Politics

(WASHINGTON) — As the war with Iran enters its fourth week, Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said the Trump administration must make its objectives of the operation clearer before Congress approves additional funding.

“What is the objective, the primary objective?” ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl asked Tillis in an interview that aired Sunday.

“I don’t know, and I think it’s a real problem,” the North Carolina senator said.

Praising last summer’s “Operation Midnight Hammer” when the U.S. military struck Iran’s nuclear facilities, Tillis said he “could see why we needed to finish some of the work and go back in,” but the weeks-long operation now is “ambiguous.” 

“I don’t know what our long-term strategic goals are, but we’re going to need to know that,” Tillis said. “I generally support what the president’s doing in Iran, but if we’re going to get anything close to the $200 billion supplemental request, we got to get 60 votes, and we’re going to have to figure out how to accomplish that.”

The Pentagon is seeking $200 billion in funding, according to a senior administration official. While he said the topline number could move, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth confirmed Thursday that the department will request additional funding for the war, saying, “It takes money to kill bad guys.”

As the war rages on, Iran continues to block the critical Strait of Hormuz. A significant share of the world’s oil passes through the strait each day, and the blockage has surged global oil prices. Gas prices in the U.S. are up $1 per gallon on average since the war began Feb. 28, according to GasBuddy.

“Can’t all of a sudden walk away”
President Donald Trump has mused about “winding down” the war soon and last week he suggested in a social media post that he may pull out of Iran before the Strait of Hormuz issues are resolved.

“I wonder what would happen if we ‘finished off’ what’s left of the Iranian Terror State, and let the Countries that use it, we don’t, be responsible for the so called ‘Strait?’ That would get some of our non-responsive ‘Allies’ in gear, and fast!!!” Trump posted Wednesday.

Tillis was critical of that option, arguing leaving the strait as it is harms U.S. allies in the region.

“We have a number of partners and allies in the region whose economic fortunes rests on the Strait of Hormuz being open,” Tillis said. “We’ve decided that we’re going to project power and try and produce good outcomes in the Middle East. You can’t all of a sudden walk away after you’ve kind of created the event and expect other people to pick it up and leave — and leave a good taste in their mouth.”

After Trump lashed out U.S. allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for not assisting the U.S. with opening the Strait of Hormuz, labeling them “cowards,” Tillis — the co-chair of the Senate NATO Observer Group — defended those allies’ decisions.

“I don’t think that they’re cowards. I think they’re people that weren’t consulted on a major military operation, and I’d have the same reaction if I was the head of state,” Tillis said.

“These folks love the United States,” he added. “But they don’t appreciate the way they’re being treated right now. And I can, I can absolutely understand that.”

“American lives will be lost” without NATO
The North Carolina Republican also pushed back on Trump’s recent suggestion that he could leave NATO without consulting Congress. 

“Well, that’s factually not true. The president of the United States cannot withdraw from NATO,” Tillis said. “American lives have been saved by the NATO alliance, and American lives will be lost without it.”

In June, Tillis announced he would not seek reelection this year. No longer concerned with having to run a campaign, the self-described “plain-spoken” senator has become even more so.

He didn’t vote for the Republicans’ tax overhaul and spending cuts bill. He’s not planning to vote for the “SAVE America Act,” a Trump priority. He called out Trump’s Justice Department for seeking indictments against Democrats Trump accused of seditious behavior for posting a video telling service members not to follow illegal orders, and he’s threatening to hold up any nominee to the Federal Reserve until the DOJ ends its probe of Chair Jerome Powell.

But no members of Trump’s administration have received more criticism from Tillis than Stephen Miller, the deputy chief of staff to the president and one of his top advisers on immigration, and outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Tillis has called the pair “sycophants” and called for Trump to fire Noem, which he ultimately did.

The president has praised Miller over the years. In October, he said he was “doing an unbelievable job” and told him, “The people of this country love you.” 

But Tillis said he doesn’t think Miller is “particularly loyal” to the president.

“If the president thinks that Stephen Miller is worried about [Trump’s] legacy, he’s fooling himself. Stephen Miller is worried about his own legacy,” Tillis said.

A “healthy” relationship with Trump
Still, Tillis told Karl he believes he has a “healthy relationship” with the president.

