lead our COVID-19 response—in fact, in one of my first calls as President-elect—I immediately asked Dr. Fauci to extend his service as my chief medical advisor to deal with the COVID-19 crisis our nation faced,” the statement said.

“In that role, I’ve been able to call him at any hour of the day for his advice as we’ve tackled this once-in-a-generation pandemic. His commitment to the work is unwavering, and he does it with an unparalleled spirit, energy and scientific integrity.”

Newsweek reached out to the NIAID for further comment.

The National Archives found more than 150 sensitive documents when it got a first batch of material from the former president in January, helping to explain the Justice Department’s urgent response.

Dr Anthony Fauci, the top infectious disease expert in the United States who emerged as the public face of the country’s COVID-19 pandemic response, has announced that he will step down in December.

Fauci said in a statement on Monday that he will leave both his post as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), as well as that of top medical adviser to President Joe Biden, to “pursue the next phase” of his career.

“It has been the honor of a lifetime to have led the NIAID, an extraordinary institution, for so many years and through so many scientific and public health challenges. I am very proud of our many accomplishments,” said Fauci, who has led the institute for 38 years.

“While I am moving on from my current positions, I am not retiring. After more than 50 years of government service, I plan to pursue the next phase of my career while I still have so much energy and passion for my field.”

Fauci became the most recognisable figure from the scientific community during the early days of the COVID-19 crisis, acting as a source of sober medical authority for many Americans while frequently butting heads with Donald Trump over the former president’s pandemic response.

Trump verbally attacked Fauci during his 2020 presidential campaign, hinting at one point that he would fire him if re-elected.

But the top medical expert enjoyed a warm relationship with Biden, who on Monday praised Fauci as a “dedicated public servant and a steady hand with wisdom and insight honed over decades at the forefront of some of our most dangerous and challenging public health crises”.

“His commitment to the work is unwavering, and he does it with an unparalleled spirit, energy, and scientific integrity,” Biden said in a statement, extending his “deepest thanks” to Fauci.

During his nearly 40-year term at the helm of the NIAID, Fauci has been involved in the US response to a number of public health challenges, from HIV/AIDS to the Ebola virus and the COVID-19 pandemic.

He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2008, the highest honour a US civilian can receive.

While Fauci did not share details about his plans for the future, he noted in Monday’s statement that he would “use what I have learned as NIAID Director to continue to advance science and public health and to inspire and mentor the next generation of scientific leaders as they help prepare the world to face future infectious disease threats”.

He also will step down as head of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, the statement said.

While Biden drew a sharp contrast with Trump on COVID-19, stressing the need to impose public health measures to stem the spread of the virus, coronavirus-related deaths have continued to rise during his tenure.

The Biden administration also has been criticised for its failure to push for global vaccine equity.

The US surpassed one million COVID-19 deaths in May, and public health agencies have started to search for answers to understand the nation’s failure to contain the virus.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the country’s top public health agency, announced a series of reforms last week amid criticism. The agency said that its response to the deadly pandemic “did not reliably meet expectations”.

NEW YORK (AP) — Mounds of paper piled on his desk. Framed magazine covers and keepsakes lining the walls. One of Shaquille O’Neal’s giant sneakers displayed alongside football helmets, boxing belts and other sports memorabilia, crowding his Trump Tower office and limiting table space.

Well before he entered politics, former President Donald Trump had a penchant for collecting. And that lifelong habit — combined with his flip disregard for the rules of government record keeping, his careless handling of classified information, and a chaotic transition born from his refusal to accept defeat in 2020 — have all culminated in a federal investigation that poses extraordinary legal and political challenges.

The search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club earlier this month to retrieve documents from his White House years was an unprecedented law enforcement action against a former president who is widely expected to run for office once again. Officials have not revealed exactly what was contained in the boxes, but the FBI has said it recovered 11 sets of classified records, including some marked “sensitive compartmented information,” a special category meant to protect secrets that could cause “exceptionally grave” damage to U.S. interests if revealed publicly.

Why Trump refused to turn over the seized documents despite repeated requests remains unclear. But Trump’s flouting of the Presidential Records Act, which outlines how materials should be preserved, was well documented throughout his time in office.

He routinely tore up official papers that later had to be taped back together. Official items that would traditionally be turned over to the National Archives became intermingled with his personal belongings in the White House residence. Classified information was tweeted, shared with reporters and adversaries — even found in a White House complex bathroom.

