Trump's DHS says Biden released 'barbaric' illegal immigrant now accused of heinous crime
FIRST ON FOX: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced on Wednesday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a detainer in Massachusetts for a criminal illegal immigrant charged with raping a child with force in a crime that was captured on video.
Lorenzo Lopez Alcario, a 30-year-old Guatemalan national, accused of tying up and brutally sexually assaulting a young girl in a video that was ultimately found by the girl's mother, had the ICE detainer placed on him this week, according to a press release from DHS.
The press release states that Alcario first entered the United States illegally on an unknown date before being arrested in 2017 in Arlington, Virginia, for drug possession.
Later that year, in September, Alcario was ordered by a judge to be removed by the United States and was deported by aircraft on Sept. 28, 2017.
However, according to DHS, Alcario re-entered the United States in June 2022 and was released into the country by the Biden administration despite his criminal history and previous deportation.
In a statement, Assistant DHS Secretary Tricia McLaughlin made the case that Alcario should never have been allowed back into the United States and that the ICE detainer is aimed at ensuring Alcario does not victimize anyone else in the future.
"Lorenzo Lopez Alcario is a pedophile illegal alien from Guatemala who should've never been in the U.S. in the first place," McLaughlin said.
"Despite his previous criminal charges and deportation, President Biden released this barbaric criminal into American communities in 2022. Under President Trump and Secretary Noem, ICE lodged a detainer to ensure this criminal illegal alien will not be allowed to terrorize American citizens and will deport this child predator to prevent further victims."
ICE has been active in Massachusetts in recent weeks, including via Operation Patriot, which resulted in the arrest of nearly 1,500 illegals, including murderers, rapists, drug traffickers and child sex predators, in the deep blue sanctuary city-heavy state.
Sources at ICE told Fox News that 790 of those arrested had criminal convictions or charges and 277 had final removal or deportation orders. The sources said that all the targeted criminals were roaming the streets of Massachusetts cities freely before being apprehended.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Veterans remain central to D-Day anniversary ceremonies
The Brief D-Day marks the day allied troops stormed the beaches of Normandy in Nazi-occupied France on June 6, 1944. D-Day was the largest amphibious invasion in military history. June 6 marks the anniversary of D-Day, the day allied troops stormed the beaches of Normandy and changed the course of World War II. The invasion was unprecedented in scale and audacity and implemented the largest-ever armada of ships, troops, planes and vehicles to punch a hole in Adolf Hitler's defenses in Western Europe. Today, though the D-Day generation of veterans are smaller, they remain a crucial reminder of what June 6 means as they continue to spread the message that they fought so hard for 81 years ago: Freedom is worth defending. About 66,143 of the 16.4 million Americans who served in World War II were alive as of 2024, according to statistics from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Dig deeper At the Normandy American Cemetery that overlooks Omaha, the resting place for nearly 9,400 American war dead, workers and visitors rubbed sand from the beach onto the white gravestones, so the engraved names stand out. Wally King, a sprightly 101-year-old, shared a few words at the grave of Henry Shurlds Jr. Shurlds who flew P-47 Thunderbolt fighters like King and was shot down and killed on Aug. 19, 1944. What they're saying When "most veterans from World War II came home, they didn't want to talk about the war. So they didn't pass those experiences on to their children and grandchildren," King said. "In a way, that's good because there's enough unpleasantness, bloodshed, agony in war, and perhaps we don't need to emphasize it," he added. "But the sacrifice needs to be emphasized and celebrated." Jack Stowe, a 98-year-old who served in the Navy, shared that he still receives "the sweetest letters" from kids he has met on previous trips. "The French people here, they're so good to us … they want to talk to us, they want to sit down and they want their kids around us," he said. Jake Larson, 102, survived machine gunfire while storming Omaha beach on D-Day. "We are the lucky ones … They had no family. We are their family. We have the responsibility to honor these guys who gave us a chance to be alive," Larson said. What does "D" stand for in D-Day? It depends on who you ask. The backstory Some say it stands for designated day, decision day, doomsday or even death day, according to the U.S. military. Others also said it merely stands for "Day," as in Day-Day. There have been other instances in history which utilized D-Day as a coded designation