博客

Judge in Miami says Trump must sit for deposition in BBC defamation lawsuit by Dec. 11

2026-10-22T12:46:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: October 22, 2026 / 1:55 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — A federal judge said President Trump must sit for a deposition with lawyers for the BBC by Dec. 11 as part of his ongoing defamation lawsuit against the British broadcaster.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjolique Lett set the deadline during a hearing in Miami on Thursday morning, according to the Associated Press. The judge ordered Mr. Trump to answer questions by Dec. 11 or face penalties, which could include dismissal of his lawsuit against the BBC, unless the period for the president and the network to collect information in the case is extended, the AP reported.

Mr. Trump was supposed to sit for a deposition Friday, but his lawyers told the BBC late last month that he would no longer be available to answer questions “due to other matters of national importance.” The BBC told the court that on the day of the scheduled deposition, Oct. 16, the president spoke at a rally in Georgia alongside GOP candidates for the Senate and governor. He then traveled to his South Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, where he attended an event for the Republican National Committee.

The president said he would be available for the deposition in the second or third week of January, according to the BBC.

Lawyers for the broadcaster had asked the judge to compel Mr. Trump to confirm a date for the deposition and answer their questions.

In a statement, a spokesman for the president’s legal team did not address the judge’s demand for a deposition, but said his “powerhouse lawsuit is holding the BBC accountable for its defamation and reckless election interference just as he has held other fake news mainstream media responsible for their wrongdoing.”

Mr. Trump filed his $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC in December over a documentary that featured spliced-together portions of a speech he gave outside the White House on Jan. 6, 2021. Mr. Trump alleged that the documentary, which aired in October 2024, just weeks before the presidential election, misled viewers and falsely depicted his remarks to supporters.

Following the president’s speech, a crowd of his backers marched to the U.S. Capitol and breached the building, where lawmakers and then-Vice President Mike Pence were gathered to reaffirm the results of the 2020 election.

The BBC said in November 2025 that it “sincerely regrets” how the clip of Mr. Trump’s speech was edited but disagreed that there was a basis for a defamation claim. The network apologized to the president.

At the hearing Thursday, lawyers for the BBC and the president were set to discuss the network’s subpoena for deposition testimony from Jack Smith, the former special counsel who brought criminal charges against Mr. Trump in 2023. The case involved Mr. Trump’s alleged efforts to subvert the transfer of presidential power after the 2020 election. The charges were dismissed after the president was elected to a second term in 2024.

In defending the subpoena for Smith’s testimony, the BBC said in a court filing that the former special counsel could shed light on matters involving Mr. Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, including whether the president knew his remarks could lead to violence. The network said Smith does not object to the subpoena.

But Mr. Trump’s lawyers refuted the notion that Smith has personal knowledge about the president’s speech or state of mind when he delivered it. They also said Smith’s testimony would be “duplicative,” since he authored a final report on his investigation and testified twice to Congress about his case against Mr. Trump.

The BBC is also seeking documents from Mar-a-Lago about its membership and initiation fees, which the president’s lawyers argue does not serve a legitimate purpose.

The discovery process began in February and is set to end Dec. 18. BBC lawyers said in a filing that nearly eight months into discovery, they still have not spoken with Mr. Trump and do not have a schedule to question him. They called the president “the most central figure in this case.”

“There is hardly a more crucial and relevant piece of discovery in a defamation lawsuit than the deposition of the Plaintiff. For that reason, a plaintiff’s unwillingness to sit for a deposition can be perilous to his claim,” they wrote in a motion earlier this month.

Ramaswamy should drop ad featuring Acton’s mom, GOP governor says, as Vance accuses critics of “whining”

2026-10-22T13:56:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: October 22, 2026 / 3:39 PM EDT / CBS News

Ohio’s GOP Gov. Mike DeWine said Thursday that Vivek Ramaswamy, the Republican nominee to replace him, should take down an ad that features Democratic opponent Amy Acton’s estranged mother calling her a liar.

DeWine’s comments come one day after Vice President JD Vance told Republicans to “stop whining” about the ad.

“It’s wrong to run this ad,” DeWine told reporters. “I would urge Ramaswamy’s campaign to take this down.”

DeWine, who is term-limited, called the ad “on its face, deeply, deeply troubling” but said when one knows the backstory of allegations of abuse and neglect, “it makes it even more wrong.”

DeWine refused to say if he had spoken with the Ramaswamy campaign, but said he was not rescinding his endorsement of Ramaswamy.

