Connect with us

News

Vladimir Putin hints at swapping US reporter Evan Gershkovich for Russian assassin

Published

on

Vladimir Putin hints at swapping US reporter Evan Gershkovich for Russian assassin

Vladimir Putin on Thursday said he believed “an agreement can be reached” to free imprisoned US journalist Evan Gershkovich, suggesting he would swap him for a Russian assassin serving a life sentence in Germany.

Russia’s president compared Gershkovich’s imprisonment in Moscow to “a person serving a sentence in an allied country of the US”, a likely reference to Vadim Krasikov, who killed a former Chechen rebel Zelimkhan Khangoshvili in Berlin’s Tiergarten park in 2019. US officials have said Russia has raised his case in prisoner swap negotiations.

Putin appeared to hint that Krasikov, who German prosecutors have said likely carried out the hit for Russia’s FSB security service, was acting on Moscow’s orders, despite earlier denials.

“There was a patriot who eliminated [Khangoshvili] in one of the European capitals. Whether he did it of his own volition or not. That is a different question,” Putin said.

His comments came in an interview in the Kremlin with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, the first he has given to western media since ordering the invasion of Ukraine two years ago.

Advertisement

They were the most concrete description yet of Russia’s conditions to release Gershkovich, a 32-year-old Wall Street Journal reporter who has been jailed for almost a year on espionage charges. The US government and the paper reject the charges and describe them as completely false.

“I do not rule out that the person you refer to, Mr Gershkovich, may return to his motherland,” Putin said. “We want the US special services to think about how they can contribute to achieving the goals our special services are pursuing.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Putin’s claims.

The Wall Street Journal late on Thursday said: “Evan is a journalist, and journalism is not a crime. Any portrayal to the contrary is total fiction. Evan was unjustly arrested and has been wrongfully detained by Russia for nearly a year for doing his job, and we continue to demand his immediate release.”

“We’re encouraged to see Russia’s desire for a deal that brings Evan home, and we hope this will lead to his rapid release and return to his family and our newsroom.”

Advertisement

Another US journalist, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reporter Alsu Kurmasheva, is also being held in Russia after being arrested last year. Kurmasheva, who is also a Russian citizen, is accused of violating a law on “foreign agents” and may face additional charges.

US Marine veteran Paul Whelan was convicted of espionage charges in Russia in 2020, which he and the US vehemently deny, and is serving a 16-year sentence in a rural prison colony.

Gershkovich was detained by Russia’s FSB in March 2023 while he was on a reporting assignment in the city of Ekaterinburg. At the time of his arrest, he had press credentials from Russia’s foreign ministry.

Russian state media had promoted the interview ever since Carlson, who has become a star in Russia after making sympathetic comments about Putin, was first spotted at the Bolshoi ballet earlier this week.

The Kremlin said Carlson had secured the interview because his stance was “different from traditional Anglo-Saxon media” it claims are biased against Russia.

Advertisement

By granting the rare meeting to Carlson, who has broadcast his programme on Elon Musk’s social media platform X since being fired from Fox News last year, the Kremlin appeared to hope it could reach sympathetic audiences ahead of the US election.

Republican frontrunner Donald Trump, who Carlson is backing in the White House race, frequently spoke of his admiration for Putin while in office and has torpedoed attempts in Congress to pass more US military aid for Ukraine.

Although Carlson had promised his audience they would hear a Russian point of view normally held from them by western media, Putin offered a grab bag of the rants, paranoia, and grievances he has frequently aired since launching the war.

His answer to Carlson’s first question lasted 36 minutes and covered the past thousand years of Ukraine’s history with Russia. He proffered a thick folder full of letters written by Bohdan Khmelnytsky, a 17th century Cossack leader.

Putin repeated familiar grievances against the US, which he blamed for forcing him to order the invasion of Ukraine.

Advertisement

He said he had told US President Joe Biden shortly before the war began that “you are making a huge mistake of historic proportions by supporting everything that is happening there, in Ukraine, by pushing Russia away”.

Putin added that the war could be ended quickly if the US and its western allies stopped arming Ukraine, and dismissed fears that he could use a nuclear weapon or start a global conflict with the west if the war in Ukraine did not go Russia’s way.

