News – Page 498 – 105.7 WDNY

Karen Read on trial again for alleged murder of police officer boyfriend

April 23, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(BOSTON) — A Massachusetts woman is on trial again for the death of her police officer boyfriend, after a jury was unable to reach a verdict in the initial murder trial last year.

Karen Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, John O’Keefe, a Boston police officer, in January 2022. The prosecution alleges that, following a night of drinking in Canton, Read struck O’Keefe with her SUV outside of a private residence, then left the scene. An autopsy found that he died of hypothermia and blunt force injuries to the head.

Read’s defense attorneys have long centered on allegations that the defendant was the subject of a cover-up.

Read has maintained her innocence. She pleaded not guilty to charges including second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and leaving the scene of a collision causing death.

During opening statements Tuesday in Norfolk County Superior Court in Dedham, special prosecutor Hank Brennan focused on numerous accounts Read has given in interviews with the media, in which he claims Read makes a series of “admissions.” Brennan announced his intent to present Read’s numerous statements to the media as important evidence in the Commonwealth’s case.

“You are going to hear from her own lips, and many of her statements, her admissions to her extraordinary intoxication. Her admissions to driving the Lexus. Her admissions to being angry at John that night,” he said.

Brennan directed the jury’s attention to a clip of the defendant’s interview from October 2024.

“I didn’t think I ‘hit him,’ hit him,” Read said in the interview. “But could I have clipped him, could I have tapped him in the knee and incapacitated him?”

Brennan told jurors they will see a host of video and DNA evidence during the trial, including what he said is DNA of O’Keefe’s hair recovered from Read’s bumper.

He also pointed to evidence pulled from Read’s Lexus, which he said will show that the defendant’s vehicle reversed at least 70 feet around the time of the alleged murder. Brennan repeatedly highlighted the broken taillight identified on the defendant’s vehicle as evidence that her Lexus struck O’Keefe.

Defense attorney Alan Jackson asserted in his opening statement that Read did not cause the death of O’Keefe.

“There was no collision with John O’Keefe,” Jackson repeated three times.

Jackson said the assertion that O’Keefe was struck by Read’s Lexus SUV is “contrary to science.”

“John O’Keefe did not die from being hit by a vehicle, period,” Jackson said.

Jackson promised to show the jury that the police investigation on which the Commonwealth has based its case is “riddled with errors.”

He made numerous references to personal relationships that investigating officers held with witnesses in this case, including Boston police officer Brian Albert, who owned the residence where O’Keefe was found dead on the lawn.

The attorney also criticized the involvement of former Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor, the lead investigator in the case. Jackson introduced Proctor as “a longtime family friend of the Alberts who has been disgraced by his own agency,” alluding to his dismissal by state police.

“You’ll see from the evidence in this case that this case carries a malignancy, one that is spread through the investigation,” Jackson said. “It’s spread through the prosecution from the very start, from the jump, a cancer that cannot be cut out, a cancer that cannot be cured, and that cancer has a name. His name is Michael Proctor.”

The attorney promised to show the jury personal text messages between Proctor and his high school friends, in which he made vulgar and sexist comments about Read. Jackson then alleged that Proctor admitted in the same text conversation to seizing the defendant’s cell phone without her permission and searching her phone for nude photos.

Proctor’s family responded to Jackson’s opening statement, calling it “yet another example of the distasteful, and shameless fabrication of lies that embodies their defense strategy” in a statement to ABC Boston affiliate WCVB.

“Jackson is under no oath to tell the truth; he does not have to speak in truths,” the statement continued. “The defense team continues to do anything to deflect from facts of the case and continues to use inappropriate analogies like casting someone as a cancer. We wholeheartedly believe the truth will prevail in this case, and justice for Officer John O’Keefe and his family will be achieved.”

The Commonwealth’s first witness, Timothy Nuttall, a Canton firefighter and paramedic who administered medical aid to O’Keefe, testified that he heard Read say, “I hit him,” at the scene.

“She said, ‘I hit him, I hit him, I hit him,'” Nuttall said. “I remember it very distinctly.”

In his cross-examination, Jackson focused on the witness’ ability to accurately recall details from that morning.

Jackson pointed to an inconsistency between Nuttall’s testimony in Read’s first trial, where he stated that Read said, “I hit him,” twice, and his statements Tuesday in court, where he now claims she repeated the statement three times.