John Bolton, who served as Trump’s third national security adviser, said that, before he arrived, he’d heard “there was a concern in the air about how he handled information. And as my time went on, I could certainly see why.”

Others in the Trump administration took more care with sensitive documents. Asked directly if he kept any classified information upon leaving office, former Vice President Mike Pence told The Associated Press on Friday, “No, not to my knowledge.”

The investigation into Trump’s handling of documents comes as he’s facing mounting legal scrutiny on multiple fronts. A Georgia investigation into election interference has moved closer to the former president, with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a top defender, informed earlier this month that he is a target of a criminal probe.

Meanwhile, Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination as he testified under oath in the New York attorney general’s long-running civil investigation into his business dealings. A top executive at the business pleaded guilty last week in a tax fraud case brought by the Manhattan district attorney.

But few legal threats have galvanized Trump and his most loyal supporters like the Mar-a-Lago search. The former president and his allies have argued the move amounts to political persecution, noting the judge who approved the warrant has given money to Democrats. The judge, however, has also supported Republicans. And White House officials have repeatedly said they had no prior knowledge of plans to search the estate.

Trump allies have tried to claim the presidency granted him unlimited power to unilaterally declassify documents without formal declaration. But David Laufman, the former chief of the Justice Department’s counterintelligence section, said that’s not how it works.

“It just strikes me as a post hoc public affairs strategy that has no relationship to how classified information is in fact declassified,” said Laufman, who oversaw the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s personal email server during her tenure as secretary of state. While he said it is true that there is no statue or order that outlines procedures the president must abide by to declassify information, “at the same time it’s ludicrous to posit that a decision to declassify documents would not have been contemporaneously memorialized in writing.”

It’s “not self executing,” he added. “There has to be some objective, contemporaneous, evidence-based corroboration of the claims that they’re making. And of course there won’t be because they’re making it all up.”

The decision to keep classified documents at Mar-a-Lago — a property frequented by paying members, their guests and anyone attending the weddings, political fundraisers, charity dinners and other events held on site — was part of a long pattern of disregard for national security secrets. Former aides described a “cavalier” attitude toward classified information that played out in public view.

There was the dinner with then-Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Mar-a-Lago’s patio, where fellow diners watched and snapped cellphone photos as the two men reviewed details of a North Korean missile test.

There was the time Trump revealed highly classified information allegedly from Israeli sources about Islamic State militants to Russian officials. And there was the time he tweeted a high-resolution satellite image of an apparent explosion at an Iranian space center, which intelligence officials had warned was highly sensitive. Trump insisted he had “the absolute right” to share it.

Former White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said Trump was “careless” with sensitive and classified information and “seemed never to bother with why that was bad.”

Grisham recalled one incident involving Conan, a U.S. military dog hailed as a hero for his role in the raid that killed Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. She said that before the dog’s arrival at the White House, staff had received a briefing in which they were told the dog could not be photographed because the images could put his handlers in danger. But when the dog arrived, Trump decided he wanted to show it off to the press.

“Because he wanted the publicity, out went Conan,” she said. “It’s an example of him not caring if he put lives in danger. … It was like its his own shiny toy he’s showing off to his friends to impress them.”

Bolton said that, during his time working for Trump, he and others often tried to explain the stakes and the risks of exposing sources and methods.

“I don’t think any of it sank in. He didn’t seem to appreciate just how sensitive it was, how dangerous it was for some of our people and the risks that they could be exposed to,” he said. “What looks like an innocuous picture to a private citizen can be a gold mine to a foreign intelligence” entity.

“I would say over and over again, ‘This is really sensitive, really sensitive.’ And he’d say, ‘I know’ and then go and do it anyway.”

Bolton said that top intelligence officials would gather before briefings to discuss how best to handle sensitive subjects, strategizing about how much needed to be shared. Briefers quickly learned that Trump often tried to hang onto sensitive documents, and would take steps to make sure documents didn’t go missing, including using iPads to show them to him.

“Sometimes he would ask to keep it and they’d say, ‘It’s really sensitive.’ Sometime he just wouldn’t give it back.”

Trump’s refusal to accept his election loss also contributed to the chaos that engulfed his final days in office. The General Services Administration was slow to acknowledge President Joe Biden’s win, delaying the transition process and leaving little time to pack.

While other White House staff and even the former first lady started making arrangements, Trump largely refused. At the same time, White House staff were departing in droves as part of the regular “offboarding process,” while morale among others had cratered in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Bolton said he doubted that Trump had taken documents for nefarious reasons, and instead thought Trump likely considered them “souvenirs” like the many he’d collected through his life.