“There are aspects about this president that I admire and will always admire, but I do not admire bad advice, and I hate bad execution, and when I see it and I think it’s undermining the president of the United States’ agenda, then I’m going to call them out,” he said.

Tillis said his motivation for criticizing the administration and some of its policies are to help Republicans perform well in this year’s midterm elections.

“I’m not trying to undermine Republicans. I’m trying to undermine efforts that are going to make it very difficult for Republicans to get elected in November,” he said.

Asked by Karl why he feels liberated to speak out since announcing his retirement, Tillis had a simple answer.

“When people have said, ‘You seem a little bit more liberated.’ I said, ‘No, s—, Sherlock,'” Tillis said. “I no longer have to view things through a political lens.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump said on Saturday that he is ready to deploy Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to U.S. airports starting Monday if Democrats don’t agree to a funding package to end the Department of Homeland Security shutdown.

“I look forward to moving ICE in on Monday, and have already told them to, ‘GET READY.’ NO MORE WAITING, NO MORE GAMES!” the president wrote in a post to his social media platform.

In an earlier social media post on Saturday, Trump wrote that unless Democrats “immediately sign an agreement” he will move to deploy ICE agents into American airports and conduct security enforcement “like no one has ever seen before.”

Trump said that operations would include immigration enforcement. It’s currently unclear what security roles, exactly, ICE agents will take on in airports.

The White House referred ABC News back to the president’s post when asked what capacity Americans can expect to see ICE operating in at airports.

Trump’s statements come after Democrats on Friday blocked legislation to reopen DHS for the fifth time since the partial shutdown began in mid-February.

Democrats have demanded changes to policy surrounding ICE and Customs and Border Protection in exchange for votes to fund all of the department. Republicans, meanwhile, have rejected Democratic efforts to fund other agencies in DHS like the Coast Guard, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Thousands of TSA employees have now missed their first full paychecks, and travelers are facing long lines at airports around the country.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, during an appearance on Fox News earlier Saturday, called on Democrats to negotiate with Republicans.

“I just wish they would stop using the American people as leverage. Make them go through pain so Democrats can get what they want legislatively,” Duffy said. 

On Capitol Hill, in a rare Saturday morning press conference, Senate Majority Leader John Thune also urged Democrats to agree to a funding deal.

“At some point, the Democrats are going to have to take yes for an answer. I know they think this is politically good for them. It is not,” Thune, R-S.D., said.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers met behind closed doors with White House border czar Tom Homan throughout the week. The latest meeting concluded late Friday night.

“We need to get the government open and we’ll keep talking until it has,” Homan told ABC News after the meeting.

Thune said he believed that meeting was “productive” and confirmed that the Trump administration added to its offer on DHS funding and submitted legislative text, though lawmakers have not publicly discussed what the new offer from the White House entails.

Thune said he hopes additional meetings take place over the weekend.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, in speech on the Senate floor on Saturday, urged Republicans to support a Democratic effort to fund TSA while other negotiations continue.

“It is unacceptable for workers and travelers and entire airports to get taken hostage in political games, but that’s what the Republicans are doing,” Schumer, D-N.Y., said.  

“It is unacceptable to say we will only pay TSA workers if it is attached to a bill that funds ICE with no reforms, but that’s what the Republicans have been doing. Democrats want to pay TSA workers ASAP, with no strings attached,” Schumer added.

Schumer said Democrats are “having productive conversations on reforming ICE and CBP” but that the process is “ongoing.”

“But we must fund TSA now. Let us keep negotiating the outstanding issues with ICE, but let us start sending paychecks to TSA workers now. Let us end the long lines at the airport now,” Schumer said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Democrats once again on Friday blocked a funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security on Friday as they continue to insist on reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection in exchange for funding the agency.

It marks the fifth time since the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security — which began in mid-February — that the funding bill has failed to be advanced in the Senate.

The vote comes as many federal workers continue to go unpaid and travelers face massive lines at airports as Transportation Security Administration employees working without pay call out.

The bill that Republicans put forward on Friday to fund all of DHS would have needed 60 votes to advance. It fell short by a vote of 47-37.  

Parts of DHS — from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to the Transportation Security Administration — are shut down amid a funding fight over ICE.

