Connect with us

News

Visual analysis: Ukraine’s war of survival enters third year

Published

on

Visual analysis: Ukraine’s war of survival enters third year

Ukrainians enter the third year of war with a bleaker outlook than at any point since the early days of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion on February 24 2022.

A year ago they were brimming with optimism over their chances of pushing Moscow’s troops back and breaking the so-called land bridge between the occupied Crimean peninsula and the other parts of Russian-held territory in eastern Ukraine. But the counteroffensive failed to make headway, with opposing forces now entrenched along the 1,000km frontline.

Kyiv’s best hope is to hold the line and cause its enemy much higher casualties than it incurs. Putin’s bet is that Russian superiority in both mobilising men and defence industrial production will break western and Ukrainian resolve.

Most Ukrainians are determined to fight on for their freedom. But their forces are running low on ammunition and air defence interceptors. The country also needs to find about 500,000 new recruits this year. Wavering US military support and Europe struggling to make up shortfalls in arms supplies will make this more difficult.

Here is a visual guide to how Russia’s war against Ukraine is bearing on each nation’s military, economy and politics.

Advertisement

Military

The land battle in 2023 consisted of minor gains for the Ukrainian forces, compared with their lightning counteroffensive in 2022 which liberated swaths of territory.

Ukraine lost the eastern city of Bakhmut in May after a gruelling nine-month battle in which Russia was estimated to have lost some 30,000 men. Many of the dead were convicts recruited by the Wagner Group, led by Yevgeny Prigozhin, who a month later staged a mutiny against Moscow and then died in a plane crash.

The much-anticipated Ukrainian counteroffensive of summer 2023 ground to a halt after advancing a mere 30km. Russian minefields and fortifications coupled with constant drone surveillance and instant artillery strikes proved insurmountable.

Valeriy Zaluzhny, then commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian armed forces, admitted in November that the land war was at a “stalemate” and that only a technological revolution, including drones and electronic warfare, would give his country back the advantage. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy replaced Zaluzhny with Oleksandr Syrsky this month.

Key battlefield and frontline movements

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Advertisement

Ukraine’s strategy of “active defence” is intended to bleed the enemy while minimising its own losses. Russia on the other hand is taking the “meat-grinder” approach by recruiting vast numbers of soldiers who seem expendable on the battlefield.

Western officials estimate some 350,000 Russians have been killed or badly injured since February 2022, while 70,000 Ukrainians have died and 120,000 have been seriously wounded.

After a mobilisation wave in 2022, Moscow claims to have recruited an additional 490,000 men last year mostly by offering generous pay and recruiting convicts from prisons. While Ukraine struggles to replace soldiers who have been fighting for two years, Russia is expected to add another 400,000 fresh recruits in 2024.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Towards the end of 2023, Ukraine began facing shortfalls in artillery supplies from the US and Europe. Rationing of shells is having an impact on the battlefield, making it harder for Ukrainian forces to fend off Russian infantry assaults or strike battery positions. This month, Ukraine withdrew its troops from the frontline town of Avdiivka after a four-month battle.

With the land war looking grim, Ukraine pivoted last year to using technology to carry out daring attacks within occupied territory and in Russia.

Advertisement

Ukraine’s biggest military achievements were drone and missile strikes against military facilities in Russian-occupied Crimea. Ukrainian forces are estimated to have sunk one-fifth of Russia’s Black Sea fleet stationed in the area.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

There has also been a vast uptick in attacks deeper into Russian territory, with home-built Ukrainian missiles and drones striking military facilities, munitions factories and energy infrastructure in Russia.

Ukraine aims to step up these strikes on Russian soil in 2024, with the aim of at least disrupting if not crippling the Kremlin’s war effort and bringing the conflict home to ordinary Russians.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Economy and trade

Both Russia and Ukraine’s war economies grew faster than expected last year, with Moscow defying western sanctions imposed in 2022 that were aimed at reducing the Kremlin’s revenues and ability to fund the conflict.

The Kremlin has been successful in evading curbs on its oil exports, while at the same time firing up the Russian defence industrial complex to produce large amounts of ammunition, drones, missiles and armour. However, Ukrainian and western officials say sanctions banning western chip exports to Russia are limiting Moscow’s capacity to produce more sophisticated kit.

