Trump Administration Live Updates: President to Speak With Zelensky and European Allies on Ukraine
On Monday, Mr. Trump and his newly confirmed federal prosecutor for Washington cited an array of inaccurate statistics about murders in the city and crimes committed by children. It was part of a broader bid by his administration to rail against crime in urban, largely liberal cities, often turning to exaggerated and inaccurate figures to portray soaring violence and lawlessness.
Here's an assessment of some of their claims.
What Was Said
'Murders in 2023 reached the highest rate probably ever. They say 25 years, but they don't know what that means because it just goes back 25 years.'
— Mr. Trump in the news conference on Monday
False. There were 274 homicides in Washington in 2023 among a population of about 679,000 people, a rate of about 40.4 per 100,000 people. That was the highest rate in over 20 years, but not 'ever.' Moreover, the homicide rate has since declined.
The number of homicides declined by about a third in 2024 to 187 while the population grew to over 702,000 people, for a rate of 26.6 per 100,000. The recent trend of declining homicides appears to be holding, with 100 homicides as of Aug. 12, compared with 112 at the same point last year.
The 274 homicides in 2023 was the highest number since 1997, when the city reported 301 homicides, according to police data compiled by the F.B.I. And the rate was the highest since 2003, which had a rate of 44 per 100,000, according to an analysis by Jeff Asher, a crime analyst based in New Orleans.
But Mr. Trump is wrong that it was the highest rate 'ever' or that the data only extends to the early 2000s. Records dating back to the 1960s show that Washington's homicide rate peaked in the 1990s at more than 80 per 100,000 people in 1991, or about double the rate in 2023.
What Was Said
'Look at the kind of numbers we have: D.C., 41 per 100,000, No. 1 that we can find anywhere in the world. Other cities are pretty bad, but they're not as bad as that.'
— Mr. Trump in the news conference
False. Mr. Trump held up a chart that first appeared on Fox News and was shared by Vice President JD Vance last week purportedly comparing Washington's homicide rate to that of eight other 'capitals.' (One, Lagos, Nigeria, is not a capital.) But the chart cites outdated data and omits several capitals and many other cities with much higher rates.
The chart cited a homicide rate of 41 per 100,000 people for Washington, close to the city's rate for 2023. But again, the rate declined to 26.6 per 100,000 in 2024.
Mr. Trump has a point that Washington's homicide rate is much higher than many capitals, but its rate is nowhere near the highest 'anywhere in the world.'
In 2023, according to data compiled by the Igarapé Institute, a Brazilian think tank, capitals with higher homicide rates included Port-au-Prince, Haiti, with a rate of 67.2 per 100,000 people; Cape Town, South Africa, with 66.8; Kingston, Jamaica, with 64.2; Caracas, Venezuela, with 47.9; and Guatemala City at 47.8.
The think tank reported a slightly lower homicide rate for Washington at 39.1, based on data from the Council on Criminal Justice and its higher population estimate. Overall, the think tank reported, 47 cities with more than 250,000 people had higher homicide rates than 40.4 and 49 cities had rates higher than 39.1, including six in the United States: Memphis, New Orleans, St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland and Detroit.
Image
President Trump cited an array of inaccurate statistics about murders in the city and crimes committed by children during a news conference on Monday.
Credit...
Doug Mills/The New York Times
What Was Said
'Juvenile offenders in crimes against persons, as they say, it's getting worse.'
— Mr. Trump in the news conference
This is exaggerated. Total arrests of youths under 18 did increase from 2021 to 2023, but declined in 2024. Juvenile arrests through the first six months of 2025 are slightly higher compared with the same time period last year. But arrests of youths still remained below prepandemic levels and have significantly declined over the past 20 years.
According to data compiled by the city's Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, the police made about 1,500 arrests of children in 2020; 1,400 in 2021; 1,700 in 2022; 2,200 in 2023; and 2,000 in 2024. Juvenile arrests totaled 1,128 through the first half of 2025, compared with 1,114 in the first half of 2024.
In comparison, the police arrested 2,300 to 2,900 youths annually from 2016 to 2019 and 3,400 to 4,000 annually from 2006 to 2010.
What Was Said
'They know, these young gangs — or as they're called here, crews — they know that if they're 14, 15, 16, or 17, they're below the age of criminal responsibility unless they commit the crime of murder, rape, armed robbery or burglary in the first degree.
And that means if you shoot someone and they don't die, I don't even get the case as a prosecutor. And understand I'm not just a federal prosecutor, I'm the local D.A., so to speak here for D.C.: All of the cases go to family court and the goal of family court — the 14- through 17-year-olds — and those cases go to family court where the focus is rehabilitation and they talk about ice cream socials and yoga.'
— Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, in an interview with Fox News on Monday night
This is misleading. It is true that Ms. Pirro, who was nominated by Mr. Trump to her role and confirmed by the Senate this month, does not have jurisdiction over most crimes committed by children 17 years and under. But that does not mean arrested youth are not prosecuted at all; rather, a local prosecutor handles those cases. Similarly, many youth are detained at a center criticized for violence and overcrowding, not simply engaged in 'ice cream socials and yoga.'
By 'family court,' Ms. Pirro is most likely referring to the role of the D.C. Superior Court's family court social services division as the city's probation agency for children. The agency decides whether arrested youth are released to parents or a guardian, placed in a shelter or confined to a juvenile detention center as they await trial or sentencing.
Nearly half of youth arrests in Washington result in detention before an initial hearing, which is higher than the national average of about a quarter.
Ms. Pirro is correct that she can directly charge a child as an adult if the child commits one of four serious crimes: murder, rape, armed robbery or burglary. But youths arrested on other offenses can be prosecuted by the city's elected attorney general, who prosecuted 84 percent of violent crimes committed by children in 2024, and about 73 percent of all crimes.
If the children are judged to have been 'involved in a delinquent act' — which would be a crime if committed by an adult — the family court then decides again if the children should be released on probation or detained. If sentenced to a juvenile detention center, the children receive services like counseling and education and vocational training with the goal of rehabilitation and eventual re-entry into society, as Ms. Pirro correctly noted.
Ms. Pirro's portrayal of the criminal justice system as indulgent is a matter of opinion.
Eduardo R. Ferrer, a professor at Georgetown University who supervises its Juvenile Justice Clinic, described her portrayal of the juvenile criminal justice system as inaccurate.
He pointed to a number of local news reports about understaffing, confinement, sexual abuse and physical abuse at the juvenile detention facility in Washington. A recent investigation by The Washington Post also found that the number of dangerous incidents at the center nearly quadrupled in recent years, and that many children are held longer than the stated goal of 30 days.
'Young people are not coddled in D.C.,' he said. 'To the contrary, generally, system-involved youth are not currently receiving the services and supports necessary for them to succeed.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
10 minutes ago
- CBS News
Transcript: Rep. Jason Crow on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Aug. 17, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Democratic Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on Aug. 17, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we're joined now by Colorado Democratic Congressman Jason Crow. Good to see you in person. Before we start talking about Ukraine, I want to pick up on something, since you sit on the Intelligence Committee. The Secretary of State just said that lawmakers had come to the Trump administration with information that they've been granting visas to individuals with ties to Hamas, or with organizations with ties to Hamas. That's a pretty stunning accusation. Israel controls who enters and exits Gaza. The United States screens all visas. So, is there really a blind spot that you are aware of? REP. JASON CROW: I'm not aware of that. But if that's true, actually, that is concerning. That would be a problem. I mean, Hamas is a brutal terrorist organization. They should not be traveling anywhere. So, if that's happening, it should be stopped immediately. And, you know, the Intelligence Committee has a role to play in that. MARGARET BRENNAN: But the Intelligence Committee wasn't behind the information presented to the Secretary of State. SPEAKER: I have not been briefed on that. I have no information about it. MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, on Ukraine: You know that the U.S. intelligence assessment is that the battlefield is turning in Russia's favor, despite the fact that Putin has to rely on Iran and North Korea to keep this thing going. If neither President Biden nor President Trump were ever willing to commit troops, doesn't the secretary have a point that it has to be hammered out at the negotiating table? REP. CROW: You know, this absolutely will end at a negotiating table, like most conflicts will. But what happened on Friday was a historic embarrassment for the United States. There's no other way to put it. Right? You listen to what Marco Rubio and the president have said. They keep on saying they're dedicating time. They're making it a priority. They're focusing their attention on it. In any negotiation, when you're trying to end an armed conflict, there's nothing more important than understanding what motivates your adversary. What is making Vladimir Putin tick, in this instance. Vladimir Putin does not care about the amount of time that we're nego- we're allocating to this, does not care about a B-2 bomber flyover, does not care about a lineup of F-22 fighters rolled out. He doesn't care about any of that. What Vladimir Putin cares about is basically three things. He cares about economic pressure in the form of sanctions. He cares about political, diplomatic isolation, being a pariah state. And he cares about military defeat. Those are the three things that will end this conflict if he feels pressure on all of those three fronts. And this administration continues to be unwilling to do anything to assert pressure in any of those three areas. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, they have put in place some secondary sanctions, at least on India here, and they haven't pulled back. They need Congress to help them repeal a lot of these sanctions. But bigger picture, in hindsight, do you think the United States to date has been too hesitant to actually help Ukraine win this war? President Obama did not send offensive weapons to Ukraine. President Biden was criticized for being perhaps too slow in delivery of certain weapons. REP. CROW: There's no doubt. As you know, I was one of the members of Congress that, on a bipartisan basis, pushed really hard in the first two years of this war, under the Biden administration, to do more, to do more quicker. And I was concerned that we were doing just enough to prevent Ukraine from losing and not doing enough to help them win. And I do believe that had we done more, and we had done it faster, and that we were willing to be more aggressive in providing aid and support for Ukraine, then they would be in a different position on the battlefield today. But compare that to what this administration has done, which has relieved almost all pressure. Like look at what happened on Friday. U.S. military personnel in uniform, literally, were on their hands and knees, rolling out a red carpet for the most murderous dictator of the 21st century. Somebody who has kidnapped and is holding prisoner tens of thousands of Ukrainian children. Somebody who started this whole war, right? This both-sides-ism that the administration is engaging in, that both sides need to come to the table and negotiate. Ukraine is the victim. They are the victim. They didn't start this war. Russia did. And somehow we keep on acting like Vladimir Putin deserves to be brought out into the open like any other head of state. This is a historic embarrassment and defeat for U.S. foreign policy. MARGARET BRENNAN: You have served this country in uniform. I wonder, since you sit on the Armed Services Committee, how comfortable you would be with the United States giving this, whatever the Article Five-like security guarantee would look like. Is that something you should see boots on the ground to do? REP. CROW: I don't think boots on the ground would be the way to go. But, certainly, the United States has assets and capability that I think are essential to any type of security guarantee. I think Europe has to come forward with the forward presence of military. But we can provide intelligence. We can provide economic support, diplomatic support. One of the most important things that we can do right now is actually seize Russian assets. This would be huge. This would be a game-changing thing that put pressure on Vladimir Putin. And actually create security guarantees and reconstruction for Ukraine. There's over $150 billion of seized Russian assets, and the United States could lead a coalition to seize that money. Allocate it towards reconstruction, allocate it towards security, allocate it towards the building of a Ukrainian military that could actually resist Russia going forward. But this administration is unwilling to do it. MARGARET BRENNAN: Last administration was too, they-- REP. CROW: --That's right. MARGARET BRENNAN: They did agree to the legislation. But on the immigration front, you and your fellow Democratic lawmakers are now trying to challenge the Trump administration's policy that requires notice to be given before you visit an immigration facility. You just did visit some. What did you see, and how does that compare to the last visit? REP. CROW: Well, there's an ICE detention center in my district, in Aurora, Colorado. I have visited that center 10 times now over the last five years, six years. And oversight of federal facilities is one of the most important things that any member of Congress does. Air Force bases, military bases, VA hospitals and ICE detention centers. This administration just tripled the budget of ICE. Made it the largest federal law enforcement agency in the history of the United States. Bigger than the FBI, ATF, DEA, all others combined. And they are putting in roadblocks to prevent oversight, to prevent transparency because they were trying to hide what they are doing. That is unacceptable. So we filed a lawsuit to force them to abide by federal law that guarantees us access. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we'll see where that heads next. Jason Crow, thank you. We'll be right back.
New York Times
10 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Minimizes Summit Papers Left in Hotel
The Trump administration this weekend downplayed a report that officials left in a public area of a hotel documents describing the confidential movements of President Trump and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia during their meeting in Alaska on Friday. NPR reported earlier that the documents were left on a printer in the Hotel Captain Cook in downtown Anchorage, near Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin had their meeting about the war in Ukraine. The documents were produced by the Office of the Chief of Protocol, a position held by Monica Crowley, a former Fox News personality who served in Mr. Trump's first term. The papers were found around 9 a.m. on Friday and sent to NPR by a guest of the hotel, who was granted anonymity. They listed the sequence of events, which included a smaller meeting with Mr. Trump, Mr. Putin and their top foreign policy advisers; an expanded meeting and working lunch with several cabinet officials; a news conference; and an interview between Mr. Trump and Sean Hannity of Fox News. The documents also included a lunch menu for a three-course luncheon held 'in honor of his excellency Vladimir Putin.' Green salad, filet mignon, and halibut Olympia — a humble local favorite — were on the menu. But since the lengthy day of meetings was cut short on Friday, the expanded meeting and the working lunch were bypassed in favor of an abrupt news conference between the two leaders, who did not take questions. The White House and State Department have both derided the documents as a glorified lunch menu. 'Instead of covering the historic steps towards peace achieved at Friday's summit, NPR is trying to make a story out of a lunch menu. Ridiculous,' Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, said in an email. The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Sunday, but NPR reported a day earlier that an administration spokeswoman had characterized the papers as a 'multipage lunch menu' and not a security breach. The papers included precise times and locations of each meeting, as well as the phone numbers of several administration officials. Eliot A. Cohen, a former counselor in the State Department who served in the Bush administration, said in an interview that the administration had been both 'sloppy' and 'incompetent' in leaving behind the materials. 'Above all, they don't have process,' said Mr. Cohen, who is now an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 'A well-drilled bureaucracy doesn't do these things.' But he added that the materials did not seem high-level or reveal state or military secrets. 'My guess is the Russians already have everybody's phone numbers,' Mr. Cohen said.
