(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Kathy Sanders, who lost two grandchildren in the April 19, 1995, Oklahoma City bombing, has filed a lawsuit for records about an unidentified leg found in the rubble more than 31 years ago.
The unidentified leg remains one of the enduring mysteries from the bombing, the deadliest domestic terrorist attack in U.S. history. In the immediate aftermath of the attack, investigators recovered a severed lower left leg and foot wearing a combat boot. That leg was eventually matched to OKC bombing victim Lakesha Levy, who was an airman at Tinker Air Force Base. However, Levy had already been buried with another left leg in her coffin.
To this day, the leg initially buried with Levy remains unidentified. In Sanders’s lawsuit, filed last Friday against Oklahoma’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, she seeks the state’s complete case file about both Levy’s leg and the unidentified leg—labeled P-54 and P-71, respectively.
Sanders said in her lawsuit that she believes the unidentified leg may belong to an additional co-conspirator to bomber Timothy McVeigh and his accomplice, Terry Nichols, who assisted in the plot.
🚨NEW: Kathy Sanders, who lost her 2 grandsons in the OKC bombing, has filed a lawsuit for records on the unidentified leg found in the rubble after the attack.
Sanders believes the leg may belong to an additional co-conspirator.
To her point, the FBI initially had a manhunt out for a mystery co-conspirator referred to only as John Doe 2—only to later claim that John Doe 2 doesn’t exist and that the 20-plus witnesses who saw him were mistaken. McVeigh received the death penalty and was executed in June 2001, while Nichols is serving life in prison. To this day, the government says those were the only two men involved in the attack.
However, Nichols himself told Sanders in a letter that the leg probably belonged to a co-conspirator of McVeigh.
“What will change things and break the case wide open is to do a genetic DNA geneology [sic] trace on that unidentified leg,” Nichols said in the letter, which Sanders attached to her lawsuit as an exhibit. “I don’t know nor understand why this has not been diligently pursued. If you really want to get to the bottom of the OKC bombing then do a geneology [sic] trace on that leg.”
The state has admitted to having records that would prove Sanders’s theory one way or the other.
For over two decades after the bombing, investigators maintained that they were unable to extract DNA from the leg that was retrieved from Levy’s coffin because it has been embalmed. But in December 2015, Oklahoma Chief Toxicologist Dr. Byron Curtis told the Washington Times that the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner did, in fact, have DNA from the mystery leg.
According to the book Oklahoma City: What the Investigation Missed, and Why it Matters, the FBI later surmised that the missing limb belonged to Cynthia Campbell Brown, a Secret Service agent killed in the bombing. However, the FBI didn’t want to test its theory because “doing so could raise the question of whose leg she was buried with—and perhaps set off an uncontrollable chain reaction of exhumations and mistaken body-part re-identifications,” the book said.
“If the extra leg did belong to a coconspirator, he was never investigated, much less identified,” the book added.
The Oklahoma Office of the Chief Medical Examiner has yet to respond to Sanders’s lawsuit. Headline USA will cover the case as it develops.
Ken Silva is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/jd_cashless.
(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) On the fifth anniversary of the Kabul terror attack, the Trump-led Pentagon accused the Biden administration of hiding classified documents connected to the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell made the revelations in a heartfelt video commemorating the 13 U.S. servicemen who died on Aug. 26, 2021, while protecting thousands of Afghans as the Taliban closed in on the country.
Parnell said that “highly relevant classified documents, materials that should have disclosed,” were “stashed and hidden away in safes where they would not be found.”
While Parnell did not specify the content of the alleged classified materials, he said that after reviewing them, “it became clear why someone tried to hide them.”
An update from Sean Parnell, Chairman of the Afghanistan Withdrawal Special Review Panel, on the Fifth Anniversary of the Abbey Gate bombing pic.twitter.com/5pkbmuuyX0
Parnell stated that further information would be revealed in the future.
“I’m not going to give you a convenient version of the truth, nor will I give you a rushed one,” he added. “Here is my commitment: We are following the evidence to wherever it leads and to whoever it touches. We’re not accepting incomplete or comfortable answers.”
