New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell indicted after federal corruption investigation
Cantrell is charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to obstruct justice, making false statements and false declaration before a grand jury, according to a federal indictment filed Friday in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Shortly after news broke of the allegations, a lawyer for Cantrell told NBC News they had not yet seen the indictment and had no comment.
Prosecutors allege that Cantrell was in a romantic relationship with Jeffrey Paul Vappie II, who served as a member of the Executive Protection Unit on occasions from May 2021 to April 2024.
'To hide their relations from detection and to maximize their time together, Cantrell and Vappie exploited their public positions to develop and implement a scheme to defraud the city of New Orleans and the New Orleans Police Department by engaging in personal activities while Vappie claimed to be on duty and was paid for,' the indictment states.
New Orleans City Council President JP Morrell on Friday offered prayers for Cantrell and her family.
'Our office is aware of the indictment that was filed today,' Morrell said in a statement. 'This is a sad day for the people of New Orleans. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Cantrell family as they navigate through this difficult time."
Cantrell, a Democrat, is serving her last term as mayor and is set to leave office in January.
She is a Democrat and the city's first female mayor in its 300-year history. Her second term has been turbulent and she survived a recall effort in 2022.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
28 minutes ago
- NBC News
Meet the Press – August 17, 2025
KRISTEN WELKER: This Sunday: Russian roulette. President Trump meets Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, trying to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: There's no deal until there's a deal. PRES. VLADAMIR PUTIN: Next time in Moscow. KRISTEN WELKER: But after rolling out the red carpet, was this high-stakes meeting a setback or a step forward to reaching a deal? My guests this morning: Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. Plus: guard duty. President Trump orders National Guard troops to the streets of D.C.,taking control of the city's police force and pledging a crackdown on crime in the nation's capital. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: We're starting very strongly with D.C., and we're going to clean it up real quick. KRISTEN WELKER: Joining me for insight and analysis are: NBC News Chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell; Jonathan Martin of POLITICO; former State Department spokesperson Ned Price; and Republican strategist Sara Fagen. Welcome to Sunday, it's Meet the Press. ANNOUNCER: From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history, this is Meet the Press with Kristen Welker. KRISTEN WELKER: Good Sunday morning. President Trump is preparing to welcome Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelenskyy to the White House on Monday after rolling out the literal red carpet for Russian President Vladimir Putin for their high-stakes summit in Alaska. Yet following a tarmac greeting, a military flyover and a ride for the Russian leader in the president's limo – where Putin could be seen smiling – it remains unclear what, if anything, was agreed to in efforts to end Russia's war in Ukraine. The president, vague, in his post-meeting statement to reporters. [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I believe we had a very productive meeting. There were many, many points that we agreed on, most of them, I would say, a couple of big ones that we haven't quite gotten there, but we've made some headway. So there's no deal until there's a deal. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Later, putting the pressure on Ukrainian President Zelenskyy to make a deal to end the war. [BEGIN TAPE] SEAN HANNITY: Based on today, when you talk to Volodymyr Zelenksyy, what's your advice to – PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Make a deal. SEAN HANNITY: Make the deal. PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Russia's a very big power. And they're not. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: On his long flight back to Washington, D.C. from Alaska, the president held talks with President Zelenskyy as well as European leaders. NBC News has learned they discussed the potential of a NATO-like security guarantee for Ukraine. For months, President Trump has threatened to impose crushing sanctions on Russia if it did not agree to a ceasefire, saying this aboard Air Force One earlier in the day on the way to Alaska: [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I'd like to see a ceasefire. I wouldn't be thrilled if I didn't get it, but everyone says you're not going to get the ceasefire. It'll take place on the second meeting. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: But later, reversing course, posting on his Truth Social account: "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a peace agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere ceasefire agreement, which oftentimes do not hold up.' With seemingly no plans to punish Putin for his refusal to end the war, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the president, saying, "Trump handed Putin legitimacy, a global stage, zero accountability and got nothing in return." Mr. Trump's comments on Friday in stark opposition to what he vowed earlier in the week: [BEGIN TAPE] REPORTER: Will Russia face any consequences if Vladimir Putin does not agree to stop the war after your meeting on Friday? PRES. DONALD TRUMP: Yes, they will. Yeah. REPORTER: What will the consequences be? Sanctions? Tariffs? PRES. DONALD TRUMP: There will be consequences. There will be, I don't have to say, there will be very severe consequences. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: And joining me now is Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio. Secretary Rubio, welcome back to Meet the Press. SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you for being here. So heading into the meeting with President Putin on Friday, President Trump said he wanted a ceasefire agreement. Now, he is saying he wants a broader peace deal. We know that Ukraine, we know that European allies want a ceasefire first. Is a ceasefire now off the table, Mr. Secretary? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: No, it's not off the table. I think what the president said, in fact you just read it on – on the air a few moments ago, is it was agreed to by all that the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal. There's no doubt about that. I mean, who would be against the fact if tomorrow we came to you and said, "We have a full peace deal, and it's done." I think that's the best way to end the war. Now, whether there needs to be a ceasefire on the way there, well, we've advocated for that. Unfortunately, the Russians as of now have not agreed to that. But the ideal here, what we're aiming for here, is not a ceasefire. What we ultimately are aiming for is an end to this war. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, I want to drill down on that exactly and what happened because, as you just heard before the meeting with President Putin, President Trump warned there would be, quote, "very severe consequences for Russia if it didn't stop the war." Here's a little bit more of what he said on the plane ride over. Take a look. [BEGIN TAPE] PRES. DONALD TRUMP: I want to see a ceasefire rapidly. I don't know if it's going to be today. But I'm not going to be happy if it's not today. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: So what exactly changed? Is it that Putin would not agree to a ceasefire? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, first of all the Russians are already facing very severe consequences. There's not a single sanction that's been lifted, not – not one. I mean, they're facing all the same sanctions that have been in place today. All the American support continues for Ukraine. And, ultimately, look, if we're not going to be able to reach an agreement here at any point, then there are going to be consequences, not only the consequences of the war continuing, but the consequences of all those sanctions continuing and potentially new sanctions on top of it as well. But what we're trying to do right now is end the war. And in order to end the war, you've got to give every opportunity that exists. You have to – you have to be open to any opportunity that exists to bring it about. And here's the thing to remind everybody – and when the president says this is not our war, but let's be frank, this is not our war. The United States is not in a war. Ukraine is in a war. And we've been supporting Ukraine. We happen to be in the role of the only country in the world with the only leader in the world that can actually bring Putin to a table to even discuss these things. Now, the president has traveled, you know, all the way to Alaska, all the way back, has dedicated months and months of work, him, our entire team on this matter because we want to see an end to the war. But – but if tomorrow the war continues, life in America will not be fundamentally altered. So I – I think that what we have to understand is that this has been a priority for this president because he wants to promote peace. He wants to promote the end of a war. And I think we should be happy that we have a president that's trying to promote peace and bring a war to an end. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, let's look at the state of the war. It's really captured in this chart. I want to put it up on the screen for our viewers. It shows that Russian attacks on Ukraine have nearly doubled since President Trump came into office. And in fact, in July, Russia launched more than 6,000 missiles and drones. That's the highest amount of attacks since the war began. What do you say to Ukrainians who worry that without a ceasefire in place, you are giving Putin more leverage at the negotiating table and a green light to drop more bombs? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, the problem with that is that we've – we've been asking for a ceasefire for a long period of time. We think usually it's very hard to negotiate when you're in the middle of hostilities. But that said, the only way to have a ceasefire is for both sides to agree to stop firing at one another. Beyond that – and the Russians just have not agreed to that. Beyond that, I would say that one of the complications about ceasefires is they have to be maintained, which is very difficult. I mean, every single day we keep an eye on what's happening between Pakistan and India, what's happening between Cambodia and Thailand. Ceasefires can fall apart very quickly, especially after a three and a half year war like what we're facing now. But I don't think anyone disagrees that the ideal here, what we're aiming for is not some permanent ceasefire. What we're aiming for here is a peace deal so there's not a war now, and there's not a war in the future. KRISTEN WELKER: But why not impose more sanctions on them and force them to agree to a ceasefire instead of accepting that Putin won't agree to one? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, first I think that's – that's something that a lot of people go around saying that I don't necessarily think is true. I don't think new sanctions on Russia are going to force him to accept the ceasefire. They're already under very severe sanctions. I think that it should be – you could argue that that could be a consequence of refusing to agree to a ceasefire or the end of hostility. But there is no evidence that more sanctions, because sanctions take months and sometimes years to bite, and we may very well wind up in that place. I hope not because that means that peace talks failed. But we have to give opportunity for peace a chance – KRISTEN WELKER: So – SEC. MARCO RUBIO: – in this particular case. And that's what we're trying to do here. And so those options remain to the president. The minute he takes those steps, all talks stop. 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. So that moment may come. I hope not because I hope we get a peace deal. KRISTEN WELKER: But so, Mr. Secretary, a lot of people have heard President Trump threaten sanctions for months, and they are wondering, "Are they empty threats?" Why hasn't he punished Putin to date for this war since taking office? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, again, every single sanction that was in place on the day he took over remain. And every – the impact of all those sanctions remain. You know, when the Russians landed in Alaska, they were there to refuel. They had to offer to pay in cash to refuel their airplanes because they can't use our banking system. They face consequences every single day. But at – the bottom line is that that has not altered the direction of this war. That doesn't mean those sanctions are inappropriate. It means it hasn't altered the outcome of it. And here's what we do think is important, and that is we end this war. To end this war, you have to be able to engage with the Russians. As much as people may not like it, as distasteful as people may find it, the only way to end this war is to get the Russians to agree, as well as the Ukrainians, but the Russians to agree to a peace deal. And the minute you issue new sanctions, your ability to get them to the table, our ability to get them to table, will be severely diminished. That moment may arrive. But when it comes, what you're basically signaling is, "There is no opportunity for peace at this point. So just let's put on more sanctions and allow more people to get bombed and more people to be killed." And that's what we're trying to stop. KRISTEN WELKER: So Mr. Secretary, what will Russia have to give up? What concessions will Russia, the aggressor, have to make as a part of this peace agreement? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, that's – that's what these negotiations are about. And as you can imagine, everybody goes into a negotiation wanting 100% of what they want. That includes Ukraine, but obviously, the Russians. And the only way to reach a deal on anything, whether it's in business or in politics or in geopolitics, the only way to reach a deal is for each side to get something and each side to give something. And that's been very difficult. If it was easy, this wouldn't have been going on for three and a half years. Understand the longer these wars go on, the harder they are to end unfortunately. Because one side is always looking for leverage on the other, in this particular case, the Russian side as well. And so I think that that's the core of what we're trying to work through here. That's why Zelenskyy's coming tomorrow. That's why European leaders are coming tomorrow. That's why the president called them from the airplane, spent two hours in the middle of the night talking to them. And that's why we've been engaged with them every step of the way is we are trying to find what can we get to that both sides can agree on. And it's been difficult. This is a hard issue set. But we're dedicating a lot of time to it. And the president deserves credit for dedicating time to it. KRISTEN WELKER: And I understand that these negotiations are ongoing. But can you name one thing that President Trump is asking Russia to give up in order to get peace? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, I'm not going to disclose those things because if we do, then you can imagine our negotiations could fall apart. These negotiations – look, I know everybody wants to know what's happening. And to a certain degree that's important. But what's more important is that these negotiations work. And for us to run to the press. Like, you see these leaks sometimes that are completely inaccurate, and in many cases sometimes you see leaks out there that undermine the negotiations. Okay, these negotiations, in order for them to be successful allow – require for us to allow both sides to agree to potential concessions or discuss potential concessions without it finding its way in the public sphere and creating all kinds of internal problems for one country or the other country. So here's the bottom line: we all know what the elements of such a deal. There has to be talk about what the territories are going to look like and what the border lines are going to look like at the end of this conflict. There has to be talk about Ukraine's legitimate desire for security in the long term to make sure they don't get invaded again. There has to be talk about how Ukraine is rebuilt. And how do you rebuild a country that's been attacked as often as it has over the last three and a half years? These are key elements of any agreement. We understand that. And each side – if there's going to be a deal, each side is going to have to give up on something. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary – SEC. MARCO RUBIO: That's just a fact. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, I want to show folks what Ukraine looks like right now. This is a map of Ukraine. That red section there, that's the area currently under control by Russia. It's about 20% of the entire country. There are reports that Putin is asking to keep all of this territory in a potential deal. Is that what's being discussed? Can you confirm that? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, I can confirm that he's given speeches in which he has said that repeatedly. KRISTEN WELKER: So he's asking – SEC. MARCO RUBIO: That he's asked for territories, that – KRISTEN WELKER: – for that now in these private conversations? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, look, ultimately, if – if the Ukrainians are not willing to give that up, and no one's pushing Ukraine to give that up. And so I don't think –if there's going to be a peace deal, it's not going to look like that. But he certainly is making demands. He's certainly asking for things that the Ukrainians and others are not willing to be supportive of and that we're not going to push them to give. And the Ukrainians are asking for things that the Russians are not going to give up on. I know this sounds, you know, I know everybody wants to have more detail. But we're trying to have a serious negotiation here and see if we can find any middle ground between two warring parties in a very difficult war where the Russians feel, as they always do, like they have momentum on their side. And – and the Ukrainians have been incredibly brave in fighting back and in the defensive posture they've taken. The Ukrainians have inflicted a tremendous amount of damage on the Russians. I think last month alone, 20,000, 20,000 Russian soldiers were killed in one month in this war. So the Ukrainians have inflicted tremendous amount of damage on the Russians as a result of this. Both sides are very dug in. This is a difficult one. But we're going to continue to work on it because the president's made it a priority to try to end the war that should have never happened. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, you were one of the few people in that room with President Putin and President Trump. You got to look him in the eyes. Do you believe that President Putin believes in Ukraine's right to exist based on what you heard and saw? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, look, I – I wasn't playing any of those games about looking people in the eye and trying to read their minds. I'm reading actions. And that's what we're looking at is actions. What will you agree to, what will you commit to, and what will you follow-up on? And in order for this war to end, Russia will have to take actions. Ukraine will have to take action. Ukraine's partners and allies will have to take actions as well to enforce that peace in the long term. That's what we're interested in. You know, I get all the drama around this stuff. And, but at the end of the day, we are talking about a war in which people are being killed and maimed every single day in which a country has been dismembered by 20%, as you just pointed out, and it's really important to bring this war to an end. This war doesn't get better. It gets worse as time goes on. It gets worse. It actually threatens to spill over into other areas. So it needs to be stopped. That's why the president's made it a priority. And that's what we're focused on, concrete actions by both sides, especially the Russian side, to bring this conflict to an end. And we're going to do everything we can to make it happen. Is it possible? I don't know. But we're going to try. We've tried. We've spent a lot of time on this issue. We have a lot of other issues to focus on. But the president's made this a priority. And he deserves credit for that. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, a couple more questions, and we're almost out of time. NBC News is reporting this morning that NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine were discussed as a part of this agreement. Can you tell us what role would the United States play in such a security agreement? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, there'll have to be some security guarantees for Ukraine, right? I mean, it's one of their fundamental plans – demands is that if this war were to end, they have to make sure this never happens again. They don't want to get re-invaded. They don't want to wait three or four years from now and find another, you know, war on their hands. So there's going to have to be some security guarantees as part of it. How that's structured, how that's built, what our role will be, that will be the kinds of things we'll have to work through. But again, that – that is going to be a key element of this deal. And it is something that in order for there to be a peace, the Russian side is going to have to accept that Ukraine is a sovereign country that has a right to defend itself and has a right to enter into alliances with other countries to defend itself. How that's constructed, what we call it, how it's built, and what guarantees are built into it that are enforceable, that's what we'll be talking about over the next few days with our partners who are coming in from overseas tomorrow for a series of meetings and in the days to come. We had a long phone call about this yesterday with several of the national security advisors from various countries in Europe. KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, I want to play something you said about President Putin. This was right after the invasion in March of 2022. Take a look. [BEGIN TAPE] SEC. MARCO RUBIO: This guy lies, habitually lies. He's never kept a deal they've ever signed. And he lies all the time. And I don't know why, but he plays us like a – like a violin in the West because the West wants to believe that you can cut a deal with everybody. You can't cut a deal with guys like this. He's a professional, experienced liar. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: Mr. Secretary, given that, what makes you think that if you are able to reach a deal with President Putin that he would stick to it based on, as you just said, he's a liar? SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Well, that's the point. That's why the deal has to have enforceable mechanisms in it. That's why the deal has to have things like security guarantees. That's the point I was making a few minutes ago when you were asking me about looking someone in the eye. What's – what's important here is action, not words, not paper documents. Those are all important. Those are elements of a deal. But they have to be enforceable. They have to be verifiable. They have to be enduring. There's no point here in signing a deal that's going to be violated in three or four months. There's no point in doing that. It actually would make things worse. So that's why this is such a difficult thing. Not only do you need a deal, you need a deal that's verifiable, that's enforceable, and that's enduring. If you don't achieve that, then I think you could have a ceasefire for a few months, a few weeks. And then the war will start again and more people will die. That's not the outcome we're interested in. That's not the outcome anyone wants. So that's why this is so difficult. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, thank you so much for joining us after a historic week. We really appreciate it. SEC. MARCO RUBIO: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: When we come back, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut joins me next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. Joining me now is Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. Senator Murphy, welcome back to Meet the Press. SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Yeah, thanks for having me. KRISTEN WELKER: Thank you so much for being here on a very big week. You just heard my conversation with Secretary Rubio. We specifically started talking about the fact that President Trump initially said he wanted a ceasefire agreement. Now, he wants a broader peace deal. Secretary Rubio defending that approach, basically saying the Russians wouldn't agree to a ceasefire. Do you think that it's the right strategy to now focus on that broader peace deal? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: That meeting was a disaster. It was an embarrassment for the United States. It was a failure. Putin got everything he wanted. I mean, first of all he wanted that photo op, right? He wanted to be absolved of his war crimes in front of the world. He was invited to the United States. War criminals are not normally invited to the United States of America. He is intentionally murdering civilians. He's kidnapping children. And now he got to stand next to the president of the United States, legitimized in the view of the world. Second, he didn't have to give up anything. Nothing, right? President Trump said he wanted a ceasefire. It appears the ceasefire wasn't even seriously discussed. And, then third, there's no consequences. Trump said, "If I don't get a ceasefire, Putin's going to pay a price." And then he walked out of that meeting saying, "I didn't get a ceasefire. I didn't get a peace deal. And I'm not even considering sanctions." You heard Secretary Rubio downplay sanctions. And, so, Putin walks away with his photo op, with zero commitments made and zero consequences. What a great day for Russia. KRISTEN WELKER: What about the argument that you heard Secretary Rubio make, which is he said he doesn't think that sanctions would make a difference in terms of forcing a ceasefire agreement? Does he have a point? I mean, after all, we have seen President Putin continue this war, dropping bombs relentlessly, despite the fact that there have been all of these sanctions imposed against him. SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: So he is right that sanctions have not had any practical impact thus far. But that is in part because our