Karoline Leavitt makes rare appearance with husband and son at White House easter egg hunt
accompanied by her husband Nicholas Riccio
and their nine-month-old son Nico.
The 27-year-old Leavitt has been seldom to be seen in public with her 59-year-old spouse, but made an exception for this family-oriented event. Her husband looked remarkably youthful in a tan suit and purple tie, pushing their baby boy, dressed in soft blue, around the South Lawn in a stroller. The couple
welcomed their first child last July
.
The day, hosted by President
Donald Trump
and Melania Trump, was filled with festivity and offered a variety of activities for families such as an egg hunt and cookie decorating.
Read More
Related Articles
Deranged Donald Trump posts mad 184-word Easter message taking aim at all his enemies
Read More
Related Articles
Trump has awkward senile moment with young girl who holds out hand for high five
Leavitt herself donned a beautiful designer dress in pastel baby-blue for the
grand occasion.
Karoline Leavitt pushes baby stroller at the White House
She addressed the media outside the White House in her attire as the annual tradition commenced on the South Lawn.
Embracing the spring theme, she unveiled her Easter ensemble, which seemed to be an elegant, square-neck lace dress from designer Self Portrait.
Leavitt's appearance coincided with President Trump and his wife welcoming thousands of guests to the yearly Easter celebration. However, this year saw a change as Trump swapped plastic Easter eggs for real ones, generously donated by American egg farmers.
This year's event was backed by several corporations, including YouTube, Amazon and Meta, according to NPR.
The funds raised will be donated to the nonprofit White House Historical Association.
However, egg hunting isn't the only thrilling activity planned for the South Lawn event.
As per The White House's website, other attractions include a Be Best Military Card Writing Station, cookie decorating station, Reading Nook, courtesy of Amazon and Be Best Hopscotch.
Children attending the event will also have the opportunity to engage in the America250 initiative, a precursor to the nationwide celebration of America's 250th founding anniversary.
The America250 initiative will enable kids to sign a mini Declaration of Independence and even dress up as the Founding Fathers.
Leavitt is named as a featured reader at the Reading Nook during the event, alongside U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and First Lady Melania, among others.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
EVN Report
2 days ago
- EVN Report
Iran's Strategic Uncertainty and Armenia's Security Challenges
Following the Second Karabakh War, and particularly after Azerbaijan's assault on Armenia's sovereign territory in September 2022, many observers began describing Iran's regional policy as increasingly pro-Armenian. While Tehran continues to pursue a broadly balanced approach in the South Caucasus , this perception has been reinforced by frequent high-level visits with Armenian officials, regular statements affirming Armenia's territorial integrity, and a sustained ' war of words ' with Baku. Tensions deepened amid reports of Azerbaijani involvement in Israel's strike on Iran. Both the recent 12-day Israeli-American-Iranian war and shifting Iran-Azerbaijan dynamics carry direct implications for Armenia's security. As the risk of renewed escalation lingers, this article assesses those risks from the perspective of Armenia's security. Iran-U.S.-Israeli War and Its Outcome After Donald Trump returned to the White House and declared his strategic goal of becoming a ' peacemaker president ', mediated talks resumed between Washington and Tehran on Iran's nuclear program. Following five Oman-mediated meetings described as ' successful ', the parties appeared close to reaching an agreement. However, shortly before the sixth round of negotiations, Israel attacked Iran, killing key nuclear scientists and senior military officials. Israel subsequently convinced the U.S. to join in the military action against Iran, using ' bunker buster' bombs to strike Iran's Fordow nuclear facility. Though a ceasefire was established after 12 days of conflict, uncertainties about Iran's nuclear program and the future of negotiations persist. All sides declared ' victory ,' yet paradoxically, each fell short of its strategic objectives. This phase of the conflict left relations between the parties no clearer than before. Uncertainty over Iran's nuclear program persists, as U.S. military strikes provided no conclusive evidence that it has been fully disrupted. Iran has acknowledged significant damage to its nuclear infrastructure, likely delaying any potential nuclear weapon development by months or years (whether Iran intends to create such a weapon is a separate discussion). Reports suggest Iran preemptively safeguarded some of its enriched uranium, suggesting Tehran may have had advance knowledge of the U.S. strikes. Meanwhile, according to American sources , informal U.S.