Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt said the killing Saturday of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse who protested President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, was a “real tragedy.” Pretti was a U.S. citizen, born in Illinois.
“I think the death of Americans, what we’re seeing on TV, it’s causing deep concerns over federal tactics and accountability,” Stitt told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “Americans don’t like what they’re seeing right now.”
When asked if he thought the president should pull immigration agents from Minnesota, Stitt said Trump has to answer that question.
“He’s getting bad advice right now,” Stitt said.
The governor said the Republican president needed to tell the American people what the solution and “endgame” are, and that there needed to be solutions instead of politicizing the situation. “Right now, tempers are just going crazy and we need to calm this down,” Stitt said.
Other Republicans, including Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, also conveyed unease. In a social media post, Cassidy called the shooting “incredibly disturbing” and that the “credibility of ICE and DHS are at stake.” Tillis urged a “thorough and impartial investigation.”
“Any administration official who rushes to judgment and tries to shut down an investigation before it begins are doing an incredible disservice to the nation and to President Trump’s legacy,” Tillis said in a post.
Administration officials were firm in their defense of the hard-line immigration tactics.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said “it’s a tragedy when anyone dies” but he blamed Democratic leaders in Minnesota for “fomenting chaos.”
“There are a lot of paid agitators who are ginning things up and the governor has not done a good job of tamping this down,” Bessent said on ABC’s “This Week.”
__
Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report
This week, guest host Zach Weissmueller is joined by Freddy Guevara, a Venezuelan opposition leader who was imprisoned by the regime of Nicolás Maduro and now lives in exile.
Guevara first entered politics as a student activist opposing Hugo Chávez, later becoming the youngest elected city council member in Venezuelan history before winning a seat in the National Assembly. After the government stripped the assembly of power and escalated repression, Guevara spent three years as a political refugee in the Chilean Embassy in Caracas and was later imprisoned by the Maduro regime. He has lived in exile since 2021 and is now a visiting fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School, where he studies democratic transitions and political repression.
Weissmueller and Guevara discuss how authoritarianism operated under Nicolás Maduro, including political imprisonment, surveillance, and the foreign alliances that helped sustain his oppressive regime. They examine Maduro’s capture, why many Venezuelans support U.S. intervention, and what a democratic transition would require after decades of dictatorship. Guevara challenges common assumptions in the West about sovereignty and regime change and makes the case that Venezuelans themselves have driven the push to remove Maduro – while explaining how Venezuela’s collapse was not simply the result of corruption but a predictable consequence of socialism in practice.
The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie goes deep with the artists, entrepreneurs, and scholars who are making the world a more libertarian—or at least a more interesting—place by championing “free minds and free markets.”
BOSTON — Backers of recreational cannabis have formed a committee to oppose a referendum inching toward the November ballot that would repeal the state’s 2016 pot law.
The group behind the ballot initiative, Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, wants to effectively halt recreational cannabis sales and prohibit non-medical home growing, among other changes.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
HONG KONG — From 18th place to 140th. That’s how much Hong Kong’s ranking plunged in a global press freedom index over some 20 years.
Behind the decline are the shutdown of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily, more red lines for journalists and increasing self-censorship across the territory. The erosion of press freedom parallels a broader curtailment of the city’s Western-style civil liberties since 2020, when Beijing imposed a national security law to eradicate challenges to its rule.
Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai was convicted in December under the security law, facing up to life in prison. Hearings will begin on Monday for Lai and other defendants in the case to argue for a shorter sentence.
His trial has been watched closely by foreign governments and political observers as a barometer of media freedom in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997. The government insists that his case has nothing to do with press freedom.
Hong Kong’s media environment was once freewheeling. Journalists often asked the government aggressive questions even as the owners of their outlets were pro-Beijing. News outlets regularly broke stories critical of politicians and officials.
But the space for reporters has drastically narrowed after China imposed the security law, which it deemed necessary for stability after huge anti-government protests in 2019.
In 2020, Lai became one of the first prominent figures charged under the law. Within a year, authorities used the same law to arrest senior executives of Apple Daily. They raided its office and froze $2.3 million of its assets, effectively forcing the newspaper to shut down in June 2021.
Online news site Stand News met a similar fate in December of that year, with arrests, police raids and asset freezes forcing its shutdown. By 2022, Hong Kong had plunged 68 places to 148th in the press-freedom index compiled by media freedom organization Reporters Without Borders.
In 2024, two Stand News editors became the first journalists since 1997 to be convicted of conspiracy to publish seditious articles under a separate, colonial-era law.
In December, Lai was found guilty of conspiring with others to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious articles. Six Apple Daily executives charged in the same case had entered guilty pleas, admitting they conspired with Lai to request sanctions, blockades or engage in other hostile activities against Hong Kong or China.
Francis Lee, a journalism and communication professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said the Apple Daily and Stand News cases indicate that some common news practices of the past are no longer permitted. The Stand News case showed that some strongly critical commentaries with relatively intense expression might be considered seditious, he said. Lai’s case involved allegations of calling for foreign sanctions.
“Maybe some advocacy journalism was at least permitted within the legal framework back then,” he said, referring to before the security law was introduced. “Today, it’s no longer allowed.”
Self-censorship has become more prominent, but not only because of politics. Lee said mainstream news outlets face greater pressure not to upset their vital revenue streams, including advertisers and big companies, amid a difficult business environment.
Many large companies in the city value the vast mainland Chinese market and ties with the government.
Finding interviewees is not easy, either. “In Hong Kong nowadays, when some topics and perspectives cannot be reported, it’s not just because of media outlets practicing self-censorship,” Lee said. “No one is willing to speak. Self-censorship is a broad social phenomenon.”
Many opposition politicians and leading activists were jailed under the security law. Dozens of civil society groups closed down. Facing potential risks, some residents also became more reluctant to talk to reporters.
Hong Kong Journalists Association chairperson Selina Cheng said many stories perceived to be politically sensitive or potentially questioning the authorities are not always easily published. There is an outsized concern over including responses from the government and pro-China groups to create balance, she said.
“To do journalism in Hong Kong means that people always have to worry at the back of their heads: What are the risks that they may get involved in?” said Cheng.
A massive fire that killed at least 161 people in an apartment complex in late November revealed some of these shifts.
After the fire broke out on Nov. 26, reporters, including those from newer online outlets, went out in force to cover Hong Kong’s deadliest blaze in decades. They interviewed affected residents, investigated scaffolding nettings that authorities said had contributed to the blaze’s rapid spread, and reported on concerns over the government’s oversight.
Cheng was encouraged by the coverage of the aftermath. But warnings and arrests followed.
Beijing’s national security arm in Hong Kong summoned representatives of several foreign news outlets, including The Associated Press, on Dec. 6. The Office for Safeguarding National Security said some foreign media had spread false information and smeared the government’s relief efforts after the fire and attacked the legislative election.
After arrests of non-journalists who posted allegedly seditious content online or organized a petition, public voices grew quieter, leaving reporters with fewer interviewees, Lee said.
A planned news conference related to the fire, organized by people including former pro-democracy district councilors, was canceled. Bruce Liu, an organizer, was summoned by police for a meeting the same day. An investigative report on the maintenance project by a pro-Beijing newspaper is no longer viewable on its website.