sanctions are directly levied on Russia. And there's very limited economic relationship between the United States and next sanctions that we're talking about, that Congress is considering authorizing, are actually secondary sanctions, sanctions that would make it hard for Russia to continue to do business with countries like China and India, who are essentially funding the war. So this next set of sanctions could be much more impactful. The problem is in the Senate, the Republican leader won't even bring up a vote, a debate on this bill, because Donald Trump doesn't even want a discussion about these sanctions because he's so worried that it might upset his great friend Vladimir Putin. What is most impactful, and what will be most impactful on this war, are more weapons for Ukraine. And here's where Putin has the upper hand. So long as Trump is still opposed to continuing to arm Ukraine, Putin knows that it is just a matter of time before he can gain the advantage. So Putin walks away from the summit with no economic sanctions, with no sense that Trump is going to continue to send weapons to Ukraine and essentially, a green light to continue the war on his terms. KRISTEN WELKER: Let me ask you about this new reporting that we have that basically President Trump did in a call with European allies, with President Zelenskyy, say that the United States would be willing to enter into a NATO-like security agreement, not including U.S. troops, but that the U.S. would back European troops that were there. Is that enough? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Well, that is an essential element of a peace agreement because any commitment that Vladimir Putin makes to not invade Ukraine again isn't worth the paper that it's written on. He's made that commitment many times. So yes, there has to be a guarantee that if Putin were to enter Ukraine after a peace settlement, that there would be some force there, a U.S. force, a U.S.-European force, there to defend Ukraine. But there are also reports from that call that Trump is willing to give more territory to Russia than they even occupy today, which would be a stunning development. Again, another sense that Putin is just in charge of these negotiations. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, to that very point, if you talk to military experts, they say, "Look, the reality is Ukraine likely cannot win a prolonged war militarily." Senator, do you think from a realistic standpoint, Ukraine will need to cede some of its territory in order to end this war, in order to stop the killing? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: That question is up to the Ukrainian people and to President Zelenskyy. And if they want to enter into that negotiation, the United States should support them. The only way they would do that is if they had that security guarantee from the United States. So that has to be a conversation that is probably brokered by the United States but is a direct conversation between Ukraine and Russia. And the only way that Ukraine would even consider that is, is a realistic threat that the war would continue, and that the United States would continue to get Ukraine's back with additional weapons if those negotiations fell apart. And so long as Putin knows that the flow of weapons is about to end from the United States to Ukraine, there is zero incentive for Russia actually to come down and sit legitimately and realistically at the negotiating table with Ukraine. KRISTEN WELKER: President Trump was asked what his message will be to President Zelenskyy on Monday, he said, 'To make a deal.' What is your message to President Zelenskyy heading into these high-stake talks tomorrow? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Well, I mean, listen, I would love to tell him that there is still a bipartisan consensus to support Ukraine in the United States Senate. But, as I mentioned to you, we actually have a very tough sanctions bill that gives the president the ability to levy these new sanctions against Russia. But the Senate leadership won't even bring it up for a vote. Why? Because, in the Congress, the Republicans essentially work for President Trump. And if President Trump tells them that his number one priority is to keep Vladimir Putin happy, not to actually levy the kind of sanctions that would create a realistic negotiating table, Senate Republicans are going to listen. So this is a really dangerous moment because Senate Republicans, House Republicans are not willing to support Ukraine if Donald Trump won't give them the green light. And as you saw coming out of that summit, it seems that Trump's number one priority is just keeping his friend Vladimir Putin happy. KRISTEN WELKER: Let me ask you about what is unfolding here in the nation's capital. Federal troops patrolling the capital under what President Trump has called a 'crime crackdown.' Republicans, as you know, have long tried to brand Democrats as being soft on crime. If you look at the polls, actually, Republicans get higher numbers when it comes to the public trusting them to be tough on crime. Do you think, and what is your message to people in the capital and elsewhere who buy into this argument that President Trump is making that these cities are unsafe, in part because of Democratic policies? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Well, first, let's just look at the actual numbers. In Washington, D.C. and all across the country, crime was going up during Donald Trump's first term. And when Joe Biden became president crime started to come down. In fact, it's been coming down precipitously in Washington and in cities all across the country. So it's just not true the allegation that they are making. What's happening here in Washington, D.C. is just a stunt. Donald Trump didn't like the fact that the walls were closing in on him, that his own base was questioning why he wouldn't release the Epstein files, why he was protecting very powerful people. He didn't want to talk anymore about the fact that our health care system is about to collapse because of the cuts that they have made, that premiums are going to go up by 75% on Americans. And so true to form, he just decided to create a new news cycle. Nothing different is really happening in the United States' capital today. Crime will continue to go down whether or not there are U.S. troops to your National Guard troops here. He's just trying to distract from the stories he doesn't want Americans to be talking about. KRISTEN WELKER: I hear you calling it a stunt, and yet the question is do Democrats need to step up their response to this? And let me read you, this is framed by Maureen Dowd, of course a columnist with the New York Times. Here's what she wrote: "Progressives should not fall into Trump's trap and play down crime. Once more, getting on the wrong side of an inflammatory issue. Even if Trump is being diabolical, Democrats should not pretend everything is fine here because it's not." Do Democrats need to take this issue head on? SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Democrats absolutely need to, as we have, take the issue of crime and violent crime seriously. That's why we made it a priority to reach out across the aisle and pass legislation when Joe Biden was president to dramatically reduce the flow of illegal guns into these cities, to put money on the streets to interrupt violent crime. It was working. Crime was coming down. And then Donald Trump suspended many of the funding sources that help cities clean up their crime rates. He stopped many of the enforcement mechanisms that stopped the flow of illegal guns into these cities. We saw crime rates plummet all across this country when Joe Biden was president. We'll see what happens when Donald Trump treats the issue of crime, you know, more as a distraction, rather than as an issue that legitimately needs to be addressed. KRISTEN WELKER: All right, Senator Murphy, thank you so much for being here today. SEN. CHRIS MURPHY: Thank you. KRISTEN WELKER: We really appreciate it. And when we come back, is President Trump moving closer to Putin after his face-to-face meeting? The panel is next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. The panel is here. NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs and Chief Washington Correspondent Andrea Mitchell; Jonathan Martin, Politics Bureau Chief and Senior Political Columnist for POLITICO; Republican strategist Sara Fagen; and Ned Price, former State Department spokesperson under President Biden. Thanks to all of you for being here. Andrea, I have to start with you and some of what we just heard from Secretary Rubio. And as we're having this conversation, we are learning that more European leaders are joining President Zelenskyy at the White House on Monday: the leaders of Finland, Germany, the NATO Commander as well as – Secretary General – as well as Keir Starmer, the U.K. prime minister. What do you make of the fact that Secretary Rubio said that effectively a ceasefire is not off the table, but he doesn't think sanctions would basically be effective at pushing for a ceasefire? ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, he made a lot of news there because he confirmed that it was Vladimir Putin, as we had assumed, inferred from the dynamics of the meeting and what the president said afterwards, that it was President Putin who said no to a ceasefire right from the get go. And President Trump went into this saying that he wants a ceasefire, and if not, there would be severe consequences, and he said they would be economic consequences. We all understood that to be the secondary sanctions, and the only country not yet officially announced to be sanctioned that is the biggest purchaser of Russian oil is China. So that raised all sorts of other complications for the U.S., but he was just prepared to do that on Air Force One traveling out. And then at the end of the meeting, there are no consequences, and there are no sanctions. And Secretary Rubio confirmed that today, that sanctions take too long, they take months, they take years. Well, secondary sanctions do bite. And that would have an impact. But that's – there's no punishment for Vladimir Putin. He got what he wanted. He got the photo op. The foreign ministry spokeswoman in Moscow is crowing about that – that he's no longer isolated. So is Medvedev, the former president of Russia who trolls, you know, President Trump all the time. They're both, you know, they're bragging about this. So Putin comes out as the victor. He's no longer isolated. He's got his summit. He got his ride in the limo. He got the red carpet. And – and what we're hearing today is that the ceasefire is not on the table, and Russia, as you pointed out, is escalating its attack. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, and the fact that you heard Secretary Rubio basically say, "Russia didn't agree to a ceasefire." JONATHAN MARTIN: Right. KRISTEN WELKER: I mean what do you make of where this stands and – and where these talks could potentially go? JONATHAN MARTIN: I mean Putin came to this summit kind of like Corleone in The Godfather. He said, "My offer is this: nothing." Because what is Putin offering in terms of? You tried to press Rubio on what is – what is Russia offering as far as concessions, and he didn't answer because the answer is basically what Putin is saying is, you know, "If you basically sign over a fifth of your country, Ukraine, I'll take it and I'll give a piece of paper that says, 'I, Vladimir Putin, will be a good boy and stop invading my neighbors.'" Well, that – that paper isn't worth what it's even written on. So, you know, Putin is offering nothing, and he gets everything from that summit. And Trump doesn't push back because Trump doesn't want to walk out of that summit a la Reagan in Reykjavik because Trump wants to keep the deal alive because Trump desperately wants this deal. And so we'll see what happens this week. I think it's smart of the Ukrainians to bring allies. Trump likes comfort food around him, literally and metaphorically. I think that's smart to bring some of his friends from Europe, and hopefully, Trump will listen to the last folks in the room. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, Ned, we should remind people you were in the Biden administration, of course, when Russia went into Ukraine in 2022. But pick up on that point. I pressed Secretary Rubio: name one thing that Putin's being asked to give up, and there was nothing. And that's not to say that there wasn't something that was privately discussed, but at least publicly, they are not saying what Russia is being asked to give up. NED PRICE: Well, because the answer might be simple: Russia might be asked to give up very little or nothing at all. President Trump likes to give Putin concessions, not to make demands of him. Look, there has been a lot made of this question, "How much will Ukraine have to give up? Will Ukraine have to give up land to see peace ultimately?" Of course, we would all like to see Ukraine retain the land that it had – that it had not only in 2022 but in 2014 when President Putin's little green men first went into Crimea, into eastern Ukraine. But if you listen to Ukrainians, and sometimes, they'll only say this privately, that's just not all that realistic. Ultimately, just as the senator said, this has to be up to them. And there's going to be one thing that will ultimately dictate what Ukraine looks like, and that's leverage. How much leverage Ukraine has in the first instance on the battlefield, and ultimately, in turn, how much leverage Ukraine has at the diplomacy – at the diplomatic table. And the United States has to be the key provider of that leverage. Unfortunately, Ukraine coming out of Friday has less leverage, not more. KRISTEN WELKER: Sara, how is this playing inside Republican circles? SARA FAGEN: Well, I mean one thing we saw in recent weeks is polling that showed the Republican base moving to the side of the Ukraine, in part because of President Trump's comments against Russia and against Vladimir Putin. I mean, look, coming out of this summit, it feels uncomfortable to sort of have seen the pageantry for a – a warmonger, you know, effectively. But it is one inning in a – in a long process. And so the question, ultimately, is, you know, the president not getting a ceasefire, the president not imposing sanctions doesn't mean that he won't get those things. And so – so Monday is very important in terms of sort of how does this play out over the course of the next several weeks and potentially months. KRISTEN WELKER: Well, you take us to the next part of the conversation beautifully, because Andrea, inning two takes place at the White House with President Zelenskyy and these European allies on Monday. What will you be watching for? Particularly, the fact that this is President Zelenskyy's first trip to the White House since that explosive meeting he had with the vice president, President Trump. I'm told Vice President Vance will be in this meeting as well. ANDREA MITCHELL: Oh, you can be sure that Vice President Vance will be in there. The lineup on the couch will include Vance, Rubio and all the rest, Witkoff clearly, Bessent. But on the other side will be von der Leyen from the EU and, you know, the NATO secretary general, the other Europeans, Macron, and we understand Starmer. In the U.K., Prime Minister Starmer has been coaching Zelenskyy ever since that disastrous Oval Office because Zelenskyy was, many people feel, ambushed. And he felt that he had to defend his – his own country. He's got a political audience at home, but what this president has never – what President Trump has never agreed to, and this was clear in his conversation a week ago Monday, in fact, when he talked about Zelenskyy: He has never accepted the fact that Russia invaded, that Russia was the aggressor. You've never heard that come from him. And until he or unless he acknowledges that, I don't know how he can mediate this dispute. JONATHAN MARTIN: The Europeans have conceded what was the Putin line, now is the Trump line, which is, "Forget the ceasefire. Let's go straight to a bigger deal." If that's the case, can the Europeans at least get from Trump a concession from Trump that, "Yes, we will send some kind of, you know, U.S. assets as part of a western security force in Ukraine after this war." That, to me, I think is important coming out of this meeting is, look, if we're not going to do a ceasefire, what can we get to at least save some face? We being the Europeans and Ukraine. And I think they're going to try to get something from Trump in terms of a concrete promise to have American assets in Europe. KRISTEN WELKER: Ned, what do you think the best thing Zelenskyy can get at this point is? NED PRICE: Well, clearly I think he needs to bring back President Trump to his side. Look, to the extent there was any good news coming out of Friday, it was not entirely the surrender summit. It wasn't entirely the betrayal at the Bering Strait. But that's where the good news sort of ends for Ukraine and for the West. I'd say Friday was a very bad day. In some ways, Saturday was an even worse day for Ukraine, for the West, because that's when President Trump came out and started pushing Vladimir Putin's proposal for a peace agreement rather than an immediate unconditional ceasefire. Look, Secretary Rubio said this. A peace agreement might sound nice. It might sound good. But if you think about peace as merely the absence of war, the absence of violence, well, Ukraine could've had peace on February 25th of 2022. They could've raised their hands. They could've waved the white flag. They could've said, "Here, Russian invaders. Take the keys to our city. Take the keys to our country." That's not a just, endurable peace. What President Zelenskyy needs to do is to bring President Trump onto his side to push for that end goal of just, endurable peace. KRISTEN WELKER: As you're saying, a lot of Republicans still support Zelenskyy. What do you think is going to happen? SARA FAGEN: Well, I think the president I mean, there are reports of Russians cash reserves being way down. They're having difficulty recruiting soldiers. And so Vladimir Putin also needs this to end because what we know about him is that he cares more about his own political power than – than anything else. And so to the degree that this extends and these additional sanctions are put forward, he will start to ultimately face pressure internally. KRISTEN WELKER: All right, well, we're all going to be watching very closely. Stay with us. We'll have more in just a bit. But when we come back, Ronald Reagan coined the phrase, "Trust but verified," when negotiating with the Soviets. Our Meet the Press Minute is next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. Another high-stakes U.S.