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
White House signals strong momentum toward peace in Ukraine but many questions linger
President Donald Trump's foreign envoy Steve Witkoff — one of three American participants in Friday's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin — described on Sunday several major agreements reached during the Alaska talks that he said created strong momentum toward a peace agreement with Ukraine. Witkoff told CNN that Putin had signed off on allowing 'robust' security guarantees as part of an eventual peace accord, including a provision that would provide for a collective defense of Ukraine by the United States and Europe should Russia attempt another invasion. 'We agreed to robust security guarantees that I would describe as game changing,' Witkoff told Jake Tapper on 'State of the Union,' adding the Russians had also pledged 'legislative enshrinement' of a promise not to invade Ukraine or another European country in any forthcoming peace plan. Neither provision has been mentioned in Russian accounts of the summit. Witkoff's public description of Friday's summit was the most fulsome yet of what was discussed for nearly three hours behind closed doors in Anchorage. Trump will meet Monday at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky and several European leaders to discuss the matter in more detail. Still, many questions remained about how the US is assessing Putin's seriousness about reaching a deal, whether his promises can be trusted after a track record of violating previous peace agreements and what exactly Trump is willing to offer to ensure Ukraine isn't invaded again. Heading into Friday's meeting, Trump said he would be disappointed if a ceasefire wasn't reached and threatened 'severe' consequences on Russia if Putin didn't end the fighting. But as he departed, Trump said he was no longer aiming for an immediate ceasefire and declared 'we don't have to think' about sanctions after the talks. Witkoff said significant progress during the summit led Trump to abandon his push for an immediate ceasefire and instead work toward advancing a larger peace agreement. 'We made so much progress at this meeting with regard to all the other ingredients necessary for a for a peace deal that we, that President Trump, pivoted to that place,' Witkoff said. The other US participant in the talks, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, offered a more guarded assessment of how close a peace agreement may be. 'We made progress in the sense that we identified potential areas of agreement, but there remains some big areas of disagreement. So we're still a long ways off,' he said on ABC's 'This Week.' 'We're not at the precipice of a peace agreement, we're not at the edge of one, but I do think progress was made.' He said later on CBS' 'Face the Nation' that any agreement to end the war would cause disappointment on both sides. 'It may not be pleasant, it may be distasteful, but in order for there to be an end to the war, there are things that Russia wants that it cannot get and there are things that Ukraine wants that it's not going to get,' he said. The agreements Witkoff described will be at the center of meetings Monday between Trump and Zelensky. A large delegation of European officials — including the leaders of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, Finland, the European Union and NATO — will accompany the Ukrainian leader for the talks. European leaders have been pressing Trump to follow through on his threat of tough new economic penalties on Russia, but Rubio cautioned such steps could scuttle progress on a peace deal. 'The minute he takes those steps, all talks stop,' he said. 'The minute we take those steps, there is no one left in the world to go talk to the Russians and try to get them to the table to reach a peace agreement.' A breakout session during Monday's talks at the White House will explore options for security guarantees for Ukraine that would ensure Russia is unable to re-invade the country once a peace deal is in place. Zelensky and European leaders have said such assurances are necessary as part of a peace accord. Witkoff said the clause agreed to by Russia — akin to NATO's 'Article 5' agreement that an attack against one country is an attack against all — was a workaround for Russia's insistence Ukraine never be able to join NATO. He described it as the 'first time we had ever heard the Russians agree' to such a provision being included in a peace deal. What the United States would contribute to the effort — versus the the Europeans — remained unclear. Trump has previously stated clearly that American troops won't be on the ground in Ukraine, and has said the onus is on European nations to take the lead in protecting it. Some officials believe a robust security infrastructure for Ukraine could make it easier for Zelensky to accept some of Russia's demands for land concessions as part of a peace deal. Putin has not abandoned some of his maximalist ideas, including that Ukraine give up the entire eastern Donbas region, where Russia currently occupies large swaths of territory. But Witkoff said Putin did make some concessions on his land requirements, suggested the Russians now see 'land swapping' occurring at the current frontlines of the war rather than the administrative boundaries of at least some of the five regions long in Putin's sights. 'The Russians made some concessions at the table with regard to all five of those regions,' he said, adding the issue would be discussed with Zelensky on Monday and 'hopefully we can cut through and make some decisions right then and there.'