“They’re trying to intimidate their own population with an imaginary Russian threat,” Putin said. “Tomorrow, Russia will use tactical nuclear weapons. Tomorrow Russia will use that. No, the day after tomorrow. So what.”

Putin also dismissed US attempts to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia or weaken its economy through sanctions aimed at isolating the country and cutting off supply chains for its war machine.

He said Russia’s burgeoning trade relationship with China meant US hegemony and the dollar’s role as global reserve currency were on the wane.

Advertisement

“You cannot prevent the sun from rising. You have to adapt to it,” Putin said. “Your political establishment does not understand that the world is changing under objective circumstances. [ . . . ] Such brutal actions, including with regard to Russia and say other countries, are counterproductive.”

US officials played down the interview before it aired. “Remember, you’re listening to Vladimir Putin. And you shouldn’t take at face value anything he has to say,” US National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said earlier on Thursday.

News

Utah County declares State of Emergency as wildfires ‘ravage’ the state

Published

on

Utah County declares State of Emergency as wildfires ‘ravage’ the state

UTAH COUNTY, Utah (ABC4) — Utah County has declared a state of emergency.

According to an announcement from the Utah County Commissioner Skyler Beltran, the county is in a dire position due to the extensive wildfires in the area and high fire risk.

The announcement states that declaring the State of Emergency will allow the county to access additional resources, and notes there is no imminent threat to Utah County residents.

“We have utilized a tremendous amount of our resources (very early in the traditional fire season schedule) responding to the Iron Fire and continue to face ongoing recovery concerns,” the statement read. “This was even before the Maple Peak and Cherry fires, which have now merged and are moving toward the Iron Fire.”

The Iron Fire, which started last week, has burned over 40,000 acres. Around 22,830 of those acres were in Utah County. Reportedly, the county has limited resources available to help those who are evacuating from Juab County, including the 600 residents in the Town of Eureka.

Advertisement

Due to the influx in evacuees, the Utah County Commission says that more resources are necessary to help the evacuation shelters in Elberta, Utah. Additionally, due to the Iron Fire and other wildfires, Utah County is facing immense repair needs to avoid future flooding, loss of homes, and disruption to local economies and ecosystems.

There is “imminent threat” to public safety due to the damage.

The commission also asks the public to be vigilant when handling heavy equipment, using campfires or barbecues, and discharging fireworks, to avoid preventing fires.

Their statement added, “Our firefighters are exhausted, our resources are stretched thin and we are in a very vulnerable position.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

A day after Alito’s testy response to Sotomayor’s dissent, court says it was a ‘misunderstanding’

Published

on

A day after Alito’s testy response to Sotomayor’s dissent, court says it was a ‘misunderstanding’

The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor (seated left) and Justice Samuel Alito (seated second from right).

Alex Wong/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Alex Wong/Getty Images

As the Supreme Court heads into the announcement of its final and hugely important opinions next week, there are reverberations from this week’s announcements, and Justice Samuel Alito’s public rebuke of his colleague Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

On Thursday, Justice Alito summarized from the bench three very big opinions he authored for the court’s six justice conservative majority. Alito, unlike most of his colleagues, doesn’t spend much time on these summaries. And it is rare that a justice has three big opinions to announce, but it is almost the end of the term, and there are a lot of big cases still outstanding.

The first case he announced came and went. Alito then moved on to a second case, this one tests whether migrants may apply for asylum in the U.S. by going to one of several ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexican border, and presenting themselves for admission. This entails presenting documents that persuade an asylum officer that applicants’ fear of persecution in their home country is credible enough to allow them to enter the U.S. while their asylum application is processed. Alito’s opinion ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s policy of refusing all such applicants by blocking them at the border. It was a policy also followed at one time by the Obama administration until it was blocked by the lower courts.

Advertisement

After Alito finished his summary of the opinion, he paused, at which point Justice Sotomayor read a summary of her contrary views in dissent. When she finished, however, Justice Alito did not move on to the announcement of his third opinion. Instead, he did something that nobody in the press corps ever remembers happening before. Looking much as if he had just bitten into a lemon, Alito said, “There is much that I would have added to my bench statement had I known there would be a dissent read.” And he then went on to a short extemporaneous rebuttal.