Advertisement

Russia’s annual artillery munition production has risen from 800,000 prewar to an estimated 2.5mn, or 4mn including refurbished shells. EU and US production capacity stands at about 700,000 and 400,000 respectively, although the EU aims to hit 1.4mn by the end of this year and the US 1.2mn by 2024.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Ukraine’s economy suffered a catastrophic slump following Russia’s full-scale invasion, but it has since begun to recover.

One bright spot for Kyiv is that its attacks on Russia’s Black Sea fleet in Crimea have forced the Kremlin to pull its ships away from the Ukrainian coast. This has allowed Ukraine to restart regular cargo shipping from its Black Sea ports, despite Russia pulling out of the grain initiative, which has restored a major export route and vital economic lifeline.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

The surge in Russia’s defence spending may be buoying the growth of gross domestic product but it is also fuelling inflation, which is now higher than in Ukraine.

This will erode real wages and living standards in a country where investments in crumbling Soviet-era infrastructure and public utilities are badly needed.

Advertisement

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Politics

Ahead of Putin’s expected re-election in March, a new wave of repression against dissenting voices is taking place in Russia. Western politicians and regime critics have roundly blamed Putin for the death of the president’s most prominent critic, Alexei Navalny.

While few signs of the public turning against the president are reflected in opinion polls, this may not be a reliable indicator in a regime dominated by fear. Anti-war criticism is outlawed in Russia and any show of support for dissidents is crushed.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Zelenskyy’s public support is not holding up quite so well, as war fatigue and fears of abandonment by western allies set in.

The Ukrainian leader has also faced criticism over his decision to replace Zaluzhny and accusations of the erosion of media freedom. Elections in Ukraine have also been suspended during the country’s state of emergency.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Advertisement

Nevertheless, some 85 per cent of Ukrainians are confident of their country’s victory over Russia, according to a survey in February conducted by the Kyiv-based Rating Group.

However, Ukrainians know that international support is an important condition for victory. Just 19 per cent of respondents believed Ukraine could defeat Russia without international assistance.

Support for Ukraine dropped markedly in the US last year, particularly among Republicans, who have held up further military aid for Kyiv and whose presidential frontrunner Donald Trump is seeking to oust Ukraine ally Joe Biden from the White House in November.

Unless Congress approves a $60bn aid package, there will be no further transfers of weaponry from US stockpiles to Ukraine.

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

In the EU there is still a solid majority in favour of helping Ukraine, but public support is beginning to soften, potentially increasing pressure on European leaders to rethink their stance.

But for now there is no sign of solidarity with Kyiv breaking down. After a two-month delay caused by Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, EU leaders this month agreed a four-year €50bn financial support plan for Ukraine and several European capitals have made significant pledges of military aid.

Advertisement

You are seeing a snapshot of an interactive graphic. This is most likely due to being offline or JavaScript being disabled in your browser.

Most military experts said Russia probably lacked the combat power to break through Ukrainian defensive positions in a sweeping manoeuvre this year.

But Ukraine urgently needs western supplies of ammunition. If it does not receive them, holding its lines will prove difficult — and Kyiv risks losing a lot of men by simply holding on, even if it does so successfully.

“What Ukraine is losing is its capacity to mount a counteroffensive,” said military analyst François Heisbourg.

News

Anthropic CEO says he’s sticking to AI “red lines” despite clash with Pentagon

Published

on

Anthropic CEO says he’s sticking to AI “red lines” despite clash with Pentagon

Hours after a bitter feud between the Pentagon and Anthropic ended with the Trump administration cutting off the artificial intelligence startup, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei told CBS News in an exclusive interview Friday night he wants to work with the military — but only if it addresses the firm’s concerns.

“We are still interested in working with them as long as it is in line with our red lines,” he said.

The conflict centers on Anthropic’s push for guardrails that explicitly prevent the military from using its powerful Claude AI model to conduct mass surveillance on Americans or to power autonomous weapons. The Pentagon wants the ability to use Claude for “all lawful purposes,” and says it isn’t interested in either of the uses that Anthropic was concerned about.

