World
Former FBI Director Robert Mueller, who investigated Russia-Trump campaign ties, dies
WASHINGTON (AP) — Robert S. Mueller III, the FBI director who transformed the nation’s premier law enforcement agency into a terrorism-fighting force after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and who later became special counsel in charge of investigating ties between Russia and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, has died. He was 81.
“With deep sadness, we are sharing the news that Bob passed away” on Friday night, his family said in a statement Saturday. “His family asks that their privacy be respected.”
At the FBI, Mueller set about almost immediately overhauling the bureau’s mission to meet the law enforcement needs of the 21st century, beginning his 12-year tenure just one week before the Sept. 11 attacks and serving across presidents of both political parties. He was nominated by Republican President George W. Bush.
The cataclysmic event instantaneously switched the bureau’s top priority from solving domestic crime to preventing terrorism, a shift that imposed an almost impossibly difficult standard on Mueller and the rest of the federal government: preventing 99 out of 100 terrorist plots wasn’t good enough.
Later, he was special counsel in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether the Trump campaign illegally coordinated with Russia to sway the outcome of the 2016 presidential race. Mueller was a patrician Princeton graduate and Vietnam veteran who walked away from a lucrative midcareer job to stay in public service, and his old-school, buttoned-down style made him an anachronism during a social media-saturated era.
Trump posted on social media after the announcement of Mueller’s death: “Robert Mueller just died. Good, I’m glad he’s dead.” The Republican president added, “He can no longer hurt innocent people!”
The FBI did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment. The FBI Agents Association cited Mueller’s “commitment to public service and to the FBI’s mission.“
A second act as an investigator of a sitting president
The second-longest-serving director in FBI history, behind only J. Edgar Hoover, Mueller held the job until 2013 after agreeing to Democratic President Barack Obama’s request to stay on even after his 10-year term was up.
After several years in private practice, Mueller was asked by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to return to public service as special counsel in the Trump-Russia inquiry.
Mueller’s stern visage and taciturn demeanor matched the seriousness of the mission, as his team spent nearly two years quietly conducting one of the most consequential, yet divisive, investigations in Justice Department history. He held no news conferences and made no public appearances during the investigation, remaining quiet despite attacks from Trump and his supporters and creating an aura of mystery around his work.
All told, Mueller brought criminal charges against six of the president’s associates, including his campaign chairman and first national security adviser.
His 448-page report released in April 2019 identified substantial contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia but did not allege a criminal conspiracy. Mueller laid out damaging details about Trump’s efforts to seize control of the investigation, and even shut it down, though he declined to decide whether Trump had broken the law, in part because of department policy barring the indictment of a sitting president.
But, in perhaps the most memorable language of the report, Mueller pointedly noted: “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.”
The nebulous conclusion did not deliver the knockout punch to the administration that some Trump opponents had hoped for, nor did it trigger a sustained push by House Democrats to impeach the president — though he was later tried and acquitted on separate allegations related to Ukraine.
The outcome also left room for Attorney General William Barr to insert his own views. He and his team made their own determination that Trump did not obstruct justice, and he and Mueller privately tangled over a four-page summary letter from Barr that Mueller felt did not adequately capture his report’s damaging conclusion.
Mueller deflated Democrats during a highly anticipated congressional hearing on his report when he offered terse, one-word answers and appeared uncertain in his testimony. Frequently, he seemed to waver on details of his investigation. It was hardly the commanding performance many had expected from Mueller, who had a towering reputation in Washington.
Over the next months, Barr made clear his own disagreements with the foundations of the Russia investigation, moving to dismiss a false-statements prosecution that Mueller had brought against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, even though that investigation ended in a guilty plea.
Mueller’s tenure as special counsel was the capstone of a career spent in government.
FBI transformed into a national security agency
His time as FBI director was defined by the Sept. 11 attacks and its aftermath, as an FBI granted broad new surveillance and national security powers scrambled to confront an ascendant al-Qaida and interrupt plots and take terrorists off the street before they could act.
It was a new model of policing for an FBI that had long been accustomed to investigating crimes that had already occurred.