-Russia meeting took place 40 years ago when President Ronald Reagan met Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev amid an intensifying arms race between both nations. The 1985 Geneva Summit marked a turning point in the Cold War, breaking the ice after years of hostility, opening the door to arms control and signaling a shift toward deescalation. Then-Secretary of State George Shultz joined Meet the Press days after that historic meeting. [BEGIN TAPE] SEC. GEORGE SHULTZ: The president speaks about realism and about the necessity for realism as we approach our relations with the Soviet Union, and it has been unchanged. At the same time, the president has had a chance to meet directly with the new Soviet leader, Mr. Gorbachev, and his associates, and have a intense discussion with them. And he's done that because he thinks that, with all of our differences and all of our difficulties, nevertheless here we are two countries that either one of which could blow up the world. And we just have to see if we can't put together a more stable and constructive relationship, and that's what he's trying to do. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: When we come back, President Trump takes over the police force in Washington, D.C. and orders up the National Guard. More with the panel next. KRISTEN WELKER: Welcome back. The panel is still with us. Andrea, let's start off by talking about this federal takeover of the D.C. police department. President Trump has deployed the National Guard, saying that the city of D.C. is crime ridden, despite the fact that crime statistics have gone down. He's signaling he wants to impose similar situations in other cities and states. How do you see this playing out? ANDREA MITCHELL: It's, first of all, it's expanding, it's escalating, because now he is also bringing in West Virginia, South Carolina, Missouri, potentially Ohio, other states, red states with Republican legislatures, Republican governors. And so more troops are coming in. And it's not clear what they're doing. They are performative. And you see humvees outside Union Station and Washington Monument, but it seems like more for show. The arrest statistics are not up. They're in fact lower than the normal police arrests on an average night. This is a city of 700,000 people. Clearly they are cleaning out and clearing out homeless encampments, and there's a quality-of-life issue there as well. But whether these are real arrests, and, no, there's no predicate for an emergency or a crisis in the city. KRISTEN WELKER: Ned, he is trying to paint Democrats as being soft on crime. Since 2016, he's said, "I'm the law-and-order president." What do you make of this and how Democrats are responding? NED PRICE: Yeah. Look, Kristen, I've spent my career at the CIA, at the National Security Council, at the State Department. I've seen militarized streets in a number of capitals. None of them have been in thriving democracies. So, of course, we're talking about what this means for our country. We should also think about the signal this sends to the rest of the world. You know, President Trump says he wants to 'make America great again.' He's been truly effective at making us somewhat mundane because there are so many people in un-free societies who recognize what's going on here. But you raised the point of how Democrats should talk about this. And there's a debate of, you know, "Do we talk about this?" "Do we talk about the tariffs?" "Do we talk about his tax-and-spend bill?" "Do we talk about Epstein?" I think the answer to all of that is very clear: It is yes. Yes, we have to talk about all of it because there are certain through lines that flow through all of this. It's self-dealing. It's corruption. It's abuse of power. It's putting his own interests over the national interest. This is very clearly an abuse of power, just as is his weaponization of institutions. KRISTEN WELKER: Sara, is it? SARA FAGEN: I mean, look, theatrics aside, crime in this city is a problem. And, you know, we hear the comments out of the Democrats about, "Well, this city is more crime, or this city, so why not go there?" Washington, D.C. is different. Every major corporation, every country, every university has a presence here and does business here. And the fact that you can't go north or east of the White House and the Capitol and feel safe is a problem. So, so again, some of the theatrics, you know, maybe we don't need people in uniforms around the gallery of art. More bodies on the street is helpful and needed. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Well, we'll watch how it unfolds. There's a big court fight right now unfolding as well– ANDREA MITCHELL: I would just question whether, I mean, I live in the neighborhoods. I've lived here for 50 years in the same– SARA FAGEN: I own property here too in those neighborhoods I described. ANDREA MITCHELL: And, and I just don't think–I think it can be a problem in any urban area. It's not a crisis. KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Well, another big flash point right now certainly is this debate, J-Mart, over gerrymandering– JONATHAN MARTIN: Yes. KRISTEN WELKER: –Which is the technical term for basically trying to carve out new districts. Texas Republicans trying to find five new Republican seats. Governor Gavin Newsom of California responding in kind, saying, "Okay. If you do that, we're going to find more Democratic seats here in California." Take a listen to a little bit of what he had to say this week. [BEGIN TAPE] We have got to recognize the cards that have been dealt. And we have got to meet fire with fire. And we've got to be held to a high level of accountability. [END TAPE] KRISTEN WELKER: How do you — JONATHAN MARTIN: Well — KRISTEN WELKER: —see this playing out in 2016 and 2028 based on what we saw there? JONATHAN MARTIN: Yeah. KRISTEN WELKER: — based on what we saw there? JONATHAN MARTIN: — exactly. Let's take this first looking at the midterms, 2026. The upshot of this is it creates a mess. These states, Texas, California, and everybody who follows, red and blue, are now going to be locked in court fights, protracted legal battles. We're not going to have lines for a lot of these states' house districts until well into calendar year 2026. There is an arms race. It is now fully engaged, and it's going to be a mess going into the midterms. I think the upshot of this is there are more red states that can deliver more seats for the Republicans than there are blue states available. But let's focus on 2028 for a minute though. This is a gift for Gavin Newsom. Donald Trump loaded the weapon and handed it to Gavin Newsom. And now Gavin Newsom is thrilled for this opportunity because it puts California front and center this year. KRISTEN WELKER: Sara? SARA FAGEN: Well, I agree with Jonathan. This is good for Gavin Newsom. I'm not sure it's good for the Democratic Party. You know, here you have this prolonged conversation around Texas and going in and doing redistricting. And the longer that played out, the worse it was going to be in the eyes of independent voters toward the Republican Party. And now, it is, it's just a jump ball, and it's both sides fighting. NED PRICE: Look, I think the difference is the Republicans are doing this out of zeal. Democrats are doing this in response. They're doing it somewhat out of sorrow, somewhat out of regret. This is what they have to do in order to maintain parity. But, look, I think we also want to see backbone. We have seen so much folding. All of our institutions, most of our institutions have caved. Academia, law, corporate media. I think what Gavin Newsom is finding, and others are finding it as well, is that when people stand up, stand up to President Trump and to power grabs and to Republicans trying to do the same, they're applauded. We need to see more of that. JONATHAN MARTIN: The Democratic base wants to see fight. Gavin's giving them fight. What I would watch for is JB Pritzker, Wes Moore also eyeing 2028. Do they follow suit and gerrymander their own states to give Dems more seats in Maryland and Illinois? KRISTEN WELKER: All right. There's a lot to unpack in this fight that we're watching. Thank you all so much for a fantastic conversation. That is all for today. Thank you for watching. We'll be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.