Cheng raised concerns over what she called the “more covert muscling of people speaking out.”
“If this keeps happening, then it’s much harder for the public to know what they’re missing out on,” she said.
In an emailed reply to the AP’s questions, the government strongly condemned attempts to use the fire as an excuse to smear the administration with baseless accusations.
“Human rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents have all along been firmly protected by the constitution and the Basic Law,” it said.
Beyond reporting restrictions, Cheng’s trade union previously raised concerns about some journalists facing unwarranted tax audits and harassment through anonymous messages. The Inland Revenue Department has maintained that the background of a taxpayer has no bearing on its reviews.
Cheng has launched a lawsuit against her former employer, The Wall Street Journal, for allegedly firing her over her union role.
Both Cheng and Lee said journalists are still learning to survive in the narrowing space.
In October, Cheng’s association showed journalists’ ratings of the city’s press-freedom index rebounded slightly.
“Today’s situation is far from the previous state of freedom,” Lee said. “Self-censorship throughout society is severe. Yet some media outlets are still finding ways.”
As we begin a new year, we wanted to take a moment to look back on what we’ve accomplished together in 2025, and to look forward to all that we will accomplish together in 2026.
Thank you from the bottom of our hearts!
Because of MoveOn members like you, we took action when it mattered. We pushed back against harmful fascist agendas, fought to protect democracy, elected progressive leaders up and down the ballot, and helped ensure millions of voices were heard. None of that happens without people willing to stay involved, even when progress feels slow.
To capture just a snapshot of that work, we put together a short year in review highlighting some of the biggest wins moveOn members helped achieve in 2025.
If we’re going to win back congressional power with progressive candidates, we’re going to need your help.
We also know that staying engaged in this fight requires rest and here at MoveOn, we thrive on creativity and care. To start the year, we are sharing a few tokens of our appreciation for all of the change you helped drive in 2025. Check out some of our favorite stress relievers: a fun coloring book and a calendar to keep up the fight all year long.
METHUEN — A bid by Mayor D.J Beauregard aimed at increasing government efficiency through cutting down on City Council oversight failed resoundingly.
The council voted 7-2 on Monday against approving an ordinance, proposed by Beauregard, to raise the dollar limit from $25,000 to $50,000 on contracts not requiring council approval.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
WASHINGTON — Five years ago outside the White House, outgoing President Donald Trump told a crowd of supporters to head to the Capitol — “and I’ll be there with you” — in protest as Congress was affirming the 2020 election victory for Democrat Joe Biden.
A short time later, the world watched as the seat of U.S. power descended into chaos, and democracy hung in the balance.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Ask any history teacher in Michigan how their lessons could be better and they will tell you that they need to incorporate more current events into the curriculum, East Kentwood High School history teacher Matt Vreisman insists.
State standards require social studies teachers to cover pre-Columbian history to the present, and incorporating modern historical events — such as the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection — is a challenge, adds Whitehall High School history teacher Brian Milliron.
Though Tuesday is the five-year anniversary of the event, Vriesman, Milliron and other teachers found a way to weave the insurrection into their advanced placement history classes months ago when they taught about the American Revolution, the establishment of the Constitution and the contentious presidential election in 1800.
John Adams, the nation’s second president and a Federalist, was the incumbent candidate but lost to Thomas Jefferson, the nation’s third president and the Democratic-Republican Party candidate. It was the nation’s first exchange of presidential power between rival political parties, and it was peaceful, and that established a precedent for a peaceful change of power every election since.
It’s during that lesson that Vreisman and Milliron teach their students about the anomaly after the 2020 election, when then-incumbent Republican President Donald Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden and violence erupted at the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, as members of Congress met to certify the election results.
Milliron asks junior and senior students in his class what they remember and then fills in the blanks about what they don’t know.
“By connecting the present day event that kids literally saw to the stuff in their curriculum it helps them understand why we have a peaceful transfer of power and the negative effects when we don’t,” said Milliron.
Vriesman, who was the 2023 National History Teacher of the Year, also asks his students what they know about Jan. 6, shows them a PBS documentary about the day, talks about democracies that have failed throughout history and asks them to write a reflection about why a peaceful transition is important to a democracy.
“Connecting historical content to current events gives students authentic practice evaluating evidence, recognizing different viewpoints, and disagreeing respectfully about the most relevant issues of today,” said Vriesman.
He regularly weaves in major events that occurred during his students’ lifetimes that connect to different parts of American history.
“Our goal as social studies is to create informed citizens who are ready to engage in matters of substance. And current events hook students so much more.”
Michigan’s most recent curriculum standards, issued in 2019-20, became less prescriptive on the topics teachers are expected to teach so it’s likely many history and government teachers are weaving Jan. 6 into their lessons, said Nick Orlowski, executive director of the Michigan Council for History Education. At the same time, standards require teachers to cover wide time frames of history, so there is a lot to cover.
The American History Association recently issued a report that touched on how politics affects history instruction, Orlowski said.
“It showed that teachers are teaching from a neutral stance,” said Orlowski, adding that many teachers build inquiry into lessons — where students are presented with a historical question and do the work of historians. “They gather sources on the topic to reach their own conclusion. That seems to be how teachers are teaching. They are not bringing their own politics into the classroom.”
Vriesman is working to help other teachers have tools to incorporate contemporary history into their lesson plans. In November, he launched a nonprofit, Empowering Histories, which provides free, inquiry-based history lessons to teachers across the country.
This is important, Vriesman said, because scholarship settled long ago about how race, racism and slavery shaped American institutions is now being framed as “opinions” or “one side of the story.” He noted that 20 states have recently passed laws restricting classroom discussions of race or history and most teachers said in a poll that political pressures lead them to modify lessons.
“Historians and the public are not having the same conversation,” said Vriesman. “Within the academic field, certain truths about the past are not up for debate. But in many communities, those same truths are framed as controversial. That disconnect has real consequences in classrooms. It leaves teachers without support, and students without the tools they need to analyze evidence, evaluate claims, and make informed contributions to our democracy.”
This story was originally published by Bridge Michigan and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Determined to preserve the nation’s history, some 100 members of Congress, mostly Democrats, have taken it upon themselves to memorialize the moment. For months, they’ve mounted poster board-style replicas of the Jan. 6 plaque outside their office doors, resulting in a Capitol complex awash with makeshift remembrances.
“On behalf of a grateful Congress, this plaque honors the extraordinary individuals who bravely protected and defended this symbol of democracy on Jan. 6, 2021,” reads the faux bronze stand-in for the real thing. “Their heroism will never be forgotten.”
In Washington, a capital city lined with monuments to the nation’s history, the plaque was intended to become a simple but permanent marker, situated near the Capitol’s west front, where some of the most violent fighting took place as rioters breached the building.
But in its absence, the missing plaque makes way for something else entirely — a culture of forgetting.
Visitors can pass through the Capitol without any formal reminder of what happened that day, when a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the building trying to overturn the Republican’s 2020 reelection defeat to Democrat Joe Biden. With memory left unchecked, it allows new narratives to swirl and revised histories to take hold.
