In a sweeping restructuring move aligned with its ambitious artificial intelligence expansion strategy, Meta Platforms has announced plans to eliminate approximately 10 percent of its global workforce, according to internal company documents cited by multiple media outlets this Thursday. The layoffs mark the latest step in the social media conglomerate’s push for operational streamlining as it diverts massive resources toward AI development and infrastructure buildout.
标签： North America
北美洲
-
Falklands veteran hopes King can persuade Trump to ‘back down’
A decades-long sovereignty dispute over the Falkland Islands (known as the Malvinas to Argentina) has reignited after leaked reports suggested the United States could reconsider its longstanding stance on the contested South Atlantic territory, drawing sharp pushback from a decorated British Falklands War veteran.
Simon Weston, a Welsh Guardsman who survived the 1982 Falklands conflict with life-altering 46% burns after the bombing of RFA Sir Galahad, has publicly urged King Charles III to press US President Donald Trump to reverse course during the monarch’s upcoming state visit to Washington next week. In an exclusive interview with BBC Newsnight, Weston framed the potential US shift as a disrespectful slight to the sacrifices of service members who fought for the islands four decades ago.
Weston characterized the reported policy review as a childish “hissy fit” from Trump, saying it undermines the meaning of the sacrifices made by British troops and dismisses the right of Falklands islanders to self-determination. “He’s paying absolutely no heed to the humanity that he’s abusing with his words because the people of the Falklands deserve more respect, but so do every veteran who served down there deserve more respect,” Weston said. Calling Trump’s stance “very unstatesmanlike,” the veteran added that he was “sad and disappointed it’s come to this.”
The reported potential policy shift stems from an internal Pentagon email obtained by Reuters, which claims the US is weighing options to penalize NATO allies that it accuses of failing to back its campaign against Iran. The BBC has not independently verified the contents of the leaked email.
Downing Street has quickly reaffirmed Britain’s longheld position: sovereignty of the Falklands rests exclusively with the UK, and the islanders’ right to self-determination is non-negotiable. The United States has attempted to walk back tensions following the leak, however. A US State Department spokesperson told AFP on Friday that Washington’s stance remains unchanged: it maintains formal neutrality on sovereignty claims, acknowledges that both the UK and Argentina assert competing claims, and recognizes the UK’s de facto administration of the archipelago.
Sovereignty over the resource-rich islands has been a core nationalist rallying point for successive Argentine governments for decades. A commemorative plaque claiming the islands as Argentine territory sits in a prominent position in the country’s presidential palace. Current Argentine President Javier Milei, a close political ally of Trump, doubled down on his country’s claim this week, posting in all capital letters on social media: “The Malvinas were, are, and always will be Argentine.” Milei’s foreign minister has repeated calls to restart bilateral sovereignty negotiations with the UK—a demand the UK has repeatedly rejected—and condemned ongoing British efforts to explore and extract oil from the large offshore reserves surrounding the islands.
-
Dozens of sloths died before opening of Sloth World attraction in Florida
A planned Orlando, Florida, sloth exhibit billed as the region’s only purpose-built “slothnarium” has been thrown into chaos after regulators confirmed 31 of the mammals imported for the attraction died months before its scheduled spring opening, triggering widespread scrutiny of animal welfare practices and regulatory gaps in the state’s wildlife permitting system.
According to a report released Friday by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), the bulk of the fatalities stemmed from dangerous, unfit living conditions at a private Florida warehouse where the imported sloths were held awaiting the attraction’s completion. The incident has already prompted additional investigations from multiple state and local regulators, as well as harsh criticism from animal conservation groups and elected officials.
The 31 sloths were imported in two separate shipments to be displayed at Sloth World, a permanent public tourist attraction marketed as a rainforest-inspired sanctuary built specifically to prioritize sloth welfare, located along Orlando’s busy tourist corridor. The FWC’s investigation, obtained by the BBC, details two separate fatal incidents that unfolded between late 2024 and early 2025.