-Iran negotiations continued even during the strikes. The war also exposed the vulnerability of Iran's military and strategic infrastructure, which can be attributed to several objective realities: The once-united ' Axis of Resistance '—the main pillar of Iran's regional policy and security—is now fragmented. Syria no longer operates under pro-Iranian rule, Hezbollah has suffered significant losses, and Houthis forces face more direct threats and targeted U.S. strikes. Meanwhile, Iran's strategic allies, Russia and China , offered nothing beyond condemnatory statements during the war. Not all of Israel's strategic goals materialized. Its expectation of regime change in Iran proved overly ambitious. While some Iranian ethnic minority movements receive external backing, foreign actors have used separatist rhetoric more as leverage than as a genuine push for Iran's partition. Turkey and Azerbaijan, for example, have encouraged Turkic separatism among Iran's Azeris, yet both understand that Iran's fragmentation could also embolden Kurdish separatism—an outcome Turkey opposes. Likewise, Pakistan condemned the Israeli strikes, likely wary of unrest among its own Baluchi population. Despite public discontent with the regime, Iranian society carries the traumatic memory of the Iran-Iraq War and the painful experience of a foreign-backed coup (the overthrow of Mossadegh ). These historical wounds make expectations of a mass internal uprising against the backdrop of missile strikes unrealistic. While some social media voices portrayed the conflict as a war against the regime rather than the people of Iran, these perspectives were largely perceived as disconnected from actual Iranian sentiment. Nevertheless, despite the regime maintaining its formal integrity, recent developments suggest the possibility of internal change. President Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Araghchi took on key decision-making roles during the war, emphasizing continued diplomacy and distinguishing between U.S. and Israeli approaches. Following the war, both officials gave interviews to American media highlighting their willingness to resume negotiations on Iran's peaceful nuclear program. In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Pezeshkian stated that Iran would welcome American investors if sanctions were lifted, clarifying that 'the slogan 'Death to America,' by no means refers to the American people, or even officials .' While Iranian conservatives have severely criticized these positions, they will continue to shape Iran's foreign policy as long as distrust in the president remains incomplete. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was absent from the public sphere during the military strikes and did not attend the funerals of military and political figures. The vulnerability of Iran's airspace calls into question both the viability of holding mass public events and the regime's ideological slogans of 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel.' These slogans are not just rhetoric but form the ideological backbone of the regime. The succession process of the Supreme Leader and the role of a weakened Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) may determine whether Iran pursues ideological reorientation or further escalation with the United States. Rather than complete regime change, Iran may undergo a transformation of its political identity, shifting from the Shiite Islamic concept of ' Velayate Faghih ' toward a more national political strategy. This trend is already visible in Khamenei's commissioning of a patriotic song during Ashura ceremonies, Pezeshkian's emphasis on the need to start dialogue with the political opposition, and even in calls from conservative actors, saying ' we need change .' Thus, Iran's policy in the near future faces strategic uncertainty due to both external conflict threats (with Israel and the U.S.) and internal leadership instability. Three possible scenarios emerge: New military escalation Diplomatic reintegration (perhaps with or without a new nuclear agreement) Or the continuation of the current status quo of strategic uncertainty Iran's Political Uncertainty and Its Impact on the South Caucasus and