Five years ago, the jarring scene watched the world over was declared an “insurrection” by the then-GOP leader of the Senate, while the House GOP leader at the time called it his “saddest day” in Congress. But those condemnations have faded.
Trump calls it a “day of love.” And Johnson, who was among those lawmakers challenging the 2020 election results, is now the House speaker.
“The question of January 6 remains – democracy was on the guillotine — how important is that event in the overall sweep of 21st century U.S. history,” said Douglas Brinkley, a professor of history at Rice University and noted scholar.
“Will January 6 be seen as the seminal moment when democracy was in peril?” he asked. Or will it be remembered as “kind of a weird one-off?”
“There’s not as much consensus on that as one would have thought on the fifth anniversary,” he said.
At least five people died in the riot and its aftermath, including Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot by police while trying to climb through a window toward the House chamber. More than 140 law enforcement officers were wounded, some gravely, and several died later, some by suicide.
All told, some 1,500 people were charged in the Capitol attack, among the largest federal prosecutions in the nation’s history. When Trump returned to power in January 2025, he pardoned all of them within hours of taking office.
Unlike the twin light beams that commemorated the Sept. 11, 2001, attack or the stand-alone chairs at the Oklahoma City bombing site memorial, the failure to recognize Jan. 6 has left a gap not only in memory but in helping to stitch the country back together.
“That’s why you put up a plaque,” said Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa. “You respect the memory and the service of the people involved.”
The speaker’s office over the years has suggested it was working on installing the plaque, but it declined to respond to a request for further comment.
Lawmakers approved the plaque in March 2022 as part of a broader government funding package. The resolution said the U.S. “owes its deepest gratitude to those officers,” and it set out instructions for an honorific plaque listing the names of officers “who responded to the violence that occurred.” It gave a one-year deadline for installation at the Capitol.
This summer, two officers who fought the mob that day sued over the delay.
“By refusing to follow the law and honor officers as it is required to do, Congress encourages this rewriting of history,” said the claim by officers Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges. “It suggests that the officers are not worthy of being recognized, because Congress refuses to recognize them.”
The Justice Department is seeking to have the case dismissed. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro and others argued Congress “already has publicly recognized the service of law enforcement personnel” by approving the plaque and displaying it wouldn’t alleviate the problems they claim to face from their work.
“It is implausible,” the Justice Department attorneys wrote, to suggest installation of the plaque “would stop the alleged death threats they claim to have been receiving.”
The department also said the plaque is required to include the names of “all law enforcement officers” involved in the response that day — some 3,600 people.
Lawmakers who’ve installed replicas of the plaque outside their offices said it’s important for the public to know what happened.
“There are new generations of people who are just growing up now who don’t understand how close we came to losing our democracy on Jan 6, 2021,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the Jan. 6 committee, which was opposed by GOP leadership but nevertheless issued a nearly 1,000-page report investigating the run-up to the attack and the attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
Raskin envisions the Capitol one day holding tours around what happened. “People need to study that as an essential part of American history,” he said.
“Think about the dates in American history that we know only by the dates: There’s the 4th of July. There’s December 7th. There’s 9/11. And there’s January 6th,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-calif., who also served on the committee and has a plaque outside her office.
“They really saved my life, and they saved the democracy and they deserve to be thanked for it,” she said.
But as time passes, there are no longer bipartisan memorial services for Jan. 6. On Tuesday, the Democrats will reconvene members from the Jan. 6 committee for a hearing to “examine ongoing threats to free and fair elections,” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York announced. It’s unlikely Republicans will participate.
The Republicans under Johnson have tapped Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia to stand up their own special committee to uncover what the speaker calls the “full truth” of what happened. They’re planning a hearing this month.
“We should stop this silliness of trying to whitewash history — it’s not going to happen,” said Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., who helped lead the effort to display the replica plaques.
“I was here that day so I’ll never forget,” he said. “I think that Americans will not forget what happened.”
The number of makeshift plaques that fill the halls is a testimony to that remembrance, he said.
Instead of one plaque, he said, they’ve “now got 100.”
CONAKRY, Guinea — The Supreme Court in Guinea on Sunday upheld the election victory of Gen. Mamadi Doumbouya, cementing the junta leader’s transition to a democratically elected president four years after staging a coup in the West African nation.
Doumbouya won the country’s first election since the 2021 coup after polling 86.7% of the votes, according to the General Directorate of Elections. His victory, which had been predicted by analysts, was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the capital Conakry.
“Today, there are neither winners nor losers. There is only one Guinea, united and indivisible,” Doumbouya said in a broadcast late Sunday, calling on citizens to “build a new Guinea, a Guinea of peace, justice, shared prosperity, and fully assumed political and economic sovereignty.”
Yero Baldé, the runner-up who won 6.59% of the vote, had filed a petition accusing the electoral body of manipulating the results in Doumbouya’s favor. But authorities said he withdrew the petition a day before the Supreme Court verdict.
The Dec. 28 election was held under a new constitution that revoked a ban on military leaders running for office and extended the presidential mandate from five years to seven years.
Critics say Doumbouya has clamped down on political opponents and dissent since the 2021 coup, leaving him with no major opposition among the eight other candidates in the race.
The weakened opposition “focused attention on Mamadi Doumbouya as the only key figure capable of ensuring the continuity of the state,” said N’Faly Guilavogui, a Guinean political analyst. “Guineans are waiting to see what efforts he will make to ensure political stability and reconciliation,” Guilavogui added.
Despite the country’s rich mineral resources including the world’s biggest exporter of bauxite, which is used to make aluminum, more than half of its 15 million people are experiencing record levels of poverty and food insecurity, according to the World Food Program.
The junta’s most important initiative has been a mega-mining project at Simandou, the world’s largest iron ore deposit. The 75% Chinese-owned project began production in December after decades of delays.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI
In a press conference Saturday detailing the operation to capture Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and U.S. plans to “run” the country and rebuild its oil industry, there was one word President Donald Trump never used: Democracy.
Trump’s comments, detailing negotiations with a hardcore regime figure, Delcy Rodríguez, and dismissing opposition leader and Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado as a “nice woman” who does not have her country’s “respect,” shocked Venezuelans and others who wanted to see a restoration of democracy in the South American nation.
Trump also did not mention the prospects of elections or a role for Edmundo Gonzalez, the opposition candidate widely believed to have won last year’s Venezuelan presidential election, whom the U.S. government officially recognized as president-elect.
The president did mention the U.S. would “run” Venezuela until a “judicious” transition takes place, but provided little clarity on what that would look like.
On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Miami native and longtime champion of the Venezuelan opposition’s efforts to overthrow Maduro, made it clear that in negotiations with Venezuelan regime figures, U.S. officials are prioritizing stability in the South American country and U.S. national security objectives, at least in the short term.
“We all wish to see a bright future for Venezuela, a transition to democracy. These are things I still care about. We still care about. But what we’re talking about is what happens over the next two, three weeks, two, three months, and how that ties to the national interests of the United States,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press.
“I would argue that democracy in Venezuela is a U.S. national interest,” said Eric Farnsworth, a former State Department official who is a senior associate with the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “What gives me optimism is that Rubio actually is now in charge of the effort, and so he gets it. From his days in the Senate, he has been a fierce advocate for democracy in Venezuela, and a friend of Maria Corina.”