When he became FBI director, “I had expected to focus on areas familiar to me as a prosecutor: drug cases, white-collar criminal cases and violent crime,” Mueller told a group of lawyers in October 2012.
Instead, “we had to focus on long-term, strategic change. We had to enhance our intelligence capabilities and upgrade our technology. We had to build upon strong partnerships and forge new friendships, both here at home and abroad.”
In response, the FBI shifted 2,000 of the total 5,000 agents in the bureau’s criminal programs to national security.
In hindsight, the transformation was a success. At the time, there were problems, and Mueller said as much. In a speech near the end of his tenure, Mueller recalled “those days when we were under attack by the media and being clobbered by Congress; when the attorney general was not at all happy with me.”
Among the issues: The Justice Department’s inspector general found that the FBI circumvented the law to obtain thousands of phone call records for terrorism investigations.
Mueller decided that the FBI would not take part in abusive interrogation techniques of suspected terrorists, but the policy was not effectively communicated down the line for nearly two years. In an effort to move the FBI into a paperless environment, the bureau spent over $600 million on two computer systems — one that was 2½ years overdue and a predecessor that was only partially completed and had to be scrapped after consultants declared it obsolete and riddled with problems.
For the nation’s top law enforcement agency, it was a rocky trip through rough terrain.
But there were many successes as well, including thwarted terror plots and headline-making criminal cases like the one against fraudster Bernie Madoff. The Republican also cultivated an apolitical reputation on the job, nearly quitting in a clash with the Bush administration over a surveillance program that he and his successor, James Comey, considered unlawful.
He famously stood alongside Comey, then deputy attorney general, during a dramatic 2004 hospital standoff over federal wiretapping rules. The two men planted themselves at the bedside of the ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft to block Bush administration officials from making an end run to get Ashcroft’s permission to reauthorize a secret no-warrant wiretapping program.
In an extraordinary vote of confidence, Congress, at the Obama administration’s request, approved a two-year extension for Mueller to remain at his post.
A Marine who served in Vietnam before becoming a prosecutor
Mueller was born in New York City and grew up in a well-to-do suburb of Philadelphia.
He received a bachelor’s degree from Princeton and a master’s degree in international relations from New York University. He then joined the Marines, serving for three years as an officer during the Vietnam War. He led a rifle platoon and was awarded a Bronze Star, Purple Heart and two Navy Commendation Medals. Following his military service, Mueller earned a law degree from the University of Virginia.
Mueller became a federal prosecutor and relished the work of handling criminal cases. He rose quickly through the ranks in U.S. attorneys’ offices in San Francisco and Boston from 1976 to 1988. Later, as head of the Justice Department’s criminal division in Washington, he oversaw a range of high-profile prosecutions that chalked up victories against targets as varied as Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega and New York crime boss John Gotti.
In a mid-career switch that shocked colleagues, Mueller threw over a job at a prestigious Boston law firm to join the homicide division of the U.S. attorney’s office in the nation’s capital. There, he immersed himself as a senior litigator in a bulging caseload of unsolved drug-related murders in a city rife with violence.
Mueller was driven by a career-long passion for the painstaking work of building successful criminal cases. Even as head of the FBI, he would dig into the details of investigations, some of them major cases but others less so, sometimes surprising agents who suddenly found themselves on the phone with the director.
“The management books will tell you that as the head of an organization, you should focus on the vision,” Mueller once said. But “for me there were and are today those areas where one needs to be substantially personally involved,” especially in regard to “the terrorist threat and the need to know and understand that threat to its roots.”
Two terrorist attacks occurred toward the end of Mueller’s watch: the Boston Marathon bombing and the Fort Hood shootings in Texas. Both weighed heavily on him, he acknowledged in an interview two weeks before his departure.
“You sit down with victims’ families, you see the pain they go through and you always wonder whether there isn’t something more” that could have been done, he said.
___ Associated Press writer Nicholas Riccardi in Denver contributed to this report.
Published on
EU lawmakers have overcome a key political hurdle in the negotiations of digital euro, making the project closer to approval, according to a draft text seen by Euronews.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Parliamentary rapporteurs involved in the legislation have found an agreement on the design of the digital euro, which will be able to function both online and offline.