Parnell, a veteran who served in Afghanistan, was appointed by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth to lead a Pentagon-wide review of the Biden administration’s handling of the withdrawal and the deaths of the 13 U.S. service members in Kabul.
The Pentagon said in a statement that “the ongoing review was taking place on behalf of the American people and on behalf of the Gold Star families.”
In his video, Parnell also emphasized the personal cost borne by the fallen service members.
“These patriots commanded troops; they took fire; they carried the wounded, and they buried their friends,” he said. “They knew how decisions in Afghanistan became consequences because they are the ones who lived with them.“
The Biden administration had long faced questions over its handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The administration repeatedly pointed to decisions made by the Trump administration that led to the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, which occurred more than seven months after Joe Biden took office.
(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) A man was arrested and charged with weapon-related offenses after federal law enforcement officers spotted a guillotine in the bed of his pickup truck near the U.S. Capitol and the Supreme Court.
U.S. Capitol Police said in a press release that the man, Philan-Tam-Duy Le, had traveled from California to Washington, D.C., for unknown reasons before his arrest on Tuesday.
The 35-year-old suspect was initially booked on a charge of carrying a dangerous weapon in connection with the guillotine.
Federal prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia later downgraded the charge to attempted possession of a prohibited weapon, a federal misdemeanor, according to The Washington Post.
This afternoon our officers seized a guillotine, which they spotted in the bed of a pickup truck along the 100 block of East Capitol Street.
USCP said in a press release that it seized the guillotine near the 100 block of East Capitol Street after 3 p.m. Tuesday. Le’s truck was also reportedly “illegally parked.”
U.S. Judge Robert Hildum declined prosecutors’ demand to keep Le detained in federal prison, saying that he “didn’t even threaten anyone.”
“He was completely cooperative,” Hildum added, as quoted by the Post. “He didn’t flee, he didn’t do anything other than speak to the police officers.”
Le reportedly told federal law enforcement that he did not have an issue with any lawmaker and did not travel to the Capitol for any particular reason.
His next court hearing is reportedly scheduled for September.
The incident comes amid heightened concerns over political violence in the United States, following the 2024 assassination attempt against President Donald Trump at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
Trump escaped a second assassination attempt on Sept. 15, 2024, when an armed man was spotted near Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Charlie Kirk, a young conservative leader and staunch Trump ally, was assassinated at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025.
(Money Metals News Service) Most people have regrets. They make a bad decision, miscalculate, or miss an opportunity and later wonder what might have happened.
Money Metals Midweek Memo host Mike Maharrey shared one of his own investment regrets. Around 2015 or 2016, he received one Bitcoin as payment for a service. Bitcoin was worth roughly $400 at the time, and he quickly sold most of it to buy a used laptop.
The lesson was not simply to mourn a missed windfall. Regret can be a valuable teacher if it helps someone avoid making the same mistake twice.
That lesson is especially relevant for precious metals investors. Gold gained approximately 14.6 percent during the month, climbing from $4,045 per ounce on July 31 to more than $4,600.
Silver moved even faster. After trading at $57.66 per ounce on July 31, it gained more than 20 percent and approached $70 as Maharrey recorded the episode.
British Savers Regret Missing the Rally
A Royal Mint survey found that one-third of British adults regretted not investing in gold during the previous five years. Another 30 percent regretted missing the rise in silver.
Those regrets are understandable. Gold gained nearly 50 percent over five years, while silver rose almost 200 percent.
Despite those gains, only 8 percent of UK adults held any savings in gold. Just 3 percent owned silver.
This reluctance is common among Western investors. By contrast, demand from China, India, and other Asian markets helped propel the gold bull market while many Western investors remained on the sidelines.
The survey also found that 73 percent of respondents worried about how global conflicts and economic instability could affect the value of their money.
Maharrey argued that the deeper threat is monetary debasement. Governments benefit from creating and spending additional currency, even though the resulting inflation gradually erodes the public’s purchasing power.
Regret Has Not Produced Action
Although many British adults recognized that gold and silver could have protected their savings, few planned to change their behavior.
