US slams ‘smear campaign' as pro-Iran hackers threaten to release Trump material
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said the threat to expose emails about the president is 'nothing more than digital propaganda' meant to damage Mr Trump and other federal officials.
'A hostile foreign adversary is threatening to illegally exploit purportedly stolen and unverified material in an effort to distract, discredit and divide,' CISA spokeswoman Marci McCarthy wrote in a social media post.
'These criminals will be found, and they will be brought to justice.'
Reuters reported that it contacted the alleged hackers online, and they told the news organisation that they had a large cache of emails from Trump chief of staff Susie Wiles, other senior advisers and porn actress Stormy Daniels, to whom a hush money payment led to Mr Trump's criminal conviction.
Federal prosecutors charged three Iranians last year on allegations of hacking into Mr Trump's presidential campaign. Hackers also targeted the campaign of Democrats Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and unsuccessfully tried to leak material supposedly taken from Mr Trump to Democrats and members of the media.
The threat to release more hacked emails was reported on the day that CISA, the FBI and the National Security Agency issued a public bulletin warning that hacking groups supportive of Tehran may attack US interests despite a fragile ceasefire between Iran and Israel.
The hackers, authorities warned, could seek to disrupt or disable critical infrastructure systems such as utilities, transportation and economic hubs. They also could target defence contractors or other American companies with ties to Israel, the agencies said.
The bulletin outlined recommendations, including the use of regular software updates and strong password management systems to shore up digital defences.
Hackers backing Tehran have targeted US banks, defence contractors and energy companies after American strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, but so far have not caused widespread disruptions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
40 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump has hung Ukraine out to dry
Volodymyr Zelensky thought he had done everything right. When Donald Trump demanded he sign away Ukraine's mineral rights in exchange for military aid, he did it. When the White House decided that offering Moscow an unconditional ceasefire was the only way to stop the war, Zelensky quickly acquiesced. When the US asked Ukraine to hold off using Nato military equipment against targets inside Russia, they agreed. In the end it didn't make any difference. This week Politico broke the news that the US Department of Defence had paused key weapons deliveries already agreed to and funded by Congress under the Biden administration; this leaves Ukrainian cities defenceless against Russian missile strikes and its troops dangerously low on ammunition. Trump has already clearly signalled his opposition to future arms shipments from the US. But cutting off arms already promised and paid for seems cruel and gratuitous. 'This decision was made to put America's interests first following a DOD review of our nation's military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,' explained deputy White House press secretary Anna Kelly. 'The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.' But drill down into the list of weapons withheld this week and the claim that the US is protecting its own dwindling supplies makes little sense. For a start, almost all the pledged weapons are located in American military stockpiles in Poland, not in the US. The Defence Department has blocked the transfer of 250 GMLRS missiles to Ukraine – yet Lockheed Martin makes 14,000 a year. Ukraine will receive 8,496 fewer rounds of 155 mm artillery shells – which is less than a week's production by US industry. And it's hard to see how holding back 25 Stinger missiles is going to help Make America Great Again. There is some debate over whether the delivery freeze comes on the orders of the White House, or whether it's a screw-up by the bean counters in America's defence department. Indeed, just last week Trump signalled that he was willing to find some more Patriot batteries for Kyiv – the holy grail of missile defence that Ukraine so desperately needs as Russia ramps up its missile attacks to unprecedented levels of intensity and frequency. But in the big picture it doesn't matter. Long-term, Trump has made it clear that the US is out of the Ukraine weapons supply game, and he believes that the war must end in diplomacy. Sending more weapons to Kyiv, Trump apparently believes, will only add fuel to the conflict. Trump is wrong, for one simple reason. Ukraine is currently fighting a defensive war on the ground, and slowly losing it in part because of a lack of firepower. Its only successful attacks are targeted at Russian airfields and military factories, and these strikes are undertaken using ingenious weapons of Ukraine's own devising and manufacture. And Kyiv has signalled that it's ready for an immediate ceasefire if Russia follows suit. Ukraine needs weapons to defend against continuous Russian attacks, not to prolong the war. Ukraine's biggest practical problem is that European promises to step into the breach and fill the gap left by the US have so far yielded little in the way of actual arms deliveries. European militaries have been hollowed out by years of budget cuts, and whatever meagre stockpiles existed three years ago have been quickly consumed in the killing fields of Donbas. Pledges to increase defence spending to five per cent of GDP agreed at the Nato summit earlier this month will boost Europe's military industrial complex – indeed the market capitalisation of Rheinmetall, the German tank manufacturer, have risen above Volkswagen's. But that extra investment will take years to make a difference. Europe's immediate answer has been to buy US arms and donate them to Ukraine. But if Washington is not able or willing to send crucial armaments to Kyiv, as this week's withheld shipments suggests, then Zelensky's situation is worse than his remaining allies feared.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Kilmar Abrego Garcia suffered psychological and physical torture in El Salvador prison, attorneys say