Chicago Tribune
2 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Video of Merrillville woman's arrest by Lake County Sheriff's Department shows excessive force before miscarriage, lawyer says
A Merrillville woman's lawyer said recently released bodycam footage backs up her accusations that Lake County Sheriff's deputies forcibly pulled her from a vehicle during an arrest despite knowing she was pregnant. Three months later, she had a miscarriage. I'm '(expletive) pregnant,' Shikeia Randolph, 31, yells just before two officers pull her from a red Chevrolet Trailblazer, according to video obtained by the Post-Tribune through a public records request. A federal lawsuit accusing the officers of excessive force was filed two months ago in the U.S. District Court in Hammond. It alleges that a 3:24 a.m. traffic stop on June 5, 2023 was 'pretextual' — for an issue with a license plate cover, then a school truancy warrant — and quickly spiraled out of control. The video from an officer's dashboard camera appears to show, as she is arrested, the two officers turn her on her stomach as one pins her down to handcuff her hands behind her back. Randolph previously told the Post-Tribune she had just stopped for milk at a 24-hour gas station in Gary near Ridge Road and Grant Street with her four kids in the vehicle. She was supposed to drop them off at her mother's house, then head to her early shift as a receptionist at the Gary Housing Authority. Officer Peter Hamady, who pulled her over, is named with the sheriff's department in the lawsuit. His lawyer Casey McCloskey declined comment. In a federal filing on Aug. 7, McCloskey formally denied the accusations against Hamady, saying in part that his actions were 'objectively reasonable' and protected by 'qualified immunity.' Some of Randolph's claims could fall outside of a two-year statute of limitations, he wrote. McCloskey argued because Randolph refused to get out of her SUV, she forced cops to go after her, according to court documents. She disputed this, in interviews with the Post-Tribune. On the way to booking, Randolph tells Hamady the truancy case in Merrillville Town Court was for taking her daughter repeatedly to school a little late when she was in pain from just having another baby, according to footage recorded inside Hamady's police car. He appears to soften. 'I didn't know they had warrants for that,' he said in the footage. In an interview, Matthew Custardo, Randolph's lawyer in the federal lawsuit, argued the use of force was unjustified, even if she was arguing with the cops. 'She was confused why she was being pulled over,' he said. 'She's scared. She has every reason to be a little concerned about what's going on. She's standing up for herself, certainly.' According to the nearly 40-minute bodycam video, police officers tell her to call someone to pick up the kids, so they don't have to call child protective services. Originally, Randolph said she thought it might have been a warrant for an old driving while suspended case. 'Call CPS for what?' she responds in the video. 'A warrant for a suspended license?' 'It's not for that,' Hamady tells her in the footage. After she asks again, he says it's for truancy. 'Listen, you have a warrant,' Hamady said in the video. 'You're lucky I don't have you cuffed out of the car right now. You wanna go that route?' In the video, she accuses Hamady of pulling out of a nearby parking lot before she passed him. 'Ma'am, I was behind you,' he responded in the footage. At least three other officers are in view. 'I'm taking you to court,' she the phone, Randolph tells her mother the '(expletive) police' pulled her over as she asked her to get her kids, according to the video. She asks officers to wait until her mother arrives. 'I guess they are going to take me to jail,' she said over the phone in the footage. Randolph said in a previous interview with the Post-Tribune that the encounter appeared to escalate when she rolled up her window slightly to hear what her mom was saying. The arrest happens within about 12 minutes into the footage. As officers open her car door and grab her arm, Randolph's children can be heard crying in the back seat. 'This is your last warning,' one of the officers said in the video. 'We don't want your kids to see this.' 'You already freaked my kids out,' she said. 'Get out of the (expletive) car,' one officer stated in the footage. I'm '(expletive) pregnant,' she yells just before two officers pull her from the vehicle after she tried to cling to the steering wheel in the video. 'Let me go! Get off of me! Please get off of me! Somebody help me!' After she is handcuffed on the ground, a police dog is seen in the background of the dashboard camera footage. Randolph's white shoes are scattered nearby. 'I'm trying to help you out here,' one officer tells her in the video. Randolph was charged with resisting law enforcement two months later. Hamady's account in court documents makes no mention of her pregnancy. During the ride to booking at the Lake County Jail, they talk at length about her decision to have a fifth child, according to footage inside the police car. Her fiancé wanted one last child, she said. When Hamady asks how far along she is on the video, she responds she's nearly 12 weeks pregnant. 'Well, congrats to you,' he said in the video. Hamady stated in the footage that her bond should be $400. It's 'not Friday, so it's a good thing,' he tells her in the video. 'I'll make sure they keep you updated.' He asks if she's comfortable as late-'90s era music plays over the radio, the footage shows, before they chat about where she is planning to get married. Do you 'want the window open back there, or are you good?' he asks in the video. Since police insisted on towing her red Chevrolet Trailblazer, Randolph's mother had to take four kids back in a cramped sedan, a situation that was not likely 'legally safe,' Custardo said. Randolph's lawsuit alleged her arrest suggested a 'broader pattern' in the Lake County Sheriff's Department, including 'inadequate training,' 'insufficient supervision' and a 'failure to implement effective accountability measures,' according to court documents. The Lake County Sheriff's Department refused to answer questions related to the incident, including what kind of de-escalation training its officers receive at various stages in their careers. Hamady joined the department in 2022, according to court filings. Sheriff Oscar Martinez Jr. declined comment through a spokeswoman, who said he could not discuss pending litigation. Watching the video with her mother was 'very emotional,' Randolph said in an Aug. 5 interview, especially hearing her kids crying in the video's background. She refused to let her 12-year-old daughter view it. 'I feel better now that I've seen it,' Randolph said. 'It matches the exact story I've been telling for so long.' There's been some 'expected' backlash online after a pair of articles in local newspapers, Randolph said. She was there trying to protect herself and her Williams, her criminal public defender, said she did remember parts of the case in retrospect, and confirmed she tried to get the bodycam from the Lake County Sheriff's Department 'multiple times' since the case was filed in August 2023. Court filings show one discovery request for the body cam was made as late as October 2024. The only reason not to turn it over was if they 'didn't want me to see something,' she said. Randolph was tired of repeatedly coming to court for a slow-moving case, Williams said. She told her client that she could fight to get the bodycam footage, or take a pretrial diversion to get rid of the case in a year. 