Armenia Developments around Iran could directly affect the security of the South Caucasus, particularly Armenia's. Recent threats to Armenia included potential breakdown of negotiations with Azerbaijan, political conditions favoring military escalation, ongoing disagreements over the Syunik transit route, and the continuing blockade of Armenia. An Israeli attack on Iran, especially with U.S. participation, could intensify these threats for several reasons: First, conducting negotiations while simultaneously planning what could be termed a ' preemptive attack ', undermines established norms in international relations and encourages other actors to consider military options even during peace talks. Engaging Iran in a protracted war would shift the balance of power in the South Caucasus. Military operations near the region could embolden Azerbaijan to attack Armenia, particularly since a conflict with Iran would jeopardize the security of connections between Azerbaijan and Nakhichevan. Israel's plans for a protracted war include activating separatist forces inside Iran. This scenario would require using the Azeri-speaking population in northern Iran, with Azerbaijan playing a significant role. Such involvement would enhance Azerbaijan's political importance to the West, especially Israel, potentially creating an additional threat for Armenia. If these plans were viable, the transit route through Syunik might become less urgent since Azerbaijan would already have a land border with Nakhichevan. However, there's no guarantee that northern Iran would seek independence or unification with Azerbaijan, even during internal chaos. Consequently, in the medium term, Azerbaijan would likely still have additional political justifications for demanding a transit route through Syunik, similar to the situation described earlier. On the very first day of the war, news spread in Iranian media that one of Iran's neighbors had supported Israel's attack on Iran. Azerbaijani officials denied these rumors. Nevertheless, the issue became a topic of discussion during a later telephone conversation between the presidents of Iran and Azerbaijan. During his subsequent visit to Azerbaijan, Iranian President Pezeshkian expressed satisfaction with the ' responsible position ' taken by member states of the Economic Cooperation Organization during the war. While some Iranian circles still advocate for a cautious approach toward Azerbaijan, officials are working to ease tensions through diplomatic engagements. The declaration adopted by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Istanbul—which referenced the right of return for 'Western Azerbaijanis'—represents one such diplomatic effort. Despite the Iranian ambassador to Armenia stating , 'The use of such wording should be avoided. The name 'Western Azerbaijan' is the name of one of the provinces of the Republic of Iran. It cannot be used to name any other geographical area, especially if it implies any form of territorial claims,' Iran maintained its signature on the document. Similarly, Pezeshkian did not cancel his visit to Karabakh and engaged in cordial discussions with Aliyev regarding destruction attributed to Armenians. The U.S.-backed Syunik Transit Route and Iran's Response Following the war, developments emerged regarding the proposed transit route through Syunik and the U.S. proposal for this route. While official details of the proposal, (or possibly multiple proposals) remained undisclosed, discussions about this possibility spread through both Armenian and international media after the Carnegie Endowment published an article and the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey issued a statement . Iran remained silent for several days. Eventually, during a telephone conversation between the security council secretaries of Iran and Armenia, both parties reaffirmed their commitment to preserving national sovereignty and territorial integrity in any project implementation. In a subsequent interview with Iranian Public Television, Iran's ambassador emphasized that Tehran would accept any project that aligned with Armenia's security interests. Ali Khamenei's foreign affairs advisor, Ali Akbar Velayati, also reaffirmed Iran's opposition to the 'Zangezur corridor' though notably did not address potential American involvement in the transit road. Despite Armenian officials' announcement that Armenia would not 'lease land' to America, it seemed unlikely that American proposals would end there. Indeed, the peace declaration initialed between Armenia and Azerbaijan on August 8 at the White House—in the presence of and witnessed by the