Democrats have said they will fund the department only if changes are made to the agency in the wake of the shooting deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal law enforcement in Minneapolis earlier this year.

Democrats said that they will continue to block funding until their demands on body cameras, judicial warrants and unmasking officers are met.

“Democrats have been very clear what we are asking for here since late January, and our asks have not changed,” Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a speech on the Senate floor Friday.

There are signs of potential progress though as Border Czar Tom Homan met with a bipartisan group of lawmakers on Capitol Hill Thursday to discuss DHS funding, and Majority Leader John Thune told ABC News that there will be another meeting between lawmakers and Homan later Friday.

These meetings follow repeated demands by Democrats for the White House to engage in the negotiations over ICE reform.

Thune said that Friday’s meeting with Homan would be critical in determining whether there could be movement on funding.

“We’re going to find out if Dems are serious. There were a couple of areas yesterday that they had identified, in additions to some of the, you know, reforms the administration had recommended that to me could find a path forward,” Thune said. “The question is, are Dems serious? Or do they see this as a political issue and something that benefits them.”

Murray, who was part of the negotiations with Homan Thursday, said that the conversations were “productive,” but that the “basic challenges remain.” She said that Democrats remain “very far apart” from Republicans and the White House on a path forward.

With long airport security lines plaguing travelers across the country, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are feeling the heat to hammer out a deal. 

“This needs to be resolved,” Democratic Sen. Mark Warner said. “I mean, there are genuine disputes about ICE reforms. I think no one wants to see a return of what we saw in Minneapolis. But that doesn’t mean we should be holding the rest of these federal employees hostage again.”

As negotiations continue there have been efforts by Democrats to fund other agencies in DHS other than ICE — like the Coast Guard, TSA, Federal Emergency Management Agency and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. But Republicans have blocked those efforts, saying that Democrats need to negotiate a full funding package rather than taking a piecemeal approach.

“Democrats have tried again and again to get paychecks to TSA and CISA and the Coast Guard and FEMA — agencies that are doing really important work right now,” Murray said. “The only reason these workers are going without pay right now is because Republicans are holding their funding hostage so they can try to give ICE even more money without including any necessary reforms.”

While there is some FY2026 funding for ICE, the agency received a $75 billion infusion of funding over the next decade through the already-passed “Big Beautiful Bill.”

Democrats are expected to continue efforts to fund these agencies, including TSA, while negotiations proceed. But right now, it does not seem that Republicans are open to this approach.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump made a stunning reversal Friday by again backing a Colorado House Republican for reelection a month after he publicly scorned him and endorsed his opponent.

In a lengthy social media post, Trump said he would no longer back Hope Scheppelman’s bid in the Republican primary for Rep. Jeff Hurd’s seat in Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, after she accepted an offer to join his administration. 

“Together with them, we decided that Congressman Jeff Hurd, of Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, should in no way, shape, or form, be impeded from winning the District in that the Democrat alternative is a DISASTER for our Country,” he said in his social media post. 

In February, Trump withdrew his endorsement of Hurd, lashing out against him in a social media post after he voted to rebuke the president’s tariffs on Canada.

“Hurd is one of a small number of Legislators who have let me and our Country down,” Trump said in the February social media post.

In Friday’s announcement, the president changed his mind.

“Every true MAGA supporter and Republican, if they truly care about saving our Country, will do everything in their power to unify together, and defeat the Crazed Radical Left Democrats this November,” he said.

The district has been red since 2011, and has traditionally been seen as a strong Republican area.

Trump said he spoke with Scheppelman, a Navy veteran and nurse, and her husband, about his decision and offered both of them positions in his administration in a “capacity to be determined.”

“Hope and Steven are wonderful and patriotic Veterans of our U.S. Navy, and loyal supporters of our Historic MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN Movement,” Trump said in the post. 

Hurd thanked Trump for the endorsement in an X post Friday.

“The President and I share the same goals: securing the border, American energy dominance, and helping working families,” he said.

Scheppelman, whose social media pages feature a picture of her and Trump posing with thumbs-up signs, said in a statement on X that she would suspend her campaign given Trump’s request.

She said Hurd “now has the opportunity to correct his naive voting record and support President Trump, and our slim Republican majority in the U.S. House, in our shared battle to save the country we love.”

“If he does not, I will run again in 2028 and defeat [Hurd] in order to give the citizens of Colorado’s 3rd district, and all of America, the representation we deserve,” Scheppelman added.

Trump’s involvement a welcome development for House Republicans and Speaker Mike Johnson protecting a historically small majority this fall.

By backing Hurd, the GOP avoids another contentious primary in a long red district, as the incumbent is running unopposed.

Alex Kelloff, a Democratic candidate running for the House seat, responded to the president’s announcement Friday on X.  

“Trump is worried we’re going to win this seat, a testament to all the work our campaign has been doing the last 11 months,” he said. 

The Colorado primary is set for June 30.

-ABC News’ Benjamin Siegel contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Three Navy ships carrying 2,200 Marines left San Diego earlier this week for a previously scheduled deployment to the Indo-Pacific, but two U.S. officials tell ABC News their ultimate destination is likely the Middle East.

The 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) is aboard the USS Boxer, the USS Comstock and the USS Portland — along with 2,000 sailors.

If it receives final orders to the Middle East, joining the 31st MEU, it will be an increase of close to 9,000 additional forces to the region.

The 31st MEU is still on its way to the Middle East from Asia after receiving orders from the Pentagon last Friday. Those Marines and ships are likely to arrive in the region sometime next week.

It will take two weeks for the USS Boxer Amphibious Ready Group to get to southeast Asia, then additional time to make its way to the Middle East if it gets final orders to go there.

Included in the MEU: ground forces, a logistical element and aviation units that include fighter jets, MV-22 Ospreys and attack helicopters.

Last week’s deployment of the 31st MEU to the Middle East has sparked speculation as to whether they might be used to seize Kharg Island in the Persian Gulf — crucial to Iran’s oil trade — or carry out raids on the Iranian shoreline around the Strait of Hormuz.

For now, the U.S. Navy Third Fleet says the 11th MEU is conducting routine operations in its area of operations.

“An integral part of U.S. Pacific Fleet, U.S. 3rd Fleet operates naval forces in the Indo-Pacific to conduct routine training that ensures the continued warfighting readiness of Navy and Marine forces operating in the area,” the U.S. Navy Third Fleet said in a statement. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Traumatic brain injuries are quickly emerging as the signature wound of the U.S. war with Iran so far, echoing a pattern of post-9/11 wars, according to a U.S. official.

More than 200 U.S. troops have so far been wounded in the war, and at least 140 of those were TBI-related injuries, the U.S. official said. It’s a surge being driven by Iran’s reliance on one-way attack drones and the concussive blasts they deliver in strikes against American troops in countries across the Middle East, including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

Symptoms of TBI can be subtle at first but often linger for years, or even a lifetime, ranging from persistent headaches, fatigue, dizziness and vertigo, to more severe cognitive effects like memory loss, impaired decision-making and difficulty concentrating.

Veterans with TBIs are also nearly twice as likely to die by suicide compared to veterans without a diagnosed brain injury, according to data from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

“If they’re near a blast, there should be no doubt they have a TBI,” Dr. Jayna Moceri-Brooks, who studies combat-related brain injuries, said. “You can’t escape from blast overpressure … symptoms can be debilitating.”

ABC News reached out to the Pentagon for comment.

TBIs have been widely seen as a signature wound of the post-9/11 wars, as insurgent tactics have relied on explosives to target U.S. troops. More than 460,000 service members were diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries between 2001 and 2023, according to VA data. 

While such injuries have been suffered in warfare for generations, it wasn’t until 2011, nearly a decade into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that the Army formally made TBIs eligible for the Purple Heart. 

After Iran launched 15 ballistic missiles at U.S. forces at Al Asad Air Base in Iraq in January 2020, in retaliation for the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the first Trump administration initially said no troops had been injured.

That assessment was slowly revised by the administration, first minimizing the scope of the damage before ultimately acknowledging that 110 service members had been wounded, most suffering traumatic brain injuries, the kind of blast-related wounds that can carry lasting, life-altering effects.