Continue Reading

News

“It’s blood money”: Family of exonerated man in Texas yogurt shop murders speaks out after settlement

Published

on

“It’s blood money”: Family of exonerated man in Texas yogurt shop murders speaks out after settlement

The widow and the daughter of Maurice Pierce, one of the four men wrongfully accused in the 1991 Texas yogurt shop murders, have confirmed they signed a multimillion-dollar settlement with the city of Austin.

Kimberli and Marisa Pierce spoke with correspondent Erin Moriarty in a new episode of the podcast “48 Hours: Case by Case.” Moriarty has reported on the yogurt shop murders for over 30 years. 

Maurice Pierce’s widow Kimberli made clear that their priority has never been financial compensation. “It’s blood money for us. He died for this money,” Kimberli Pierce said. “It’s about the reform and the changes that need to happen, not only in Austin, but apparently across the country.”

They also went into great detail about what they believe happened when Maurice Pierce was shot and killed by police in 2010. 

Advertisement

Maurice Pierce was one of four men, along with Michael Scott, Robert Springsteen and Forrest Welborn, who were wrongfully accused in the murders of four teenage girls in Austin on Dec. 6, 1991. Eliza Thomas, Amy Ayers, and sisters Jennifer and Sarah Harbison were tied up, shot and left inside the yogurt shop as it was set ablaze. 

The four men were exonerated in February after investigators linked another man, Robert Eugene Brashers, to the killings. The city of Austin subsequently offered a $35 million settlement. Because Maurice Pierce died in 2010, his share of $10 million will go to Kimberli and Marisa Pierce.

Eight days after the killings, 16-year-old Maurice Pierce was arrested at a mall, carrying a .22, the same caliber handgun connected to the crime. Kimberli Pierce said police told Maurice Pierce that his gun was the murder weapon. He responded by mentioning his friend Forrest Welborn. Maurice Pierce was then wired up and sent to speak with Welborn, but investigators ultimately determined that Welborn and the others knew nothing about the murders, and no charges were filed at that time.

Marisa Pierce has said there was no evidence when her father was questioned, “only a detective and a narrative, a narrative so completely false. It feels evil.”

From left, Maurice Pierce, Forrest Welborn, Michael Scott and Robert Springsteen were exonerated in February 2026 after investigators linked another man, Robert Eugene Brashers, to the December 1991 killings of four teenage girls in an Austin, Texas, yogurt shop. 

Advertisement

CBS News/AP


Nearly eight years later, in 1999, all four men were arrested after Scott and Springsteen confessed to the murders. They later recanted, saying they had been coerced. Springsteen and Scott were tried and convicted, but later those convictions were overturned on constitutional grounds. A subsequent DNA test excluded all four men. Maurice Pierce was never convicted but spent three years in jail before his release in 2003. 

Kimberli Pierce said her husband came home a hardened man. She believes police continued to harass Maurice and their family after his release. In 2010, Maurice Pierce was stopped for a routine traffic stop, fled on foot, and was shot and killed by an Austin police officer who said Pierce had stabbed him with a knife. 

Marisa and Kimberli Pierce told “48 Hours” that they intend to review the circumstances surrounding the night of Maurice Pierce’s death. Marisa Pierce revealed in new, emotional detail that she was on the phone with her father at the time. She believes he panicked and was only trying to get away, not to hurt anyone. She described her father’s last breaths: “And in those last moments, he had just said I’m sorry, I don’t think you’re gonna see me again, and I love you.” 

Advertisement

“48 Hours” reached out to the Austin Police Department about the Pierces’ allegations of harassment and their questions about Maurice Pierce’s death in 2010. The police department said they had no additional comment.

For the Pierce family, the settlement is a starting point, not an end point. They have put forward seven proposed reforms they hope the city of Austin will approve, including appointing a child advocate whenever a minor is questioned, prohibiting deceptive interrogation tactics, educating juveniles about their rights and establishing accountability measures to address tunnel vision in police investigations.

In a statement shared with “48 Hours,” the Pierces wrote: “Real justice is not only about acknowledging harm after the fact but about creating safeguards that prevent future families from enduring the same pain.”  

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending