News
Mystery drones flying over New Jersey have residents and officials puzzled
Residents across New Jersey have been trying to decipher who has been flying mysterious unidentified drones over the state, with some taking to Facebook to share videos of sightings. Above, a screengrab from video of a potential sighting shared on Facebook.
Scott Ingenito/Screenshot by NPR
hide caption
toggle caption
Scott Ingenito/Screenshot by NPR
There is something strange happening in the skies above New Jersey, and no one seems quite sure what to make of it — not the governor, not members of Congress, not the FBI.
What they know is that starting in mid-November, dozens of identified drones have been spotted at night flying in at least 10 different counties across the state. What they don’t know is where the drones are coming from, who’s flying them and why.
The drones have been spotted above critical infrastructure, according to authorities, including reservoirs, electric transmission lines, rail stations, police departments and military installations.
A U.S. Army base in northern Morris County has already had at least 11 sightings, Army officials said this week, several of which came even after the Federal Aviation Administration moved to temporarily restrict drones from flying overhead. In neighboring Somerset County, the FAA has also banned drones from flying over the golf course owned by President-elect Donald Trump.
It’s not illegal to fly a drone in New Jersey, so long as the operator is certified with the FAA. Small unregistered drones being used for recreation can be flown in unrestricted areas.
But the number and mysterious nature of the sightings have left many Garden State residents on edge. So too has their size, as many of the drones appear to be larger than those that are typically used by hobbyists.
The office of New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy did not respond to a request for comment, but speaking at an unrelated bill signing earlier this week, Murphy said there had been 49 sightings on Sunday alone — though several of those may have been duplicates or merely possible sightings.
In a posting on social media last week, Murphy said state officials were “actively monitoring the situation and in close coordination with our federal and law enforcement partners.”
“There is no known threat to the public at this time,” Murphy said.
Murphy’s assurances have done little to quiet the concerns of residents and other officials across the state. In a statement posted to Facebook last week, the police chief of Florham Park, N.J., said “their presence appears nefarious in nature.” And during a House hearing on Monday focused on unmanned aerial systems, N.J. Rep. Chris Smith, a Republican, said he thought the drones were a “very serious threat.”
Given the alarm the drones have caused, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said in a statement Monday that he was calling for more transparency from federal officials.
“There is a growing sense of uncertainty and urgency across the state — from constituents and local officials alike — despite assurances that the drones pose no known threats to public safety,” Booker wrote in a letter to leaders at the FBI, and the Departments of Transportation and Homeland Security.
“As such, I urge you to share any relevant information about these drone sightings with the public. Without transparency, I believe that rumors, fear, and misinformation will continue to spread,” he added.
So far at least one theory has been ruled out — that the drones were coming from the Picatinny Arsenal military research base in Morris County. In a statement obtained by the Morristown Daily Record on Monday, base commander Lt. Col. Craig Bonham II said the drones were not theirs.
“While the source and cause of these aircraft operating in our area remain unknown, we can confirm that they are not the result of any Picatinny Arsenal-related activities,” Bonham said.
The FBI has opened an investigation, but bureau officials say key questions remain unresolved.
Speaking to House lawmakers Monday, Robert Wheeler, the assistant director for the bureau’s critical incident response group, said the FBI still did not know whether a specific individual was responsible for the flights or whether they were the work of a larger group. Wheeler also could not definitively rule out the possibility that the drones may pose a risk to public safety or national security.