In the years since the attack, Staff Sgt. Aaron Futrell, 44, who served in the Ohio Army National Guard, who was near one of the missile strikes at Al Asad, has wrestled with a cascade of lingering symptoms. What were once daily, debilitating migraines have only recently subsided to once or twice a week with treatment through the VA. He still deals with memory lapses, describing his cognition at times as “buffering like a YouTube video,” struggling mid-sentence to find the right words.

The first year after his injury proved especially grueling. Futrell said he was often overcome by extreme fatigue, going straight to bed after work and feeling as though he “lost a year” of his life. He was medically discharged from the Guard, where he served in aviation operations, and was given a high disability compensation rating from the VA.

Even routine settings can present challenges. Loud, echoing environments, like his son’s school, can trigger headaches, at times forcing him to sit out events from his car.

“I limit myself to some places,” Futrell said. “It’s learning what places might trigger headaches or be stress-inducing.”

The toll extends beyond his own health. “It has been a huge strain on my family and me,” he said. “I don’t look disabled. I can act like a normal individual. I’m good until I’m not.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — In his opening statement to the House Oversight Committee, Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime attorney Darren Indyke claimed that he had “no knowledge whatsoever” of the late financier’s crimes and categorically denied facilitating the sex trafficking of women.

“I’m left trying to explain what many people who knew Jeffrey Epstein have noted after his death: he led two entirely separate lives, his professional one and the other, a private, personal one that caused many others to suffer,” Indyke said on Thursday, according to his prepared remarks obtained by ABC News. “That I did not know what my client did in his private life may be difficult for some to believe, but it is true.”

Indyke addressed some of the allegations levied against him in civil lawsuits filed after Epstein’s death, including that he withdrew hundreds of thousands in cash for Epstein and coordinated sham marriages to keep victims in the United States.

According to Indyke, he never tried to “structure” cash withdrawals to avoid triggering an alert to the Treasury Department. He seemingly acknowledged that he did withdraw thousands for Epstein, arguing that the sex offender required large amounts of cash because he had trouble obtaining credit cards from major banks.

“For a person in Mr. Epstein’s financial position – with five multimillion-dollar residences staffed by dozens of employees and with an extensive travel itinerary – it did not strike me as unusual that Mr. Epstein’s business, household and personal needs required large amounts of cash on a regular basis,” he said. “I never believed that cash that I withdrew for Mr. Epstein and his staff was used by Mr. Epstein or his staff for any improper purposes.”

Indyke also said he never did “arrange, assist or facilitate any marriages between acquaintances of Mr. Epstein.” Multiple now-settled lawsuits alleged that he assisted with at least three marriages to keep Epstein’s victims in the United States.

“I did not consider it appropriate to interrogate anyone as to the reasons for their decisions to marry or the bona fides of their relationships,” Indyke said in his remarks.

Indyke claimed that he would have quit working for Epstein had he known about his abuse and trafficking of women and girls. According to Indyke, Epstein vowed to never commit another crime after his 2008 guilty plea.

“After he pled guilty in 2008 to procuring a person under the age of 18 for prostitution, Mr. Epstein appeared to me to be devastated and extremely contrite,” Indyke said. “He was adamant that he had no idea anyone involved was underage, and personally assured me he would never again let himself be in that position. I believed him, and I made the mistake of believing Mr. Epstein that he would not again commit a crime. I deeply regret doing so. Most importantly, I feel horrible for those women whom Mr. Epstein abused.”

Indyke served as Epstein’s longtime attorney since the mid-1990s.

As Epstein for years attempted to avoid scrutiny while orchestrating a notorious sex trafficking operation, Indyke — together with accountant Richard Kahn — allegedly helped him navigate legal issues and formed part of the financier’s inner circle. Indyke allegedly helped facilitate at least three sham marriages between Epstein’s victims and withdrew hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash for Epstein, according to one lawsuit, and attested to Epstein’s character when he faced legal scrutiny.

“Knowing that they would earn millions of dollars in exchange for facilitating Epstein’s sex abuse and trafficking, Indyke and Kahn chose money and power over following the law,” alleged one lawsuit that Indyke and Kahn agreed to settle with no admission of wrongdoing.

Neither man has been charged with any crimes. They both deny any wrongdoing and say they were unaware of Epstein’s crimes while working for him.