Still, the transactional tone of Trump’s remarks and what some see as his dismissing Machado have raised fears in South Florida, the home of the largest Venezuelan community, that the goal of a democratic transition might get lost along the way – if it was ever an administration goal.
“It was incredibly disturbing that President Trump doesn’t apparently plan to help a transition to the democratically elected Edmundo González and María Corina Machado’s opposition party, and seems to have only gone through this process to exploit Venezuela’s oil — which would be incredibly disappointing to the people I represent,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Broward County.
The congresswoman said Venezuelans would feel more confident about the road ahead had Trump suggested the need for another election or talks with Machado. “He didn’t even mention the word democracy in his press conference,” she said.
U.S. priorities
In interviews on morning television news shows, Rubio spoke of Machado and Gonzalez with admiration, but dismissed talks of future elections in Venezuela as “premature” and hinted that it was a problem that both opposition leaders are apparently out of the country.
“María Corina Machado’s fantastic,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press, “but unfortunately the vast majority of the opposition is no longer present inside of Venezuela.” Machado’s whereabouts are unknown, and she is likely outside the country after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway in October. González is exiled in Spain.
“Ultimately, Rubio insisted, “we care about elections, we care about democracy. We care about all of that. But the number one thing we care about is the safety, security, well-being and prosperity of the United States.”
Rubio also attempted to clarify that “running” Venezuela did not mean U.S. boots on the ground or an intervention, but “running” U.S. policy to pressure the remaining elements of the Maduro government, who are still in control of the country, to address several administration priorities.
“We want drug trafficking to stop,” he said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “We want no more gang members to come our way. We don’t want to see the Iranian and, by the way, Cuban presence…. We want the oil industry in that country not to go to the benefit of pirates and adversaries of the United States, but for the benefit of the people.”
He also seemed to walk back other comments from President Trump suggesting the U.S. was going to take control of Venezuela’s oil facilities.
“Ultimately, this is not about securing the oilfields,” Rubio told ABC’s This Week. “This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.”
Rubio said the administration would continue to use the significant military presence off the coast of Venezuela as leverage to get U.S. priorities addressed, and expected “more compliance and cooperation than we were previously receiving.”
“Let’s be realistic here,” he told NBC. “What we are focused on right now is all the problems we had when Maduro was there. We are going to give people an opportunity to address those challenges and those problems.”
Many of those problems were the result of a corrupt regime that remains largely intact. But by choosing to work with Rodriguez, political analysts say, the administration is taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid the kind of power vacuum and lack of security that had haunted past attempts at regime change in other nations.
Perilous path ahead
Trying to stabilize Venezuela without the opposition’s direct participation, however, will backfire, experts warn.
“Any attempt to stabilize Venezuela while sidelining the 2024 [presidential] mandate would immediately face three problems: domestic rejection, international fragmentation and internal regime sabotage,” Benigno Alarcón Deza, an analyst and former director of the Center of Government and Political Studies at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Caracas, wrote in Americas Quarterly. “Whatever her administrative role, Rodriguez cannot serve as the foundation of a political transition because she inherits the regime’s original sin: the absence of democratic legitimacy.”
There is also a chance that Rodriguez, a cunning politician who has presented herself as a technocrat who has revived the Venezuelan oil industry, would not play along or that her grip on power does not hold. For starters, Maduro’s inner circle is intact, and that includes powerful figures like Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, both indicted in the U.S., along with Maduro, on charges of drug trafficking.
“The question is going to be, how long does Delcy function in this capacity?” said Farnsworth. “ “You still have Padrino Lopez, certainly Diosdado Cabello, they haven’t left. Don’t forget, Diosdado has a $25 million bounty on his head. So you could also see another operation like this against him. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but all these guys now have to be thinking they could be next.”
But negotiations with figures close to Maduro — and Trump’s views on Machado — are a hard pill to swallow for many Venezuelan exiles and could create political headaches for the administration in South Florida, where the local Republican congressional delegation has vocally opposed negotiations with the Maduro regime in the past.
U.S. Rep. María Elvira Salazar of Miami told the Miami Herald she did not believe the administration should be working with Rodríguez, who is under U.S. sanctions.
“Delcy has been sanctioned by the United States and she said that Maduro is the legitimate president of the country,” Salazar told the Herald. “We cannot work with her.”
Tensions flared during a press conference on Saturday evening in Doral, home to a large Venezuelan community. Visibly angry at the suggestion by a reporter that he had not supported Machado, U.S. Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart replied: “When have we ever not supported her? Do not put words in my mouth. I am convinced there is going to be a transition and…whether there are new elections or there is a decision to take the old elections, the next democratically elected president of Venezuela is going to be Maria Corina Machado.”
Salazar also said she was confident the Venezuelan opposition would eventually rise to power.
“Marco, he said it today, that this is just a transition we’re talking about the next two weeks, the next few months,” she said. “We need to leave the country stabilized for the opposition and for the civil society to take over. We’re doing them a favor. We’re doing them a favor by cleaning up the house.”
“The good thing,” she added, “is that we have a Miami boy leading this charge.”
This story was originally published January 4, 2026 at 4:46 PM.
Nora Gámez Torres is the Cuba/U.S.-Latin American policy reporter for el Nuevo Herald and the Miami Herald. She studied journalism and media and communications in Havana and London. She holds a Ph.D. in sociology from City, University of London. Her work has won awards by the Florida Society of News Editors and the Society for Professional Journalists.//Nora Gámez Torres estudió periodismo y comunicación en La Habana y Londres. Tiene un doctorado en sociología y desde el 2014 cubre temas cubanos para el Nuevo Herald y el Miami Herald. También reporta sobre la política de Estados Unidos hacia América Latina. Su trabajo ha sido reconocido con premios de Florida Society of News Editors y Society for Profesional Journalists.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI
In a press conference Saturday detailing the operation to capture Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and U.S. plans to “run” the country and rebuild its oil industry, there was one word President Donald Trump never used: Democracy.
Trump’s comments, detailing negotiations with a hardcore regime figure, Delcy Rodríguez, and dismissing opposition leader and Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado as a “nice woman” who does not have her country’s “respect,” shocked Venezuelans and others who wanted to see a restoration of democracy in the South American nation.
Trump also did not mention the prospects of elections or a role for Edmundo Gonzalez, the opposition candidate widely believed to have won last year’s Venezuelan presidential election, whom the U.S. government officially recognized as president-elect.
The president did mention the U.S. would “run” Venezuela until a “judicious” transition takes place, but provided little clarity on what that would look like.
On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Miami native and longtime champion of the Venezuelan opposition’s efforts to overthrow Maduro, made it clear that in negotiations with Venezuelan regime figures, U.S. officials are prioritizing stability in the South American country and U.S. national security objectives, at least in the short term.
“We all wish to see a bright future for Venezuela, a transition to democracy. These are things I still care about. We still care about. But what we’re talking about is what happens over the next two, three weeks, two, three months, and how that ties to the national interests of the United States,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press.