Only one-quarter of respondents said they were likely to put money into precious metals over the next five years. Meanwhile, 60 percent still preferred to keep their savings in a checking account.
That could lead to another round of regret five years from now. Investors who missed gold near $1,800 five years ago—or $4,045 on July 31—may eventually look back longingly at prices around $4,500 or $4,600.
Central banks in the United States and United Kingdom officially target 2 percent annual inflation. At that rate, money loses a little more than 10 percent of its purchasing power every five years.
Policymakers are not trying to eliminate inflation entirely. They are trying to keep it at a level they consider manageable.
For Maharrey, gold and silver should be viewed as part of a long-term strategy. Daily price swings matter less than the continuing decline in the purchasing power of fiat currencies.
Tuning Out the War-Driven Noise
Maharrey recently interviewed David Morgan, publisher of The Morgan Report, for the Friday Market Wrap podcast. One of their central themes was the importance of tuning out short-term market noise.
The US-Iran war has caused real economic disruptions. Closures in the Strait of Hormuz have affected oil, energy supplies, and fertilizer flows.
Nevertheless, Maharrey characterized the war’s influence on precious metals as a short-term distraction. Gold and silver have repeatedly rallied when news suggested progress toward peace or the possible reopening of the strait.
He interpreted those rallies as evidence that bullish sentiment remains intact. War headlines may be suppressing precious metals temporarily, but the forces supporting the longer-term bull market have not disappeared.
Those forces include enormous government debt, economic distortions created by years of loose monetary policy, central-bank gold purchases, and the weaponization of the dollar.
Treasury Intervention Lasted One Day
The catalyst that may have cut through the war-related noise came from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
The Treasury announced that it would double buybacks of securities in the 10-to-20-year and 20-to-30-year maturity sectors from a maximum of $2 billion to $4 billion per operation. The goal was to support the bond market and lower borrowing costs at the long end of the yield curve.
Initially, the announcement worked. The 30-year Treasury yield closed at 5.31 percent on Tuesday, August 18, after reaching an intraday high of 5.34 percent—the highest yield since 2007.
Following the announcement, the yield fell to 5.19 percent at Wednesday’s close, a decline of nearly 20 basis points. Two days later, however, it had rebounded to 5.27 percent.
Instead of demonstrating control over the bond market, the intervention may have signaled desperation. The dollar weakened while gold and Bitcoin rallied, suggesting that investors interpreted the announcement as evidence of growing fiscal strain.
A Small Move Sent a Big Message
The planned increase from $2 billion to $4 billion per buyback is small compared with a Treasury market valued at approximately $35 trillion.
Its psychological impact was much larger.
Precious metals analyst Brian Lundin called the announcement a “sign of desperation” and said investors saw “blood in the water.” He also pointed to gold and silver breaking through important technical levels.
Bessent later suggested that the Treasury could use as much as $1 trillion from its general account to support additional bond purchases and lower rates.
Lundin argued that such action would also prove temporary. The Treasury’s effort to project strength exposed its weakness and encouraged mainstream investors to embrace the debasement trade.
What Is the Debasement Trade?
The debasement trade is an investment strategy centered on assets that may retain value as fiat currencies lose purchasing power.
It commonly includes gold, silver, other commodities, and sometimes Bitcoin. Investors turn toward these assets when they become concerned about debt, money creation, inflation, or the long-term value of paper currencies.
The US national debt recently surpassed $40 trillion. With policymakers showing little willingness to restrain borrowing or spending, foreign governments and investors have more reasons to question their exposure to Treasury securities and the dollar.
Central banks are already responding. Many are reducing their exposure to dollar-denominated assets while increasing their gold reserves.
The weaponization of the dollar has accelerated this trend. The United States and its allies locked Russia out of the SWIFT financial system, froze Russian assets, and discussed using those assets to support Ukraine.
Other governments have taken notice. Countries that fear similar treatment have an incentive to reduce their dependence on dollars and hold more politically neutral reserve assets, including gold.
AI Adds Competition for Capital
The artificial-intelligence boom is also complicating Washington’s funding problem.