The first shipment, carrying 21 sloths imported from Guyana, arrived in Florida in December 2024. Investigators found the animals were held in a disused warehouse that lacked basic running water and working electricity. Staff purchased portable space heaters to warm the temperature-sensitive tropical mammals, which naturally thrive in constant temperatures between 70°F and 86°F, but the heaters overloaded the building’s electrical system, tripping a circuit breaker that cut off power to the heaters. For at least one full night, the sloths were left without any heating during a week when outdoor low temperatures dropped to 46°F, according to regional historical weather data. All 21 sloths ultimately died from exposure to cold, a condition investigators labeled “cold stun.”
A second shipment of 10 sloths imported from Peru arrived in February 2025. Two of the animals were already dead on arrival, and the remaining eight were found to be severely emaciated. All eight later died from complications linked to their poor pre-existing health, the report confirmed.
When FWC investigators launched their probe, Peter Bandre, who is publicly listed as Sloth World’s vice president and promoted in the attraction’s marketing as “one of the most respected sloth experts in the world,” admitted the warehouse was never properly prepared to receive the animals. He told investigators the shipment could not be canceled after it was already en route, confirming the cold exposure killed the first group of sloths. The FWC also found that on two separate occasions, sloths under Bandre’s care were held in enclosures that failed to meet the state’s minimum captive wildlife welfare standards, resulting in a verbal warning at the time, but no formal citation.
Ben Agresta, owner of Sloth World, has pushed back against the FWC’s findings, dismissing the official report as rife with misinformation. Agresta claims the sloths died from an undetectable virus that produced no visible symptoms and could not be identified even after post-mortem necropsies. The BBC has reached out to Agresta, Sloth World, and its listed representatives for additional comment, but has not received a formal response.
The FWC closed its investigation without issuing any written warnings or formal citations, but an agency spokesperson confirmed that multiple other regulatory bodies are currently conducting separate probes into the incident. Last week, Orange County’s Building Safety Department posted a stop-work order at the warehouse where the sloths were held, citing alleged violations of state building codes and local county regulations.
With regulatory investigations ongoing and the site shuttered by local officials, it remains unclear whether Sloth World will ever open to the public as planned. The 13 surviving sloths intended for the attraction are currently being cared for by another accredited zoo in Central Florida, according to local media reports. While Agresta holds a valid state wildlife permit that allows him to exhibit captive wildlife, the incident has exposed major gaps in Florida’s regulatory framework, according to critics.
Democratic Florida State Representative Anna Eskamani, who has publicly criticized the handling of the case, noted that current rules do not require the FWC to be automatically notified when captive wildlife dies under a permit. She argued that the deaths would likely have never been uncovered without reports from concerned private citizens. “If it wasn’t for everyday people who care and reported these deaths it’s hard to know when FWC would have even learned about the deaths,” Eskamani said.
Leading sloth conservation organizations had already raised red flags about Sloth World long before the deaths were revealed. The Sloth Institute and the Sloth Conservation Foundation both warned that capturing wild sloths and shipping them long distances for captive exhibits puts the animals at extreme risk of life-threatening health complications stemming from sudden diet changes, stress, and adaptation to artificial environments. Sam Trull, executive director of The Sloth Institute, noted that for many illegally or improperly captured sloths, the stress of transit and captivity proves fatal.
-
‘We cried together’: Trump’s deportation drive forces tough decisions for couples
Since US President Donald Trump began his second term in January 2025, a sharp escalation in immigration detention and deportation operations has forced hundreds of thousands of mixed-status American families—couples where one partner is a US citizen and the other lives in the country without authorized immigration status—to make an agonizing choice: stay separated forever, or leave the only home many of them have ever known to rebuild their lives together in Mexico. This is the untold story of two families who chose love over distance, chronicling their pain, sacrifice, and fragile hope for the future.