The military gave Anthropic a Friday evening deadline to either meet its demands or get cut off from its lucrative Defense Department contracts. With the two sides still seemingly still far apart, President Trump on Friday ordered federal agencies to “immediately” stop using Anthropic’s technology. Then, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared the company a “supply chain risk,” directing military contractors to also stop working with the AI startup.

In his interview later Friday, Amodei stood by the guardrails sought by Anthropic, which is the only company whose AI model is deployed on the Pentagon’s classified networks.

Advertisement

“Our position is clear. We have these two red lines. We’ve had them from day one. We are still advocating for those red lines. We’re not going to move on those red lines,” Amodei later said. “If we can get to the point with the department where we can see things the same way, then perhaps there could be an agreement. For our part and for the sake of U.S. national security, we continue to want to make this work.”

Amodei told CBS News that Anthropic has sought to deploy its AI models for military use because “we are patriotic Americans” and “we believe in this country.” But the company is worried that some potential uses of AI could clash with American values, he said.

Mass surveillance is a risk, Amodei argued, because “things may become possible with AI that weren’t possible before,” and the technology’s potential is “getting ahead of the law.” He warned that the government could buy data from private firms and use AI to analyze it.

In theory, artificial intelligence could also be used to power fully autonomous weapons that select targets and carry out strikes without any human input. Amodei said his company isn’t categorically opposed to those kinds of weapons, especially if U.S. adversaries develop them, but “the reliability is not there yet” and “we need to have a conversation about oversight.”


The Free Press: Will AI Doom Us All? The Market Can’t Decide

Advertisement

Since AI technology is still unpredictable, Amodei is concerned that autonomous weapons could target the wrong people by mistake. And unlike with human-powered weaponry, it’s not clear who is responsible for the decisions made by fully autonomous weapons.

“We don’t want to sell something that we don’t think is reliable, and we don’t want to sell something that could get our own people killed or that could get innocent people killed,” he said.

Amodei called the guardrails around surveillance and autonomous weapons “narrow exceptions,” and said the company has no evidence that the military has run into either of them.

The Pentagon’s position is that federal law already prevents it from surveilling Americans en masse, and fully autonomous weapons are already restricted by internal military policies, so there is no need to put restrictions on those uses of AI in writing.

Emil Michael, the Pentagon’s chief technology officer, told CBS News in an interview Thursday: “At some level, you have to trust your military to do the right thing.”

Advertisement

“But we do have to be prepared for the future. We do have to be prepared for what China is doing,” Michael said, referring to how U.S. adversaries use AI. “So we’ll never say that we’re not going to be able to defend ourselves in writing to a company.” 

As a compromise, Michael said the military had offered written acknowledgements of the federal laws and military policies that restrict mass surveillance and autonomous weapons — though Anthropic said that offer was “paired with legalese” that allowed the guardrails to be ignored.

As the conflict between Anthropic and the Pentagon escalated this week, top military officials accused the company and Amodei of trying to impose their values onto the government. Hegseth called Anthropic “sanctimonious” and arrogant, Michael said that Amodei has a “God-complex” and Mr. Trump called the AI startup a “radical left, woke company.”

“Their true objective is unmistakable: to seize veto power over the operational decisions of the United States military. That is unacceptable,” Hegseth alleged.

Said Mr. Trump: “Their selfishness is putting AMERICAN LIVES at risk, our Troops in danger, and our National Security in JEOPARDY.”

Advertisement

Asked if weighty questions about AI guardrails should be left up to Anthropic rather than the government, Amodei told CBS News that “one of the things about a free market and free enterprise is, different folks can provide different products under different principles.”

He also said: “I think we are a good judge of what our models can do reliably and what they cannot do reliably.”

In the long run, he said, Congress should probably weigh in on AI safeguards.

“But Congress is not the fastest moving body in the world. And for right now, we are the ones who see this technology on the front line,” said Amodei.

With Anthropic and the Pentagon unable to reach a deal by Friday, the military is now expected to phase out its use of Anthropic’s AI technology within six months and transition to what Hegseth called “a better and more patriotic service.”

Advertisement

Hegseth also labeled Anthropic a “supply chain risk” and said all companies that do business with the military are now expected to cut off “any commercial activity with Anthropic.” 