AI companies and infrastructure projects are issuing debt to finance data centers, computing capacity, and expansion. This borrowing competes with Treasury securities for investor capital.
Whether the AI boom eventually resembles the dot-com bubble remains to be seen. For now, it is adding more debt to the market and increasing competition for a limited pool of buyers.
Investors must decide whether to lend money to companies they believe could generate substantial future profits or to a federal government already carrying more than $40 trillion in debt.
The Buybacks Have Not Begun
The expanded Treasury operations are scheduled to begin on September 9 and continue through November 4.
That means the initial market response occurred before the Treasury bought any bonds. Investors reacted to what the announcement revealed about the government’s financial position.
The Treasury also cannot create money. To purchase long-term bonds, it must raise cash by issuing more short-term Treasury bills and notes.
The operation changes the maturity of the government’s debt, but it does not eliminate the debt. The government is effectively borrowing new money to pay existing lenders.
Nathan Thooft, a senior portfolio manager at Manulife Investment Management, summarized the limitation. The Treasury can influence liquidity and sentiment, but it cannot sustainably override growth, inflation, deficits, and the supply of bonds.
Through quantitative easing, the Fed buys securities and holds them on its balance sheet. This removes bonds from the private market instead of merely replacing long-term debt with short-term debt.
Maharrey argued that the Fed is already conducting small-scale operations that resemble quantitative easing, even if policymakers call them technical or liquidity measures.
Newly created money enters the financial system and contributes to monetary inflation. That creates a contradiction for the Fed.
Higher interest rates may restrain inflation, but they also make the federal debt more expensive to finance. Lower rates and quantitative easing can reduce borrowing costs, but they risk producing more inflation and further weakening the dollar.
The United States is already spending more than $1 trillion annually to service its debt. As older securities mature and are refinanced at higher rates, that burden can grow.
If the Treasury cannot contain long-term yields, pressure on the Fed will intensify. A more aggressive response could mean interest-rate cuts, larger bond purchases, and additional quantitative easing.
The Long-Term Case for Gold and Silver
Many analysts believe the United States may be entering a long-term bear market in bonds. The supply of government debt is extremely high, demand is weakening, and investors are demanding higher yields as compensation for inflation and fiscal risk.
Government intervention can move markets temporarily, but it cannot indefinitely override excessive debt, persistent deficits, inflation, and declining confidence in the dollar.
Short-term corrections remain possible. War headlines, interest-rate expectations, and shifting sentiment will continue to produce volatility.
The longer-term trend remains monetary debasement. Federal debt is growing, borrowing costs are rising, central banks are diversifying away from dollars, and the Fed may ultimately respond with looser monetary policy.
Investors who focus only on tomorrow’s gold price may miss the larger purpose of owning precious metals. Gold and silver are not merely vehicles for chasing a rally. They are tools for preserving purchasing power during periods of fiscal and monetary instability.
Money Metals encourages investors to speak with a precious metals specialist at 1-800-800-1865 or visit MoneyMetals.com. Customers can purchase gold and silver for delivery or store their holdings at Money Metals’ audited bullion depository in Eagle, Idaho.
The episode’s final lesson was simple. Missing an earlier opportunity does not mean every future opportunity is gone. Regret becomes useful when it leads to a better decision the next time.
(Headline USA) A 22-year-old college student killed by Pennsylvania police responding to a possible burglary had just realized he was at the wrong home and was waiting for friends to come get him when he was shot, his father said Wednesday.
Police in Upper Pottsgrove Township, northwest of Philadelphia, responded around 12:30 a.m. Sunday to a 911 call about a possible break-in attempt, according to the Montgomery County district attorney’s office. The office said in a statement that police found Glenwood Pysher IV at the rear of the home and ultimately shot and killed him.
Pysher’s father, Glen Pysher, said his son and his friends had visited several bars earlier in the evening and were splitting up to spend the night in two homes when his son took a wrong turn in the woods. Based on what he has been told by his son’s friends, Pysher believes his son mistakenly tried to enter what he thought was his friend’s house. He wasn’t carrying any weapons, just a phone and backpack containing clothing and a few beers, he said.
