Venezuela frees 10 Americans in swap for deported migrants
The Venezuelan men have spent months in El Salvador's most notorious prison, known by its Spanish acronym CECOT, after the Trump administration ignited the Alien Enemies Act to deport them in March. It is unclear what fate awaits them in Venezuela.
In exchange, the Venezuelan government released all U.S. residents held by the Maduro regime.
'It is unacceptable that Venezuelan regime representatives arrested and jailed U.S. nationals under highly questionable circumstances and without proper due process. Every wrongfully detained American in Venezuela is now free and back in our homeland,' Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement.
While the Trump administration has accused the Venezuelan men it deported under the rarely-used wartime authorities of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang, the evidence appeared to be slim.
Many of the accusations rested on tattoos, and among the men sent to CECOT were those who had tattoos that were references to autism and football teams.
The U.S. had agreed to pay the Salvadoran government millions to house the men.
'This operation is the result of months of negotiations with a tyrannical regime that had long refused to release one of its most valuable bargaining chips: its hostages,' Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele wrote on X.
'However, thanks to the tireless efforts of many officials from both the United States and El Salvador, and above all, thanks to Almighty God, it was achieved.'
Under the deal, Venezuelan political prisoners were also released, but neither U.S. nor Salvadoran authorities made clear the number of those released nor where they would reside.
'We also welcome the release of Venezuelan political prisoners and detainees that were also released from Venezuelan prisons. …The regime's use of unjust detention as a tool of political repression must end. We reiterate our call for the unconditional release of remaining unjustly and arbitrarily detained political prisoners and foreign nationals,' Rubio said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Epstein's ghost is haunting Trump, and America's enemies could summon more
It's the irony of all ironies: How could President Trump put his credibility on the line with his hard core MAGA supporters over Jeffrey Epstein? Trump has survived a felony conviction and was twice impeached and acquitted. He was found liable by a judge of sexual assault, owes potentially millions of dollars in libel suits for his actions and avoided possible prosecution and considerable jail time for gross mishandling of highly classified material. None of these mishaps prevented Trump from being reelected as America's 47th president. Yet, despite this graphic history, Trump is now threatened by the ghost of a convicted sexual predator. How can this be? As Epstein's attorney Alan Dershowitz wrote in the Wall Street Journal on July 16, Trump was free and clear of any and all entanglements with his client. And it was reported that Trump had once barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago. Extreme elements of his MAGA constituency have turned against Trump. For what seem to be irrational reasons, they have accused the president of a cover-up and lying about not providing full transparency on the Epstein saga and releasing the so-called 'client's list' that Dershowitz asserted was nonexistent. Conspiracy theories sprouted like mushrooms: for example, that Trump was obviously hiding his relationship with Epstein or protecting others in his administration and circle of friends from the Epstein stain. Shrill calls reverberated through Washington's political gasosphere for Attorney General Pam Bondi to resign over this failure to release the Epstein files. Having bragged that he could shoot someone dead on Park Avenue and be absolved, it is incredible that Trump could be attacked by his MAGA allies on such an extraordinarily trivial matter, given the magnitude of obstacles he has previously faced and overcome. Worse, so far, the explanations of why part of his base is incensed make little sense. That Trump has somehow now become part of the 'deep state' that he vowed to eliminate is nonsensical. Promising to release all 'any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony' on Epstein (and, for that matter, JFK's assassination) and not following through has been part of Trump's lifelong pattern of deception and disinformation, if not outright lying. It is quite possible — again, quoting Dershowitz — that there simply was no there there regarding the Epstein files, and that Trump simply exaggerated or distorted that possibility to play to his base. Then he got caught. And now Trump is lashing out against this base. Whether this is a minor tempest and will dissipate soon or has tsunami-like consequences remains to be seen. Why has this brouhaha over Epstein been so explosive? Is this the state of American politics today when a leader's credibility among his followers fractures over literally nothing, as occasionally happens in marriages? Has Trump violated some mythical bond or unspoken oath with this base? Or is the MAGA movement's instability or irrationality causing such a backlash? The