The deposition Thursday comes as the House Oversight Committee attempts to zero in on members of Epstein’s inner circle to better understand how the disgraced financier was able to commit decades of crime with seeming impunity.

Following higher profile depositions of people like billionaire Leslie Wexner as well as Bill and Hillary Clinton, the questioning of both Indyke and Kahn arguably presents the committee with their strongest opportunity to learn more about Epstein’s life and crimes.

“I was not aware of the nature or extent of Epstein’s abuse of so many women until after Epstein’s death,” Kahn told lawmakers last week, according to his prepared remarks. “However, it pains me to think, and I deeply regret, that I may have unknowingly assisted Epstein in any way.”

Executor of Epstein’s Trust 

In a will signed two days before he was found dead in a Manhattan jail cell, Epstein named Kahn and Indyke as the co-executors of his estate and bequeathed them $25 million and $50 million, respectively. At the time of his death, Epstein’s estate was valued as much as $650 million. It was last valued at approximately $127 million, according to an October 2025 court filing, after paying out multiple settlements to Epstein’s victims.

As co-executors of Epstein’s estate, Indyke and Kahn recently agreed to settle a proposed class-action lawsuit brought by Epstein’s victims that accused them of “facilitation, participation, and concealment of Epstein’s illegal conduct” for their own financial gain.

According to the lawsuit, both men helped “structure Epstein’s bank accounts and cash withdrawals to give Epstein and his associates access to large amounts of cash in furtherance of sex trafficking.”

“The Epstein Enterprise would not have existed for the duration it did and at its scope and scale, without the collaboration and support of others. No one, except perhaps Ghislaine Maxwell, was as essential and central to Epstein’s operation as these Defendants,” the lawsuit alleged.

The settlement did not include an admission of wrongdoing and still needs to be approved by a judge.  Though the lawsuit was brought against them personally, the $25-35 million settlement would be paid by Epstein’s estate, according to the settlement terms.

“Neither Mr. Indyke nor Mr. Kahn socialized with Mr. Epstein, and both men reject as categorically false any suggestion that they knowingly facilitated or assisted Mr. Epstein in his sexual abuse or trafficking of women, or that they were aware of his actions while they provided professional services to him,” an attorney for the men told ABC News in December.

Allegedly arranged sham marriages

In a lawsuit filed by government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Indyke and Kahn were alleged to have helped facilitate at least three sham marriages created to secure immigration status for some of Epstein’s victims, further securing control of the women and ensuring they could remain in the United States.  

“The victims were coerced into participating in these arranged marriages, and understood that there would be consequences, including serious reputational and bodily harm, if they refused to enter a marriage or attempted to end it,” the complaint alleged.

According to a civil lawsuit filed in 2019 by an anonymous accuser, one woman alleged that Epstein’s longtime attorney — not explicitly named as Indyke in the lawsuit — helped prepare the legal paperwork for the marriage, going as far as arranging photographs “to give the appearance that the marriage was legitimate.”

“When the victim inquired about getting divorced … Indyke tried to talk her out of a divorce and threatened that she would lose Epstein’s protection,” a 2024 lawsuit alleged.

Files released earlier this year by the Department of Justice appeared to reference some of the marriages allegedly arranged by Indyke and Kahn.

“Good morning Jeffrey! We are going now to get marriage license,” an unidentified individual wrote Epstein in 2013. “She is asking if it’s possible to meet with you? Because she has some questions.”  

Withdrawing thousands in cash 

Court filings as well as documents released by the Department of Justice suggested that both Indyke and Kahn played integral roles in managing Epstein’s wealth and overseeing his regular expenses, including alleged payments to women.

According to the Virgin Islands lawsuit — which was settled by the Epstein estate with no admission of wrongdoing — Indyke and Kahn allegedly arranged payments from Epstein’s personal, corporate and nonprofits bank accounts to victims. That lawsuit alleged that Epstein — together with Kahn and Indyke — managed more than 140 different bank accounts.

According to documents released by the DOJ, Indyke served as an officer for many of the holding and shell companies related to Epstein’s real estate and financial holdings.

A 2020 settlement between Deutsche Bank and the New York state financial regulator also suggested that an attorney for Epstein — who sources told ABC News is Indyke — methodically withdrew cash for Epstein in a manner they said intentionally avoided scrutiny.