“So your memory is clearer today, now, as you sit here, than it was a year ago, when you testified it was two times?” Jackson asked.

“Yes, sir,” Nuttall said with a nod.

The next witness, Kerry Roberts, testified that she saw Read point to an abnormality in the taillight of her SUV the morning that O’Keefe was found and that she recalled seeing a piece missing.

Roberts will resume her testimony on Wednesday. The trial is expected to last six to eight weeks.

Hours before the proceedings began on Tuesday, roughly two dozen protesters supporting Read gathered near the courthouse. Judge Beverly Cannone ordered a 200-foot no-protest zone around the courthouse in the interest of ensuring a fair trial.

A man “lingering and filming” within the buffer zone was arrested Tuesday morning after police say he ignored multiple requests to leave the zone, Massachusetts State Police said. The Arlington man was expected to be arraigned Tuesday on a trespassing charge, police said.

ABC News’ Nadine El-Bawab contributed to this report.

Rubio plans sweeping reorganization of the State Department

April 23, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(WASHINGTON) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Tuesday unveiled a sweeping plan to dramatically restructure the State Department that would see many of its longstanding offices and hundreds of positions eliminated.

“In its current form, the department is bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission in this new era of great power competition,” Rubio said in a statement. “The sprawling bureaucracy created a system more beholden to radical political ideology than advancing America’s core national interests.”

Officials familiar with the plans say Rubio’s vision involves reducing the number of offices within the State Department from 734 to 602 and eventually wiping out roughly 700 Washington-based positions for Foreign Service and Civil Service employees.

The officials said that the reductions would not be immediate, and that leaders within the department would have 30 days to analyze and implement the plan.

An updated organizational chart released by Rubio shows offices on the chopping block include those that fall under the department’s Bureau of Energy Resources and its Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, which is aimed at helping the federal government “better anticipate, prevent, and respond to conflict,” according to the department.

Other offices that would be eliminated under the plan include the Office of the Science and Technology Advisor to the Secretary, the Office of International Religious Freedoms, the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, the Office of Global Women’s Issues, the Office of Global Partnerships, and the Office of Global Criminal Justice, which is aimed at coordinating the government’s response to war crimes and promoting accountability for offenders.

Under the plan, the department will also combine two bureaus focused on arms control and eliminate units focused on countering violent extremism from the department’s counterterrorism bureau.

Officials also expect that several special envoys and their offices will be eliminated.

State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said that reorganization did not necessarily mean that the area of focus previously covered by an eliminated office was no longer a priority for the department.

“Certainly, all these issues are important,” Bruce said, adding that department would work at “blending” those topics within the new framework so they could be “dealt with as a whole.”

However, officials say that other reductions are planned for areas in the department that were not directly impacted by the reorganization, and that undersecretaries throughout the bureau have been instructed to draw up plans to reduce their personnel by 15% — a move that could lead to thousands of additional job cuts.

State Department leadership has been under increased pressure to reduce its workforce amid broader cuts across the federal government spearheaded by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

On Tuesday, Bruce downplayed the role DOGE had in the reorganization plans.

“We know the American people love the result of DOGE. I think there were some questions, perhaps, about how it was applied,” she said.

“I would say that DOGE is not in charge of this, but this is the result of what we’ve learned and the fact that we appreciate results,” Bruce added.

The Trump administration has been considering a budget proposal that would cut the State Department’s budget by roughly half, according to officials familiar with internal deliberations and documents reviewed by ABC News.

Rubio’s restructuring doesn’t address the department’s overseas operations, which officials say are also likely to undergo significant cuts in the coming months.

Supreme Court leans toward parents in dispute over LGBTQ storybooks in school

April 23, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Tuesday signaled that it is poised to establish a right of parents to opt-out their children from public school instruction that conflicts with sincerely held religious beliefs.

The case, brought by a group of Christian, Muslim and Jewish parents from Montgomery County, Maryland, specifically seeks a guaranteed exemption from the classroom reading of storybooks with LGBTQ themes, including same-sex marriage and exploration of gender identity.

The parents allege use of the books in elementary school curriculum — without an opportunity to be excused — amounts to government-led indoctrination about sensitive matters of sexuality. The school board insists the books merely expose kids to diverse viewpoints and ideas.

The justices engaged in spirited debate for more than 2 1/2 hours of oral arguments, wrestling with where to draw the line between exposure and coercion, which is forbidden under the First Amendment.

