Two arrested after glue found in locks at St. Anthony Starbucks

posted in: All news | 0

St. Anthony police arrested a man and woman on Wednesday morning following reports of damaged door locks filled with super glue and expanding foam at the Starbucks coffee shop on Silver Lake Road.

Workers attempting to open the Starbucks contacted police around 6:30 a.m. and said they were unable to get doors open, according to a statement from the police department. The employees said they had interacted with a man and a woman in a nearby vehicle who they believed were part of a group readying to demonstrate outside the coffee shop.

Starbucks workers at that location, as well as dozens of other sites across the country, have been on strike since Nov. 13. The striking workers are demanding higher wages, more work hours, an end to what they say is understaffing and the resolution of alleged retaliatory firings and discipline for union actions. Starbucks has said the company already offers the best wage and benefit package in retail.

The pair drove off when police approached them, but they were quickly stopped and arrested on suspicion of felony damage to property based on evidence collected at the scene and during the stop, police said. They were transported to the Ramsey County Adult Detention Center and formal charges are pending.

Shortly afterward, police were called back to Starbucks because a large group of demonstrators were blocking the drive-through lane. The group was advised to move off private property.

Related Articles


Workers at two Twin Cities Starbucks take part in national strike


Election 2025: St. Anthony-New Brighton school board special election

What’s next once Trump signs bill releasing the Epstein files

posted in: All news | 0

By STEPHEN GROVES, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress is sending President Donald Trump a bill to compel the Justice Department to make public its case files on the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a potentially far-reaching development in a yearslong push by survivors of Epstein’s abuse for a public reckoning.

Both the House and Senate passed the bill this week with overwhelming margins after Trump reversed course on his monthslong opposition to the bill and indicated he would sign it. Once the bill is signed by the president, it sets a 30-day countdown for the Justice Department to produce what’s commonly known as the Epstein files.

“This bill is a command for the president to be fully transparent, to come fully clean, and to provide full honesty to the American people,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Wednesday.

Schumer added that Democrats were ready to push back if they perceive that the president is doing anything but adhering to “full transparency.”

The swift, bipartisan work in Congress this week was a response to the growing public demand that the Epstein files be released, especially as attention focuses on his connections to global leaders including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, who has already been stripped of his royal title as Prince Andrew over the matter, and many others.

There is plenty of public anticipation about what more the files could reveal. Yet the bill will most likely trigger a rarely seen baring of a sprawling federal investigation, also creating the potential for unintended consequences.

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., leaves the U.S. Capitol after voting in favor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

What does the bill do?

The bill compels Attorney General Pam Bondi to release essentially everything the Justice Department has collected over multiple federal investigations into Epstein, as well as his longtime confidante and girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for luring teenage girls for the disgraced financier. Those records total around 100,000 pages, according to a federal judge who has reviewed the case.

It will also compel the Justice Department to produce all its internal communications on Epstein and his associates and his 2019 death in a Manhattan jail cell as he awaited charges for sexually abusing and trafficking dozens of teenage girls.

The legislation, however, exempts some parts of the case files. The bill’s authors made sure to include that the Justice Department could withhold personally identifiable information of victims, child sexual abuse materials and information deemed by the administration to be classified for national defense or foreign policy.

“We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims,” Bondi told a news conference Wednesday when asked about releasing the files.

The bill also allows the Justice Department to withhold information that would jeopardize active investigations or prosecutions. That’s created some worry among the bill’s proponents that the department would open active investigations into people named in the Epstein files in order to shield that material from public view.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a longtime Trump loyalist who has had a prominent split with Trump over the bill, said Tuesday that she saw the administration’s compliance with the bill as its “real test.”

“Will the Department of Justice release the files, or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” she asked.

In July, the FBI said in a memo regarding the Epstein investigation that, “we did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” But Bondi last week complied with Trump’s demands and ordered a federal prosecutor to investigate Epstein’s ties to the president’s political foes, including Clinton.

Still, Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who sponsored the bill, said “there’s no way they can have enough investigations to cover” all of the people he believes are implicated in Epstein’s abuse.

“And if they do, then good,” he added.

The bill also requires the Justice Department to produce reports on what materials it withheld, as well as redactions made, within 15 days of the release of the files. It stipulates that officials can’t withhold or redact anything “on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

Related Articles


Labor Department won’t release full October jobs report, a casualty of the 43-day federal shutdown


ICE crackdown heightens barriers for immigrant domestic violence victims


Trump nominates new CFPB director, but White House says agency is still closing


A health center closure in New England town reveals toll of federal cuts on rural communities


What to know about the impacts Medicaid cuts are having on rural health care

Who could be named?

There’s a widely held expectation that many people could be named in case files for investigations that spanned over a decade — and some concern that just because someone is named, that person would be assumed guilty or complicit.

Epstein was a luminary who kept company with heads of state, influential political figures, academics and billionaires. The release of his emails and messages by a House Oversight Committee investigation last week has already shown his connections with — and private conversations about — Trump and many other high-powered figures.

Yet federal prosecutors follow carefully constructed guidelines about what information they produce publicly and at trial, both to protect victims and to uphold the fairness of the legal system. House Speaker Mike Johnson raised objections to the bill on those grounds this week, arguing that it could reveal unwanted information on victims as well as others who were in contact with investigators.