U.S. President— included an important provision about the transit road through Meghri, to be named the 'Trump Road for Peace and Prosperity' (TRIPP). Iran's reaction to this event was twofold: First, even before the signing, an article by Ali Akbar Velayati published on August 8 described in harsh terms the path 'to be given to a third party.' Second, Tehran's official response came through a press release from the Foreign Ministry which welcomed peace efforts between Armenia and Azerbaijan while expressing concerns about potential American presence in the region. In the days following the declaration, after telephone conversations between Prime Minister Pashinyan and President Pezeshkian , and between Foreign Ministers Ararat Mirzoyan and Abbas Araghchi , and particularly after Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan's visit to Tehran, Pezeshkian and Araghchi issued several statements . They affirmed that Iran's red lines were respected in the declaration, noting there was no mention of a third-party presence, especially armed forces, and that Armenia had assured them the declaration would not negatively impact the shared Iran-Armenia border. Both officials also highlighted the widespread disinformation circulating in the country about this issue. This dualism in Iran's responses should be analyzed primarily through the lens of Iran's domestic politics. President Pezeshkian's government faces criticism for emphasizing the importance of U.S. negotiations after the war. Conservative circles are characterizing recent developments in the South Caucasus as consequences of Pezeshkian's policy that work against Iran's interests. However, these circles lack decision-making authority. When analyzing Iran's response, one should rely exclusively on statements from those with foreign policy authority—namely, members of the government. I believe that President Pezeshkian's August 18 visit to Armenia will provide an important opportunity to clear up existing misconceptions. Iran's balanced response to the fundamental shift that occurred on August 8 in the South Caucasus serves as an important indicator of Iran's potential future role and the evolving Iran-U.S. relations in the broader region. While Iran continues to navigate its ties with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, its fraught relations with Israel and the U.S.—and the prospect of further clashes—pose potential security risks for Armenia. At the same time, the war exposed the vulnerability of Iran's strategic infrastructure, and the possibility of renewed U.S.-Iran engagement could trigger a broader regional realignment. Much will depend on whether the current ceasefire evolves into a lasting settlement through negotiations, rather than serving merely as a pause before renewed conflict.
Libyan Express
5 days ago
- Libyan Express
Trump says ‘no deal until there's a deal'
BY Libyan Express Aug 16, 2025 - 01:33 Trump says 'no deal until there's a deal' after Putin summit U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday that his long-awaited meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska ended without any formal agreement, after nearly three hours of talks centered on the war in Ukraine. 'There's no deal until there's a deal,' Trump told reporters, acknowledging that no ceasefire or binding commitments were reached. The U.S. president described the discussions as 'very productive' and claimed 'some great progress' had been made, but offered no specifics. 'We didn't get there,' he added, before leaving without taking questions from the gathered press. The summit, held at Joint Base Elmendorf–Richardson in Anchorage, was part of Trump's effort to encourage direct negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv. While stressing that he was not negotiating on Ukraine's behalf, Trump said he planned to arrange direct talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Putin expressed hope that all sides would respect what had been discussed and hinted at the possibility of meeting again, but no follow-up summit has been scheduled. For Washington's allies in Europe and the Middle East — many of whom have a direct stake in regional stability and energy markets — the meeting's failure to produce a breakthrough underscores the difficulty of reaching a negotiated end to the conflict. The views expressed in Op-Ed pieces are those of the author and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of Libyan Express. How to submit an Op-Ed: Libyan Express accepts opinion articles on a wide range of topics. Submissions may be sent to oped@ Please include 'Op-Ed' in the subject line.