'It's common to get slow discovery (evidence) when you're requesting bodycams,' Williams said, adding that some police departments are worse than others, but she's had 'good experience' with the sheriff's department in the past. Randolph's case is scheduled for a pretrial diversion hearing on Aug. 15. However, an automatic court filing on Aug. 11 appears to show there may be a snag. Court filings show Randolph, her fiancé and sister were charged June 26 with resisting law enforcement in Hobart. Hobart Police Cpl. Christopher Sipes wrote that Randolph and her fiancé got his attention around 1:30 a.m. May 25 on Main Street for ignoring a 'pedestrian signal.' , Randolph said they were out that night celebrating her fiancé's birthday. As End Zone let out across the street, a crowd, including the half-dozen in her group, were migrating to the other bar, Randolph said. At least two officers were there, as someone behind them yelled something about the guy handcuffed on the ground getting arrested nearby. The officer thought her fiancé said something, she said. Sipes wrote he and the other officer followed them into Cagney's. 'Bulls jersey, stop right there,' the other officer said to Randolph's fiancé, according to court records. As they got to the bar, Randolph said an officer grabbed her arm from behind. According to court documents, when the officer asked for identification, the couple 'ignored' him and said they 'didn't do anything.' Randolph 'stepped in front' of officers to block them from her fiance. As the cops went to arrest them just inside the bar's entrance, the crowd 'became aggressive,' the officer wrote. During a 'struggle' as she was being handcuffed, Randolph's black strapless top fell down, exposing her breasts, records state. Randolph said in an interview she tried to turn away for some privacy, because there were a 'million people standing around.' Once she stood up, an officer wrote, he pulled her top back up, records state. She denied she got in their way or refused to give her identification card. The officer was bigger than her, and it didn't make sense that she could overpower him. The whole incident was 'very unfortunate,' her lawyer Patrick Young said Aug. 7, adding he's working with prosecutors to resolve the case.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
Rubio says a ceasefire deal 'not off the table' between Ukraine and Russia
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Sunday that a temporary ceasefire agreement between Ukraine and Russia is 'not off the table,' even though U.S., Ukrainian and Russian leaders agree that the best outcome is a peace deal that permanently ends the war. 'It was agreed to by all that the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal,' Rubio told NBC News' 'Meet the Press.' 'There's no doubt about that. I mean, who would be against the fact that tomorrow we came to you and said, 'We have a full peace deal, and it's done.' I think that's the best way to end the war.' 'Now, whether there needs to be a ceasefire on the way there, well, we've advocated for that,' Rubio added. 'Unfortunately, the Russians, as of now, have not agreed to that.' Rubio's comments come days after President Donald Trump returned from Alaska, where he met for several hours with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a delegation of Russian leaders. The fact that neither Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy nor any representative from Ukraine were present for the discussions did not dim hopes among U.S. officials that they could push Putin toward a ceasefire agreement or a peace deal. After the Alaska meeting, however, the U.S. president told reporters, 'There's no deal until there's a deal.' Later in the 'Meet the Press' interview, Rubio placed blame on Putin for not moving toward a ceasefire, responding to questions about Russia's continued strikes in Ukraine over the last few days. 'We think usually it's very hard to negotiate when you're in the middle of hostilities. But that said, the only way to have a ceasefire is for both sides to agree to stop firing at one another ... and the Russians just haven't agreed to that,' he said. Zelenskyy is headed to the White House on Monday to meet with Trump and other European leaders, including Finland's President Alexander Stubb, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Rubio on Sunday spoke more about the Trump administration's decision not to impose new sanctions on Russia, despite Putin's reluctance to move toward a peace deal, saying, 'What we're trying to do right now is end the war.' 'If we're not going to be able to reach an agreement here at any point, then there are going to be consequences, not only the consequences of the war continuing, but the consequences of all those sanctions continuing, and potentially new sanctions on top of it as well. But what we're trying to do right now is end the war,' Rubio told 'Meet the Press' moderator Kristen Welker. 'I don't think new sanctions on Russia are going to force them to accept ceasefire. They're already under very severe sanctions,' he added later in the interview. The secretary of state also said that the decision to impose new sanctions is incompatible with the fight for a lasting peace deal. 'Those options [for sanctions] remain to the president,' Rubio said. 'The minute he takes those steps, all talks stop. 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. So that moment may come. I hope not, because I hope we get a peace deal.' Though Rubio declined to provide insight into negotiations among Ukraine, Russia, the U.S. and European allies, two points that have arisen publicly in recent weeks appear to be about territorial swaps and security guarantees for Ukraine. 'There has to be talk about what the territories are going to look like and what the border lines are going to look like at the end of this conflict. There has to be talk about Ukraine's legitimate desire for security in the long term to make sure they don't get invaded again,' Rubio said Sunday. 'There has to be talk about how Ukraine is rebuilt, and how do you rebuild a country that's been attacked as often as it has over the last three and a half years.' 'These are all key elements of any agreement. We understand that. And ... if there's going to be a deal, each side is going to have to give up on something,' he added. Looking at a map of the territory in Ukraine that Russia has occupied, Rubio added, 'Ultimately, if the Ukrainians are not willing to give that up, and no one's pushing Ukraine to give that up — and so I don't think that's what — there's going to be a peace deal. It's not going to look like that.' The secretary of state added that Putin is 'certainly asking for things that the Ukrainians and others are not willing to be supportive of and that we're not going to push them to give, and the Ukrainians are asking for things that the Russians are not going to give up on.' Rubio also wouldn't comment on what the United States' role could look like in potential security guarantees, though Trump has maintained that a potential peace deal would not include a pathway for Ukraine to join NATO. NBC News previously reported that Trump spoke with Zelenskyy and European leaders over the phone phone early Saturday morning about a potential NATO-like security guarantee for Ukraine that includes the U.S. as part of a deal struck with Russia. 'There'll have to be some security guarantees for Ukraine, right?' Rubio said Sunday. 'I mean, it's one of their fundamental demands — is that if this war were to end, they have to make sure this never happens again.' 'In order for there be a peace, the Russian side is going to have to accept that Ukraine is a sovereign country that has a right to defend itself and has a right to enter into alliances with other countries to defend itself. How that's constructed, what we call it, how it's built, what guarantees are built in there that are enforceable, that's what we'll be talking about over the next few days,' the secretary of state added.