Kilmar Abrego Garcia was stripped naked, had his head shaved, beaten, forced to kneel for hours overnight, and lost over 30 pounds during his time at the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador, his attorneys say in a new court filing. Abrego, of Maryland, was deported to El Salvador in March by the Trump administration in an "administrative error" and was returned to the U.S. in June to face federal charges. At the time of his removal from the U.S., Abrego was protected from deportation by a 2019 court order. His high-profile case was pushed into the national spotlight, sparking heated debate over Trump's immigration crackdown and the race to deport people, at times without due process. Abrego was deported on March 15 to El Salvador and placed into CECOT, a mega prison and terrorism confinement center known for brutal and harsh conditions. There, he was allegedly subjected to severe beatings, sleep deprivation, inadequate nutrition, and psychological torture, his attorneys said in an amended complaint filed Wednesday. That complaint is part of a federal lawsuit filed by Abego's wife against the Trump administration in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The complaint states that upon arrival at CECOT, Abrego was forced to strip, issued prison clothing, kicked in the legs with boots, and struck on his head and arms to change faster. His head was also allegedly shaved, and he was frog-marched to a cell while being hit with wooden batons. The following day, he had "visible bruises and lumps all over his body," the complaint said. In that cell, he and 20 other Salvadorans "were forced to kneel from approximately 9 p.m. to 6 a.m., with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion," the filing said. During that time, Abrego was denied bathroom access and soiled himself, according to the complaint. The inmates were confined to metal bunks with no mattresses in overcrowded cells without windows and bright lights that stayed on 24 hours a day, the complaint says. While there, prison officials repeatedly told Abrego that "they would transfer him to cells containing gang members who, they assured him, would 'tear' him apart," the complaint says. The attorneys said Abrego observed prisoners violently harm each other without intervention. "Screams from nearby cells would similarly ring out throughout the night without any response from prison guards or personnel," the complaint says. In his first two weeks, he lost 31 pounds. On April 9, the complaint says Abrego and four others were transferred to a different module in CECOT. But the next day, he was transferred alone to the Centro Industrial prison facility in Santa Ana, El Salvador. Throughout his time in El Salvador, his lawyers say Abrego was denied any communications with his family and access to counsel until Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) visited him on April 17. The Supreme Court ruled in April that his removal was 'illegal' and determined that a judge's order for the administration to facilitate his return was proper. Abrego was ultimately returned to the U.S. on June 6, following a contentious back-and-forth between the court and the Trump administration that raised concerns about defiance of the judicial branch. The government has repeatedly accused the 29-year-old of being involved with the gang MS-13 — claims Abrego's family and attorneys have denied. His attorneys say Abrego, who is from El Salvador, left the country when he was around 16 years old to flee gang violence. In 2011, Abrego entered the U.S. without inspection and stayed in Maryland, where his older brother, a U.S. citizen, lived, the complaint said. In the Wednesday filing, attorneys for the Abrego family ask Judge Paula Xinis to rule that over the course of this entire ordeal — from the time he was picked up in that Maryland parking lot to when he was returned to the US — the government violated laws, and his Fifth Amendment right to due process. They also want Abrego returned to Maryland and, separately, want a habeas corpus hearing held in Maryland. When Abrego returned last month, the Justice Department said he would face human smuggling charges in Tennessee. He is accused of transporting people not legally in the U.S. within the country. He allegedly participated in a conspiracy over nine years to move people from Texas deeper into the country, including members of MS-13, the Trump administration said. Abrego's wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, has insisted that he was not involved in criminal activity. "Kilmar worked in construction and sometimes transported groups of workers between job sites, so it's entirely plausible he would have been pulled over while driving with others in the vehicle," his wife previously said in a statement. "He was not charged with any crime or cited for any wrongdoing" at the time. The family's attorney, Chris Newman, previously said the Trump administration's efforts are part of a "campaign of disinformation, defamation against Kilmar and his family."
