Former Honduras President Hernández freed after Trump pardon

posted in: All news | 0

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras (AP) — Former Honduras President Juan Orlando Hernández, sentenced last year to 45 years in prison for his role in helping drug traffickers move hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States, was released from prison following a pardon from President Donald Trump, his wife announced Tuesday.

Related Articles


Mass killings in 2025 in the US hit the lowest level since 2006


Abortion opponents coming before the Supreme Court in challenge to state investigation


Northeast prepares for first major snowstorm of season


Russia and the US threatened to resume nuclear testing after several decades. Here is why it matters


Today in History: December 2, Terror attack on San Bernardino holiday party kills 14

The U.S. Bureau of Prisons inmate website showed that Hernández was released from U.S. Penitentiary, Hazelton in West Virginia on Monday and a spokesperson for the bureau on Tuesday confirmed his release.

His wife Ana García thanked Trump for pardoning Hernández via the social platform X early Tuesday.

“After almost four years of pain, of waiting and difficult challenges, my husband Juan Orlando Hernández RETURNED to being a free man, thanks to the presidential pardon granted by President Donald Trump,” García’s post said. She included a picture of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons listing for Hernández indicating his release.

Hernández was arrested at the request of the United States in February 2022, weeks after handing over power to current President Xiomara Castro.

Two years later, he was sentenced to 45 years in prison in a New York federal courtroom for taking bribes from drug traffickers so they could safely move some 400 tons of cocaine north through Honduras to the United States.

Hernández maintained throughout that he was innocent and the victim of revenge by drug traffickers he had helped extradite to the United States.

On Sunday, Trump was asked about why he pardoned Hernandez by reporters traveling with him on Air Force One.

“I was asked by Honduras, many of the people of Honduras,” Trump said.

“The people of Honduras really thought he was set up, and it was a terrible thing,” he said.

“They basically said he was a drug dealer because he was the president of the country. And they said it was a Biden administration set-up. And I looked at the facts and I agreed with them.”

The pardon promised by Trump days before Honduras’ presidential election injected a new element into the contest that some said helped the candidate from his National Party Nasry Asfura, one of the leaders as the vote count proceeded Tuesday.

Mass killings in 2025 in the US hit the lowest level since 2006

posted in: All news | 0

By REBECCA BOONE, Associated Press

A shooting last weekend at a children’s birthday party in California that left four dead was the 17th mass killing this year — the lowest number recorded since 2006, according to a database maintained by The Associated Press and USA Today in partnership with Northeastern University.

Related Articles


Abortion opponents coming before the Supreme Court in challenge to state investigation


Northeast prepares for first major snowstorm of season


Russia and the US threatened to resume nuclear testing after several decades. Here is why it matters


Today in History: December 2, Terror attack on San Bernardino holiday party kills 14


USA Gymnastics and Olympic sports watchdog failed to stop coach’s sexual abuse, lawsuits alleges

Experts warn that the drop doesn’t necessarily mean safer days are here to stay and that it could simply represent a return to average levels.

“Sir Isaac Newton never studied crime, but he says ‘What goes up must come down,’” said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University. The current drop in numbers is more likely what statisticians call a “regression to the mean,” he said, representing a return to more average crime levels after an unusual spike in mass killings in 2018 and 2019.

“Will 2026 see a decline?” Fox said. “I wouldn’t bet on it. What goes down must also go back up.”

The mass killings — defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed in a 24-hour period, not including the killer — are tracked in the database maintained by The Associated Press and USA Today in partnership with Northeastern University. Fox, who manages the database, says mass killings were down about 24% this year compared to 2024, which was also about a 20% drop compared to 2023.

Mass killings are rare, and that means the numbers are volatile, said James Densley, a professor of at Metropolitan State University in Minnesota.

“Because there’s only a few dozen mass killings in a year, a small change could look like a wave or a collapse,” when really it’s just a return to more typical levels, Densley said. “2025 looks really good in historical context, but we can’t pretend like that means the problem is gone for good.”

Decline in rates of homicide and violent crime might be a factor

But there are some things that might be contributing to the drop, Densley said, including an overall decline in homicide and violent crime rates, which peaked during the COVID-19 pandemic. Improvements in the immediate response to mass shootings and other mass casualty incidents could also be playing a part, he said.

“We had the horrible Annunciation School shooting here in Minnesota back in August, and that case wouldn’t even fit the mass killing definition because there were only two people killed but over 20 injured,” Densley said. “But I happen to know from the response on the ground here, that the reason only two people were killed is because of the bleeding control and trauma response by the first responders. And it happened on the doorsteps of some of the best children’s hospitals in the country.”

Crime is complex, and academics are not great at assessing the reasons behind crime rate changes, said Eric Madfis, a professor of criminal justice at University of Washington-Tacoma.

“It’s multicausal. It’s never going to be just one thing. People are still debating why homicide rates went down in the 1990s,” Madfis said. “It is true that gun violence and gun violence deaths are down, but we still have exceedingly high rates and numbers of mass shootings compared to anywhere else in the world.”