Limiting the withdrawals to $7,500 in cash — the maximum amount permitted and below the threshold to trigger concerns — Indyke allegedly withdrew hundreds of thousands of dollars for Epstein over four years. While the transactions were below the $10,000 limit to trigger an alert to the Treasury Department, a report by New York State’s Department of Financial Services faulted Deutsche Bank for ignoring red flags about Epstein’s bank accounts.

Jail visits and a character reference 

After securing a plea deal in Florida, Jeffrey Epstein was visited in jail frequently by Indyke, according to visitor logs maintained by the Palm Beach Sheriff. Indyke also helped secure a lenient work-release program for Epstein by vouching for his employment, allowing Epstein to leave the jail for up to 16 hours a day, ABC News reported in 2021.

Prior to Epstein’s plea deal, Indyke also attested to Epstein’s character. According to a letter sent from defense lawyers to prosecutors in Florida, Indyke vouched for Epstein’s character and claimed that Epstein provided financial and emotional support to his family.

“Although Jeffrey was adamant that we owed him nothing, Jeffery honored us by agreeing to be the godfather of our children,” the letter quoted Indyke. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Thursday that the Pentagon will be asking Congress for more money to cover the Iran war, saying he wants to ensure current and future costs are covered “above and beyond.”

A senior administration official confirmed that a $200 billion request was sent from the Pentagon to the White House on Wednesday. The Washington Post first reported the request.

It was not clear whether the White House had formally submitted the request to Congress as of Thursday morning or what kind of reception it would have among lawmakers, who remain deeply divided on President Donald Trump’s decision to attack Iran.

The conflict began Feb. 28 after negotiations on its nuclear and ballistic missile program failed, and the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes. In its third week, the U.S. says it’s destroyed more than 7,800 military targets, 120 Iranian ships and 11 submarines.

Pentagon officials told a group of senators in a closed-door briefing earlier this month that the war in Iran cost at least $11.3 billion in its first six days.

When asked about the $200 billion request, Hegseth didn’t confirm the total, saying that the number “could move.”

“As far as $200 billion, I think that number could move. Obviously it takes, it takes money to kill bad guys,” Hegseth said in a news conference Thursday morning. “So we’re going back to Congress and our folks there to ensure that we’re properly funded for what’s been done, for what we may have to do in the future, ensure that our ammunition is — everything’s refilled, and not just refilled, but above and beyond.”

Wartime supplementals are used to ensure the military remains ready to handle other potential conflicts and to replenish stockpiles spent on the ongoing mission.

Asked about the $200 billion request on Thursday, Trump said “we’re asking for a lot of reasons beyond even what we’re talking about in Iran.”

“So we’re in very good shape, but we want to be in the best shape. The best shape we’ve ever been in,” Trump said.

House leadership has not received a formal defense supplemental request from the Trump administration, according to a source familiar with the details.

Asked about the amount, Speaker Mike Johnson said Congress has a commitment to “adequately fund defense.”

“I’m sure it’s not a random number, so we’ll look at that,” Johnson said Thursday morning. “But obviously it’s a dangerous time in the world, and we have to adequately fund defense, and we have a commitment to do that.”

As of Wednesday night, several Senate appropriators, including Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, said they had not yet seen the request.

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations committee, said she had not seen the funding request, and would need details to be provided.

“We have not seen that request, and I will tell you that this administration needs to tell Congress definitely what they’re doing and how long this is going to take. There is no goal here, and we’re not going to write them a blank check,” Murray said.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who is on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, told reporters on Thursday morning that to her knowledge the Pentagon has not made a request to Congress.

“What we have is a number that we have heard the White House presented to the Pentagon. So far as I know it has not been presented to us in Congress. So it needs to not only be presented, the amount, but also the rationale behind it,” Murkowski said.

The money that has so far been spent to fund operations in Iran comes out of Pentagon funds already allocated by Congress. Congress has not yet approved any additional funding for the war with Iran.

The funding request also indicates plans for a longer war — after Trump has previously said the war would last four to five weeks. The president has also brushed off that timeline, saying “whatever it takes.”