timing is not helpful to Trump. In the midst of what could be a major global tariff war, the conflict in Gaza still blazing and Vladimir Putin given 50 days to put up or shut up on a cease-fire and peace negotiation in Ukraine, how do these outside players react? Do all or many shake their heads believing that this is simply the vulgarity of U.S. politics and ignore this display? Or do others, probably in Beijing and Moscow, see this as a fatal weakness in American culture and society to be exploited? Despite Trump's refusal to believe Russia interfered on his behalf in the 2016 election, make no mistake: Chinese and Russian, as well as other intelligence services, are exploring how these flaws and cracks in American politics can be exploited. For example, assuming that ex-KGB officer Putin wanted to alter the 2016 election, imagine how he could have exploited the so-called Steele dossier that alleged Trump's sexual misconduct in Moscow. The internet would have been filled with torrid stories and deep fake shots of Trump in compromising positions. With AI and other technical means, identifying seemingly minor issues that could have otherwise profound political consequences would not be difficult for an adversary or for anyone wishing to meddle in politics. This happened during Brexit. With social media as a force multiplier, it is easy to see how political fractures could be generated. As a thought experiment, suppose the resurrection of Epstein's ghost originated in a certain building in the Kremlin or inside Beijing's Forbidden City. That, I am sure, did not happen. But it could. Harlan Ullman, Ph.D., is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior advisor at Washington, D.C.'s Atlantic Council, the chairman of two private companies and the principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He and David Richards are authors of a forthcoming book on preventing strategic catastrophe.
The Hill
13 minutes ago
- The Hill
Judge weighs reality of Trump ‘ideological' deportation policy as activists crackdown trial ends
A federal judge on Monday questioned the true nature of the Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activists during closing arguments of a bench trial over the controversial arrests. U.S. District Judge William Young, an appointee of former President Reagan, must determine whether the so-called 'ideological deportation policy' exists, such that the administration singled out campus activists critical of Israel's war in Gaza unlawfully. The plaintiffs, who make up several university associations, argued that the administration's policy is to revoke the visas and green cards of noncitizens based on their pro-Palestinian advocacy in aim of chilling speech. 'It is stifling dissent, your honor,' said Alexandra Conlon, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. 'That's the goal.' But the Justice Department called the suggestion 'silly,' contending that the trial evidence demonstrated no such policy exists. 'This policy is a product of the imagination and creative conjuring of the plaintiffs,' said DOJ lawyer William Kanellis. The arguments cap a roughly two-week trial over the crackdown, namely the arrests of and efforts to deport foreign-born students and faculty members linked to campus demonstrations. It was the first major trial of President Trump's second administration. Across several days, green card-holding professors at U.S. universities took the stand to testify that the high-profile arrests of outspoken students, like former Columbia University pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil and Tufts student Rümeysa Öztürk, made them fearful and stifled their speech. On Monday, Conlon argued that was the administration's goal. She referenced statements made by Trump and other officials lauding the arrests and said they were 'designed to terrorize' those who share the views of those who were arrested. She also pointed to testimony from a senior Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), official that 'most' names his team was directed to investigate in March came from Canary Mission, a pro-Israel online blacklist that is anonymously run. The site has been accused of doxxing people protesting Israel's war with Palestinian militant group Hamas but describes its mission as documenting individuals and organizations 'that promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews on North American college campuses and beyond.' Conlon called the group 'extremist.' 'The fact that's the pool of people the government started with shows you what the point of this policy was,' she said. Young questioned whether the trial evidence showed Canary Mission is 'extremist' and said it seems 'perfectly appropriate' for the government to take leads from any source, noting that leads frequently come from a 'wrongdoer' or 'rival gang.' But Conlon said those leads relate to alleged lawbreaking, where here, the leads amount only to criticism of Israel or the U.S. 