The digital euro would be an electronic form of cash issued by the European Central Bank, designed to sit alongside banknotes and the payments services offered by commercial banks.
It has taken on new political weight as economic tensions between the EU and the US sharpen the debate over Europe’s reliance on American payment giants, such as Visa and Mastercard.
Under the European Commission’s proposal, digital euro users would have a wallet for both online and offline payments, with transactions designed so they are not trackable.
The situation in Parliament changed on Wednesday evening, when the centre-right politician Fernando Navarrete, who is the leading rapporteur on the file, announced the withdrawal of his position to reduce the scope of the digital euro to offline use only.
His position blocked the advancement of negotiations for months, jeopardising the whole legislative process, according to three sources familiar with the negotiations.
The political deadlock has pushed EU leaders to accelerate progress on the digital euro. At the European Council meeting on 19 March, they set a goal to have the digital euro legislation approved by the end of 2026.
With the Council, representing EU countries, having already adopted its position, the European Parliament is now the only institution left to advance the law.
“Thanks to our amendments and firm stance, we have finally broken the political deadlock on the digital euro. The distinction between online and offline has been removed, and it is now established as a single payment system,” Pasquale Tridico, the rapporteur for The Left, told Euronews.
However, lawmakers still need to agree on two key aspects: the “hold limits” and the “compensation.”
The hold limits determine the maximum amount a user can store in a digital euro wallet, while compensation sets out a model for reimbursing commercial banks that provide digital euro services.
Although negotiations are not yet complete, the text is expected to be voted on in the Parliament’s economy committee before the summer, according to a source familiar with the matter.
Why did Netflix just impose a price increase across U.S. plans? As the “KPop Demon Hunters” Oscar-winning hit song “Golden” says: “We’re goin’ up, up, up.”
It’s not rocket science. The formula is pretty simple: Invest in more content (Netflix is eyeing $20 billion in content cash spending in 2026, up 10%) to attract and retain streaming subscribers, and keep your profit margins ticking upward by increasing the retail price.
Under the new pricing, effective March 26 for new users and rolling out to current customers depending on their billing cycle, Netflix’s Standard plan (which has no ads and provides streaming on two devices simultaneously) is rising by $2, from $17.99 to $19.99/month. The ad-supported plan is going up a buck, from $7.99 to $8.99/month, and the top-tier Premium plan (no ads, streaming on up to four devices at once, Ultra HD and HDR) is increasing from $24.99 to $26.99/month..
But the question is: Why now?
First off, it would be difficult to imagine Netflix would have pulled this pricing lever — hiking fees for its approximately 86 million U.S. customers — if the deal to acquire Warner Bros. were still in play. That deal would have required approval by the Justice Department and other regulatory bodies, amid allegations by David Ellison’s Paramount Skydance (the winning bidder for Warner Bros. Discovery) that the combo of Netflix + HBO Max would create a monopolistic entity in the streaming biz.
Netflix strongly disputed that, asserting it would have had a roughly 21% share of the U.S. subscription-streaming market with the addition of HBO Max. However, the optics of a Netflix price hike as the WB deal was pending would be terrible, especially after co-CEO Ted Sarandos testified at a Senate hearing that “We will give consumers more content for less” through the Warner Bros. deal. (Sarandos meant Netflix would have bundled its service with HBO Max at a price discount.)
Without the need to worry about such appearances in the midst of a massive M&A deal, the reason Netflix feels confident in ratcheting up prices in its biggest market is illustrated by this chart from Wall Street analyst firm MoffettNathanson. It estimates revenue streamers generated in 2025 as a function of total number of hours viewed.
In a nutshell, it shows that Netflix delivers the best bang for the buck of this cohort — it pulls in 48 cents per hour viewed, lower than anyone else. That indicates Netflix not only has upside in ad revenue relative to the others but also that has room to raise its pricing from a competitive standpoint.