ABC News’ Lauren Peller contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(MONTGOMERY, Ala.) — The former Alabama Supreme Court justice who wrote the controversial ruling that temporarily halted in vitro fertilization services two years ago is running for state attorney general — and a group of conservative IVF parents is banding together to try to stop him.

Jay Mitchell wrote the majority opinion in a ruling that classified frozen embryos as people, prompting three of the state’s largest IVF treatment providers to halt care out of fear of wrongful death lawsuits when handling embryos.

“Unborn children are ‘children’ … without exception based on developmental stage, physical location, or any other ancillary characteristics,” Mitchell wrote in the majority ruling in 2024.

The decision led to widespread public outcry and an effort at the Alabama statehouse to pass a bill protecting IVF treatments. Republican Gov. Kay Ivey signed the bill shortly after the legislature passed it.

In the aftermath of the ruling, a group of parents who relied on in vitro fertilization to build their families created “Alabama Families for IVF,” a conservative grassroots coalition. The group is now airing ads against Mitchell in the state, voiced by Annie Hensler, who became a mother through IVF, though they have not yet endorsed a specific candidate.

“The attorney general’s office is a very powerful position, and we cannot have someone in that position that has this kind of judgment,” Katelanne Fadalla, an IVF parent who chairs the group, told ABC News.

Alabama’s attorney general would be responsible for enforcing state laws, including those related to reproductive health.

“We cannot risk having someone in office with this much influence over Alabama legislation who has already demonstrated that they cannot think through the consequences of the words that they write,” she added.

In a statement to ABC, Mitchell said, “I support IVF. My opinion protected IVF families and upheld Alabama law, but woke liberals and my political opponents continue to push lies about this case because they know I will fearlessly advance President Trump’s agenda as Alabama’s next Attorney General.”

Fadalla said she was preparing for her first consultation about IVF when news of the ruling broke in 2024.

“It was absolutely devastating,” she said.

“The opinion that came out of the Supreme Court from Jay Mitchell was not only extremely disruptive, but it was devastating to families across the state of Alabama during a time when all we are trying to do is grow our families,” Fadalla said.

In an ad airing across the state, the group accuses Mitchell of going against President Donald Trump, who declared his support for IVF after the 2024 ruling and called on the state legislature “to act quickly to find an immediate solution to preserve the availability of IVF in Alabama.”

“We want to make it easier for mothers and fathers to have babies, not harder — you know that. That includes — and you saw this was a big deal over the last few days — that includes supporting the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every state in America,” Trump said during the 2024 presidential campaign shortly after the ruling.

Mitchell has defended his record, describing himself as a “rock-solid conservative and warrior for the Trump agenda.”

“Jay shares the incredible commitment Alabamians have to faith, family and freedom, and his legal record proves that he is ready and willing to defend those values in court,” his campaign states on its website.

Three candidates are running in the Republican primary for Alabama attorney general, which will take place on May 19.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s nomination to be the secretary of Homeland Security narrowly cleared a committee vote Thursday morning with the help of Democratic Sen. John Fetterman, teeing up the Oklahoma Republican’s nomination for a final vote on the Senate floor as soon as next week.

Mullin’s nomination advanced out of Senate Homeland Security Committee by a vote of 8-7. He needed a simple majority of votes to clear the committee.

After a series of contentious exchanges during Wednesday’s confirmation hearing, Sen. Rand Paul, the committee’s chairman, ultimately cast a vote against Mullin in committee on Thursday. Fetterman was the only Democrat to cast a vote in his favor.

Fetterman’s vote proved to be critical for Mullin as Republicans only hold a one seat majority on the committee. Paul’s objection meant that at least one Democrat would be necessary to push Mullin over the line. 

After the vote, Fetterman said he approached the Mullin vote with an “open mind.”

“We need a leader at DHS. We must reopen DHS. My AYE is rooted in a strong committed, constructive working relationship with Senator Mullin for our nation’s security,” Fetterman wrote in a post on X.

Mullin’s hearing came weeks after President Donald Trump fired DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, following her handling of the Minneapolis immigration enforcement and criticism that she used $220 million in taxpayer money for an ad campaign.

Mullin’s nomination will head to the Senate floor where he’ll need a simple majority of votes to be confirmed. He is expected to be approved by the chamber when he comes up for a final vote.

-ABC News’ Ivan Pereira contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.