Still, Johnson did not actually try to make changes to the bill and voted for it on the House floor.

For the bill’s proponents, a public reckoning over the investigation is precisely the point. Some of the survivors of trafficking from Epstein and Maxwell have sought ways to name people they accuse of being complicit or involved, but fear they will face lawsuits from the men they accuse.

Massie said that he wants the FBI to release the reports from its interviews with the victims.

Those reports typically contain unvetted information, but Massie said he is determined to name those who are accused. He and Greene have offered to read the names of those accused on the House floor, which would shield their speech from legal consequences.

“We need names,” Massie said.

Texas man indicted on murder charge in shooting of ‘King of the Hill’ voice actor Jonathan Joss

posted in: All news | 0

By JUAN A. LOZANO, Associated Press

HOUSTON (AP) — A grand jury in Texas has indicted the man accused of killing “King of the Hill” voice actor Jonathan Joss on a murder charge.

But it is unclear whether Joss’ killing will be considered a hate crime. Police in San Antonio did not immediately return an email seeking comment Wednesday on whether its investigation had determined that Joss’ sexual orientation played a role in his shooting, and the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office declined to comment on the matter.

Police allege Sigfredo Ceja Alvarez, 57, confronted Joss and his husband on June 1 as they were checking their mail at their San Antonio home, which had been burned down in January.

FILE – Candles, flowers, and notes are placed at a makeshift memorial in San Antonio, on Thursday, June 5, 2025, for voice actor Jonathan Joss who was recently killed. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, file)

Joss’ husband, Tristan Kern de Gonzales, has claimed the person who killed the actor yelled “violent homophobic slurs” before opening fire.

Ceja Alvarez’s attorneys did not immediately return emails seeking comment Wednesday.

In June, Alfonso Otero, one of Ceja Alvarez’s attorneys, said his client was innocent and denied making any homophobic statements.

The grand jury returned the indictment Monday, and Ceja Alvarez remains free on a $200,000 bond.

A friend of the 59-year-old Joss has said that Joss and Ceja Alvarez were neighbors and the two had argued for years.

Related Articles


Fed minutes: Most officials supported more rate cuts but not necessarily in December


McDonald’s is losing its low-income customers. Economists call it a symptom of the stark wealth divide


ICE crackdown heightens barriers for immigrant domestic violence victims


Nvidia earnings will shed a light on whether Big Tech is fueling an AI boom or bubble


Arrests now top 250 in immigration crackdown across North Carolina

Initially, San Antonio police had said there was no evidence indicating the shooting was related to Joss’ sexual orientation. But San Antonio Police Chief William McManus later walked back that statement, saying it had been “premature” and that whether Joss’ sexual orientation played a role in the shooting was “part of the investigation.”

The district attorney’s office said in a statement Wednesday that Ceja Alvarez “is charged with murder, which is the most serious charge applicable to this crime under Texas law. As the case is still pending, no additional details or information can be released at this time.”

Under Texas law, a hate crime — if there’s a conviction — would be handled as an enhancement during sentencing and not as a separate charge.

Joss was the voice of John Redcorn, a Native American character on the popular “King of the Hill” animated series, which ran for 13 seasons from 1997 to 2008. A reboot of the show, which Joss had already worked on, premiered in August.

Joss also had a recurring role on the television show “Parks and Recreation,” playing Chief Ken Hotate. He appeared in two episodes of the series “Tulsa King” in 2022.

Follow Juan A. Lozano: https://x.com/juanlozano70

Fed minutes: Most officials supported more rate cuts but not necessarily in December

posted in: All news | 0

By CHRISTOPHER RUGABER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — A majority of Federal Reserve policymakers expressed support in late October for further interest rate cuts, though not all committed to making the reduction at their next meeting in December, according to minutes released Wednesday.

At the same time, many officials said “it would likely be appropriate” to keep rates “unchanged for the rest of the year,” a sign of strong divisions among policymakers about the central bank’s next steps.

Related Articles


McDonald’s is losing its low-income customers. Economists call it a symptom of the stark wealth divide


ICE crackdown heightens barriers for immigrant domestic violence victims


Nvidia earnings will shed a light on whether Big Tech is fueling an AI boom or bubble


Arrests now top 250 in immigration crackdown across North Carolina


Judge pushes for resolution in lawsuit over legal access at Everglades detention center

Rate cuts by the Fed, over time, typically lower borrowing costs for mortgages, car loans, and credit cards.

Fed officials are deeply split over the biggest threat to the economy: weak hiring or stubbornly-elevated inflation. If a sluggish job market is the biggest threat, then the Fed would typically cut rates more. But it combats inflation by keeping rates elevated, or even raising them.

Chair Jerome Powell had telegraphed the deep divisions among the Fed’s 19-member interest-rate setting committee at a news conference following the Oct. 28-29 meeting. The minutes were released after the customary three-week delay.

“Participants expressed strongly differing views” about whether the Fed should cut at its December 9-10 meeting, the minutes said.

The central bank decided to cut its key rate to about 3.9% at the late October meeting, down from 4.1% and the second cut this year. In September, the Fed projected it would reduce rates three times this year, in September, October, and December.