In response to DeWine’s comments, Ramaswamy campaign spokesperson Connie Luck doubled down in defense of the ad, saying “the first and only candidate to attack the mother of her opponent in this race was Amy Acton.”

“Acton’s mother is speaking out about her clear pattern of lying — not abuse — and it should be covered as such, not just with the Acton campaign spin,” Luck said.

The ad first circulated Monday night on social media with unclear origins, before Ramaswamy confirmed Tuesday it was “an ad from our campaign.”

In it, Acton’s mother, Donna Arthur, whose husband was accused of raping Acton when she was a child, says, “It’s not easy for a mother to say this, but Amy was a serious problem. She is a liar; she lies about her past.”

Acton, who served as the state’s public health commissioner under DeWine during the pandemic, has previously talked about being abused by her now-deceased stepfather. According to documents provided by the campaign, in 1978, Arthur’s husband was charged with raping Acton, when she was between 10 and 12 years old. He entered a not guilty plea and left the area while out on bond; the case never went to trial.

Acton has not been in touch with her mother since a court date after her stepfather was arrested. The court records also show that the family lived in a tent, which Arthur disputed in the ad.

Ramaswamy on Tuesday defended the content of the ad, saying, “Every person who appears to know her the best … have told voters not to vote for her but to vote for me instead.”

Acton said Thursday on CNN that she had hoped Ramaswamy “wouldn’t sink this low, but of course he did.”

She said some Republicans “just don’t have the courage” to speak out about an ad she said crossed “everyone’s boundary that has ever been done before.”

But Vance, who represented Ohio in the Senate before becoming vice president and was campaigning in the state on Wednesday, had a different reaction, telling reporters that “whether the ad was appropriate or not is not really my concern.”

“Politics is a tough business,” Vance said. “And my message to my fellow elected Republicans is, if you actually believe in the things you say you believe in, stop whining about an advertisement and go win the race in 13 days.”

DeWine is not the only Republican to speak out against the ad. Ohio Sen. Jon Husted, who is in a tough reelection battle against Democrat Sherrod Brown, said Wednesday in a statement to The Associated Press that he would not have run it.

Former Republican Rep. Jim Renacci posted on social media that “any Republican who fails to distance themselves from this ad risks taking on water as well.”

When asked about the ad on Wednesday, President Trump said, “I know nothing about it.” He added, “It’s a very unusual situation to have a mother hate a daughter that much, but I don’t think that has anything to do with Vivek.”

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, who was subjected to personal and family attacks by Ramasway in the 2020 GOP presidential primary campaign, responded to the ad in a social media post saying that she’s “just seeing what we tried to tell everyone back then. He’s a bad guy. It’s a shame he continues to get away with it.”

Hegseth bans DoD personnel from using nonpublic info to bet on U.S. military operations

October 22, 2026 3:21 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has banned Defense Department personnel from using nonpublic information to bet on U.S. military operations, according to a memorandum obtained by CBS News.

In the Oct. 20 message to senior Pentagon leadership and combatant commanders, Hegseth said the prohibition would apply to classified and unclassified information and specifically includes prediction markets such as Polymarket and Kalshi, which are named in the memo.

The defense secretary warned that financial transactions on prediction markets could expose sensitive military movements to foreign adversaries and endanger American troops.

“Make no mistake why this matters. Our enemies watch movements in these markets,” Hegseth wrote. “When an American Service member, intelligence professional, or other Department civilian engages in a financial transaction on a military outcome, they create a signal.”

Hegseth warned that foreign intelligence services could analyze betting activity to anticipate American military movements, targets and timing of an operation. The memorandum said violations could result in administrative disciplinary or criminal action under federal law or the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the laws and regulations governing the U.S. military.

The directive follows growing scrutiny of service members participating in military-related prediction markets. In April, a U.S. Special Forces soldier involved in the military operation that captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro was arrested after allegedly betting on Maduro’s removal from office before news of the raid was made public.

Federal investigators believe U.S. Army Master Sgt. Gannon Ken Van Dyke made bets of more than $33,000 on the prediction market Polymarket within hours of President Trump’s announcement in January that Maduro had been captured. The bets resulted in winnings of more than $409,000.

The soldier entered a not guilty plea in New York federal court.