“I think he just thought some things were cool and he wanted them,” Bolton said. “Some days he liked to collect french fries. Some days he liked to collect documents. He just collected things.”

The Washington Post first reported in February that the National Archives had retrieved 15 boxes of documents and other items from Mar-a-Lago that should have been turned over to the agency when Trump left the White House. An initial review of that material concluded that Trump had brought presidential records and several other documents that were marked classified to Mar-a-Lago.

The investigation into the handling of classified material intensified in the spring as prosecutors and federal agents interviewed several people who worked in the Trump White House about how records — and particularly classified documents — were handled during the chaotic end of the Trump presidency, a person familiar with the matter told The Associated Press. Around the same time, prosecutors also issued a subpoena for records Trump was keeping at Mar-a-Lago and subpoenaed for surveillance video from Mar-a-Lago showing the area where the records were being stored, the person said.

A top Justice Department official traveled to Mar-a-Lago in early June and looked through some of the material that was stored in boxes. After that meeting, prosecutors interviewed another witness who told them that there were likely additional classified documents still stored at Mar-a-Lago, the person said. The person was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Justice Department later sought a search warrant and retrieved the additional tranches of classified records.

___

Balsamo reported from Washington.

UVALDE, Texas (KSAT) – A massive lawsuit was announced on behalf of those affected by the Robb Elementary School shooting.

The class-action suit is going after several law enforcement agencies as well as a gun manufacturer.

The lead attorney filing the suit, Charles Bonner, said they are fighting for justice and accountability.

“What we intend to do to help serve this community and that is to file a $27 billion civil rights lawsuit under our United States Constitution, one-of-a-kind in the whole world,” he said.

Bonner, a civil rights attorney, said he intends to file a class action lawsuit against anyone who can be held responsible for what happened inside of Robb Elementary on May 24.

“We have the school police, OK, out of Redondo. We have the city police, and we have the sheriff and we have the Texas Rangers, the DPS, and we have the Border Patrol,” he said, as well as gun manufacturer Daniel Defense and Oasis Outback, where the gunman bought the weapon used.

“There will be some institutional defendants, including the school board or the city council,” Bonner said.

He and his associate have been traveling to Uvalde from their California office for weeks – meeting with families at Pastor Daniel Myers’ church, Tabernacle of Worship.

“Up to right now, there’s been no accountability, there’s no justice for those 19 children and the two teachers,” Myers said.

The suit is being filed on constitutionality. Bonner said the victims, survivors and their families had their 14th Amendment rights violated.

“And what we’ve seen here is that the law enforcement agencies have shown a deliberate, conscious disregards of those lives,” he said.

Bonner’s law firm is taking on this class-action suit with a team of other firms, including a local Uvalde law office. It’s a big undertaking, one he said he believes is necessary to save lives.

“Everyone in this world (is) hurting and bleeding about what is happening here in Uvalde. And it’s up to us to make sure it doesn’t happen again,” Bonner said.

The lawsuit is still being drafted. Bonner said it’ll be filed in September when the investigation into the shooting is done.

Copyright 2022 CNN Newsource. All rights reserved.

Russian FSB reveals that Ukraine’s special services are behind Darya Dugina’s murder, and disclose the identity of the perpetrator.

VLADIMIR Putin’s so-called “spiritual mastermind” has suffered a suspected heart attack after surviving an attempt on his life, reports have claimed.

Alexander Dugin, the man sometimes described as “Putin‘s brain”, is in hospital following the blast that wiped out his 30-year-old daughter Darya Dugina.

Putin’s alleged ‘spiritual guide’ Alexander Dugin has reportedly suffered a heart attackCredit: Reuters

Dugin survived an alleged assassination attempt on Saturday nightCredit: Getty

The car bomb killed his daughter, Russian journalist Darya Dugina, 30Credit: Twitter

Kremlin analyst Olga Lautman reported that Dugin had suffered a heart attack, quoting his close ally Sergei Markov.

Markov posted on his Telegram channel: “Poor Alexander Dugin. He is in the hospital now. Our huge condolences.”

Speaking to Russian state news agency RIA-Novosti, Markov also laid the blame for the attack on Ukrainian security services.

Another counter-intelligence account @KremlinTrolls also reported the news of Dugin’s alleged heart attack, hinting that Russian security service the FSB had tried to take Dugin’s life a second time.