“He tried to open the doorknob and obviously startled the homeowner,” he said. “From what we understand, he announced, ‘Hey! Open the door!’ because he thought he was at his friend’s house.”
Pysher then sat down on the back porch and contacted his friends, who realized he was in the wrong place and started to go find him. But minutes later, they saw police and emergency vehicles and figured their friend would be arrested for public drunkenness. Instead, he was shot.
“At 12:32 a.m. my son was on a FaceTime call with his friends that were coming to get him,” he said. “We were told that my son was shot at 12:35 a.m.. So what kind of encounter could have ensued? What kind of communication could that officer have given him?”
A Montgomery County Department of Public Safety dispatch record shows police were dispatched at 12:30 a.m. and arrived at 12:34 a.m. Upper Pottsgrove Township Police Chief Al Werner declined to release any information, including the names of any officers involved in the shooting, until the investigation is complete. The Montgomery County Detective Bureau is investigating the shooting, the district attorney’s office said.
The fatal shooting by police responding to a report of a possible break-in starkly distinguishes Pysher’s death from several other instances where residents have shot people who mistakenly showed up at their homes.
Pysher was about to begin his senior year at St. Elizabeth University in New Jersey, where he planned to play baseball. His goal was to become a high school history teacher and coach after graduation.
His father described him as a kind-hearted, loving kid who could be a “knucklehead” but enjoyed helping others. Since the shooting, former teammates, coaches and others have been texting his father to share heartbreaking memories.
“One young man in particular texted me and said, ‘I was going through a lot of really difficult things in my life. I was going the wrong way. And your son is the one who helped me put my life on track,’ ” the father said. “He will be sadly missed in his community.”
Pysher said police have given the family almost no information. On Wednesday, he called asking whether he could retrieve his son’s favorite pair of black shoes to bury him in and was told that could be arranged.
“Then I got a call back saying they have to think about it,” he said. “They don’t know if they can give them to me.”
(Jon Styf, The Center Square) American voters say local communities should be able to limit data centers if they cause a strain on electricity, water, land or infrastructure, according to a new poll.
The Center Square Voters’ Voice Poll found that 68% think that communities should be able to limit data centers if they strain those local resources while 22% believe that communities should accept those trade-offs for the benefits of economic growth and the country’s technology future.
The results come from a survey conducted by Noble Predictive Insights from Aug. 12-16 that polled registered voters nationally via opt-in online panel and text-to-web cell phone messages. The sample included 2,533 respondents comprised of 930 Republicans, 930 Democrats, and 673 Independents. Among independent voters, 330 respondents were classified as true independents, which are individuals who do not lean toward either major party when given the choice. The margin of error is +/- 2.0%.
Mike Noble, founder of Noble Predictive Insights, said that polling has shown that “the incentives are bad but what’s even worse is electricity and water. If they are gobbling up local resources, that’s even worse to the electorate.”
Data centers have become hot political topics across the country with local Republicans contrasting with President Donald Trump’s national push for artificial intelligence data centers in Republican-leaning areas such as Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott is now pushing back against data centers.
Republican Congressman Tom Tiffany is doing the same in Wisconsin, pushing the moniker “Data Center David” on Democratic opponent David Crowley in the race to become the next governor.
“I think [Abbott]’s a skilled politician by making that move,” Noble said.
The Voters’ Voice poll results were similar across genders, ages and political affiliations.
“What has been the problem with data centers is their branding is bad and it keeps going from bad to worse,” Noble said.
Polling results from earlier this year showed that voters think building more data centers in the United States is not worth the potential strain on local electricity, water and infrastructure and that the negatives outweigh the importance for national security and competing with China.
A second question concluded that local governments should be cautious about new data centers because they can place strain on electricity, water, land and local infrastructure.
(Michael Carroll, The Center Square) A former Lee County English arts teacher who was suspended after posting about the death of political activist Charlie Kirk on a private Facebook account should be reinstated with back pay, an administrative judge has concluded.
Judge Andrew Manko of the state’s Division of Administrative Hearings said the Lee County school board failed to prove that Three Oaks Middle School (TOMS) teacher Mariah Roller’s post to a select group of friends had caused any substantial upheaval at the school.
“… The school board failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the dissemination of Ms. Roller’s post (by a third party) caused a substantial disruption at TOMS or that Ms. Roller’s effectiveness as an educator had been sufficiently undermined to warrant just cause for her termination,” Manko said in his Aug. 14 decision.
In the wake of Kirk’s death in September of last year, Roller posted to her private Facebook account a single comment: “What’s that about the cost of the Second Amendment being ‘some gun deaths every year?’ Bye Charlie.”
School officials alleged they were “bombarded” with critical emails in the wake of the post and that Roller had engaged in misconduct under the Florida Administrative Code and school board policies. But Manko said the middle school’s principal received at most 20 emails about the post and that he didn’t respond to most of them. In addition, no parents, students or colleagues complained to him about the incident.
“The weight of the credible evidence does not support a finding that the receipt of 15 to 20 emails by a principal – the school’s lead administrator – is either substantial or disruptive, particularly given that he only took the time to send a generic response to a few of them,” the judge said.
A spokesman for the school district said it would not be appropriate for the district to comment on pending litigation. Roller’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment, but the Florida Education Association (FEA) welcomed the judge’s decision and said it was a win for teachers’ right to due process and freedom of speech.
“Our educators deserve a voice in their workplace, and this ruling makes it clear that the district must respect the professional dignity and constitutional rights of educators,” Kevin Daly, president of the Teachers Association of Lee County (TALC), said in a statement. “Despite attempts to silence educators … we know that when our voices are heard, we’re able to create stronger, safer learning environments for our students.”
Roller had expressed a willingness to continue teaching at TOMS, but in the aftermath of the suspension, she returned to Iowa and established residency there, Manko said in his decision.
The judge concluded that it was not clear if most of the people who sent emails to the principal or otherwise complained were local parents or people with any stake in the middle school’s operations. The school seemed to be operating normally in the days after the post was disseminated by a third party who took a screen shot of it, and no uptick in teacher or student absences was detected, he said.
A media truck did visit the campus once or twice to report on the controversy, but it stayed only a few minutes and remained outside of the school grounds, according to Manko.
The school district also failed to prove that Roller violated School Board Policy 7544, which relates to the staff’s use of social media in school-sponsored events or posting while on school property – and not to personal, after-hours posts, according to the judge.
(José Niño, Headline USA) The Trump administration’s attempt to quietly enlist sympathetic online voices for its messaging apparatus stumbled into public view this week, according to a report from Alternet.
The controversy centers on Jennica Pounds, who goes by “Data Republican” on X and commands an audience nearing one million followers. On Friday, she alerted her supporters that hidden figures within the very administration she champions had allegedly attempted to lure her into an act of treason.
Journalist Will Sommer of The Bulwark offered a very different reading of the episode in a Monday article. He recounted that, in her telling, “deep state operatives embedded within the Trump administration had tried to entrap her into committing treason.”
Sommer explained that the official Pounds initially declined to name was soon revealed as Sarah B. Rogers, the State Department’s undersecretary for public diplomacy. Rogers had reportedly offered Pounds a batch of Cuba related government documents to release as a scoop. Pounds welcomed the offer at first, only to spot certain markings on the paperwork that convinced her she was being set up for possible prosecution, prompting her to broadcast her fears to followers rather than seek quiet clarification first.
The markings weren’t crossed out. I consulted people and if this were a sanctioned leak – they would have just sent over email. They tried to entrap me.
— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) August 21, 2026
That theory struck Sommer as implausible on its face. He pointed out that Pounds holds favored status among Trump loyalists after rising to prominence during the DOGE period with viral posts backing Elon Musk’s funding cuts at USAID and other federal agencies. In Sommer’s view, though, she never showed much real understanding of how government budgets actually operate. “The idea that Trump administration officials would conspire to send Pounds to prison is bizarre on its face,” he wrote.