More states are dedicating funding to school threat assessments, with 22 states mandating the practice in recent years, Madfis said, and that could be preventing some school shootings, though it wouldn’t have an impact on mass killings elsewhere. None of the mass killings recorded in the database so far in 2025 took place in schools, and only one mass killing at a school was recorded in 2024.

Most of those who die in mass killings are shot

About 82% of this year’s mass killings involved a firearm. Since 2006, 3,234 people have died in mass killings — and 81% of them were shooting victims.

Christopher Carita, a former detective with the Fort Lauderdale Police Department and a senior training specialist with gun safety organization 97Percent, said the Safer Communities Act passed in 2022 included millions of dollars of funding for gun violence protection programs. Some states used the money to create social supports for people at risk of committing violence, and others used it for things like law enforcement and threat assessment programs. That flexibility has been key to reducing gun violence rates, he said.

“It’s always been framed as either a ‘gun problem’ or a ‘people problem’ and that’s been very contentious,” Carita said. “I feel like for the first time, we’re looking at gun violence as a ‘both, and’ problem nationally.”

Focusing on extreme events like mass killings runs the risk of “missing the forest for the trees,” said Emma Fridel, an assistant professor of criminology at Florida State University. “If you look at the deaths from firearms, both in homicides and suicides, the numbers are staggering. We lose the same number of people every year to gun violence as the number of casualties we experienced in the Korean War. The number one cause of death for children is guns.

“Mass killings should be viewed as one part of the issue, rather than the outcome of interest,” she said.

Abortion opponents coming before the Supreme Court in challenge to state investigation

posted in: All news | 0

By LINDSAY WHITEHURST, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A faith-based pregnancy center will come before the Supreme Court on Tuesday to challenge an investigation into whether it misled people to discourage abortions.

Related Articles


Mass killings in 2025 in the US hit the lowest level since 2006


Northeast prepares for first major snowstorm of season


Russia and the US threatened to resume nuclear testing after several decades. Here is why it matters


Today in History: December 2, Terror attack on San Bernardino holiday party kills 14


USA Gymnastics and Olympic sports watchdog failed to stop coach’s sexual abuse, lawsuits alleges

The facilities often known as “crisis pregnancy centers” have been on the rise in the U.S., especially since the Supreme Court’s conservative majority overturned abortion as a nationwide right in 2022. Most Republican-controlled states have since started enforcing bans or restrictions on abortion, and some have steered tax dollars to the centers. They generally provide prenatal care and encourage women to carry pregnancies to term.

Many Democratic-aligned states have sought to protect abortion access and some have investigated whether pregnancy centers mislead women into thinking they offer abortions. In New Jersey, Democratic attorney general Matthew Platkin sent a subpoena to First Choice Women’s Resource Centers for donor information.

First Choice pushed back, arguing the investigation was baseless and the demand for donor lists threatened their First Amendment rights. They tried to challenge the subpoena in federal court, but a judge found the case wasn’t yet far enough along. An appeals court agreed.

First Choice then turned to the Supreme Court. Executive director Aimee Huber said she hopes the high court will rule in their favor and send a message that protects facilities like hers. “I would hope that other attorneys general who have prosecuted or harmed or harassed other pregnancy centers, or are considering that, would back off as a result of our legal battle,” she said.

New Jersey counters that First Choice is seeking special treatment. The group hasn’t even had to hand over any records since the judge overseeing the case hasn’t ordered it. “The Subpoena itself does not require Petitioner to do anything, and compliance is entirely voluntary,” state attorneys wrote in court documents.

If the Supreme Court sides with First Choice, it would “open the federal courts to a flood of litigation challenging myriad state and local subpoenas,” they argued.

First Choice said access to federal court is important in cases where government investigators are accused of misusing investigative power. The American Civil Liberties Union joined the case in support of First Choice’s free speech argument.

Erin Hawley, an attorney for the conservative Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, said subpoenas can hurt advocacy groups with unpopular points of view. “It is a broad non-ideological issue that really does transcend ideological boundaries,” she said.

With Primary Field Still in Flux, James Talarico Pitches His Big Tent Revival

posted in: All news | 0

Democrats haven’t won a U.S. Senate race in Texas for more than 35 years. In 2018, Beto O’Rourke came the closest when he lost to Ted Cruz by only 2.6 percentage points. In 2024, Cruz, boosted by Donald Trump’s performance in the state, beat then-Congressman Colin Allred by 8.5 percentage points. But, as many Texans fail to see the Republican promises of economic prosperity materialize, Democratic candidate James Talarico is running on the slogan to “start flipping tables” of Texas politics’ status quo. 

A former San Antonio public school teacher and current Presbyterian seminarian, the 36-year-old Talarico first won a seat in the Texas House back in 2018. Since then, he’s gained a reputation as an effective advocate for public schools and an unyielding opponent of school vouchers and right-wing zealotry who’s effectively built and wielded a massive social media following. 

Since launching his campaign in September, Talarico has raised a boatload of cash and garnered a Beto-esque number of fawning national headlines. The question is centered around whether this young man of faith has what it takes to not just flip the political tables, as his campaign slogan portends, but to flip the state of Texas. Talarico already has endorsements from more than a hundred state and local officials, as well as kudos from former president Barack Obama for his leadership in Texas’ redistricting battle. But first he’ll have to win a contested primary against repeat-runner Allred and, possibly, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett.