Even with the new price increases, Netflix will still have a sector-low revenue/hour viewed metric (call it in the 50-cents-per-hour range). As the MoffettNathanson analysts put it: “Netflix delivers significant value to its subscribers that has room to be better monetized over time.”
Note that all of Netflix’s competitors have also recently hiked prices. Disney+ and Hulu, HBO Max and NBCUniversal’s Peacock upped pricing last year, and Paramount+ raised prices in January. Next month, Amazon’s ad-free Prime Video tier (now called “Ultra”) is going up to $5/month.
And Netflix’s new pricing, while higher, keeps it roughly in line with the rest of the field. Indeed, its ad-supported tier remains cheaper than those from Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max and Peacock (and is now the same as Paramount+ with ads):
Netflix’s launch of the cheaper, ad-supported option, first introduced in November 2022, gave it an important tool to mitigate churn as it raises the price on its Standard (no ads) plans. Instead of presenting customers a take-it-or-leave-it price hike, Netflix can now steer those on the Standard package toward the lower-cost package with ads. In theory, the company is agnostic about which plan someone chooses: The ad revenue should make up the difference in subscription fees.
Netflix execs once swore they wouldn’t implement an advertising model, asserting that it’s a subpar user experience. But it’s clear people are willing to sit through ad breaks if it means paying less — and in the U.S., Netflix’s Standard With Ads plan is half the cost of the no-ads tier.
The streaming giant’s U.S. price increases reinforce its long-range strategy, according to MoffettNathanson’s Robert Fishman: It maintains a “wide gap between its highest and lowest tiers to simultaneously maximize monetization of its least price-sensitive subscribers while nudging more price-sensitive customers toward its still-nascent ad tier, driving engagement and, in turn, advertising revenue,” the analyst wrote in a research note Friday. “The result is a ‘best of both worlds’ approach that captures value across the full spectrum of its subscriber base and should drive even higher margins for the leading profitable streaming service.”
Will some Netflix customers cancel over the latest fee increases? Yes, of course. But the math indicates that overall, it will yield higher returns — letting the company dig an even wider moat against competitors.
Pictured top: Sadie Sink as Max Mayfield in Netflix’s “Stranger Things” Season 4
SEE ALSO: U.S. Household Spending on Streaming Video Services Remains Flat at $69 per Month, as 68% Now Pay for Ad-Supported Tiers
World
The race against time to destroy Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program heats up amid fresh strikes
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Iranian regime’s retention of key nuclear weapons facilities and its material for building atomic bombs — highly enriched uranium — has led to new efforts by the U.S. and Israeli militaries to take out the last vestiges of the regime’s program.
On Friday, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement that, that it’s “Air Force Struck the Arak Heavy Water Plant—A Key Plutonium Production Site for Nuclear Weapons.” The Arak plant is located in central Iran.
Prior to Friday’s attack, an IDF spokesperson told Fox News Digital concerning Arak, that there is a “high estimation” that attacks on “uranium enrichment sites are part of the plan.” The IDF declined to answer more specific questions about its target list and if any ground operations to retrieve the nuclear weapons-grade uranium were being considered.
NEXT MOVE ON IRAN: SEIZE KHARG ISLAND, SECURE URANIUM OR RISK GROUND WAR ESCALATION
An IDF infographic shows Iran’s Arak heavy water plant, described as a key infrastructure for plutonium production. (IDF)
Reuters, quoting regime media outlet Fars, reported that joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Friday hit the Khondab heavy water research reactor.
A statement released by the IDF said, “Heavy water is a unique material used to operate nuclear reactors, such as the inactive Arak reactor, which was originally designed to have weapons-grade plutonium production capabilities. These materials can also be used as a neutron source for nuclear weapons.”
The IDF statement added that “The plant was a significant economic asset for the terror regime and served as a source of income for the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization, generating tens of millions of dollars for the regime each year.”
The regime’s foreign minister posted a condemnation of Israel and warned the Jewish state, “Iran will exact HEAVY price for Israeli crimes.”
According to an article published by the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), “The IR-40 Arak, aka Khondab, Heavy Water Reactor and Heavy Water Production Plant date to the early 2000s… The reactor core design was ideal for making substantial amounts of weapon-grade plutonium for nuclear weapons.”