“Is merely being exposed to the reading of the book out loud coercion?” asked Justice Sonia Sotomayor of the parents’ attorney Eric Baxter. “Is looking two men getting married — is that the religious objection?”

“Our parents would object to that,” Baxter replied.

Several of the court’s conservative members suggested an opt-out for sensitive subjects should be common sense.

“I’m a bit mystified as a lifelong resident of the county how it came to this,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh. “I’m surprised that this is the hill we’re going to die on, in terms of not respecting religious liberty.”

In 2022, after introducing several LGBTQ-themed books into the language arts curriculum, the school board allowed parents to opt-out if the content was deemed objectionable as a matter of faith. One year later, officials reversed course and said an opt-out program had become unwieldy and ran counter to values of inclusion.

“I’m not understanding why it’s not feasible,” Kavanaugh said later. “The whole goal of some of our religious precedents is to look for the win/win.”

Justice Samuel Alito, who appeared most sympathetic to the parents, said he believes the five books in question — out of more than 100 in the school curriculum — “have a clear message” and that “a lot of people disagree with it.”

“What is the big deal about allowing them to opt out?” Alito asked Alan Schoenfeld, the county’s attorney. “Why is it not administrable? They are able to opt-out of the health class, right?”

Chief Justice John Roberts questioned whether elementary school students could realistically be assumed to understand that a presentation of the books was different than a teacher’s endorsement of them.

“I understand the idea when you’re talking about a sophomore, a junior, whatever, in high school,” Roberts said, “but I’m not sure that same qualifying factor applies when you’re talking about five-year-olds.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested the board may have exhibited discriminatory “hostility” toward religion in reversing course on the opt-outs, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett appeared inclined to believe the board’s distinct purpose was to coerce children into accepting beliefs about sexuality.

“It was part of the curriculum to teach them that boys can be girls or boys can — or that your pronouns can change depending on how you feel one day to the next?” Barrett asked skeptically.

“Federal courts are not meant to sit as school boards in deciding these curriculum disputes,” Schoenfeld said later, noting that the Montgomery County board was democratically elected by local residents.

The court’s three liberal justices all vigorously challenged the parents’ request in the case, seeing opt-out rights as a slippery slope.

Sotomayor said the list of potential religiously offensive content is limitless, from depictions of women who work, to stories involving divorce, pictures of interfaith marriage, even teachings around evolution.

Justice Elena Kagan said the constitutional right parents are claiming is remarkably broad. “I’m searching for what in the legal arguments would allow us to draw lines in this area, and I’m not finding it,” Kagan said. “It’ll be like opt-outs for everyone.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson worried aloud that a decision siding with the parents could have far-reaching implications beyond books.

She asked about a gay teacher with a photo of his wedding on a desk, or a student group putting “love is love” posters around the campus, or about exposure to a transgender student in the classroom, where a teacher refers to them by their preferred pronouns?

“Is it a burden for a religious student who is being taught at home and through their religion that gender is not a situation that can be changed … to be in a public school classroom where the teacher is referring to another student by what this student believes is the wrong pronoun?” Jackson asked.

“That would, in fact, constitute a burden on religious exercise,” replied Baxter, implying such a student might have a case for an opt-out.

A decision in the case is expected by the end of June.

Could the next pope be from Africa or Asia? Experts weigh in

April 23, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(VATICAN CITY) — Pope Francis marked multiple firsts for the papacy, becoming the first Latin American pope and the first from the Southern Hemisphere when elected in 2013.

He was also the first head of the Roman Catholic Church born outside of Europe in over a millennium.

Following his death on Monday at the age of 88, the selection process to elect the 267th pontiff will soon begin.

Ahead of the secretive gathering of eligible cardinals for the vote, questions swirl over whether the next pope will similarly come from outside Europe, such as Asia or Africa, and potentially be another history-making leader.

“I do think it’s fair to say that election of an archbishop from Asia or Africa is certainly a real probability now. That is not unthinkable at all,” Bruce Morrill, the Edward A. Malloy chair in Roman Catholic studies and distinguished professor of theology at Vanderbilt University, told ABC News. “That’s very different from when, let’s say, someone like John Paul II was elected. It was a big deal back in 1978 because he wasn’t Italian.”

“To move a couple papacies later to a man from Argentina — clearly, it’s reflecting more than ever a global church,” he added.