Amodei called that an “unprecedented” move for an American firm rather than a foreign adversary, and he said the government’s statements have been “retaliatory and punitive.” And he argued that Hegseth doesn’t have the legal authority to bar all military contractors from working with Anthropic, and can only stop them from using Anthropic for government contracts.

He also said that Anthropic hasn’t formally received any information from the Pentagon informing it of a supply chain risk designation, but “when we receive some kind of formal action, we will look at it, we will understand it and we will challenge it in court.”

Asked if he has a message for the president, Amodei said “everything we have done has been for the sake of this country” and “for the sake of supporting U.S. national security.”

“Disagreeing with the government is the most American thing in the world,” he said. “And we are patriots. In everything we have done here, we have stood up for the values of this country.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

How the federal government is painting immigrants as criminals on social media

Published

on

How the federal government is painting immigrants as criminals on social media

Getty Images, Dept. of Homeland Security and The White House via X/Collage by Emily Bogle/NPR

Two days after At Chandee, who goes by Ricky, was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the White House’s X account posted about him, calling the 52-year-old the “WORST OF WORST” and a “CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIEN.”

Except that the photo the White House posted was of a different person. The post also incorrectly claimed Chandee had multiple felony convictions — he has one, for second-degree assault in 1993 when he was 18 years old. He shot two people in the legs and served three years in prison.

Advertisement
At "Ricky" Chandee with his wife, Tina Huynh-Chandee.

At “Ricky” Chandee with his wife, Tina Huynh-Chandee.

Via the Chandee family


hide caption

toggle caption

Via the Chandee family

Advertisement

Chandee, who came to the U.S. as a child refugee, was ordered to be deported back to his home country, Laos. But Laos had not been accepting all of the people the U.S. wanted it to, so the federal government determined that it was likely infeasible to deport him, his lawyer Linus Chan told NPR. Chandee therefore was granted permission to stay in the U.S. and work so long as he checked in with immigration authorities periodically. He has not missed a check-in in over 30 years and has not had another criminal incident.

People who know Chandee do not see him as “worst of the worst.”

After Chandee completed his prison sentence, he finished school and became an engineering technician. He worked for the City of Minneapolis for 26 years, became a father, and his son grew up to join the military.

In his free time, Chandee enjoys hiking and foraging for mushrooms, Minnesota Public Radio reported.

Advertisement

“We are proud to work alongside At ‘Ricky’ Chandee,” said Tim Sexton, Director of Public Works for the City of Minneapolis in a statement. “I don’t understand why he would be a target for removal now, why he was brutally detained and swiftly flown to Texas, or how his removal benefits our city or country.” Chandee is petitioning for his release in federal court.

Chandee’s case is not unique 

Social media accounts from the White House, the Department of Homeland Security and other immigration agencies have spent much of the past year posting about people detained in the administration’s immigration crackdown, typically portraying them as hardened, violent criminals. That’s even as over 70% of the people detained don’t have criminal records according to ICE data.

NPR’s research of cases in Minnesota shows that while many of the people who have been highlighted on social media do have recent, serious criminal records, about a quarter are like Chandee, with decades-old convictions, minor offenses or only pending criminal proceedings. Scholars of immigration, media and criminal law say such a media campaign is unprecedented and paints a distorted picture of immigrants and crime.

A year into President Trump’s second term, the X accounts of DHS and ICE have posted about more than 2,000 people who were targets of mass deportation efforts. Starting late last March, DHS and ICE began posting on X on a near daily basis, often highlighting apprehensions of multiple people a day, an NPR review of government social media posts show.

Advertisement

Among the 2,000 people highlighted by the agencies, NPR identified 130 who were arrested by federal agents in Minnesota and tried to verify the government’s statements about their criminal histories.

In most of the social media posts, the government did not provide the state where the conviction occurred or the person’s age. Public court records do not tend to include photos so definitive identification can be a challenge.

NPR derived its findings from cases where it was able to locate a name and matching criminal history in the Minnesota court and detention system, in nationwide criminal history databases, sex offender databases, and in some cases, federal courts and other state courts.

In 19 of the 130 cases, roughly 1-in-7, public records show the most recent convictions were at least 20 years ago.