“I would argue that democracy in Venezuela is a U.S. national interest,” said Eric Farnsworth, a former State Department official who is a senior associate with the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “What gives me optimism is that Rubio actually is now in charge of the effort, and so he gets it. From his days in the Senate, he has been a fierce advocate for democracy in Venezuela, and a friend of Maria Corina.”
Still, the transactional tone of Trump’s remarks and what some see as his dismissing Machado have raised fears in South Florida, the home of the largest Venezuelan community, that the goal of a democratic transition might get lost along the way – if it was ever an administration goal.
“It was incredibly disturbing that President Trump doesn’t apparently plan to help a transition to the democratically elected Edmundo González and María Corina Machado’s opposition party, and seems to have only gone through this process to exploit Venezuela’s oil — which would be incredibly disappointing to the people I represent,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Broward County.
The congresswoman said Venezuelans would feel more confident about the road ahead had Trump suggested the need for another election or talks with Machado. “He didn’t even mention the word democracy in his press conference,” she said.
U.S. priorities
In interviews on morning television news shows, Rubio spoke of Machado and Gonzalez with admiration, but dismissed talks of future elections in Venezuela as “premature” and hinted that it was a problem that both opposition leaders are apparently out of the country.
“María Corina Machado’s fantastic,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press, “but unfortunately the vast majority of the opposition is no longer present inside of Venezuela.” Machado’s whereabouts are unknown, and she is likely outside the country after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway in October. González is exiled in Spain.
“Ultimately, Rubio insisted, “we care about elections, we care about democracy. We care about all of that. But the number one thing we care about is the safety, security, well-being and prosperity of the United States.”
Rubio also attempted to clarify that “running” Venezuela did not mean U.S. boots on the ground or an intervention, but “running” U.S. policy to pressure the remaining elements of the Maduro government, who are still in control of the country, to address several administration priorities.
“We want drug trafficking to stop,” he said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “We want no more gang members to come our way. We don’t want to see the Iranian and, by the way, Cuban presence…. We want the oil industry in that country not to go to the benefit of pirates and adversaries of the United States, but for the benefit of the people.”
He also seemed to walk back other comments from President Trump suggesting the U.S. was going to take control of Venezuela’s oil facilities.
“Ultimately, this is not about securing the oilfields,” Rubio told ABC’s This Week. “This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.”
Rubio said the administration would continue to use the significant military presence off the coast of Venezuela as leverage to get U.S. priorities addressed, and expected “more compliance and cooperation than we were previously receiving.”
“Let’s be realistic here,” he told NBC. “What we are focused on right now is all the problems we had when Maduro was there. We are going to give people an opportunity to address those challenges and those problems.”
Many of those problems were the result of a corrupt regime that remains largely intact. But by choosing to work with Rodriguez, political analysts say, the administration is taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid the kind of power vacuum and lack of security that had haunted past attempts at regime change in other nations.
Perilous path ahead
Trying to stabilize Venezuela without the opposition’s direct participation, however, will backfire, experts warn.
“Any attempt to stabilize Venezuela while sidelining the 2024 [presidential] mandate would immediately face three problems: domestic rejection, international fragmentation and internal regime sabotage,” Benigno Alarcón Deza, an analyst and former director of the Center of Government and Political Studies at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Caracas, wrote in Americas Quarterly. “Whatever her administrative role, Rodriguez cannot serve as the foundation of a political transition because she inherits the regime’s original sin: the absence of democratic legitimacy.”
There is also a chance that Rodriguez, a cunning politician who has presented herself as a technocrat who has revived the Venezuelan oil industry, would not play along or that her grip on power does not hold. For starters, Maduro’s inner circle is intact, and that includes powerful figures like Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, both indicted in the U.S., along with Maduro, on charges of drug trafficking.
“The question is going to be, how long does Delcy function in this capacity?” said Farnsworth. “ “You still have Padrino Lopez, certainly Diosdado Cabello, they haven’t left. Don’t forget, Diosdado has a $25 million bounty on his head. So you could also see another operation like this against him. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but all these guys now have to be thinking they could be next.”
But negotiations with figures close to Maduro — and Trump’s views on Machado — are a hard pill to swallow for many Venezuelan exiles and could create political headaches for the administration in South Florida, where the local Republican congressional delegation has vocally opposed negotiations with the Maduro regime in the past.
U.S. Rep. María Elvira Salazar of Miami told the Miami Herald she did not believe the administration should be working with Rodríguez, who is under U.S. sanctions.
“Delcy has been sanctioned by the United States and she said that Maduro is the legitimate president of the country,” Salazar told the Herald. “We cannot work with her.”
Tensions flared during a press conference on Saturday evening in Doral, home to a large Venezuelan community. Visibly angry at the suggestion by a reporter that he had not supported Machado, U.S. Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart replied: “When have we ever not supported her? Do not put words in my mouth. I am convinced there is going to be a transition and…whether there are new elections or there is a decision to take the old elections, the next democratically elected president of Venezuela is going to be Maria Corina Machado.”
Salazar also said she was confident the Venezuelan opposition would eventually rise to power.
“Marco, he said it today, that this is just a transition we’re talking about the next two weeks, the next few months,” she said. “We need to leave the country stabilized for the opposition and for the civil society to take over. We’re doing them a favor. We’re doing them a favor by cleaning up the house.”
“The good thing,” she added, “is that we have a Miami boy leading this charge.”
This story was originally published January 4, 2026 at 5:46 PM.
Nora Gámez Torres is the Cuba/U.S.-Latin American policy reporter for el Nuevo Herald and the Miami Herald. She studied journalism and media and communications in Havana and London. She holds a Ph.D. in sociology from City, University of London. Her work has won awards by the Florida Society of News Editors and the Society for Professional Journalists.//Nora Gámez Torres estudió periodismo y comunicación en La Habana y Londres. Tiene un doctorado en sociología y desde el 2014 cubre temas cubanos para el Nuevo Herald y el Miami Herald. También reporta sobre la política de Estados Unidos hacia América Latina. Su trabajo ha sido reconocido con premios de Florida Society of News Editors y Society for Profesional Journalists.
While campaigning, President Donald Trump said, “We’re a nation in decline.”
Now that he’s president, the left agrees.
“We are witnessing the collapse and implosion of the American empire,” says Cornell West.
Are the predictors of doom correct? Will America collapse like so many civilizations before us?
If we don’t learn from history, says historian Johan Norberg, that might happen.
“It’s a clash within every civilization on whether they should keep going, be open to innovation and progress, or whether they should retreat and decline,” he says in my new video.
Norberg argues that once people acquire a certain amount of comfort, they say, “‘We want stability, protection, we want someone to take care of us.’…That’s what leads to stagnation.”
People in power are generally comfortable with that.
“They’ve built their power on a particular system of production, certain ideas, a particular mentality….Whereas trade, innovation, growth, it’s all about change….What sets these golden ages apart is that, for a period of time, they managed to lift themselves above that and give more people more freedoms. That also allowed them to experiment more and come up with better technologies and raise living standards.”
Greece once led the world. Rome, too. Not anymore. Why?
Because people want “safety, stability, protection,” says Norberg. “They slow things down, get that stability, but they also get stagnation and poverty.”