The election of someone from the Global South would be a “move in that direction of how to be a global church,” Jaisy A. Joseph, an assistant professor of theology and religious studies at Villanova University, told ABC News.

“That move from a Eurocentric church to a truly global church — I think that’s what Francis really inaugurated,” she said.

Pope Francis’ successor could be someone who continues his progressive legacy and mirrors his pastoral approach, or someone who counters it with a more conservative approach, experts say.

“Is he going to be someone who really strongly continues the primary emphases of the Francis papacy, or do they want to go with someone that they would see as bringing a balance or a certain pendulum swing, to use that language, in counter or contrast of priorities from the Francis papacy?” Morrill said.

Such a swing occurred when Pope Francis was elected, succeeding Pope Benedict XVI, Morrill noted.

“If the electors are going to turn to someone and discern the way to go is to continue, strongly, the priorities of the late Pope Francis, Tagle fits the bill,” Morrill said.

“He’s likewise someone who smiles readily and has this warm pastoral way,” he added. “That’s what makes him the figure that we would think of as providing the most continuity.”

If elected, Tagle would be the first Asian pope.

Should the voting cardinals move in a more conservative direction, a potential pope could be found in Sub-Saharan Africa, Morrill said. Such a move would make for the first Black pope in modern history.

“There would be archbishops, cardinal archbishops in Sub-Saharan Africa that are much more focused on preservation or guarding of the strict traditional practices and teachings of the church,” Morrill said.

One name that comes to mind for Morrill is Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo Besungu, 65, of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Other conservative candidates from Africa that could gain recognition include Ghanaian Cardinal Peter Turkson, 76, and Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah, 79, according to Miles Pattenden, historian of the Catholic Church at Oxford University.

Cardinals under the age of 80 are eligible to participate in the secret conclave inside the Sistine Chapel to choose the next pontiff, a gathering that typically commences between 15 to 20 days after the pope’s death.

A two-thirds majority is required to elect a pontiff.

Francis appointed roughly 80% of the cardinals who are eligible to vote for his successor, which could impact the selection of the next pope, Morrill said.

“He was advancing and choosing more and more people from Asia and Africa, and so that does all feed these distinct probabilities or possibilities,” Morrill said. “But there really is no way to make any solid prediction.”

The Pew Research Center found that under Francis, voting-age cardinals from the Asia-Pacific region increased 10%, and those from Sub-Saharan Africa went up 8%, while those from Europe decreased 51%.

In all, there are 53 cardinal electors from Europe, 23 from Asia, 18 from Africa, 17 from South America, 16 from North America, four from Central America and four from Oceania, according to the Vatican.

For Phyllis Zagano, the senior research associate-in-residence in Hofstra University’s Department of Religion, it’s unclear at the moment how that shift in makeup will impact the election of the next pope.

“The College of Cardinals has expanded significantly under Pope Francis, who has included cardinals from the farthest reaches of the world,” Zagano told ABC News. “Whether that will make any difference in the election of his successor remains to be seen.”

HHS, FDA move to phase out 8 artificial food dyes in the US

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration announced on Tuesday a series of measures to phase out eight artificial food dyes and colorings from America’s food supply by the end of next year.

Speaking at a news conference, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary said the agencies are looking to revoke authorization for two synthetic food colorings and to eliminate six remaining synthetic dyes used in cereal, ice cream, snacks, yogurts and more.

“Today, the FDA is taking action to remove petroleum-based food dyes from the U.S. food supply and from medications. For the last 50 years, American children have increasingly been living in a toxic soup of synthetic chemicals,” he told reporters. “The FDA is also announcing plans today to authorize four additional natural color additives using natural ingredients in the coming weeks, while also accelerating the review and approval of other natural ingredient colors.”

Makary claimed studies have found a like between petroleum-based synthetic dyes and health conditions, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, obesity, diabetes, cancer and gastrointestinal issues.

‘Why are we taking a gamble?” he said. “While America’s children are sick and suffering, 41% of children have at least have at least one health condition, and one in five are on medication. The answer is not more Ozempic, more ADHD medication and more antidepressants. There’s a role for those medications, but we have to look at underlying root causes.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was also due to speak at the news conference.

Former President Joe Biden’s administration in January started the process to ban one artificial dye, Red No. 3, which will need to be removed from food by January 2027 and from medications by 2028 because it was shown to cause cancer in rats.