For Janie Pérez, a 29-year-old US-born woman from Missouri, that fateful choice began on an ordinary October morning. Her husband Alejandro, an undocumented Mexican migrant who had lived in the US for 16 years, left for his cook job at a local café, just like any other workday. Minutes after he walked out the door, Janie’s phone rang. On the line, Alejandro whispered the words that would upend their entire lives: “I think ICE is here.”
As Janie held the phone, she could hear US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in the background moving to arrest her husband. She immediately began to pray, but in that moment, she knew her life would never be the same. What she could not anticipate, though, was that just months later, she would be packing up her entire life, leaving her home country to follow her deported husband to central Mexico, alongside their two young daughters, Luna and Lexie.
Alejandro’s journey to the US began long before he met Janie. Born in Michoacán, Mexico, he first crossed into the US without documentation at age 7 with his father. When he returned to Mexico as a pre-teen, he faced a growing threat that haunts young men across his home region: forced recruitment by violent criminal organizations. To escape that danger, he made the decision to cross back into the US unlawfully as a young adult, building a quiet, law-abiding life working in restaurants for 16 years.
The pair met in 2019 while working at the same Missouri café—Alejandro as a cook, Janie as a waitress. Bonded by their shared Christian faith, they fell in love and married, and immediately sought legal help to secure Alejandro permanent resident status (a green card) through their marriage. But their efforts failed: current US immigration law bars most people who entered the country unlawfully from gaining legal status through spousal sponsorship, trapping thousands of mixed-status couples in legal limbo.
Though they knew Alejandro could be detained at any time, they tried to live as normal a life as possible, raising their two young daughters. That normalcy shattered the morning ICE agents arrested Alejandro. Over the next five months, as Alejandro awaited deportation in a detention center, Janie could only meet him through a thick pane of glass, pressing their hands together from opposite sides and crying together. She watched him in court hearings, shackled at the hands, feet and waist, a sight she describes as heart-wrenching.
When Alejandro was formally deported to Mexico in March 2025, Janie did not hesitate. Leaving behind all her friends, family and the life she had always known, she packed her belongings and brought their two daughters across the border to join him, reuniting at Querétaro’s international airport. “I had tears of happiness when I saw him again,” Janie recalled. For Alejandro, the emotion of hugging his 3-year-old daughter after five months apart was overwhelming: “It can’t be explained in words.”
Today, the family is adjusting to their new life. Janie, a native English speaker who does not speak Spanish, admits building a life from scratch in an unfamiliar country has been far from easy. Still, she has no regrets about her choice. “There is nothing more important than being together,” she says. She also pushes back against the narrative that justifies deporting undocumented migrants like her husband. Though Alejandro entered the US without authorization, he has never been convicted of a crime. He came to escape violence and build a better life, a decision Janie calls morally justified. “All these years he has devoted himself to working and he has no criminal record. That makes me think that many people want this to be a country only for white people. I am white and that does not make me a better person.”
Janie and Alejandro’s story is far from unique. Official US estimates place the number of US citizens married to undocumented partners at roughly 1.1 million. As deportation operations have ramped up, hundreds of these families are making the same choice to relocate to Mexico. For Raegan Klein, a US citizen, and her husband Alfredo Linares, an undocumented Mexican who had lived in the US for 22 years, the choice came earlier: they left voluntarily before they could be separated by detention and deportation.
Alfredo, who entered the US unlawfully at 17, built a successful career as a fine dining chef, and the couple had just launched their own Japanese-style street food barbecue business in Los Angeles when Trump took office and ramped up enforcement. Raegan, terrified that ICE would detain Alfredo and tear their family apart, convinced him to move voluntarily to Puerto Vallarta, a popular tourist hub on Mexico’s Pacific coast.