This story published first on CBS News at 3:21 p.m. on Oct. 22, 2026.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/polymarket-claims-arrest-us-soldier-accused-maduro-bet-proof-system-works/

Polymarket claims arrest of U.S. soldier accused of making Maduro bet is “proof the system works”

(08:31)

Justice Department terminates some school desegregation cases without asking court to ensure past discrimination has ended, watchdog group says

October 22, 2026 / 3:49 PM EDT / CBS News

The Justice Department moved to terminate more than a dozen decades-old school desegregation cases without asking the court first to review whether the district successfully ended its past discriminatory practices, a watchdog group has found.

A new analysis released by Red Line for Civil Rights, an oversight project of Democracy Forward run by former DOJ attorneys, reviewed a list of more than 50 school desegregation cases that the Justice Department recently announced it had dismissed.

The review found that since President Trump took office in January 2025, the Justice Department has supported the dismissal of cases in at least 56 school districts, either by formally withdrawing or not opposing motions to end them.

In at least 18 of those cases, the Justice Department supported dismissals without first asking the federal court overseeing the case to determine whether the school district had achieved “unitary status.”

That term, defined by the Supreme Court, means the school district has eliminated the vestiges of past discrimination that were the subject of the cases. The six core areas that are typically reviewed by courts are student assignment, faculty assignment, staff assignment, transportation, facilities and extracurricular activities, though other areas can also be considered.

One such case that was dismissed without determining whether unitary status was achieved is the Concordia Parish, Louisiana case, the group said.

In that example, discrimination persisted at the school for decades, prompting the Justice Department to propose a new agreement in 2024 that the school board rejected.

After Mr. Trump took office, however, the Justice Department switched sides and joined with the school board to dismiss the case. A U.S. District Court judge declined to do so, saying they had to demonstrate the school had achieved unitary status.

But the school board appealed that ruling, and the case was ultimately dismissed.

“The shameful withdrawal of DOJ resources from these cases and investigations highlights how this administration is abandoning communities across the country,” said Megan Marks, deputy director and managing editor of Red Line for Civil Rights, who previously served as deputy chief in the Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section.

“Walking away from them doesn’t mean the discrimination has been addressed. It just means DOJ is no longer watching,” she added.

CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department for comment on the findings.

At the end of Reconstruction, many states — particularly in the Deep South — enacted what were known as “Jim Crow” laws that enforced racial segregation at public facilities. These laws were spawned by an 1896 Supreme Court decision known as Plessy v. Ferguson, which created the “separate but equal” doctrine that allowed for racial segregation.

In those states, Black children were forced to attend separate schools that often lacked adequate resources and were not easily accessible by public transportation.

A landmark Supreme Court decision in the 1954 civil rights case of Brown v. Board of Education overturned the “separate but equal” doctrine, making it unlawful for public schools to discriminate on the basis of race.

For decades since that decision, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has brought legal actions to protect students from unlawful racial discrimination, often through court-monitored consent decrees with those school districts. Some of those consent decrees have remained in effect for decades, dating back to the 1960s and 1970s.

In some cases, the agreements struck by the Justice Department required school districts to change how students are assigned to different schools or modify other policies to prevent students from being segregated by race.

As of May 2022, the Justice Department still represented the federal government in some 140 school desegregation cases, according to an archived press release.

Prior to September’s announcement by the Justice Department that it had dismissed more than 50 cases, it had only publicly moved to dismiss cases in a handful of locations: Dyersburg, Tennessee; Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana; Hendry County, Florida; and Copiah County, Mississippi.

However, the Justice Department did not publicly release a list of all the dismissed cases.

Red Line for Civil Rights sought to pull all of the relevant cases from federal dockets across the country and conduct an analysis of their status and how they were terminated.

Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, in September called the consent decrees “onerous and outdated” and said that prolonged federal oversight in these cases “does not reflect the reality of those classrooms today.”

Regan Rush, the former Special Litigation Section chief at the Civil Rights Division, who now serves as director and editor-in-chief at Red Line for Civil Rights, said Thursday, “This administration’s politicized approach to civil rights enforcement imposes real costs on individuals and entire communities, eroding protections that underpin equal treatment and the rule of law for all.”

Judge insists Trump must be deposed in his $10B lawsuit against the BBC, warns it could be tossed in fight over records

2026-10-22T17:08:31.085Z / CNN

By Tierney Sneed

Updated 2 hr ago
Updated Oct 22, 2026, 1:27 PM ET
PUBLISHED Oct 22, 2026, 1:08 PM ET

President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media as he departs the White House on October 10.