Kennedy is now seeking to remove the six other petroleum-based dyes approved by the FDA. This includes Green No. 3, Citrus Red No. 2, Red No. 40, Orange B, Yellow No. 5, Yellow No. 6, Blue No. 1 and Blue No. 2. The agency is also taking steps to revoke the authorization for two synthetic food colorings — Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B — within the coming months.

The department is also authorizing four new natural color additives.

It is not yet clear what enforcement mechanism Kennedy will seek to implement the new changes.

The timeline to phase out synthetic dyes comes after Kennedy told food industry leaders at a meeting last month that he wanted their companies to remove artificial dyes from their products by the end of his four-year term, according to a memo describing the meeting, which was obtained by ABC News.

Kennedy’s announcement Tuesday speeds up that process — and alert companies that Kennedy intends to make good on his warning quickly.

From candy to breakfast cereal to medication, synthetic food dyes are in a wide range of products that Americans consume. Studies suggest their vibrant color makes food more appealing and could even increase appetite.

The health effects of the dyes are not fully understood, but many other countries have either banned the additives outright or required food packaging warning labels about the health risks.

All dyes have the potential to spark allergic reactions for a small minority. Several dyes have been linked to hyperactivity and behavioral problems in children or have been shown to cause cancer in mice or rats — but none have shown to cause cancer in humans.

Already, red and blue states alike have taken matters into their own hands in removing artificial food dyes from certain foods. Both West Virginia and California have passed laws to ban a handful of food dyes from school lunches, with plans to extend the ban to a broader, statewide level too.

In West Virginia, the ban on artificial dyes in school lunch will go into effect in August, making it the first state in the country to implement such restraints. In California, it will take effect in 2028.

Twenty-six other states, from Iowa to Washington and from to Texas to Vermont, are considering similar legislation around banning food dyes or other chemical additives in foods, according to a list compiled by the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization that focuses on chemicals and toxins.

The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment within California’s Environmental Protection Agency in 2021 concluded a two-year study into seven synthetic food dyes that found associations with certain neurobehavioral outcomes in some children.

Researchers also found that the FDA’s current level of “acceptable daily intake” levels for the dyes may be too high to protect children from the potential behavioral impact, the report said.

Tesla profits drop 71% amid anti-Musk backlash

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(NEW YORK) — Tesla’s profits fell 71% over the first three months of this year, a company earnings release on Tuesday showed. The company’s performance fell short of analysts’ expectations.

The decline coincided with a sales slump and stock woes at the electric carmaker, and comes amid worldwide protests against CEO Elon Musk over his role in the Trump administration

Total revenue decreased by 9% from one year earlier, to $19.3 billion, while revenue derived from car sales plunged 20% over the first three months of 2025 compared to a year ago, the earnings showed.

In a statement, Tesla cautioned about business impacts as result of the “current tariff landscape,” saying the company is “taking actions to stabilize the business in the medium to long-term and focus on maintaining its health.”

“Uncertainty in the automotive and energy markets continues to increase as rapidly evolving trade policy adversely impacts the global supply chain and cost structure of Tesla and our peers,” Tesla added.

The announcement holds implications for Musk, the world’s richest person, who derives much of his wealth from his Tesla holdings.

The new financial details arrive as some shareholders have called on Musk to step down from his White House role and return full-time to the helm of Tesla.

Musk, whose temporary status as a government employee expires next month, will likely face questions about his plans during a conference call with analysts after the earnings release.

“We view this as a fork-in-the-road time,” Dan Ives, a managing director of equity research at the investment firm Wedbush and a longtime Tesla booster, said in a memo to investors on Sunday.

Tesla shares have dropped in value by roughly half from an all-time high in December. Most of those losses have come since President Donald Trump took office and Musk began his controversial governmental cost-cutting efforts as the head of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Tesla remains a top electric carmaker but the company faces growing competition, especially from Chinese firms such as BYD.

Deliveries of Tesla vehicles over the first three months of 2025 dropped about 13% compared to the same period a year ago, the company said earlier this month.

When Tesla announced the decline in deliveries, the company made no mention of its CEO but did say that a “changeover of Model Y lines across all four of our factories led to the loss of several weeks of production in Q1,” but added that “the ramp of the New Model Y continues to go well.”