Seventeen of the 19 cases with old convictions did include violent crimes like homicide and first-degree sexual assault. ICE provided some of those names to Fox News as key examples of the agency’s accomplishments. “It’s the most disturbing list I’ve ever seen,” said Fox News reporter Bill Melugin on X, highlighting the criminal convictions of each person on the list.

Advertisement

For seven people, their only criminal history involved driving under the influence or disorderly conduct.

ICE agents approach a house before detaining two people in Minneapolis on Jan. 13.

ICE agents approach a house before detaining two people in Minneapolis on Jan. 13.

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

Six of the 130 Minnesota cases highlighted by the administration involved people with no criminal convictions. The government’s social media posts for those six instead rely upon the charges and arrests as evidence of their criminality, even though arrests don’t always lead to charges and charges can be dismissed.

In yet another case, the government highlighted a criminal charge even while noting it had been dismissed. (The person did have other existing convictions.)

For 37 of the 130 people, NPR was unable to confirm matching criminal history after consulting the databases and news coverage. Some of the names turned up no criminal history at all. The government said these people committed crimes ranging from homicide and assault to drug trafficking, and cited one by name to Fox News. NPR tried to reach out to all 37 people and their families for comment but did not receive a response from any.

Advertisement

In a statement to NPR, DHS’s chief spokesperson Lauren Bis did not dispute NPR’s findings or provide documentation where NPR wasn’t able to confirm matching criminal history.

“The fact that NPR is defending murderers and pedophiles is gross,” Bis wrote. “We hear far too much about criminals and not enough about their victims.” before listing four of the people with old convictions of homicide and sexual assault, underlining the date of deportation order for three of them.

Images designed to trigger emotion

The stream of social media posts with photos of mostly nonwhite people are meant to draw an emotional response, says Leo Chavez, an emeritus professor of anthropology at the University of California, Irvine. They “have been used repeatedly over and over to get people to buy into, really drastic, drastic and draconian actions and policies,” he said.

Chavez, whose most recent book is The Latino Threat: How Alarmist Rhetoric Misrepresents Immigrants, Citizens, and the Nation, recalls how political campaigns in past decades presented images of Latinos — often men — without context. “Just by showing their image, showing brown people, particularly brown men, it’s supposed to be scary.”

The fact that the government’s social media posts come with statements about criminal history as well as photos reinforces that emotional response, Chavez said. DHS has previously acknowledged inaccuracies on their website. But even if the department issues corrections, Chavez said, “the goal was actually achieved, which was to reinforce the criminality and the visualization.”

Advertisement

CNN’s analysis of DHS’s “Arrested: Worst of the Worst” website showed that for hundreds out of about 25,000 people posted on the website, the crimes listed were not violent felonies. Instead, DHS listed people with records that included traffic offenses, marijuana possession or illegal reentry. DHS said the website had a “glitch” that it will fix but also that the people in question “have [committed] additional crimes.”

“I’ve never seen anything like this when it comes to immigration enforcement in the modern era,” said Juliet Stumpf, a professor at Lewis & Clark Law School who studies the intersection of immigration and criminal law. She said the drumbeat of social media posts focused on specific individuals was like “FBI’s most wanted posters” or “like reality TV shows.”

Then-DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, flanked by deputy director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Madison Sheahan, left, and Acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Todd Lyons, speaks during a news conference at ICE Headquarters, in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2025.

Then-DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, flanked by deputy director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Madison Sheahan (left), and Acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Todd Lyons, speaks during a news conference at ICE Headquarters, in Washington, D.C., on May 21, 2025.

Jose Luis Magana/AP


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Jose Luis Magana/AP

Stumpf drew a parallel with an incident from the 1950s when the U.S. government deported two permanent residents suspected of being communists. “The government was kind of proclaiming and celebrating their deportation because getting rid of these communists was making the country safer,” said Stumpf, “Maybe that’s comparable to something like [this].”

An analysis by the Deportation Data Project shows a dramatic increase in arrests of noncitizens without criminal records during President Trump’s current term compared to President Biden’s term.

Advertisement

“If you look at research, immigrants actually tend to commit fewer crimes than even U.S. citizens do. And that’s true of immigrants who have lawful status here and immigrants who don’t,” said Stumpf. “If we have a number of social media posts that are painting immigrants as the worst of the worst…it’s actually really putting out a distorted version of reality about who immigrants actually are.”