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Supreme Court to rule on state transgender student sports bans
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday waded into the legal fight over state laws that ban transgender athletes from competing in girls and women's school and college sports, taking up cases from West Virginia and Idaho. The court will hear cases involving two transgender students, Becky Pepper-Jackson and Lindsay Hecox, who challenged state bans in West Virginia and Idaho, respectively. Both won injunctions that allow them to continue to compete in sports. Pepper-Jackson, now 15, takes puberty blocking medication, while Hecox, a 24-year-old college student, has received testosterone suppression and estrogen treatments. The court's decision to hear the case comes two weeks after the conservative majority delivered a major blow to transgender rights by upholding a Tennessee law that bans gender-affirming for young people. In doing so, the court left various legal questions about transgender rights unresolved. Oral arguments will likely take place later this year, with a ruling expected by June 2026. The states both enacted bans that categorically bar transgender students from participating in girls or women's sports. More than half the 50 states now have such laws, but legal challenges have not been decisively resolved. The fight for and against the expansion of transgender rights has become a flashpoint nationwide and was an issue in the recent presidential election, with Donald Trump denigrating Democrats for supporting the effort. His administration has begun to roll back measures taken by President Joe Biden to expand protections for transgender people. In February, the National Collegiate Athletic Association also changed course, announcing a new policy to limit women's sports to 'student-athletes assigned female at birth only.' In Pepper-Jackson's case, a federal judge initially ruled in her favor but concluded in January 2023 that the law was most likely legal and allowed it to be enforced against her. Pepper-Jackson appealed, and the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals blocked West Virginia officials from enforcing it against her. The Supreme Court in April 2023 rejected the state's attempt to enforce the law against Pepper-Jackson while the litigation continues, meaning she has been able to continue to participate in school sports, namely cross-country and track. Hecox, who plays soccer and also runs, similarly obtained an injunction from a district court judge against Idaho officials. She also won on appeal at the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Pepper-Jackson and Hecox both failed to qualify for running teams at their respective schools, according to court papers. Pepper-Jackson did place third in the state for middle school discus and sixth in middle school shot put, losing out to cisgender girls. She finished 67th out of 68 in a cross-country event in eighth grade. In barring transgender girls from participating in girls sports at the middle school, high school and college levels, the West Virginia law enacted in 2021 says gender is 'based solely on the individual's reproductive biology and genetics at birth.' As such, it says, a female is a person 'whose biological sex determined at birth as female.' The Idaho law, passed in 2020, states that sports 'designated for females, women, or girls should not be open to students of the male sex.' Both cases concern whether such laws violate the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which requires that the law apply equally to everyone. Pepper-Jackson's case also raises a claim under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in education. The Biden administration previously unveiled proposals on how Title IX applies to transgender athletes, saying that blanket bans would be unlawful but concluding that it may be lawful to limit involvement in competitive sports. But the the Trump administration has reversed course, with the White House issuing an executive order titled: 'Keeping Men out of Women's Sports.' In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that federal law barring sex discrimination in employment protected LGBTQ people, a ruling that angered conservatives. The court is yet to rule on whether the same reasoning applies to Title IX.