Leaving was devastating for Alfredo, who had built his entire adult life in the US. In a tearful social media post the day he left, he wrote: “Today is my last day here in the United States. After 20 years, it’s time to leave.” Now, one year after their move, the challenges persist. Though Alfredo is Mexican by birth, he left as a teenager and feels like a stranger in the country he now calls home. The pair have struggled to build a steady income: Alfredo cooks private dinners for small groups, but the work is inconsistent, and Raegan, who does not speak Spanish, has been unable to find steady remote work. There have been many days when they have questioned their decision.
Still, Raegan stands by the choice to stay together. Despite the financial struggles, they hold onto a new dream: opening their own restaurant in Puerto Vallarta, catering to the area’s large community of foreign tourists. Right now, they lack the startup capital to make that dream a reality, but they continue to work toward it. For these couples, the American dream that once drew their partners north of the border is now in the rearview mirror; what remains is the quiet hope of building a new “Mexican dream” together, united as a family.
The current US administration says its immigration enforcement priorities focus on deporting undocumented migrants with criminal records. Department of Homeland Security data, however, contradicts that framing: less than 38% of people deported under the new policy have ever been charged or convicted of a crime. For the growing number of mixed-status families, that means the threat of displacement and separation remains a daily reality, forcing impossible choices that prioritize immigration policy over family unity.
-
King’s ‘high stakes’ visit with Trump will be toughest test yet of his reign
Next week, King Charles III and Queen Camilla will embark on a historic state visit to the United States, a trip that insiders and analysts universally describe as a high-risk, high-reward endeavor unfolding against the most strained Anglo-American diplomatic backdrop in a century. Far from a perfunctory ceremonial stop marked by photo opportunities and celebrity receptions, the four-day tour carries genuine geopolitical and personal jeopardy, shaped by overlapping global conflicts, domestic political friction, lingering royal scandal, and the monarch’s ongoing health challenges.
The visit arrives at a moment of extraordinary volatility across global politics. A fragile ceasefire currently holds in the Middle East following violent escalation around Iran, creating a tense international backdrop for diplomatic engagement. On the US side, the trip’s host, President Donald Trump, brings a well-documented record of unpredictability that has kept officials on both sides of the Atlantic on high alert. Recent controversies, including a widely criticized AI-generated image that appeared to depict Trump as a religious figure – a awkward situation for Charles, who serves as Supreme Governor of the Church of England – have added extra layers of sensitivity to the meeting.
While Trump has long expressed open admiration for the British monarchy, his public criticism of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and his dismissive description of UK aircraft carriers as “toys” compared to American warships, has put the King – who holds the constitutional role of Head of the Armed Forces – in a delicate position. Transatlantic and NATO relations between the US and UK have sunk to a perilously low point in the months since Trump’s 2025 visit to Windsor Castle, with open disputes over the UK’s stance on the Iran conflict and Trump’s public downplaying of British military contributions in Afghanistan. Former Obama administration State Department advisor Max Bergmann warns that even with a carefully scripted itinerary designed to avoid unscripted interactions, there is no guarantee Trump will curb his usual off-the-cuff commentary during the visit.
“The Trump show doesn’t get turned off because the King is in town,” Bergmann cautioned.
Personal challenges compound the diplomatic pressure facing the 77-year-old monarch, who has lived with cancer for more than two years and will tackle a packed schedule of events across Washington D.C., New York City, and a Virginia national park. Most notably, lingering fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and Prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s long-standing ties to the convicted sex offender has already drawn demands from survivors’ advocates for a meeting with the King. Prince Andrew has consistently denied all allegations of wrongdoing connected to the case, and reached an out-of-court settlement with accuser Virginia Giuffre in 2022 without admitting liability or issuing an apology. Still, Giuffre’s family says they plan to lobby the King during his visit, asking for just 10 minutes of his time to receive a symbolic gesture of acknowledgement and support for ongoing investigations.