Tesla sold fewer cars in 2024 than it did the year prior, marking the company’s first year-over-year sales decline in more than a decade, earnings released in January showed.

As rivals have challenged Tesla’s dominance in the electric vehicle market, the company has promised a future revenue stream from autonomous taxis, also known as robotaxis.

Musk announced in late January that the company would roll out its robotaxi test program in Austin, Texas, in June. But within days, China-based competitor BYD unveiled advances in self-driving technology, which the company said was set to be included in models costing as little as $9,600.

Tesla boasts a more complete domestic supply chain than its rival U.S. carmakers but the company remains vulnerable to auto tariffs of the type President Trump imposed earlier this month, according to Musk.

“To be clear, this will affect the price of parts in Tesla cars that come from other countries. The cost impact is not trivial,” Musk said in a post on X in late March.

Gordon Johnson, CEO and founder of data firm GLJ Research, who is bearish on Tesla, voiced concerns about the company in a memo to investors on Monday, saying that the automaker faces a mix of “operational, financial, and reputational challenges.”

“Is Tesla facing an existential crisis?” Johnson added.

George Santos insists he’s ‘accepted full responsibility’ for crimes days before of sentencing

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(NEW YORK) — Disgraced former Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., insists he has “accepted full responsibility” for a series of fraudulent schemes despite a “social media blitz” that federal prosecutors said suggested otherwise.

Prosecutors repeated their request for a prison term of more than seven years when Santos is sentenced Friday, saying his recent social media posts show the 35-year-old Santos “remains unrepentant for his crimes.”

Santos, in a letter to the judge Tuesday, said he can be both “profoundly sorry” and upset by the Justice Department’s recommendation of a lengthy prison sentence.

“But saying I’m sorry doesn’t require me to sit quietly while these prosecutors try to drop an anvil on my head. True remorse isn’t mute; it is aware of itself, and it speaks up when the penalty scale jumps into the absurd,” Santos’ letter said.

“Ironically, the same political ambition that underpinned my own wrongdoing now seems to fuel the government’s overreach in this case,” hew wrote. “You’d think they might have learned something from the very person they chose to prosecute so vehemently!”

Santos included a selective chart to suggest the government’s sentencing recommendation is out of step with other political prosecutions, citing former Illinois Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. being sentenced to 30 months for misusing $750,000 in campaign funds or ex-New York Rep. Michael Grimm being sentenced to eight months for concealing $900,000 in wages and taxes.

Prosecutors alleged Santos, with the help of former Campaign Treasurer Nancy Marks, falsified Federal Election Commission filings, fabricating donor contributions and inflating fundraising totals to meet the $250,000 threshold required to join the National Republican Congressional Committee’s coveted “Young Guns” program. Marks pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing in June.

When informed he hadn’t reached the NRCC benchmark, Santos texted an associate, “We are going to do this a little differently. I got it.”

The “different” approach included submitting fake donations attributed to family members, fictitious individuals and even identities stolen from elderly supporters, according to the filing.

Santos pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in August 2024. He had already been expelled from Congress in December 2023.

Judge blocks use of Alien Enemies Act to remove noncitizens in Colorado

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s attempt to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua hit another legal roadblock Tuesday with a federal judge in Colorado blocking some removals under the wartime authority.

U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney issued a temporary order Tuesday that prohibits the administration from using the law to deport noncitizens currently within the state of Colorado, further requiring that noncitizens subject to the AEA removal receive at least three weeks’ notice before deportation..

The Trump administration last month touched off a legal battle when it invoked the Alien Enemies Act — an 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process — to deport two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.

An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that “many” of the men deported on March 15 lack criminal records in the United States — but said that “the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose” and “demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.”

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a subsequent 5-4 decision, allowed the Trump administration to resume deportations of alleged migrant gang members under the Alien Enemies Act — but said detainees must be given due process to challenge their removal.

The Colorado case is one of several lawsuits challenging the use of the AEA in Colorado, New York, and Texas, in which lawyers have argued that the Trump administration is shortchanging noncitizens by failing to provide them the “reasonable time” promised by the Supreme Court.

Judge Sweeney, in Tuesday’s order, criticized the Trump administration for attempting to remove two men in a manner she said is “deficient and fails to comport with due process.” According to the judge, the notices used by the Trump administration did not provide the men a reasonable amount of time to act on their due process and were only provided in English.

“The Court has grave concerns that Petitioners would be afforded notice that comports with due process to challenge the determination,” she wrote.