The narrative fell apart further when Rogers responded directly and casually on social media, effectively torpedoing her own attempted leak. “Lol, these are my text messages and documents,” she wrote, per Sommer’s account. “The ‘markings’ are FOIA redactions required even for voluntary disclosure. To prove this isn’t a ‘trap,’ I will happily disclose the documents myself.” She then published the records herself, closing the loop on the entire dispute.
lol, these are my text messages and documents. The "markings" are FOIA redactions required even for voluntary disclosure. To prove this isn't a "trap," I will happily disclose the documents myself. Here they are (1/x):
— Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers (@UnderSecPD) August 21, 2026
Adding another layer to the story, AP Pentagon correspondent Konstantin Toropin verified on Monday that Pounds holds an actual government role, reporting the Defense Department’s confirmation that “Ms. Pounds serves at the Department of War as a Special Government Employee.”
José Niño is the deputy editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/JoseAlNino
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Massachusetts state representative Francisco Paulino, a Democrat, has been indicted for fraudulently obtaining hundreds of thousands of dollars in pandemic relief funds from around April 2020 to December 2021.
According to the federal indictment filed Tuesday, Paulino incorporated a company called Jackson Enterprise, and used that company to start a Heav’nly Donuts shop in August 2020. Paulino then allegedly applied for pandemic relief funds, saying that Jackson Enterprise earned about $426,755 for the 12-month period ending on Jan. 31, 2020. In fact, Jackson Enterprise had earned $0 that year.
As a result of Paulino’s fraudulent representations, he was able to receive multiple loans reportedly totaling over $700,000, according to the indictment.
Paulino also allegedly applied for pandemic unemployment assistance in the name of his relative, who was 77 years old at the time. The relative did not know about Paulino’s alleged scheme.
As a result, Paulino fraudulently obtained about $44,000 in pandemic relief funds, with the money being sent straight to his bank account.
Paulino was charged with eight counts of wire fraud, three counts of unlawful monetary transactions, and money laundering. He pled not guilty on Wednesday, and was released on personal recognizance on the condition that he surrendered his passport.
Ken Silva is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/jd_cashless.
(Kyle Anzalone, Antiwar.com) An Ecuadorian official confirmed that US Green Berets were engaged in anti-cartel operations. Earlier this year, President Donald Trump formed a coalition, dubbed Shield of the Americas, that was aimed at combating cartels in Latin and South America.
A local official told AFP and UPI that US special forces have been conducting direct operations against suspected cartels in the Esmeraldas province. “We are with the 7th (Special Forces) Group of the US Army. We are working together in the fight against narcoterrorism,” Esmeraldas Provincial governor Juan Jaramillo said last week.
Ecuadorian Defense Minister Gian Carlo Loffredo added that two US warships were operating in the region.
In March, President Donald Trump said that a dozen Latin American nations had enlisted in the Shield of the Americas coalition to fight cartels in the region. Ecuador is a member of the bloc.
That month, the US and Ecuador conducted joint military operations against alleged drug targets. “The operations are a powerful example of the commitment of partners in Latin America and the Caribbean to combat the scourge of narco-terrorism,” U.S. Southern Command said following the raid.
However, The New York Times reported that the target of the operation was a dairy farm, not a drug lab. “The military strike appears to have destroyed a cattle and dairy farm, not a drug trafficking compound, according to interviews with the farm’s owner, four of its workers, human rights lawyers, and residents and leaders in San Martín,” the outlet explains.
The military activity in Ecuador is part of Operation Southern Spear. Trump ordered the Department of War last year to expand military operations in Latin America to curb narcotics trafficking to the US.
The US has conducted dozens of airstrikes against suspected drug boats in the Caribbean Sea and Eastern Pacific Ocean. The operations have killed over 200 people and over 60 vessels.
The White House has asserted that the targeted boats are operated by narco-terrorists attempting to smuggle fentanyl into the US. However, the administration has not offered the American people any evidence to support the claim.
Additionally, some evidence suggests that at least some of the vessels that have been attacked were not involved in narcotics trafficking. The family members of several victims have said their slain relatives were fishermen.
Last month, The Washington Post reported reviewing a DEA assessment that found the strikes on vessels operated by alleged narco-terrorists have not changed the amount or price of cocaine entering the US. US military officials also admitted to Congress that the operations have had no impact on purity.