Conflicting reports suggest Dugin either suffered a heart attack or a nervous breakdown following the killing of his daughter.

His official Twitter account posted a short statement early Monday morning reading simply: “Update, Alexander Dugin is in the hospital under guard.”

Dugin’s suspected heart attack comes months after Putin’s defence chief Sergei Shoigu was struck down in mysteriously similar circumstances.

Putin critic and Russian businessman Leonid Nevzlin, 62, alleged that Shoigu’s heart attack “could not have occurred from natural causes”.

Dugina, a Russian journalist, had reported from Ukraine since the start of the war for pro-Russian media, including from the Azovstal steel works in Mariupol.

She was sanctioned last month by the British government as “a frequent and high-profile contributor of disinformation in relation to Ukraine.”

No group has claimed responsibility for Saturday evening’s bombing on a highway in southwest Moscow.

But various foreign policy and intelligence experts have claimed that the attack was likely carried out on the orders of Vladimir Putin.

Anders Aslund, economist and Russian expert, wrote on Twitter that the Kremlin was most likely behind the bombing.

Aslund, who previously spoke to The Sun Online about Dugin, and wrote the book ‘Russia’s Crony Capitalism’, tweeted: “It appears most likely that Putin killed Darya Dugina. He has that habit.

“The videos at her house were out. Alexander Dugin was supposed to be in the car. Why would Ukraine waste resources on such a target?”

He added: “Given Putin’s fondness of false flag operations, it is most likely that he ordered Dugin to be blown up, making it look as done by the Ukrainians, while Dugin’s daughter was blown up instead. More such murders are likely.”

It appears most likely that Putin killed Darya Dugina

Anders Aslund

Conservative MP and chair of the cross-party Foreign Affairs Committee Tom Tugendhat also pointed the finger of suspicion at Putin’s cronies.

“In recent months, Dugin had been criticising the Kremlin for being too soft,” he tweeted.

“Given the terrorism used by Putin over decades – Beslan, Nemtsov, Litvinenko, to name but a few incidents – means the list of suspects should include his own government.”

Russian historian Dr Yuri Felshtinsky, author of the new book Blowing up Ukraine, said the car bomb was “most likely part of an internal Russian conflict” and ordered by those with an interest in eliminating Dugin.

He told The Daily Beast: “The blowing up of the car of the famous Russian fascist and ideologist of the Putin regime, Alexander Dugin, was organized, it seems, by the Russian security services.

“The Ukrainian special services, involved in a deadly battle with the aggressor on the territory of Ukraine, are unlikely to be able to send their officers to Moscow to organise terrorist attacks there.”

A former Russian MP has placed responsibility for the attack on a shadowy Russian group called the National Republican Army which is aiming to overthrow the Putin regime.

Speaking in Kyiv, anti-Putin activist Ilya Ponomarev alleged that the attack was the first of its kind aiming to bring down the Kremlin.

“A momentous event took place near Moscow last night,” he told the Russian-language opposition TV channel he launched in Kyiv earlier this year.

“This attack opens a new page in Russian resistance to Putinism. New – but not the last.”

Dugin switched cars with his daughter at the last minuteCredit: Twitter

He was rushed to hospital in the aftermath of the bombingCredit: East2West

Dugin has been described as “Putin’s brain” and the “mastermind” behind the invasion of Ukraine, but his direct influence over the Russian president has been disputed.

The BBC’s Gabriel Gatehouse interviewed Dugin five years ago and wrote on Twitter: “Alexander Dugin is not ‘Putin’s brain’. He’s a man who roughly a decade ago provided a kind of intellectual underpinning for what Putin sees as Russia’s historic mission as a geopolitical counterweight to the US.”

Dr Ian Garner, an expert on Russian media, added on social media: “Through his youth groups, TV work, internet sites and online communities, he [Dugin] has had a huge impact on Russian political culture in the last 20 years.

“His ideas are everywhere in even mildly patriotic and nationalist culture.”

Dugin’s biggest influence on Russian thinking in the past 25 years has been his promotion of the idea of Eurasianism, a new Russian empire stretching 10,000 miles encompassing Britain and Europe.

His seminal 1997 book “The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia”, sets out the division of Europe between the Russian and German spheres of influence.

He slammed Putin for not taking all of Ukraine during the invasion of Crimea in 2014, which may have alienated him from the Kremlin.

Following the annexation, Dugin urged the Kremlin to “kill kill kill” Ukrainians as he called for the destruction of the entire country.