“It’s an olive branch that we’re looking for,” said Amanda Roberts, Giuffre’s sister-in-law. “Acknowledgement, shaking the hand and looking us in the face and saying, ‘I will continue on my promise to honour a fair trial. I will support the investigations. And I’m sorry that all these survivors have waited so long for justice.’”
Despite these stacked challenges, the trip also opens a rare window of opportunity to reset strained transatlantic ties. Analysts note that Charles, a longstanding advocate for liberal democratic values and the rules-based international order, has a unique personal connection with Trump that no UK elected official can match. Trump has repeatedly praised the King, calling him “a brave man, and a great man” in a recent BBC interview, and previous private interactions between the two saw Charles successfully persuade Trump to take a harder line on supporting Ukraine. Biographer Andrew Lownie, a leading royal commentator, argues that even with their stark ideological differences – Charles is a committed multilateralist, while Trump has embraced an America First agenda – the King’s decades of diplomatic experience let him find common ground.
The centerpiece of the visit will be Charles’ address to a joint session of the US Congress, only the second time a British monarch has spoken to the full legislature, following his mother Queen Elizabeth II’s landmark 1991 speech. That 1991 address, which opened with a lighthearted joke about the Queen’s 1976 “talking hat” microphone mishap, made a forceful case for consensus politics and multilateral cooperation – a message that analysts say carries extra resonance today amid rising populism and global conflict. Charles’ speech is expected to balance flattery of the US president with quiet advocacy for core UK priorities: strengthened NATO unity, continued support for Ukraine, and progress on a bilateral US-UK trade agreement, leavened with gentle historical nods to the long-standing shared ties between the two nations.
Royal insiders describe the trip as a “delicate balancing act,” acknowledging the current frictions but emphasizing that the visit is as much about celebrating the long history of the special relationship as it is about addressing current divides. The timing also aligns with the 250th anniversary of US independence, a symbolic marker that royal officials hope will highlight how far the transatlantic partnership has evolved since the Revolutionary War.
While some analysts, like Bergmann, warn that the deep rift in current political relations makes this an inherently fraught endeavor, others see the visit as an unexpectedly timely opportunity for the UK. Harvard Kennedy School director Shannon Felton Spence, who organized a 2015 US visit for Charles when he was Prince of Wales, notes that the British monarchy remains the UK’s most effective soft power asset in the United States, particularly with a president who openly admires the institution.
“This couldn’t have come at a better moment for the UK,” Spence said. “They’re playing exactly the right card, at a time when they didn’t even realize they’d be needing to play it.”
Beyond the immediate political outcome, historians point to the long-term impact of royal state visits, from Queen Elizabeth II’s famous ride with Ronald Reagan in 1982 to Princess Diana’s iconic dance with John Travolta at the White House in 1985, moments that shaped public perception of the transatlantic relationship for decades. For King Charles, this trip will test whether his decades of preparation for the throne will let him navigate an unprecedented set of challenges to pull the special relationship back from its current low.
-
Meeting with the King would ‘demonstrate human dignity’, says Epstein survivor
A request for a meeting between survivors of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and senior British royals, including King Charles III, has been turned down by Buckingham Palace ahead of the upcoming state visit to the United States. One of Epstein’s survivors has publicly stated that a meeting with the King would have stood as a powerful demonstration of respect for human dignity, highlighting the symbolic weight that such an encounter would have carried for victims of sexual exploitation.
The confirmation of the royal household’s refusal came from an anonymous source within Buckingham Palace, who confirmed that no audience between the King and the survivor group is scheduled to take place during the trip. This decision has drawn attention to the ongoing conversations around accountability for powerful figures connected to Epstein’s network, as well as the expectations that many survivors hold for global leaders to acknowledge their trauma.
Epstein, a wealthy financier, died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, leaving dozens of survivors still seeking acknowledgment and justice. Many of his victims have spent years pushing for conversations with prominent public figures who once associated with Epstein, in hopes of raising broader awareness about sexual violence and the failures of systems that enabled his crimes for decades. The rejected request for a meeting during the British monarch’s high-profile US visit places renewed focus on how institutional bodies engage with survivors of high-profile abuse cases.