Aaron Schwartz/Getty Images

Miami—

A federal judge warned President Donald Trump could see his $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC dismissed if he does not work harder to produce information the news outlet is entitled to in the case, including sitting for a deposition.

“Engaging in discovery is burdensome, but is a burden we undertake, especially if we file a lawsuit,” Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Aytch Lett told personal attorneys for Trump at a hearing Thursday, where she also backed a subpoena from the BBC for membership records at Mar-a-Lago.

Lett expressed skepticism that Trump and his team had done an adequate job searching for internal documents related to the case.

“I tend to agree with the defendant that it strains credulity that a thorough search has been in order to determine that all of the requests have been responded to,” she said.

Lett also ordered that Trump sit for a deposition by December 11, but she and both parties said there was a likely possibility it could be moved back.

The proceedings showed how the president’s litigiousness comes with risks, including that lawsuits can expose Trump and his businesses to scrutiny from the parties he is suing.

Trump filed the lawsuit against the BBC in December 2025. He alleges he was defamed by the media company with a documentary on his political comeback that aired before the 2024 election, because of how the film spliced two parts of the January 6, 2021, speech he gave in front of the White House before his supporters violently attacked the US Capitol.

The documentary joined one section of his remarks, in which he told his supporters to “walk down to the Capitol,” with a later portion, in which he told the protestors that “we fight like hell.”

In response to an earlier round of discovery disputes, the court said that the BBC was entitled to information shedding light on the “message” of the speech and the “impression” it left. But the court said also said then it was not giving the media company a green light to “relitigate” the events of January 6.

In total, the BBC has issued at least 47 subpoenas to former and current government officials, as well as private advisers in Trump’s circle, who had a window into his efforts to overturn the election – including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, former Attorney General Bill Barr, and former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

This story is breaking and will be updated.

Obama-appointed judge at center of Trump’s anti-weaponization fund case hit with misconduct claim

October 22, 2026 10:30am EDT / Fox News

Obama-appointed Judge Kathleen Williams imposed sanctions after Trump voluntarily dismissed his $10B IRS lawsuit

By Elizabeth Elkind, Fox News

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX:A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama is being accused of “misconduct” in a case involving President Donald Trump.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, is demanding an investigation into U.S. Judge Kathleen Williams of the Southern District of Florida after she sanctioned Trump’s lawyers over his case against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

Jordan wrote to the Judicial Conference of the United States that “there is evidence that Judge Williams abused her judicial authority and violated fundamental tenets of judicial impartiality in connection with an unusual and unsupported order that imposed sanctions after the plaintiffs voluntarily had dismissed the underlying action.”

The letter is being co-led by Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the panel’s subcommittee on courts.

President Donald Trump arrives to speak during a campaign rally at Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center in Wasilla, Alaska, on Oct. 13, 2026.(Kent NISHIMURA/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump, his adult sons Eric and Donald Jr., and the Trump Organization filed a lawsuit against the IRS in early 2026 seeking $10 billion in damages after a contractor with the agency leaked the president’s tax returns to the press. The contractor, Charles Littlejohn, was sentenced to five years in federal prison.

Trump, who filed the lawsuit in his personal capacity, had it voluntarily dismissed in May. Shortly after, however, the administration announced a settlement agreement that included $1.776 billion for an “anti-weaponization fund” for victims of “lawfare” by the Biden administration. Trump himself would receive no compensation, but would get a formal apology from the federal government and bar the IRS from ever auditing Trump or his family.

Williams, however, then accused the plaintiffs of purposely manipulating the courts to achieve the settlement and sanctioned two of the president’s lawyers in a July order. Her order referred lawyer Alejandro Brito to the Florida Bar for potential disciplinary action and prevented lawyer Daniel Epstein from practicing under her jurisdiction for at least a year.

Jordan’s letter called the timing of Williams’ order “suspect” for coming after the case was voluntarily withdrawn.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, speaks at a press conference with other members of House Republican leadership in Washington, D.C., United States, on May 20, 2025.(Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

He also accused Williams of basing the action on an amicus brief submitted by left-wing judicial activist group Democracy Defenders Action. The brief, which the group said was submitted on behalf of 35 former federal judges, called on Williams to reopen the case despite the dismissal by the involved parties and accused both sides of “fraud” over the settlement.