“There’s nothing that is known that would lead me to say that, but we just don’t know, and that’s the concerning part,” Wheeler said.
In a statement, the FBI said it “remains engaged with our federal, state, local, and tribal partners to share information and protect the public.” It added that any drones “that pose a danger to any aircraft or are observed operating in restricted airspace or near critical infrastructure and other sensitive sites, can be reported to the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI (1-800-225-5324) or online at tips.fbi.gov.”
Unidentified drones have puzzled the public before. Earlier this year, the Wall Street Journal reported about unidentified drones swarming Langley Air Force Base in Virginia for 17 days. As with the drones over New Jersey, those flights called to memory the Chinese spy balloon that the U.S. military shot down over the coast of South Carolina in 2023.
The flights over New Jersey have led to calls for the military to shoot down the unidentified drones, but under federal law the military is largely prohibited from doing so unless the drone poses an imminent threat. It is also illegal for individuals to shoot down any aircraft — including drones.
News
Video: Who Is Trying to Replace Planned Parenthood?
new video loaded: Who Is Trying to Replace Planned Parenthood?
By Caroline Kitchener, Melanie Bencosme, Karen Hanley, June Kim and Pierre Kattar
December 22, 2025
News
Weather tracker: Further flood watches issued across California
After prolonged heavy rainfall and devastating flooding across the Pacific north-west in the past few weeks, further flood watches have been issued across California through this week.
With 50-75mm (2-3in) of rainfall already reported across northern California this weekend, a series of atmospheric rivers will continue to bring periods of heavy rain and mountain snow across the northern and central parts of the state, with flood watches extending until Friday.
Cumulative rainfall totals are expected to widely exceed 50mm (2in) across a vast swathe of California by Boxing Day, but with totals around 200-300mm (8-12in) possible for the north-western corner of California and western-facing slopes of the northern Sierra Nevada mountains.
Los Angeles could receive 100-150mm (4-6in) of rainfall between Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, which could make it one of the wettest Christmases on record for the city. River and urban flooding are likely – particularly where there is run-off from high ground – with additional risks of mudslides and rockslides in mountain and foothill areas.
Winter storm warnings are also in effect for Yosemite national park, with the potential for 1.8-2.4 metres (6-8ft) of accumulating snow by Boxing Day. Heavy snow alongside strong winds will make travel very difficult over the festive period.
Heavy rain, lightning and strong winds are forecast across large parts of Zimbabwe leading up to Christmas. A level 2 weather warning has been issued by the Meteorological Services Department from Sunday 21 December to Wednesday 24 December. Some areas are expected to see more than 50mm of rainfall within a 24-hour period. The rain will be accompanied by hail, frequent lightning, and strong winds. These conditions have been attributed to the interaction between warm, moist air with low-pressure systems over the western and northern parts of the country.
Australia will see some large variations in temperatures over the festive period. Sydney, which is experiencing temperatures above 40C, is expected to tumble down to about 22C by Christmas Day, about 5C below average for this time of year. Perth is going to see temperatures gradually creep up, reaching a peak of 40C around Christmas Day. This is about 10C above average for this time of year.
News
Lawmakers threaten Attorney General Bondi with contempt over incomplete Epstein files
Attorney General Pam Bondi, accompanied by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche (L) and FBI Director Kash Patel (R), speaks during a news conference at the Justice Department on Nov. 19. Some lawmakers said the department’s release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein had too many redactions as well as missing information.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Two lawmakers are threatening a seldom-used congressional sanction against the Department of Justice over what they say is a failure to release all of its files on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein by a deadline set in law.
Reps. Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie spearheaded the effort to force the Epstein files’ release by co-sponsoring the Epstein Files Transparency Act, but both have said the release had too many redactions as well as missing information.

“I think the most expeditious way to get justice for these victims is to bring inherent contempt against Pam Bondi,” Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, told CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday. “Basically Ro Khanna and I are talking about and drafting that right now.”
Inherent contempt refers to Congress’ authority to fine or arrest and then bring to trial officers who are obstructing legislative functions. It was last successfully used in the 1930s, according to the American Bar Association.
Khanna, a California Democrat, noted that the House would not need the Senate’s approval to take such action, which he said would result in a fine for Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“I believe we’re going to get bipartisan support in holding her accountable,” he told Face the Nation.
Justice Department defends partial release
The Justice Department on Sunday defended its initial, partial release of documents, some of which were heavily redacted.
“The material that we released on Friday, or the material that we’re going to release over the next a couple of weeks, is exactly what the statute requires us to release,” said Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on NBC’s Meet the Press, referring to the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Blanche said the administration has hundreds of lawyers going through the remaining documents to ensure that victims’ information is protected. Still, lawmakers from both parties remain unsatisfied.
“Any evidence or any kind of indication that there’s not a full reveal on this, this will just plague them for months and months more,” said Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky on ABC’s This Week. “My suggestion would be — give up all the information, release it.”
Blanche told NBC he was not taking the threats of contempt seriously.
“Not even a little bit. Bring it on,” he said, adding that lawmakers who have spoken negatively about Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel “have no idea what they’re talking about.”
Back and forth over Trump photo
The trove of documents released Friday contained little new information about Epstein, prompting accusations that the department wasn’t complying with the law. There was a photograph included in Friday’s release that showed a desk full of photos, including at least one of President Trump. It was among more than a dozen photographs no longer available in the Justice Department’s “Epstein Library” by Saturday, NPR found.

On Sunday, the Justice Department re-uploaded the photo of the desk, and provided an explanation on X.
“The Southern District of New York flagged an image of President Trump for potential further action to protect victims,” the post read. “Out of an abundance of caution, the Department of Justice temporarily removed the image for further review. After the review, it was determined there is no evidence that any Epstein victims are depicted in the photograph, and it has been reposted without any alteration or redaction.”
The Justice Department did not offer an explanation for the other photos whose access had been removed.
Blanche told NBC the Justice Department was not redacting information around Trump or any other individual involved with Epstein. He said the Justice Department had removed photos from the public files “because a judge in New York has ordered us to listen to any victim or victim rights group, if they have any concerns about the material that we’re putting up.

“And so when we hear concerns, whether it’s photographs of women that we do not believe are victims, or we didn’t have information to show that they were victims, but we learned that there are concerns, of course, we’re taking that photograph down and we’re going to address it,” he said.
Earlier Sunday, the Justice Department also posted to X a new version of the 119-page transcript of grand jury proceedings in the case of Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. The original version had been entirely redacted.
“Here is the document now with minimal redactions. Documents and photos will continue to be reviewed consistent with the law and with an abundance of caution for victims and their families,” the Justice Department wrote in its post.
-
Iowa1 week agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Iowa1 week agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine6 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland1 week agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
South Dakota1 week agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
New Mexico6 days agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
Detroit, MI7 days ago‘Love being a pedo’: Metro Detroit doctor, attorney, therapist accused in web of child porn chats
-
Maine6 days agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off