-
OpenAI boss ‘deeply sorry’ for not telling police of Tumbler Ridge suspect’s account
The chief executive and co-founder of leading artificial intelligence developer OpenAI has issued a formal public apology to the small Canadian community of Tumbler Ridge, after the company faced widespread criticism for failing to notify law enforcement of a problematic ChatGPT account tied to the perpetrator of a deadly January mass shooting.
In a personal letter released publicly Thursday, Sam Altman expressed deep regret that OpenAI did not alert Canadian police to the account, which the company banned six months before the attack for violating content policies. “The pain your community has endured is unimaginable,” Altman wrote in the correspondence addressed directly to Tumbler Ridge residents. “While I know that words can never be enough, I believe an apology is necessary to recognize the harm and irreversible loss your community has suffered.” Altman, who is a parent to a young child, added, “I cannot imagine anything worse in this world than losing a child.”
The shooting, carried out by 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar, left eight people dead and nearly 30 others injured, making it one of the deadliest mass violent events in the history of British Columbia. Multiple of the victims were young secondary school students. Van Rootselaar died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound during the incident, law enforcement confirmed after the attack.
In the weeks following the January shooting, OpenAI acknowledged that it had identified and banned Van Rootselaar’s ChatGPT account months before the attack over inappropriate usage. However, the company chose not to share the account information with police at the time, arguing that the activity on the account did not meet OpenAI’s internal threshold for a credible, imminent plan to inflict serious physical harm on others. Altman explained in his letter that he delayed the public apology out of respect for the community’s grieving process, noting that time was needed to allow residents to mourn before any public statement.
An OpenAI spokesperson confirmed the authenticity of Altman’s letter to reporters, but declined to provide any additional comment beyond the content of the correspondence. The apology comes after the parents of a student who was severely wounded in the school attack filed a lawsuit against OpenAI. The lawsuit alleges that the company had clear, specific knowledge of the shooter’s long-term planning for a mass casualty event but failed to take any action to warn authorities or prevent the attack.
This incident is not the only legal and regulatory scrutiny OpenAI is facing over connections between its AI chatbot and mass violent attacks. The company is already the subject of an active criminal investigation in Florida, tied to a 2025 shooting at Florida State University that left two people dead and multiple others injured. Authorities are probing the case after the suspect accused in that attack reportedly used ChatGPT to plan his assault.
In response to growing pressure over AI safety protocols, OpenAI has committed to updating and strengthening its internal safety monitoring systems. In his letter, Altman reaffirmed the company’s commitment to collaboration, writing that OpenAI will continue working with all levels of government to put new safeguards in place that prevent a similar tragedy from occurring in the future.
-
US to allow firing squads, gas, and electrocution for federal executions
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued a landmark policy shift ordering federal prison authorities to expand the approved methods of capital punishment, adding firing squads, gas asphyxiation and electrocution to the existing protocol of lethal injection. The new policy was formally outlined in a 48-page internal memo published to the public this Friday, framing the expansion as a measure to strengthen the federal death penalty system.
According to the DOJ’s official justification, broadening the range of execution methods will advance three core goals: deterring the most heinous violent offenses, delivering lawful justice to crime victims, and providing long-awaited closure for victims’ surviving families. This policy reversal comes on the heels of major shifts in federal capital punishment over the last two presidential terms. The prior Biden administration had imposed a moratorium on nearly all federal executions, and before leaving office in January 2025, President Joe Biden granted clemency to 37 out of 40 inmates held on federal death row.