The Texas Observer spoke with Talarico in late November about the policies he believes can unite working people, his faith, and why he thinks he can beat John Cornyn or Ken Paxton. 

TO: You’ve been able to engage Texans from different sides of the political spectrum around the fight for public education and against school vouchers. How does that shape how you approach this campaign?

I think the biggest divide in our politics is not left versus right, but top versus bottom. And I think that voucher fight was a prime example. It was two billionaires from West Texas who were trying to close our public schools all over the state, and we were able to build a coalition of Democrats, independents, and Republicans, rural, urban, suburban, Black, white, brown—a coalition to take on those two billionaires and and protect and strengthen public education. I remember I was walking around the halls of the Capitol during the session with those self-described MAGA moms, and we were knocking on the doors of legislators, trying to get as many votes as we could to kill the voucher bill. And we were successful time and time again until they were finally able to push it through at the end of this last session with some pretty dirty tactics. 

How does the working-class politics you describe translate to policies you would prioritize in the Senate?

I’ve served for eight years in the trenches of the Texas Legislature, and even as a Democrat, I’ve been able to pass pretty major legislation to help working people in our state: the first ever cap on insulin copays in Texas history; a bill to import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada into Texas; the first early childhood bill in recent memory that’s going to bring down the cost of childcare for working parents; and, most recently, a major housing bill that’s going to hopefully make housing cheaper for folks in Texas. I think there’s so much that I could do at the federal level to continue that work. The cost of childcare, the cost of housing, the cost of healthcare—those are, I think, three of the biggest pain points that Texans feel every day. If we’re going to make progress on all those issues, I would like to see the U.S. Senate prioritize comprehensive political reform: Ban super PACs and billionaire secret donations, ban lawmakers from insider trading—from turning around and becoming lobbyists right after they finish their public service. And finally, once and for all, ban gerrymandering in every state in the union. 

What is your position on healthcare reform?

I am very interested in fighting for a public option, so that every single Texan, every single American, would have the ability to join Medicare and would have that option of affordable, quality coverage. I think there is public support and bipartisan interest in that kind of policy. 

Immigration will once again be a hot-button issue. Many Democrats have recently moved to the right on the issue; what position are you taking on immigration that can possibly unify working people on the left and right?

I really do think that most Texans and most Americans are in the same place on this issue. Our southern border should be like our front porch. There should be a giant welcome mat out front and a lock on the door. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. Most people, including me, are pro-immigrants. We know that folks who are coming here to contribute to our economy, to live their version of the American dream, those immigrants make us stronger and richer. I think most Americans are also pro-security. We have a right to know who’s coming into our country, just like you have the right to know who’s coming into your house. So if I’m elected, I would hope to be one of the senators crafting comprehensive immigration reform that protects public safety and also creates an orderly, speedy process for immigrants who want to come and make us stronger. 

You’ve expressed that it is your faith and not partisanship that grounds your politics. Has that drawn more independents and conservatives to your campaign?

My politics grows out of my faith. I was taught when I was little, by my granddad, who was a Baptist preacher in South Texas, that we Christians are supposed to follow Jesus’s two commandments: to love God and to love neighbor. And you know that commandment to love our neighbors is inherently a public thing. Politics is just another way that we figure out how we treat our neighbors and how we treat each other. So that’s what led me into public service—first as a public school teacher and now as a public official. It allows me to connect with voters who maybe aren’t in my party or who don’t share all of my beliefs. We’re able to connect on that deeper ground. I’ve seen so many people come into our events, and met so many people who don’t consider themselves Democrats, who consider themselves Independents or Republicans or former Republicans, and many of those conversations begin with our shared faith.

Why would you be a better general election candidate than Colin Allred or Jasmine Crockett, if she runs? 

I’m not interested in tearing down my fellow Democrats, because we are all on the same team, the same team that’s trying to change the politics of this country. But, I think that I’ve got a compelling case to make. I first got elected to the Texas Legislature by flipping a Trump district, winning in a district that hadn’t voted for a Democrat in 30 years. And I did that by running an aggressive, authentic, unorthodox campaign that brought people together. On election night, we flipped that district with 51 percent of the vote. And so I want to take those skills, both electoral and legislative, and win this nomination and win the Senate seat, not just for Democrats, but for all Texans. 

On the Republican side, which candidate would you have an easier time beating, John Cornyn or Ken Paxton? 

Both of them are far more interested in serving their billionaire megadonors than serving the people of Texas, and both of them have sold us out time and time again. Obviously, Ken Paxton’s crimes are well known. I was part of the bipartisan majority in the Texas House that impeached our corrupt attorney general. But in some ways, I think John Cornyn is even more corrupt than Ken Paxton because he was the deciding vote on that Big Ugly Bill that’s going to kick Texans off their health care, take food out of the mouths of hungry Texas kids, all just to give another tax break to his donors. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

The post With Primary Field Still in Flux, James Talarico Pitches His Big Tent Revival appeared first on The Texas Observer.