“Judge Williams issued her July 13 order after the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of the case, ending the dispute between the parties,” Jordan and Issa wrote. “Although Judge Williams invoked the court’s inherent authority to impose sanctions, the Committee is not aware of Eleventh Circuit precedent applying inherent sanctions authority after a plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed a case based on briefing by partisan nonparties on an unrelated question the court never decided.”

They concluded, “Judge Williams’s conduct risks undermining public confidence in the federal courts. Accordingly, we respectfully ask that the Judicial Conference review this matter, including whether it warrants referral to the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit or other appropriate action, and that you inform the Committee of steps taken no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 5, 2026.”

Issa told Fox News Digital in his own statement, “The rogue federal judges who make up the Trump Resistance in Robes continue to disappoint but never surprise. Judge Williams hasn’t only shown her liberal contempt for President Trump — but crossed a bright ethical line by going after his attorneys.”

Trump allies, particularly in Congress, have clashed with federal judges on multiple fronts so far this term. Republicans have accused what they call “activist judges” of weaponizing their courts to block Trump’s agenda.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Democrats, meanwhile, backed up Williams’ skepticism of Trump’s settlement. The anti-weaponization fund proposal, which has since been blocked by other courts, has received bipartisan pushback.

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News.

Follow on Twitter at @liz_elkind and send tips to elizabeth.elkind@fox.com

Slotkin’s viral ‘threat’ to conservatives takes new twist as student moves to hold her accountable: ‘Shocking’

October 22, 2026 11:29am EDT / Fox News

Michael Bicksell argues Slotkin’s ‘deterrence message’ aimed to frighten young conservatives away from government service

By Andrew Mark Miller , Robert Schmad, Fox News

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6407208463112

Laura: The punishment Slotkin alludes to will be ‘severe’ if Democrats take control of the House

Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., is facing backlash after saying she wants the threat of prosecution to discourage people from taking jobs in the Trump administration. Fox News host Laura Ingraham criticizes the senator for trying to ‘play the victim’ following her remarks.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

FIRST ON FOX:Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) is facing an ethics complaint filed to the United States Senate over comments she made earlier this month that many characterized as a “threat” to conservatives who are thinking about working for the Trump administration.

During an Oct. 13 University of Chicago event, Slotkin drew criticism after a clip went viral showing her saying she wants to pursue “signature cases” against people who “enabled” President Donald Trump and push a “deterrence message” for young people.

“I want young people coming out of school to say, ‘Should I go work for the Trump administration? Like, that sounds fun, I might get an opportunity.’ I want them to be like, ‘Lord, that might be buying myself a ton of problems that I don’t want, and so let me avoid participating in that,’” she said. “I want that deterrence message sent,” Slotkin said.

Slotkin is now facing an ethics complaint filed Thursday by Michael Bicksel, a University of Chicago student who first reported her remarks. The complaint was submitted to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and argues that Slotkin proposed using congressional investigations and potential prosecutions to frighten young people away from serving in a Republican administration.

FORTY-FIVE PERCENT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS SAY VIOLENCE CAN BE JUSTIFIED TO STOP HATE SPEECH, POLL FINDS

Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., votes during a session in the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, Oct. 23, 2025.(Tom Williams/Getty Images)

“Recently at an event at my college, the University of Chicago, Senator Slotkin laid out a legislative-oversight agenda that involved using the legal process to terrorize members of the Trump administration in order to ‘deter’ young people from going to work for it,” Bicksel wrote.

The complaint asks the committee to determine whether Slotkin’s comments amounted to “improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate,” a standard described in the Senate Ethics Manual as applying to conduct that may be unethical even if it does not violate a specific law or Senate rule.

“As a college student and a conservative, this was a shocking thing to hear,” Bicksel’s complaint reads. “A prominent U.S. Senator came to my college and laid out a goal that I and my peers should be afraid to serve our country in the executive branch. This is well below the standard of conduct expected of a U.S. Senator and deserves investigation by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and appropriate subsequent disciplinary action.”

ELISSA SLOTKIN TELLS STUDENTS LIKE ME NOT TO WORK IN GOVERNMENT. DON’T LISTEN TO HER

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) rehearses the Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress on March 4, 2025 in Wyandotte, Michigan.(Paul Sancya – Pool/Getty Images)

Bicksel argued that Slotkin’s comments were directed at students considering government service, rather than exclusively at people who commit crimes or engage in unethical conduct.

“The substance of the ‘deterrence message’ is clear as day,” Bicksel wrote. “Her target was ‘young people coming out of school’ (like me and my classmates) who are debating whether they should ‘go work for the Trump administration.’”

“We are obviously not debating—as she subsequently tried to clarify—whether to go commit crimes or behave unethically,” he continued. “Those who commit crimes should be punished for doing so. No one disagrees with that. All we are debating is public service, pure and simple, and Senator Slotkin says we should think twice about doing so because it might provoke the full power of the United States Senate.”

Slotkin, when pressed on the response to her comment on CNN, referred to the controversy as “manufactured outrage.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Workers begin construction a large metal fence alongside constructions supplies on the east side of the U.S. Capitol Building on Aug. 25, 2026 in Washington, D.C.(Finn Gomez/Getty Images)

“I think the thing that I’ve heard from my own Republican colleagues and peers, including interns and folks who work around the Hill who come to our events, they’ll tell you, ‘I was worried,” Slotkin added. “My parents were worried, you know. It’s really messy. I’m not sure what to get involved in.’ Politics, in general, has become messy.”

The Justice Department is currently facing calls to investigate Slotkin over her remarks, Washington Examiner reported on Wednesday.

Slotkin’s communication director pointed Fox News Digital to a statement made by the senator on Tuesday when reached for comment.

“Now, if you take a breath, this is all pretty crazy. A president from the Oval office is weaponizing our justice system against an American who clearly gets under his skin. And if he can do it to me, he can do it to anyone,” Slotkin said. “His supporters use a coordinated play to threaten, intimidate, and silence anyone who speaks up. It’s a play to distract us from his failed economy, high gas prices, and the disastrous war he started with Iran. But if I’ve learned one thing from this past year, it’s that you have to push back.”

Andrew Mark Miller is a reporter from Pasadena, California, who has been with Fox News Digital since 2021. You can reach him at AndrewMark.Miller@fox.com.

Ilhan Omar issues stunning admission when confronted with brother marriage rumors

October 22, 2026 9:51am EDT / Fox News

Omar spoke with MS NOW in her first interview after the raid on her home stemming from an immigration fraud investigation

By Pedro B Rodriguez-Aparicio, Fox News

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., told MS NOW’s Chris Hayes that she believes the raid on her home was an effort to appeal to Republican base voters and intimidate voters.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

blob:https://www.foxnews.com/148a7d18-549d-4e9f-8d4f-7e9cfe9ab4ac

Listen to this article

2 min

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., denied Wednesday that she married her former husband, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, to commit immigration fraud and pushed back against claims that they are related.

But when asked if there’s any familial relation with her ex-husband, Omar admitted, “Not to my knowledge.”

The interview marked the Somali-born congresswoman’s first time speaking with the media since federal agents searched her Washington, D.C., residence on Oct. 12. The congresswoman’s office has not responded to Fox News Digital’s repeated requests for comment regarding the investigations and raid on her home earlier this month.

ILHAN OMAR BELIEVES TRUMP RAID ON HOME WAS MEANT TO ‘INTIMIDATE AND SCARE PEOPLE’ FROM VOTING

U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar speaks during Day 2 of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL) Party Convention in the Mayo Civic Center in Rochester, Minn., on Saturday, May 30, 2026.(Alex Kormann/The Minnesota Star Tribune via Getty Images)

“It all started with the Somali blog,” Omar told MS Now host Chris Hayes regarding longstanding rumors that they are siblings. “Somebody put it there, that he had to have been my brother or something to that effect.”

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents executed a court-authorized search warrant as part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation into possible false statements in Omar’s immigration and naturalization documents.

The Justice Department has not publicly detailed the allegations.

FEDERAL AGENTS RAID ILHAN OMAR’S DC HOME AMID IMMIGRATION FRAUD INVESTIGATION

U.S. Magistrate Judge Matthew J. Sharbaugh of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved the warrant, according to court-related reporting.

Federal agents with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) raided the Washington, D.C., home of Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., early Monday morning, a source familiar with the operation told Fox News Digital.(Andrew Murray/Fox News Digital)

Omar has denied wrongdoing and called the investigation politically motivated. She appeared publicly for the first time since last Monday’s raid with a video posted to social media from the back of a car where she asked supporters to keep sending her money.

Federal authorities issued more than a dozen grand jury subpoenas, including to members of Omar’s family, and seized her cellphone during the investigation, according to The Associated Press.

Fox News Digital reported that Omar’s sister, Sahra Noor, spoke with federal investigators last week in the wake of the raid.

ILHAN OMAR RAID SPARKS OMINOUS PREDICTION FROM WATCHDOG: ‘THEY PROBABLY GOT THE GOODS’

Ilhan Omar, left, wearing a patterned hijab and green scarf. Sahra Noor, sister of Ilhan Omar, speaking at an event at the University of Minnesota in 2016.(Stephen Maturen/Getty Images; University of Minnesota)

A separate inquiry from the immigration fraud investigation is examining Omar’s campaign finances and financial disclosures.

That investigation reportedly began during the Biden administration in 2024. The complaint about her massive wealth disparity in her disclosures was dismissed by congressional ethics hawks but is now being investigated by authorities outside the Capitol, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro announced last week.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Both investigations remain ongoing.

【美国中期选举】哈佛民调：美国青年对未来及特朗普失去信心

2026年10月22日 23:52 / 联合早报

哈佛最新调查显示，30岁以下美国青年对国家发展方向的信心已跌至历史最低点，不仅对现任总统特朗普（图）的执政表现表达强烈不满，对未来经济前景也感到空前悲观。 （路透社档案照片）

美国中期选举在即，哈佛大学肯尼迪学院政治研究所最新发布的民调，揭示美国年轻人中蔓延的深刻焦虑与政治异化。

调查显示，30岁以下美国青年对国家发展方向的信心已跌至历史最低点，不仅对现任总统特朗普的执政表现表达强烈不满，对未来经济前景也感到空前悲观。

这份基于2024名18至29岁青年的调查显示，在计划参加下月美国中期选举的年轻选民中，近三分之二（63%）表明，他们投票的主要动机是反对特朗普总统及其政策，仅14%说投票是为了支持特朗普，另有17%认为总统并非考量因素。

在经济议题上，年轻人的不满情绪尤为突出。高达77%的受访者对特朗普处理经济的方式表示不赞成，这一数字甚至涵盖约半数的年轻共和党人。更令人触目惊心的是，仅9%受访者认为美国正在向正确的方向发展，这是该民调自创立以来的最低纪录。

受深刻的幻灭感影响，年轻选民的投票意愿也大幅下降。在18至29岁的受访者中，仅33%表示一定会去投票，相比2022年的40%已显著下滑。

与此同时，民主共和两党的表现均未能赢得信任。67%的受访者不满民主党人的工作，而对共和党人的不满比例更高达74%。

哈佛大学政治研究所民调负责人沃尔佩（John Della Volpe）分析指：“在踏入成年之初，年轻人本应能够看到一条从辛苦付出走向稳定生活的清晰路径。而如今最大的悬念在于，这个承诺是否依然成立。”

法国骚乱逾2700人被捕 217人速裁入狱

2026年10月22日 23:56 / 联合早报

10月22日，法国巴黎发生由学生团体与工会联合发起的示威游行。图为示威者坐在道路中央，与筑起防线的防暴警察对峙。 （路透社）

针对上周末暴发的骚乱，法国司法部长达尔马宁说，法国法院已通过速裁程序对217名罪名成立的涉案人员判处监禁。他同时对司法部门极其坚决的应对举措表示赞赏。

达尔马宁星期四（10月22日）在位于巴黎郊区的弗勒里-梅罗吉斯（Fleury-Merogis）监狱外发表讲话时透露，自上周六（17日）以来已有2700人被拘留。

他指出，目前已有超过1000人出庭应讯，其中217人已被收监，且这一数字仍在大幅上升。

达尔马宁向媒体透露，被送往监狱的217人中，半数此前并无犯罪记录，且绝大多数为18至25岁之间的年轻男性。“这表明，即便是此前无案底的初犯，检察官和法官也同样依法予以收监。这充分证明司法机关的裁决正在得到极其严厉的贯彻执行。”

达尔马宁誓言将继续督导快速审判，以便迅速清理积压案件并形成强力震慑。然而，面对物价飞涨等诉求，新一轮抗议活动仍计划于本周末举行。

与此同时，执法部门的强硬手段也引发部分律师界的批评，指责官方正滑向过度镇压。

与众多欧洲国家类似，法国同样面临严重的监狱拥挤难题，但达尔马宁强调，解决方法绝非减少收监人数，而是扩建监狱空间。

据法国官方最新统计，截至9月1日，全国监狱在押人员已达9万人，远超6万3348个标准床位的承载极限，创下历史新高。