EVN Report
6 days ago
- EVN Report
Thea Farhadian's 'Tattoos and Other Markings'
Farhadian's evocation of a cultural past using a mechanical, abstracted soundscape, first distances the listener who finds the sound at hand alien, before they realize that they have actually been drawn into the past the same way that a patient might under guided hypnosis. Farhadian approaches trauma through sounds that appear to be similar to the scratching of needles on old-style vinyl records. The introduction of the voice of Komitas Vartabed send chills down one's spine. The choice of Komitas, the father of Armenian liturgical and folk music who was released from captivity after being deported thanks to the intervention of the American ambassador to the Ottoman Empire Henry Morgenthau Sr., is doubly relevant today given the ongoing genocidal onslaught on the Palestinian people in Gaza. Farhadian's first solo album, 'Tectonic Shifts' (Creative Sources CS 365), featured solo violin and real-time processing that introduced listeners to an echo chamber of experimental sound. Reviewer Massimo Ricci has written: 'What separates her from the typical…tedium- transmitting specimens, is the ability to render the most absurd-sounding complications with sensible unambiguity.' Farhadian has performed in some of the world's premiere music venues, including Issue Project Room, the Downtown Music Gallery, and Alternative Museum—all in New York City—as well as the Aram Khachaturian Museum in Yerevan, Armenia. An artistic polymath, she has also curated experimental video and co-founded the New York and San Francisco Armenian Film Festivals. The composer explains that she grew up listening to Armenian music at home—both folk and sacred—which eventually led her to study Arabic music with the renowned Palestinian oud and violin master Simon Shaheen: 'I fell in love with the Arabic maqamat and began to feel more freedom using these modes to compose and play music.' Until recently it was rare to find an American-born artist who had mastered both the European and Arabic classical traditions, as well as a third tradition that is quite different, as Armenian music is based on a modal system of tetrachords that can repeat indefinitely. In an Other Minds podcast hosted by composer Joseph Bohigian, Farhadian described the process of making this four-track album more like painting than creating music, as details of her past slowly revealed themselves to her like colors on a canvas. The 44-minute long album starts off with Mokats Mirza, a piece that integrates a broader mechanistic soundscape with the voice of Komitas, which weaves in and out of the background sounds. The repetition of the sounds and sequences mimic the repetition steps across the seemingly endless Syrian desert with scant food or water. Strange unidentifiable voices appear in the background. The 18 minute-long Eulogy possesses similar elements but is presented in a more dirge-like manner. At times it resembles a slow-motion recording which offers the listener the opportunity to grieve silently as the music engulfs their senses. The third track, Inscriptions is comprised of industrial sounds that have been processed and shaped out into a soundscape that resides between silence and emptiness. These include scratchings, and sounds that recall a recording machine whose tape is run backwards, an MRI Machine, and a printing press. Here multiple technologies—both advanced and primitive—share a common function of inscribing: letters, tattoos, the inside of one's body. Finally, Farhadian's fourth and final track Gar oo Chgar, (There once was and there was not), bears the title of the traditional opening for Armenian fairytales and fables. Here, the repeated sounds perhaps stand in for needles tattooing the skin or conversely erasing them. The interstices may mirror the emptiness that the marked women experienced first during their long ordeals of captivity and later when liberated and reintegrated into Armenian communities. Farhadian also included the sound of sand falling on the floor of the Aram Khachaturian Hall; a child reciting a poem in Armenian; a recording of the double reed instrument, the duduk. To get a fuller picture of the traumatic experience of deportation, I would pair this remarkable CD. with Elyse Semerdjian's previously mentioned book. I would also add the work of fine artist Linda Ganjian whose recent exhibition 'Her Mind: a Metropolis' at Hudson, New York's Front Row Gallery mixed traditional Armenian motifs and crafts with designs reminiscent of Art Deco to approach her maternal grandmother's experience of survival. As Farhadian reminds people when discussing the personal odyssey which led to her completing 'Tattoos and Other Markings,' discovering this little-known information was chilling, and led her to questions about which cultural narratives are remembered and which are forgotten. In fact, Armenian immigrants to the United States at the turn of the 20th century were made to prove their whiteness, in order to be naturalized American, so the notion of tattooing and marking is doubly pregnant with meaning here. Farhadian's music suggests new avenues for how we hear and represent the past, by leaving the listening experience open- ended rather didactic ways of listening and interpreting. As Liverpool University's James and Constance Alsop Chair of Music Emerita Anahid Kassabian notes: 'This piece invites listeners to make their own connections among the sounds, welcoming all engagements with it. Aesthetically the layers and materials are intriguing, but making the links among them is the listener's option.' The markings left on these women of 1915 by tattoos may be both psychic and mental. And much like the musical notations that mark a page, they offer new pathways to understanding and even perhaps healing the past.