Some claims are disputed by other authorities

In some posts, DHS and ICE have also used photos of people and statements about their criminal histories to burnish the federal government’s accomplishments, defend their agents and criticize states like Minnesota. State and local authorities have in turn pushed back, and some of the federal government’s claims about the people it has detained have been met with setbacks in the courts.

DHS accused Minnesota’s Cottonwood County of not honoring detainers, written requests by ICE to hold prisoners in custody for a period of time so ICE can pick them up. In one post, the agency identified a person who was charged with child sexual abuse, writing “This is who sanctuary city politicians and anti-ICE agitators are defending.”

The Cottonwood County sheriff’s office said DHS’s post “misrepresented the truth” in their own post on Facebook. According to their account, the county did honor the detainer but ICE said it was unable to pick up the person before the order expired and the county had to release the suspect.

The Minnesota Department of Corrections wrote in a blog post that dozens of people DHS listed on its “Worst of the Worst” website were not arrested as DHS described, but were transferred to ICE by the state because they were already in state custody. The Corrections Department has since launched a page dedicated to “correct the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) repeated false claims.”

Advertisement

The “Worst of the Worst” website has some overlap with the department’s social media posts, but it contains a much larger number of people — over 30,000 nationally. It included a Colombian soccer star who was extradited to the U.S., tried in Texas, convicted of drug trafficking and served time in federal prison. The website incorrectly describes him as being arrested in Wisconsin. The soccer player, Jhon Viáfara Mina, recently finished his sentence early and returned to Colombia, according to Spanish newspaper El Diario Vasco.

In some instances, DHS and ICE wrote about incidents where they ran into conflict when carrying out arrests. In those posts, they named the arrestees and posted their photos. But in one case where the incident went to court, the government’s account of the events shifted. After a federal agent shot Julio C. Sosa-Celis in Minneapolis in January, DHS claimed he was lodging a “violent attack on law enforcement.” Assault charges against Sosa-Celis fell apart in court as new evidence surfaced, and the officers involved were put on leave.

Despite the fact that the charges were dropped, DHS’s post profiling Sosa-Celis remains online.

Continue Reading

News

Bill Clinton to testify before House committee investigating Epstein links

Published

on

Bill Clinton to testify before House committee investigating Epstein links

Former president Bill Clinton is scheduled to give deposition Friday to a congressional committee investigating his links to Jeffrey Epstein, one day after Hillary Clinton testified before the committee and called the proceedings “partisan political theatre” and “an insult to the American people”.

During remarks before the House oversight committee, Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state, insisted on Thursday that she had never met Epstein.

The former Democratic president, however, flew on Epstein’s private jet several times in the early 2000s but said he never visited his island.

Clinton, who engaged in an extramarital affair while president and has been accused of sexual misconduct by three women, also appears in a photo from the recently released files, in a hot tub with Epstein and a woman whose identity is redacted.

Clinton has denied the sexual misconduct claims and was not charged with any crimes. He also has not been accused of any wrongdoing connected to Epstein.

Advertisement

Epstein visited the White House at least 17 times during the early years of Clinton’s presidency, according to White House visitor records cited in news reports. Clinton said he cut ties with him around 2005, before the disgraced financier, who died from suicide in 2019, pleaded guilty to solicitation of a minor in Florida.

The House committee subpoenaed the Clintons in August. They initially refused to testify but agreed after Republicans threatened to hold them in contempt.

The Clintons asked for their depositions to be held publicly, with the former president stating that to do so behind closed doors would amount to a “kangaroo court”.

“Let’s stop the games + do this the right way: in a public hearing,” Clinton said on X earlier this month.

The committee’s chair, James Comer, did not grant their request, and the proceedings will be conducted behind closed doors with video to be released later.

Advertisement

On Thursday, Hillary Clinton’s proceedings were briefly halted after representative Lauren Boebert leaked an image of Clinton testifying.

During the full day deposition, Clinton said she had no information about Epstein and did not recall ever meeting him.

Before the deposition, Comer said it would be a long interview and that one with Bill Clinton would be “even longer”.

Continue Reading

Trending