for the day of any important invasion or military operation, the U.S. military said. Referencing Stephen Ambrose's book, "D-Day, June 6, 1944: The Climactic Battle of World War II," the U.S. Army's first use of D-Day was in 1918. "For military planners (and later historians), the days before and after a D-Day were indicated using plus and minus signs: D-4 meant four days before a D-Day, while D+7 meant seven days after a D-Day," according to the U.S. Army website. An unknown person allegedly wrote to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Allied supreme commander for Operation Overlord, and asked what the "D" meant. His executive assistant at the time, Brigadier Gen. Robert Schultz answered: "General Eisenhower asked me to respond to your letter. Be advised that any amphibious operation has a 'departed date'; therefore the shortened term 'D-Day' is used," the Army's website reads. The sea landings started at 6:30 a.m., just after dawn, targeting five code-named beaches: Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno, Sword. The operation also included actions inland, including overnight parachute landings on strategic German sites and U.S. Army Rangers scaling cliffs to take out German gun positions. By the numbers Around 11,000 Allied aircraft, 7,000 ships and boats, and thousands of other vehicles were involved. A total of 4,414 Allied troops were killed on D-Day itself, including 2,501 Americans. More than 5,000 were wounded. In the ensuing Battle of Normandy, 73,000 Allied forces were killed and 153,000 wounded. The battle — and especially Allied bombings of French villages and cities — killed around 20,000 French civilians. The exact German casualties aren't known, but historians estimate between 4,000 and 9,000 men were killed, wounded or missing during the D-Day invasion alone. About 22,000 German soldiers are among the many buried around Normandy. The Source Information for this article was taken from previous reporting by The Associated Press, FOX News and previous reporting by FOX Local. This story was reported from Los Angeles.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's new approach to Russia's war in Ukraine might be his worst yet
Donald Trump and his team have spent a fair amount of time recently trying to convince the public that the president's policy toward Russia's war in Ukraine is having a positive impact. In mid-March, for example, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt boasted, 'I can say we are on the 10th yard line of peace, and we've never been closer to a peace deal than we are in this moment.' Two months later, Trump participated in a two-hour phone meeting with Vladimir Putin, and the Republican touted the discussion as a possible breakthrough. 'The tone and spirit of the conversation were excellent,' the American president declared, adding that his chat would 'immediately' lead to new diplomatic negotiations. Soon after, Kyiv came under a large-scale Russian drone and missile attack, described by Ukrainian officials as the largest aerial assault on the country since the war began. It was soon followed by Ukraine's surprise drone attack that proved disastrous for Russia, and that jolted global perceptions. This in turn led Russia to launch one of the largest barrages of missiles and drones of the war at targets across Ukraine. This does not look like 'the 10th yard line of peace.' It was against this backdrop that Trump has apparently come up with a new metaphor. The New York Times reported: As Germany's chancellor, Friedrich Merz, sat beside him watching in silence, President Trump compared Russia and Ukraine to two fighting children who needed to work out their differences for a while before anyone could intervene. 'Sometimes you see two young children fighting like crazy,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. 'They hate each other, and they're fighting in a park, and you try and pull them apart. They don't want to be pulled. Sometimes you're better off letting them fight for a while and then pulling them apart.' 'And I gave that analogy to Putin yesterday,' the Republican added. 'I said, 'President, maybe you have to keep fighting and suffering a lot, because both sides are suffering, before you pull them apart, before they're able to be pulled apart.'' So, a few things. First, comparing this conflict to a dispute among children on a playground is unhelpful, and Trump complaining about anyone engaging in juvenile behavior is unwise, given everything we know about his temperament and frequent tantrums. Second, the idea that the White House is prepared to let Russia and Ukraine 'fight for a while' overlooks the inconvenient fact that they've already been fighting for a while. Indeed, Russia invaded Ukraine back in February 2022 — more than three years ago — which Trump described at the time as 'genius' and part of a 'wonderful' strategy. But let's also not lose sight of the evolution of the American president's thinking. Trump's Plan A for the war in Ukraine was ending the conflict within 24 hours by way of a secret strategy he assured voters was real. When it became obvious that this strategy didn't actually exist, Trump moved on to Plan B: He told Russia that if it failed to end the conflict quickly, the White House 'would have no other choice' but to impose new economic sanctions. When Putin ignored those threats and Trump failed to follow through, the American president floated Plan C (international economic penalties designed to force a ceasefire), Plan D (Trump-backed bilateral talks between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy) and Plan E (bilateral talks between Trump and Putin). Plan F — White House passivity — is now increasingly coming into focus. Trump's latest plan to end the conflict is apparently to stop trying to end the conflict. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The AI lobby plants its flag in Washington
Top artificial intelligence companies are rapidly expanding their lobbying footprint in Washington — and so far, Washington is turning out to be a very soft target. Two privately held AI companies, OpenAI and Anthropic — which once positioned themselves as cautious, research-driven counterweights to aggressive Big Tech firms — are now adding Washington staff, ramping up their lobbying spending and chasing contracts from the estimated $75 billion federal IT budget, a significant portion of which now focuses on AI. They have company. Scale AI, a specialist contractor with the Pentagon and other agencies, is also planning to expand its government relations and lobbying teams, a spokesperson told POLITICO. In late March, the AI-focused chipmaking giant Nvidia registered its first in-house lobbyists. AI lobbyists are 'very visible' and 'very present on the hill,' said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) in an interview at the Special Competitive Studies Project AI+ Expo this week. 'They're nurturing relationships with lots of senators and a handful of members [of the House] in Congress. It's really important for their ambitions, their expectations of the future of AI, to have Congress involved, even if it's only to stop us from doing anything.' This lobbying push aims to capitalize on a wave of support from both the Trump administration and the Republican Congress, both of which have pumped up the AI industry as a linchpin of American competitiveness and a means for shrinking the federal workforce. They don't all present a unified front — Anthropic, in particular, has found itself at odds with conservatives, and on Thursday its CEO Dario Amodei broke with other companies by urging Congress to pass a national transparency standard for AI companies — but so far the AI lobby is broadly getting what it wants. 'The overarching ask is for no regulation or for light-touch regulation, and so far, they've gotten that," said Doug Calidas, senior vice president of government affairs for the AI policy nonprofit Americans for Responsible Innovation. In a sign of lawmakers' deference to industry, the House passed a ten-year freeze on enforcing state and local AI regulation as part of its megabill that is currently working through the Senate. Critics, however, worry that the AI conversation in Washington has become an overly tight loop between companies and their GOP supporters — muting important concerns about the growth of a powerful but hard-to-control technology. 'There's been a huge pivot for [AI companies] as the money has gotten closer,' Gary Marcus, an AI and cognitive science expert, said of the leading AI firms. 'The Trump administration is too chummy with the big tech companies, and basically ignoring what the American people want, which is protection from the many risks of AI.' Anthropic declined to comment for this story, referring POLITICO to its March submission to the AI Action Plan that the White House is crafting after President Donald Trump repealed a sprawling AI executive order issued by the Biden administration. OpenAI, too, declined to comment. This week several AI firms, including OpenAI, co-sponsored the Special Competitive Studies Project's AI+ Expo, an annual Washington trade show that has quickly emerged as a kind of bazaar for companies trying to sell services to the government. (Disclosure: POLITICO was a media partner of the conference.) They're jostling for influence against more established government contractors like Palantir, which has been steadily building up its lobbying presence in D.C. for years, while Meta, Google, Amazon and Microsoft — major tech platforms with AI as part of their pitch — already have dozens of lobbyists in their employ. What the AI lobby wants is a classic Washington twofer: fewer regulations to limit its growth, and more government contracts. The government budget for AI has been growing. Federal agencies across the board — from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to the IRS and the Department of Veterans Affairs — are looking to build AI capacity. The Trump administration's staff cuts and automation push is expected to accelerate the demand for private firms to fill the gap with AI. For AI, 'growth' also