China experienced a golden age during the Song Dynasty.
“They had more freedom than other Chinese dynasties….More openness to new ideas from strange places….[Farmers] were allowed to experiment with new grain, new forms of rice from Vietnam, and to trade with others. They came up with constant innovations. It became a very urbanized society that ushered in incredible experiments with iron, steel, textile, machines.”
The government scrapped laws that had limited what could and couldn’t be sold. They allowed markets to stay open all night (something not allowed before).
“In traditional Chinese society, people had fixed areas where they were allowed to live and where they had to return after having done a day’s work. People did not mingle and meet people from other classes, other professions….Under the Song Dynasty, the walls were torn down….They began to mingle with one another….They could do more business, listen to concerts, go to religious ceremonies. Eventually, Chinese society realized that this is how you make progress. This is how we become wealthier. When more people meet, when more people exchange goods and services and ideas, they prosper.”
But after the Mongols invaded, the Chinese banned ocean voyages and foreign trade. They stifled the experimentation that had made them rich.
“They wanted stability after all this uncertainty and chaos. ‘How do we do that?’…By regulating everything, telling people to stay in their places….They got stability. They also got 500 years of stagnation, 500 years that turned the richest and greatest civilization on the planet to a desperately poor country.”
If any country is in a golden age today, I would think it’s America, and Norberg agrees.
“I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else in human history. We have made such remarkable progress when it comes to expanding freedoms, reducing poverty, increasing life expectancy.”
But the American experiment is now 250 years old. Few golden ages last that long. Once affluent, people want stability, and a government that resists change.
“That then undermines the innovation that we need to keep golden ages going,” warns Norberg. “If we want a golden age to keep going, we have to fight for it.”
How?
“Double down on the institutions of liberal democracy, free markets, and unleash new waves of innovation and of progress. There is still time. We can still save this golden age.”
Here, they renew their annual tradition of looking at the year past and offering some thoughts on what the new year may bring.
Chabria: Welp, that was something. I can’t say 2025 was a stellar year for the American experiment, but it certainly will make the history books.
Before we dive into pure politics, I’ll start with something positive. I met a married couple at a No Kings rally in Sacramento who were dressed up as dinosaurs, inspired by the Portland Frog, an activist who wears an inflatable amphibian suit.
When I asked why, the husband told me, “If you don’t do something soon, you will have democracy be extinct.”
Crowds participate in No Kings Day in downtown Los Angeles in October.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
I loved that so many Americans were doing something by turning out to not just protest policies that hit personally, but to rally in support of democracy writ large. For many, it was their first time taking this kind of action, and they were doing it in a way that expressed optimism and possibility rather than giving in to anger or despair. Where there is humor, there is hope.
While eggs and gas are no longer exorbitant, the cost of just about everything else continues to climb. Or, in the case of beef, utility bills and insurance, skyrocket.
The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts is another of the long-standing institutions Trump has smeared his name across.
(Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press)
Meantime, the president seems less concerned with improving voters’ lives than smearing his name on every object he lays his eyes on, one of the latest examples being the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
I wonder: Why stop there? Why not brand these the United States of Trump-erica, then boast we live in the “hottest” country on Planet Trump?
Chabria: Stop giving him ideas!
You and I agree that it’s been a difficult year full of absurdity, but we’ve disagreed on how seriously to take Trump as a threat to democracy. As the year closes, I am more concerned than ever.
It’s not the ugly antics of ego that alarm me, but the devastating policies that will be hard to undo — if we get the chance to undo them.
Now, we are seeing overt antisemitism and racism on the MAGA right, with alarming acceptance from many. The far right has championed a debate as dumb as it is frightening, about “heritage” Americans being somehow a higher class of citizens than nonwhites.
Vice President JD Vance speaks at the University of Mississippi in Oxford.
(Gerald Herbert / Associated Press)
Recently, Vice President JD Vance gave a speech in which he announced, “In the United States of America, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore,” and Trump has said he wants to start taking away citizenship from legal immigrants. Both men claim America is a Christian nation, and eschew diversity as a value.
Do you still think American democracy is secure, and this political moment will pass without lasting damage to our democratic norms?
Barabak: I’ll start with some differentiation.
I agree that Trump is sowing seeds or, more specifically, enacting policies and programs, that will germinate and do damage for many years to come.
Alienating our allies, terrorizing communities with his prejudicial anti-immigrant policies — which go far beyond a reasonable tightening of border security — starving science and other research programs. The list is a long and depressing one, as you suggest.
But I do believe — cue the trumpets and cherubs — there is nothing beyond the power of voters to fix.
To quote, well, me, there is no organism on the planet more sensitive to heat and light than a politician. We’ve already seen an anti-Trump backlash in a series of elections held this year, in red and blue state alike. A strong repudiation in the 2026 midterm election will do more than all the editorial tut-tutting and protest marches combined. (Not that either are bad things.)
A stressed-out seeming poll worker in a polling station at Los Angeles’ Union Station.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
The best way to preserve our democracy and uphold America’s values is for unhappy citizens to register their dissent via the ballot box. And to address at least one of your concerns, I’m not too worried about Trump somehow nullifying the results, given legal checks and the decentralization of our election system.
Installing lawmakers in Congress with a mandate to hold Trump to account would be a good start toward repairing at least some of the damage he’s wrought. And if it turns into a Republican rout, it’ll be quite something to watch the president’s onetime allies run for the hills as fast as their weak knees allow.
Chabria: OMG! It’s a holiday miracle. We agree!
I think the midterms will be messy, but I don’t think this will be an election where Trump, or anyone, outright tries to undo overall results.
Although I do think the groundwork will be laid to sow further doubt in our election integrity ahead of 2028, and we will see bogus claims of fraud and lawsuits.
So the midterms very well could be a reset if Democrats take control of something, anything. We would likely not see past damage repaired, but may see enough opposition to slow the pace of whatever is happening now, and offer transparency and oversight.
But the 2026 election only matters if people vote, which historically is not something a great number of people do in midterms. At this point, there are few people out there who haven’t heard about the stakes in November, but that still doesn’t translate to folks — lazy, busy, distracted — weighing in.
If proposed restrictions on mail-in ballots or voter identification take effect, even just in some states, that will also change the outcomes.
But there is hope, always hope.
Barabak: On that note, let’s recognize a few of the many good things that happened in 2025.
MacKenzie Scott donated $700 million to more than a dozen historically Black colleges and universities, showing that not all tech billionaires are selfish and venal.
The Dodgers won their second championship and, while this San Francisco Giants fan was not pleased, their seven-game thriller against the Toronto Blue Jays was a World Series for the ages.
Any others, beside your demonstrating dinos, who deserve commendation?
Pope Leo XIV waves after delivering the Christmas Day blessing from the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican.
(Gregorio Borgia / Associated Press)
Chabria: Though I’m not Catholic, I have been surprisingly inspired by Pope Leo XIV.
So I’ll leave us with a bit of his advice for the future: “Be agents of communion, capable of breaking down the logic of division and polarization, of individualism and egocentrism.”
Many of us are tired, and suffering from Trump fatigue. Regardless, to put it in nonpapal terms, it may be a dumpster — but we’re all in it together.