STRIKES MAY SET IRAN BACK — BUT LIKELY WON’T END NUCLEAR PROGRAM, UN WATCHDOG CHIEF SAYS
Jason Brodsky, the policy director of United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), told Fox News Digital, “The one nuclear site which hasn’t been hit to date has been Pickaxe Mountain, so striking that site as part of Operation Epic Fury will be important to further degrade the Iranian nuclear program.”
A White House spokesperson referred Fox News Digital to President Trump’s cabinet meeting comments about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Trump said on Thursday, “We’re free to roam over their cities and towns and destroy all of their crazy nuclear weapons and missiles and drones that they’re building.”
A map shows damage to Iran’s Fordow nuclear site after being struck by the United States in Operation Midnight Hammer on June 22, 2025. (Fox News)
David Albright, a physicist, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security told Fox News Digital that with respect to key nuclear weapons facilities that remain, “The elephants in the tent are Natanz and Isfahan. There was an attack on Natanz that the Iranians revealed, but the Israelis said we are not aware of an attack. So it must have been the U.S.,” he claimed.
TRUMP SAYS US, ISRAEL SHATTERED IRANIAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES, PRESSES LEADERS TO SURRENDER: ‘CRY UNCLE’
He said that Natanz has enriched uranium. “The Iranians were doing recovery operations in the underground fuel enrichment plant there and continuing to build this pickaxe mountain tunnel complex, which could hold enriched uranium. Right next to it is another tunnel complex that was built much earlier, around 2007… And the Iranians sealed it up, fortified it. There is something obviously important there.”
Albright said U.S. and Israeli airstrikes “have not attacked the underground Isfahan site. We know, according to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], highly enriched uranium is in that site.” He continued that, “There may be an enrichment plant under construction in that underground complex. We would like that site to be attacked.”
Iranian worshippers hold up their hands as signs of unity with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during an anti-Israeli rally to condemn Israel’s attacks on Iran, in downtown Tehran, Iran, on June 20, 2025. (Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Albright warned that the war should not end like the previous U.S.-Israel war with Iran in 2025 with Tehran retaining the “crown jewels” of its atomic weapons program: highly enriched uranium and a number of centrifuges.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
He warned, “You don’t want it to come out of this war with the same kind of nuclear weapons capabilities that it had at the end of June war with a higher incentive to build a bomb.” He added, that is why it’s so important “to finish the job,” in Iran.
Lakers beat Nets, but Luka Doncic is facing suspension again after 16th technical
EU Parliament unblocks key political hurdle in digital euro talks
Man arrested in plot to firebomb Palestinian activist’s home after undercover op
Video: We Analyzed the Deadly Crash at LaGuardia
PWHL players bond with women’s hockey pioneers at Detroit clinic | NHL.com
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Indiana Members Credit Union announced as new anchor tenant at Bottleworks District
EU Parliament unblocks key political hurdle in digital euro talks
Man arrested in plot to firebomb Palestinian activist’s home after undercover op
WATCH: Senate hearing goes silent after Angel Father confronts top Dem over daughter’s death
US diplomat Marco Rubio denounces settler violence, tolls in Hormuz strait
Iran-linked hackers have breached FBI Director Kash Patel’s personal emails | CNN Politics
-
Detroit, MI1 week agoDrummer Brian Pastoria, longtime Detroit music advocate, dies at 68
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago‘Youth’ Twitter review: Ken Karunaas impresses audiences; Suraj Venjaramoodu adds charm; music wins praise | – The Times of India
-
Sports7 days agoIOC addresses execution of 19-year-old Iranian wrestler Saleh Mohammadi
-
New Mexico5 days agoClovis shooting leaves one dead, four injured
-
Business1 week agoDisney’s new CEO says his focus is on storytelling and creativity
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube job scam text: How to spot it fast
-
Tennessee4 days agoTennessee Police Investigating Alleged Assault Involving ‘Reacher’ Star Alan Ritchson
-
Texas1 week agoHow to buy Houston vs. Texas A&M 2026 March Madness tickets