In contrast, President Donald Trump — a longtime outspoken proponent of capital punishment — made resuming federal executions one of his first priorities upon returning to the Oval Office in January 2025. On his first day back in office, he signed an executive order mandating that the DOJ pursue death sentences for all severe crimes that warrant the punishment, as well as for cases where an undocumented immigrant kills a law enforcement officer. This mirrors actions from Trump’s first term, when he lifted a 17-year federal moratorium on executions and oversaw the execution of 13 death row inmates before leaving office in 2021.
The DOJ memo retains its backing of lethal injection as a viable execution method, describing the sedative pentobarbital as the “gold standard” for lethal injection protocols. Pentobarbital has served as the default drug for federal executions since 1993, but it has faced growing headwinds in recent years: death penalty opponents have repeatedly labeled it a cruel, inhumane method of execution, and consistent drug shortages have created widespread logistical challenges for carrying out court-ordered executions. In an accompanying report, the DOJ explained that expanding the list of approved methods eliminates the risk of delayed or canceled executions due to drug unavailability, ensuring the department can always carry out legally authorized death sentences regardless of supply chain barriers.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche doubled down on the policy in an official statement, criticizing the prior Biden administration for failing its core duty to protect the American public. Blanche argued that the previous administration abdicated its responsibility by refusing to pursue the death penalty for the nation’s most dangerous offenders, including convicted terrorists, child murderers, and officers who kill law enforcement personnel.
The policy change has drawn sharp condemnation from congressional Democrats, who have long opposed the expansion of capital punishment. Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin called the move “cruel, immoral, and discriminatory” in a public statement posted to the social platform X, adding that expanding the federal death penalty will stand as a permanent “stain on our history.”
While federal capital punishment policy has shifted with changes in presidential administration, a number of U.S. states have already adopted alternative execution methods in response to the same drug supply issues that prompted the DOJ’s policy change. Data from the Death Penalty Information Center shows that five U.S. states currently permit the use of firing squads for executions. In 2024, Alabama made history as the first U.S. state to carry out an execution using nitrogen hypoxia, and four additional states have since approved the method for future use.
-
US soldier pinched for profiting off Maduro abduction bets
In a stunning revelation of institutional corruption that has rocked the second Trump administration, the U.S. Department of Justice unveiled multiple criminal charges Thursday against an active-duty Army special operations soldier accused of illicitly profiting more than $400,000 by using top-secret insider information to bet on the timing of a U.S. military operation to abduct Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro earlier this year.
Master Sergeant Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a soldier directly involved in the planning and execution of the covert January mission targeting Maduro, faces five counts: unlawful use of confidential government data for personal profit, theft of nonpublic official information, commodities fraud, wire fraud, and an illegal monetary transaction, federal prosecutors confirmed in the official statement.
Court documents detail that Van Dyke placed 13 separate wagers totaling approximately $33,000 on Polymarket, a popular online prediction marketplace. All of his bets backed the “yes” outcome for questions asking whether U.S. forces would carry out an incursion into Venezuela and remove Maduro from power before the end of January. The classified knowledge he held about the operation’s timeline allowed him to net more than $400,000 in illicit gains from the wagers, according to prosecutors.
When questioned by reporters Thursday, former and current U.S. President Donald Trump claimed he had no prior knowledge of the charges against Van Dyke. Drawing a parallel to disgraced baseball icon Pete Rose, who was permanently banned from Major League Baseball for gambling on his own team’s games, Trump downplayed the severity of the offense depending on its direction. “Was he betting that they would get [Maduro] or they wouldn’t get him? That’s like Pete Rose betting on his own team. Now, if he bet against his team, that would be no good,” Trump told reporters. The comment lines up with Trump’s past support for Rose: in February 2025, Trump announced on Truth Social that he planned to issue a full pardon to Rose, arguing the baseball legend had only done wrong by betting on his own team to win.
The unsealing of Van Dyke’s indictment has amplified long-simmering concerns that officials and insiders throughout the Trump administration are widely exploiting nonpublic government information for personal financial gain. Independent watchdogs and governance experts have repeatedly labeled this second Trump term the most openly corrupt administration in U.S. history.
“The culture of insider trading and corruption starts at the top and is permeating everywhere and everything. This is what people hate about our government now,” said Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat from Illinois, echoing widespread criticism of the administration’s ethical standards. Many critics also point out the stark double standard in the case: while the low-ranking soldier who profited from the bet has been arrested, no senior officials who authorized the widely condemned illegal incursion into Venezuela have faced any accountability to date.
“I hear someone was arrested in connection with the patently illegal invasion of Venezuela. Can’t wait to see who is going to be held accountable for this lawless use of military force,” wrote Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the U.S. Program at the International Crisis Group, highlighting the gap in accountability for the operation itself.
The Van Dyke case is not an isolated incident: suspicious, well-timed bets connected to high-stakes U.S. military actions, from the Maduro abduction to the recent U.S. military strike on Iran, have raised alarms that systemic insider trading is widespread among Trump administration officials and associates with access to nonpublic information. Just last month, the Financial Times reported that a broker working for U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth attempted to place a multi-million-dollar investment in weapons stocks in the weeks leading up to the joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran.
“The Iran War has become a corruption racket for the people close to President Trump,” said Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat. Murphy is the lead sponsor of new legislation that would ban private wagering on government actions, terrorist events, military conflicts, assassinations, and other events where a participant has advance confidential knowledge or control over the outcome.
-
Latin American, Caribbean countries launch trade platform for China
On Friday, diplomats, business leaders, and cultural stakeholders from over 40 Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) nations gathered in Beijing to mark the official launch of the groundbreaking Latin America and Caribbean Countries Trade and Cultural Expo. Slated to run September 19 to 20, 2026 in Beijing, the event — branded LAC Day 2026 — marks the first comprehensive cross-sector platform for LAC nations hosted on Chinese soil, and is organized collectively by LAC countries’ diplomatic missions based in China.
Regional diplomatic officials frame the new initiative as a pivotal turning point for China-LAC relations, shifting bilateral and multilateral engagement from ad-hoc exchanges to a structured, institutionalized long-term partnership. Hallam Henry, Barbados’ ambassador to China, emphasized that the expo serves far more than a commercial purpose: it acts as a transcontinental bridge connecting individuals, enterprises, and sovereign nations to nurture deeper mutual understanding and collaborative action. “This expo is not just a showcase of products and services,” Henry noted. “It is a testament to the enduring friendship and partnership between Latin America, the Caribbean and China.”
Martin Charles, ambassador of the Dominican Republic to China and dean of the LAC diplomatic corps in China, called the initiative a historic milestone for the region’s collective engagement with Chinese markets and society. As the first event of its kind planned and executed entirely by the LAC diplomatic community in China, Charles explained that the platform embodies the region’s shared commitment to expanding connections beyond traditional trade ties, encompassing culture, tourism, and technological innovation.
Charles outlined the complementary strengths that both sides bring to the partnership: the LAC region holds abundant natural resources, fast-growing emerging consumer markets, and a rapidly expanding community of entrepreneurial talent, while China offers unmatched access to cutting-edge advanced technologies and one of the world’s largest global trade networks. “Our goal is to build lasting partnerships and open new channels of cooperation,” Charles added.
The upcoming expo will feature a diverse multi-track program that blends cultural exchange and commercial opportunity, including traditional cultural performances, regional food exhibitions, contemporary fashion shows, targeted business matchmaking sessions, and national branding promotion events for participating LAC nations. Organizers designed the agenda intentionally to weave cultural exchange into commercial engagement, reflecting a growing global trend of integrating soft power and trade development to build deeper, more people-centered partnerships.
Liu Kang, president of the event’s managing organization, added that the initiative seeks to establish a larger-scale, more immersive, and more influential permanent platform for LAC countries to build visibility and connection within China. “This is not only a cultural showcase, but also a bridge of friendship, a link for cooperation and a shared vision for the future,” Liu said.