Barabak: I’d like to end, as we do each year, with a thank you to our readers.
Anita and I wouldn’t be here — which would greatly please some folks — but for you. (And a special nod to the paid subscribers out there. You help keep the lights on.)
Here’s wishing each and all a happy, healthy and prosperous new year.
HONG KONG (AP) — A Hong Kong court will deliver its verdict on Monday in the trial of former pro-democracy media mogul Jimmy Lai, who’s charged with conspiracies to commit sedition and collusion with foreign forces in a case that marks how much the semi-autonomous Chinese city has changed since Beijing began a wide-ranging crackdown on dissent five years ago.
Lai, 78, was arrested in 2020 under a national security law imposed by Chinese authorities to quell the massive anti-government protests that rocked the city in 2019.
Lai’s 156-day trial is being closely watched by foreign governments and political observers as a test of the judicial independence and media freedom in the former British colony, which was promised it could maintain its Western-style civil liberties for 50 years after returning to Chinese rule in 1997.
Here’s what to know about the landmark trial:
Lai was arrested as China tightened its grip on Hong Kong
Hong Kong was long known for its vibrant press scene and protest culture in Asia. But following months of anti-government protests that brought hundreds of thousands of people into the streets, Beijing began a sweeping crackdown that has chilled most open dissent in the city.
Lai was one of the first prominent figures charged under the National Security Law, which has also been used to prosecute other leading activists and opposition politicians. Beijing deemed the law crucial for the city’s stability.
Dozens of civil society groups have closed, as tens of thousands of young professionals and middle-class families emigrated to destinations like Britain, Canada, Taiwan, Australia and the United States.
Lai’s newspaper was known for its fierce pro-democracy stand
Lai, a rags-to-riches tycoon who formerly owned clothing chain Giordano, entered the media world after the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown.
He described himself as driven by the belief that delivering information is equal to delivering freedom. His newspaper drew a strong following with tabloid-style coverage of politics and celebrities, as well as a strong pro-democracy stance. It often urged its readers to join protests.
Lai took to the streets himself, too, including in the 2019 protests.
Lai was arrested under the security law in August 2020 as about 200 police officers raided Apple Daily’s building. He has been in custody since December 2020.
Within a year, authorities used the same law to arrest senior executives of Apple Daily, raided its offices again and froze $2.3 million of its assets, effectively forcing the newspaper to shut down. The paper’s final edition sold out in hours, with readers scooping up all 1 million copies.
Authorities accused Lai of seeking to get sanctions imposed on China
The most serious accusation against Lai was that he and other people had invited the U.S. and other foreign powers to act against China with sanctions or other measures “under the guise of fighting for freedom and democracy.”
One major issue was whether Lai made such calls after the security law went into effect. Lai did not deny that he’d called for sanctions earlier, but insisted that he stopped once the law came in.
Prosecutors argued that even though Lai didn’t make direct requests for sanctions after the law took effect, he had tried to “create a false impression” of China to justify foreign countries to impose punishment, pointing to articles and his comments in online broadcasts critical of Hong Kong and China.
Lai’s lawyer Robert Pang said his remarks were just armchair punditry, akin to chatter “over the dim sum table.”
Lai said he wrote “without any sense of hostility or intention to be seditious.” Pang also pressed the court to consider freedom of expression and accused the prosecution of treating human rights as a foreign concept, leading to testy exchanges.
“It’s not wrong to support freedom of expression. It’s not wrong to support human rights,” he said. “Nor is it wrong not to love a particular administration or even the country.”
Judge Esther Toh responded that “It’s not wrong not to love the government, but if you do that by certain nefarious means, then it’s wrong.”
Lai’s foreign contacts came under attack
Prosecutors also dwelled on Lai’s foreign contacts, including meetings he had with former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and then-Vice President Mike Pence at the height of the 2019 protests.
Prosecutor Anthony Chau said Lai’s foreign connections showed his “unwavering intent to solicit” sanctions, blockades or other hostile activities against China and Hong Kong.
The prosecution also alleged Lai had conspired with fellow Apple Daily senior executives, members of an advocacy group called “Fight for Freedom Stand with Hong Kong” and the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China to call for foreign actions.
Six Apple Daily senior executives involved in the case pleaded guilty in 2022 and some of them served as prosecution witnesses.
Two other alleged co-conspirators linked to “Stand with Hong Kong” group also testified against Lai, but legal team called one of them “a serial liar” and argued that even if accepted his testimony didn’t show that Lai had agreed to work with them as alleged.
Outside the courtroom, the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, an international political group critical of China, said in a statement that it rejected “false claims” regarding Lai’s involvement with its network.
Foreign governments are watching the case
Lai, a British citizen, has drawn concerns from foreign governments, including the U.S. and the U.K. — both have called for his release. U.S. President Donald Trump said he has raised the case with China, and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has said his government has made it a priority to secure the release of Lai.
But Beijing has called Lai “an agent and pawn of anti-China foreign forces,” describing him as the main planner behind disruptive activities in the city.
Controversy arose even before his trial started. Lai’s trial, originally scheduled to start in December 2022, was postponed to 2023 as authorities barred a British lawyer from representing Lai, citing that it would likely pose national security risks.
Lai says his health is deteriorating, but he could face life in prison
In August, Pang said Lai had experienced heart palpitations and was given a heart monitor. His children raised concerns over his deteriorating health. The government said a medical examination of Lai found no abnormalities following his heart problems and that the medical care he received in custody was adequate.
The security law authorizes a range of sentences depending on the seriousness of the offense and the defendant’s role in it, from three years for the less serious to 10 years to life for people convicted of “grave” offenses.
If Lai is convicted, sentencing is expected on a later day. He can appeal the outcome.
Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
National Center for Civil and Human Rights Unveils Broken Promises Gallery “Guided” by Ida B. Wells
ATLANTA, December 5, 2025 (Newswire.com)
– The National Center for Civil and Human Rights’ new gallery, “Broken Promises,” is a permanent exhibit on Reconstruction-the period after the Civil War and Emancipation when America first attempted to build a multi-racial democracy. The Center invites people to experience the new gallery which opens to the public today, December 5, 2025, as part of the Center’s $58 million expansion.
The gallery presents Black progress during the Reconstruction Era, when nearly four million newly freed Black Americans claimed their rights as citizens, voted, won elected office, created schools, and reshaped economic and civic life across the South. It also presents the violent backlash that met and then suppressed those gains – through racial terror, political disenfranchisement, and Jim Crow legal segregation.
“Reconstruction reminds us that the expansion of rights in America has never moved in a straight line. Every reform toward wider freedom has been accompanied by efforts to limit those rights,” said Jill Savitt, the CEO of the Center. “Recognizing that pattern helps us understand the forces that have long shaped America, up until today.”
Curated by the Center’s Chief Program Officer, Kama Pierce, the gallery has anti-lynching crusader Ida B. Wells as its “docent,” and focuses on three cities – Wilmington, N.C., Atlanta, Ga., and Tulsa, Okla. In each city, Black achievement provoked white backlash that resulted in massacres and racial terror.