'That's how you end up with someone like Ms. Ozturk being described as pro-Hamas,' she added, a reference to the student's arrest being publicly linked only to an op-ed urging her university's divestment from Israel. Secretary of State Marco Rubio deemed several of the campus demonstrators threats to the nation's foreign policy, invoking a statute that makes deportable any noncitizen whose 'presence and activities in the United States' is thought to have 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.' In a memo explaining the apparent threat posed by Khalil, Rubio cited the student's beliefs as justification for his deportation. Young later expressed having 'trouble' with the apparent policy. Without making any formal findings, he said it seems to him that the new administration is implementing new foreign policy within the existing legal framework – efforts that fall squarely within executive powers. The Justice Department argued that's exactly right. Ethan Kanter, another DOJ lawyer, said that noncitizens do not have equivalent rights under the First Amendment. The nature of those rights are 'context dependent' and tied to 'competing government interests in play.' 'That is what these cases demonstrate,' Kanter said, though noting that the judge does not have to rule on that matter to decide the case in the government's favor. Young zeroed in on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)'s use of masks as a cause of concern, saying he's not aware of any other law enforcement agencies in the U.S. that allow the practice. He signaled disbelief in the government's contention that the agents were protecting their identities, instead suggesting that the 'common sense' interpretation might be that their objective is to 'spread fear.' 'Perhaps they're afraid what they're being called upon to do is of concern,' the judge said. Kanter rejected that notion, asserting that those decisions came down to the 'judgment, experience and operational needs' of individual agents. Kanellis, the other DOJ lawyer, compared the plaintiffs' case to the fictional Don Quixote's fight with windmills. In the story, Quixote sees windmills and believes they are giants. He's flung off his horse while riding to 'fight' them and does not believe his squire who notes they are windmills, not giants, insisting they were changed. 'Plaintiffs in this case imagine lawful standards amount to some grand government conspiracy,' Kanellis said, adding the challengers have been 'knocked off their horse.' But Young said another historical reference better befits the case. He described King Henry II of England asking his court to rid him of a 'troublesome priest.' Two knights went out to 'hack down' the bishop. The president, Young said, has likewise raised various concerns about campus protests. 'He doesn't have errant knights, but he's got Stephen Miller,' the judge said, referencing the top White House adviser. Young said he will issue a written ruling deciding the case but gave no indication of when it can be expected.
USA Today
13 minutes ago
- USA Today
Commanders, Guardians name changes were years in the making: Timeline of key events
While the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians have held their current names for a few years now, the teams and their past mascots – the Redskins and Indians, respectively – were thrown back into national conversation by President Donald Trump over the weekend. Trump said in a social media post on July 20 that the Guardians and the Commanders, each playing their fourth season under their new names in 2025, should revert back to their old names. "The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team. There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams, with a storied past. Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen," Trump's post on Truth Social said. "Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!" Trump concluded. Later Sunday afternoon, July 20, Trump threatened to restrict the Commanders from building on the old RFK Stadium site if the franchise doesn't change its name. "I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington (name),' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington," Trump posted. The president's most recent comments come after he previously said on social media in October 2013 that the president should not be telling the Redskins to change their name, because our country has "far bigger problems." Here's a timeline of each franchise's name changes. Timeline of Washington Commanders name change Here's a timeline of key events in the evolution of the Washington Redskins to the Washington Commanders. Timeline of Cleveland Guardians name change Here's a timeline of key events in the evolution of the Cleveland Indians to the Cleveland Guardians. In a meeting with reporters Sunday, July 20, Guardians' president of baseball operations Chris Antonetti said that he was unaware of Trump's statements prior to the meeting and that changing the name back to the "Indians" was "not something [he has been] tracking or [has] been paying a lot of attention to." "We've gotten the opportunity to build the brand as the Guardians over the last four years and are excited about the future," said Antonetti. Antonetti did not provide any indication that the team plans on reverting to its former name. Contributing: Jon Hoefling, Nate Davis & Ayrton Ostly, USA TODAY Gabe Hauari is a national trending news reporter at USA TODAY. You can follow him on X @GabeHauari or email him at Gdhauari@