The judge also cast doubt on the legitimacy of President Donald Trump’s proclamation invoking the use of the Alien Enemies Act, writing that the plaintiffs were likely to prove that the proclamation violates Immigration and Nationality Act and humanitarian protections.

The Colorado ruling comes as a federal judge in New York is set to hear arguments Tuesday after he temporarily ruled that detained migrants being held in the Southern District of New York could not be deported without due process.

U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled earlier this month that several alleged Venezuelan gang members could not be deported under the AEA without them first receiving notice and an opportunity for a hearing.

Judge Hellerstein, in his temporary order blocking the deportations, suggested his decision was meant to define the parameters of the Supreme Court’s opinion requiring due process be granted.

The relief Hellerstein granted is limited to approximately a dozen migrants currently detained in a few New York counties.

Michigan Senate race heats up as 3 major Democrats enter the fray

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(WASHINGTON) — Michigan is set to face a competitive primary and fierce race for the battleground state’s open U.S. Senate seat in 2026.

Three major Democrats have already entered the contest, while Republicans eye flipping the seat, which will be vacated by retiring Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich.

The battleground state had mixed results for both parties in 2024, with President Donald Trump snagging a win in the presidential race and then-Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat, prevailing in the Senate race. Democrats hope to keep the open seat in their hands, while Republicans hope to flip it and add to their majority in the Senate.

Rep. Haley Stevens, a Democrat who represents Michigan’s 11th District, revealed on Tuesday that she will run for Senate, with an announcement focused on the state’s automobile industry and how it may be affected by tariffs imposed by the White House.

“Growing up in Michigan meant being surrounded by innovation, ingenuity and pride in hard work. And from our farmers to our nurses to our manufacturers, Michigan has the best workers in the world,” Stevens said in an announcement video posted on social media on Tuesday.

“But Donald Trump has a much different plan for Michigan,” she added.

“His chaos and reckless tariffs are putting tens of thousands of Michigan jobs at risk,” she said, adding that costs are rising “but all we’re getting is more chaos. What the heck are they doing?”

Stevens, first elected to the House in 2018, is a member of the House Education and Workforce Committee and the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. She also served as chief of staff of the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry during the Obama administration.

In 2022, she endured a competitive member-on-member primary against then-Rep. Andy Levin, although she was bolstered by outside support from pro-Israel groups. (The U.S.-Israel relationship is a hot-button issue in Michigan and became a wedge issue during the 2024 elections.)

She is set to face a competitive Democratic primary, which includes two other high-profile figures. (One key name took himself out of contention already: Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg ruled out a Senate bid in March.)

Abdul El-Sayed, the former director of the Wayne County, Michigan, health department and a former Michigan gubernatorial candidate, announced on Thursday he will run for the seat — and he netted a quick endorsement from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

“I’m running for U.S. Senate because in the state that built the ‘American dream,’ it shouldn’t be this hard just to get by,” El-Sayed said in an announcement video that opened with a fictional, old-style cartoon talking about his background.

“We’ve got to fight back hard against Trump and [Elon] Musk with a hell of a lot more than paper paddles and broken promises. … The disease is the corruption of our politics by billionaires and corporations, while the workers who built this country are forgotten,” he added in the announcement in clips that appear to be from a podcast taping.

Sanders, who has received renewed national attention in recent months as he attracts crowds on his nationwide “Fighting Oligarchy” speaking tour, endorsed El-Sayed the same day.

Earlier in April, Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow announced her own Senate bid.

In an announcement video, which opened with a montage of news clips about Trump and a clip of Musk’s viral moment in February holding a chainsaw, McMorrow said, “There are moments that will break you. This is not that moment. This moment will challenge us, test us. And if it all feels like too much? That’s they’re plan. They want to make you feel powerless. But you are not powerless.”

McMorrow entered the national spotlight after being baselessly accused of aiming to “groom and sexualize kindergartners” in a 2022 fundraising email sent out by a fellow state senator. She struck back in a now-viral floor speech, saying, “I am the biggest threat to your hollow, hateful scheme.”

In her announcement video, McMorrow framed the Trump administration as creating a fearful moment in time and said new leaders are needed — echoing a debate within the Democratic Party about whether it needs generational change at the top of the party.