demands energy and, on the policy front, AI companies have been a key driver of the recent push in Congress and the White House to open up new energy sources, streamline permitting for building new data centers and funnel private investment into the construction of these sites. Late last year, OpenAI released an infrastructure blueprint for the U.S. urging the federal government to prepare for a massive spike in demand for computational infrastructure and energy supply. Among its recommendations: creating special AI zones to fast-track permits for energy and data centers, expanding the national power grid and boosting government support for private investment in major energy projects. Those recommendations are now being very closely echoed by Trump administration figures. Last month, at the Bitcoin 2025 Conference in Las Vegas, David Sacks — Trump's AI and crypto czar — laid out a sweeping vision that mirrored the AI industry's lobbying goals. Speaking to a crowd of 35,000, Sacks stressed the foundational role of energy for both AI and cryptocurrency, saying bluntly: 'You need power.' He applauded President Donald Trump's push to expand domestic oil and gas production, framing it as essential to keeping the U.S. ahead in the global AI and crypto race. This is a huge turnaround from a year ago, when AI companies faced a very different landscape in Washington. The Biden administration, and many congressional Democrats, wanted to regulate the industry to guard against bias, job loss and existential risk. No longer. Since Trump's election, AI has become central to the conversation about global competition with China, with Silicon Valley venture capitalists like Sacks and Marc Andreessen now in positions of influence within the Trump orbit. Trump's director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy is Michael Kratsios, former managing director at Scale AI. Trump himself has proudly announced a series of massive Gulf investment deals in AI. Sacks, in his Las Vegas speech, pointed to those recent deal announcements as evidence of what he called a 'total comprehensive shift' in Washington's approach to emerging technologies. But as the U.S. throws its weight behind AI as a strategic asset, critics warn that the enthusiasm is muffling one of the most important conversations about AI: its ability to wreak unforeseen harm on the populace, from fairness to existential risk concerns. Among those concerns: bias embedded in algorithmic decisions that affect housing, policing, and hiring; surveillance that could threaten civil liberties; the erosion of copyright protections, as AI models hoover up data and labor protections as automation replaces human work. Kevin De Liban, founder of TechTonic Justice, a nonprofit that focuses on the impact of AI on low income communities, worries that Washington has abandoned its concerns for AI's impact on citizens. 'Big Tech gets fat government contracts, a testing ground for their technologies, and a liability-free regulatory environment,' he said, of Washington's current AI policy environment. 'Everyday people are left behind to deal with the fallout.' There's a much larger question, too, which dominated the early AI debate: whether cutting-edge AI systems can be controlled at all. These risks, long documented by researchers, are now taking a back seat in Washington as the conversation turns to economic advantage and global competition. There's also the very real concern that if an AI company does bring up the technology's worst-case scenarios, it may find itself at odds with the White House itself. Anthropic CEO Amodei said in a May interview that labor force disruptions due to AI would be severe — which triggered a direct attack from Sacks, Trump's AI czar, on his podcast, who said that line of thinking led to 'woke AI.' Still, both Anthropic and OpenAI are going full steam ahead. Anthropic hired nearly a dozen policy staffers in the last two months, while OpenAI similarly grew its policy office over the past year. They're also pushing to become more important federal contractors by getting critical FedRAMP authorizations — a federal program that certifies cloud services for use across government — which could unlock billions of dollars in contracts. As tech companies grow increasingly cozy with the government, the political will to regulate them is fading — and in fact, Congress appears hostile to any efforts to regulate them at all. In a public comment in March, OpenAI specifically asked the Trump administration for a voluntary federal framework that overrides state AI laws, seeking 'private sector relief' from a patchwork of state AI bills. Two months later, the House added language to its reconciliation bill that would have done exactly that — and more. The provision to impose a 10 year moratorium on state AI regulations passed the House but is expected to be knocked out by the Senate parliamentarian. (Breaking ranks again, Anthropic is lobbying against the moratorium.) Still, the provision has widespread support amongst Republicans and is likely to make a comeback.