The immersive gallery contains artifacts from the Without Sanctuary Collection, including a fragment of a noose and photographs of lynchings that were turned into postcards for entertainment. The artifacts deepen visitors’ understanding of how racial terror was wielded as a strategy.
The gallery’s memorial space features a historical marker honoring Mary Turner, who was lynched in 1918. Turner’s family erected the public marker to honor her – but it was consistently defaced. The family donated the marker — marred by 11 bullet holes — to the Center. Artist Lonnie Holley has interpreted the marker in the gallery’s memorial space.
“The Mary Turner marker is a powerful artifact that bears witness twice – first to the original terror, and again to the present resistance to let the truth be told,” said Pierce.
The Center decided to add a gallery on Reconstruction because the era has not always been fully or accurately represented in American classrooms. The Center also wanted to provide more context for its signature gallery on the Civil Rights Movement.
“After Reconstruction, the United States entered a decades-long period of Jim Crow segregation and unequal protection for Black Americans,” said Pierce. “The Civil Rights Movement emerged not as a new struggle, but as a renewed demand to enforce the promises first made during Reconstruction.”
The Center received a $2 million grant from the Mellon Foundation for the exhibition.
About the National Center for Civil and Human Rights The National Center for Civil and Human Rights is a museum and cultural organization that inspires the changemaker in each of us. Opened in 2014, the Center connects US civil rights history to global human rights movements today. Our experiences highlight people who have worked to protect rights and who model how individuals create positive change. For more information, visit civilandhumanrights.org. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram @civilandhumanrights and LinkedIn at linkedin.com/company/ncchr.
New Delhi — India’s government revoked an order on Wednesday that had directed smartphone makers such as Apple and Samsung to install a state-developed and owned security app on all new devices. The move came after two days of criticism from opposition politicians and privacy organizations that the “Sanchar Saathi” app was an effort to snoop on citizens through their phones.
“Government has decided not to make the pre-installation mandatory for mobile manufacturers,” India’s Ministry of Communications said in a statement Wednesday afternoon.
The initial order, issued privately to phone makers by the ministry late last month, was leaked to Indian media outlets on Monday. It directed all phone makers to preinstall the Sanchar Saathi (which means Communication Partner in Hindi) app on new phones within 90 days, and also on older phones through software updates.
A man installs the state-owned and run cybersecurity application Sanchar Saathi on his mobile phone in Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India, Dec. 2, 2025.
Firdous Nazir/NurPhoto/Getty
The order, reported from Monday by numerous Indian media outlets and later acknowledged by the government, had asked manufacturers to ensure that the functions of the app could not be “disabled or restricted.”
There was an immediate backlash on Monday, with opposition political parties quickly labelling the government software a “snooping app” and drawing parallels to Pegasus, the hacking spyware developed, marketed and licensed to governments around the world by the Israeli company NSO Group.
On Tuesday, India’s national Minister of Communications Jyotiraditya Scindia insisted to journalists outside the parliament that the Sanchar Sathi app was non-compulsory and in line with democratic principles. He said smartphone owners could activate the app at their convenience to access its benefits, and they could also delete it from devices at any time.
He did not, however, say anything on Tuesday to deny or change the order to phone makers to ensure the app was pre-installed.
On Wednesday, Scindia insisted that “neither is snooping possible, nor it will be done” with the app.
India’s Minister of Communications Jyotiraditya M. Scindia speaks during a news conference at the National Media Center, in an Oct. 17, 2025 file photo taken in New Delhi, India.
Vipin Kumar/Hindustan Times/Getty
While the order for it to be installed universally was revoked, the government continued defending the app on Wednesday, saying the intent had been to “provide access to cybersecurity to all citizens,” and insisting that it was “secure and purely meant to help citizens.”
Opposition politicians say “it is a snooping app”
The government’s U-turn came after sharp criticism from opposition political parties and digital rights advocates.
“It is a snooping app. It’s ridiculous. Citizens have the right to privacy. Everyone must have the right to privacy to send messages to family, friends, without the government looking at everything,” Priyanka Gandhi, leader of the opposition Congress party, told reporters outside India’s parliament on Tuesday.
“They brought in Pegasus and have been unable to keep it under control. MPs and MLAs all say that their phones are being tapped. For the last 11 years, basic rights of the Indians have been taken away… This is the real violation of National Security,” said Renuka Chowdhury, another Congress member.
Digital privacy advocates also raised concerns about the government order, saying it would breach citizens’ right to privacy in a country with more than 1.2 billion cell phone users.
“No government will ever be expected to acknowledge that a government app is a snooping tool, even in China and Russia, where such apps have been mandated,” Indian technology analyst Prasanto K. Roy told CBS News on Wednesday. “A government statement alone is not adequate to inspire confidence in this.”
Roy said the government should restrict the default permissions settings that enable the app to access data on smartphones to the absolute minimum, and explain why those permissions were deemed necessary. He added that the code for the app should be open-source and published online, to enable independent security professionals to scrutinise it.
“In plain terms, this converts every smartphone sold in India into a vessel for state-mandated software that the user cannot meaningfully refuse, control, or remove,” the Internet for Freedom organization said in a statement Tuesday, before the government revoked its order. “For this to work in practice, the app will almost certainly need system level or root level access … so that it cannot be disabled. That design choice erodes the protections that normally prevent one app from peering into the data of others, and turns Sanchar Saathi into a permanent, non-consensual point of access sitting inside the operating system of every Indian smartphone user.”
Technology analyst Roy told CBS News the real issue was “not about faith in the government’s benevolence,” but rather “concerns about potential access to a wide range of data by many junior or mid-level officials in government or law enforcement,” as there was no clarity about what data could be accessed via the app, or who would have access to it.
Major phone makers did not publicly react to the government order, but the Reuters news agency reported that Apple had planned to refuse to comply.
Indian government says it’s just trying to help
The government argues that the app allows users to track, block and recover lost or stolen smartphones using the device’s International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI), a unique code assigned to all handsets sold around the world.
It also enables users to check how many unique mobile data connections are registered under their name, which it says will help people identify and disable fraudulent numbers and accounts opened by scammers.
Other features include tools to report suspected fraudulent calls and to verify the authenticity of devices being used to make purchases, according to officials.
The government said in its multiple statements that the app had already been downloaded 14 million times, and used to help trace 2.6 million lost or stolen phones. It said Sanchar Sathi had helped in the disconnection of over 4 million fraudulent connections, based on citizen reports.
BOSTON — With her voter-approved audit of the Legislature stalled, State Auditor Diana DiZoglio is leading a new effort to pry open Beacon Hill’s secret legislative process.
The Methuen Democrat has launched a ballot initiative to make the House of Representatives, Senate and the governor’s office subject to the state’s public records law and she said supporters have cleared a major hurdle to the 2026 ballot by collecting more than 100,000 signatures from registered voters.
This page requires Javascript.
Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.
Democracy is a powerful and dangerous force, as America and the European democracies are discovering. Elites on both sides of the Atlantic haven’t done a very good job of handling it.
We have some anniversaries coming up next year that may help us. We have, of course, the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The same day is the bicentennial of the deaths of the two founders most responsible for that great document, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. The Declaration is vital to understanding who we are as Americans.