“There’s a lot of fear and anger and uncertainty right now about people in power who frankly have no business being there. So you know what won’t fix it? The same old crap out of Washington,” McMorrow said, “We need new leaders because the same people in D.C. who got us into this mess are not going to be the ones to get us out of it.”

On the Republican side, the primary is still taking shape, but one major name has entered the fray.

Former Rep. Mike Rogers, who ran for Senate in Michigan in 2024 and narrowly lost to Slotkin, announced in mid-April that he would enter the race.

“The lessons I learned working on a factory floor, serving as an officer in the United States Army, and then as a federal agent protecting our communities, taking down drug dealers and gangsters — it taught me about grit and sacrifice,” Rogers said in an announcement video.

“I’ll stand with President Trump,” he added. “And we will deliver on the mandate given to him by the American people. … For me, it will always be America and Michigan first.”

Rogers also spoke about cutting costs and prices while bringing manufacturing jobs back to Michigan.

“I guarantee we’ll protect Social Security for our seniors,” Rogers added.

Notably, Rogers has received some key support from establishment Republicans — even though the primary field is not fully set. In a pair of statements released through the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., who is chairman of the NRSC, both endorsed Rogers.

3 federal prosecutors assigned to Eric Adams case resign, say they won’t admit to ‘wrongdoing’

April 22, 2025 by WDNY Radio

(NEW YORK) — Three federal prosecutors who worked on the corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams resigned Tuesday — while they were on administrative leave — instead of agreeing to “preconditions” on them returning to the office, sending a sharp letter to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and accusing him of pressuring them to falsely “express regret and admit some wrongdoing” in the case.

“The Department placed each of us on administrative leave ostensibly to review our, and the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney’s Office’s, handling of the Adams case,” the trio of prosecutors assigned to Adams’ case, Celia V. Cohen, Andrew Rohrbach and Derek Wikstrom, wrote to Blanche. “It is now clear that one of the preconditions you have placed on our returning to the Office is that we must express regret and admit some wrongdoing by the Office in connection with the refusal to move to dismiss the case. We will not confess wrongdoing when there was none.”

The three lawyers were part of a group in the Justice Department who refused to sign off on the dismissal of the bribery case against Adams in February. They were placed on administrative leave last month as an investigation played out.

“We have served under Presidents of both parties, advancing their priorities while pursuing justice without fear or favor,” the three prosecutors wrote. “The role of a career prosecutor is not to set policy. But a prosecutor must abide by the oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States and the rules of professional ethics set by the bar and the courts.”

They later added, “Now, the Department has decided that obedience supersedes all else, requiring us to abdicate our legal and ethical obligations in favor of directions from Washington. That is wrong.”

The fallout from acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove’s request that the Southern District of New York dismiss charges without prejudice began in mid-February. Danielle Sassoon, then-acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, resigned from her position Feb. 13 after suggesting DOJ leadership, including Bove, were explicitly aware of a quid pro quo suggested by Adams’ attorneys, saying Adams’ vocal support of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies would be boosted by dismissing the indictment against him.

“Rather than be rewarded, Adams’s advocacy should be called out for what it is: an improper offer of immigration enforcement assistance in exchange for a dismissal of his case,” Sassoon wrote at the time. “Although Mr. Bove disclaimed any intention to exchange leniency in this case for Adams’s assistance in enforcing federal law, that is the nature of the bargain laid bare in Mr. Bove’s memo.”

Five other DOJ officials would join Sassoon in resigning from the office in protest, while at least six top Department of Justice officials refused to sign onto the case’s dismissal, sources told ABC News last month.

Adams was indicted last year in the Southern District of New York on five counts in an alleged long-standing conspiracy connected to improper benefits, illegal campaign contributions and an attempted cover-up. He had pleaded not guilty.

The dismissal paperwork was later signed by an attorney in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, leaving the decision to dismiss the case to a federal judge in New York.

On April 2, Judge Dale Ho officially dismissed the case, however, he did so with prejudice, meaning the charges cannot be revived. The DOJ had asked for the charges to be dismissed without prejudice and said they could be brought against Adams again following the November mayoral election.

But three weeks later, the fallout continued with Tuesday’s letter.

The three prosecutors ended their letter to Blanche: “Serving in the Southern District of New York has been an honor. There is no greater privilege than to work for an institution whose mandate is to do the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons. We will not abandon this principle to keep our jobs. We resign.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York declined to comment.

+ More