This morning in Denver, Jeanette Vizguerra was due to report for an immigration check-in President Trump's immigration orders have expanded agents' authority, experts say Like parents around the country, Jeanette Vizguerra kissed her kids good night and sent them to bed. She didn’t know if she would be there the next night to do the same. Vizguerra is an undocumented immigrant. She was due to check in Wednesday with Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Such check-ins are routine. But this one was different. The stay on her deportation order expired last week. It means she’d likely have exhausted all avenues to ward off separation from her American-born children, the youngest of whom is just 6. The detention and deportation last week of another mother, Guadalupe García de Rayos in Arizona, scared Vizguerra’s children. They were anxious – and so was she. “My intuition,” she told CNN the night before her hearing, “is it’s a bad day.” Vizguerra lives in Denver with her husband and three youngest kids – Luna, 12, Roberto, 10, and Zury, 6. They were all born in the United States. Her eldest, Tania, also lives in Denver and has children of her own. She described Vizguerra as the “backbone” of the family. Vizguerra came to the United States from Mexico in 1997 with her husband and Tania, who was 6 at the time. Tania said she lives in the United States under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, which lets undocumented people brought to the country as kids attend school and work. Like thousands of immigrants, the family came in search of a better life. Vizguerra’s husband had been kidnapped three times during his work as a bus driver in Mexico City, they said. For the first decade, Vizguerra and her family experienced the regular worries and paranoia of many of America’s estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. But she and her husband stayed under the radar, working odd jobs and avoiding trouble. That changed in 2009. “I was leaving work. It was about 10:20 at night. About a block away from my work, I saw a patrol car parked,” she recalled. “As soon as I drove by, the patrol turned on its lights and went after me, and I didn’t understand why because I wasn’t speeding.” Vizguerra was charged with not having a license or insurance and for having an expired license plate, but those charges were dismissed, court records show. She also was charged in connection with what her lawyer, Hans Meyer, said was a job application on which she used a made-up – not stolen – Social Security Number. She pleaded guilty to “attempted possession of a forged instrument.” Identity theft and other similar charges were dropped, records show. The case brought Vizguerra to the attention of immigration authorities, Meyer said. Vizguerra, who counts housekeeper, janitor and house painter among the jobs she’s held, spent the next 3 1/2 years fighting and appealing various orders to deport her from the United States. As she pressed her own case, she also took on the mantle of immigrants’ rights activist, fighting for other families hoping to cement their own tenuous roots in the United States. In September 2012, Vizguerra was in the middle of appealing a “voluntary departure” order – under which an undocumented person is allowed to arrange his or her own departure from the United States within a certain time frame. Then she learned her mother was terminally ill. Vizguerra hadn’t seen her mom since she left Mexico 15 years earlier. If she wanted to be by her mother’s bedside, Vizguerra would need to abandon her appeal. She wouldn’t be able to return legally to the United States. She decided to chance it. “It was a very difficult decision,” she said. Her mother died while Vizguerra was flying home. Soon, her heartbreak was compounded. “I was there (in Mexico) for seven months, and that was extremely difficult. It was very difficult for me to be without my children,” she said. “My children had to stay in here in the US with their father, and it was very difficult for them, especially for our youngest, Zury, who was only a year and one month at the time.” Vizguerra spent much of her time in Mexico City trying to figure out a way to reunite with her family. She eventually paid a smuggler to sneak her across the border, but she was picked up by Border Patrol agents near Presidio, Texas. She was detained for several weeks. That’s when the Colorado immigrant community Vizguerra had worked so hard to serve mobilized for her. Supporters showed up in Texas to demonstrate outside the facility where she was being held. Back in Colorado, they lobbied politicians. Ultimately, they won a stay on her deportation. The support hasn’t wavered. Leading up to her check-in Wednesday morning at the ICE office in Denver, Vizguerra had the backing of the National Domestic Workers Alliance, members of the First Unitarian Church in Denver and Democratic Rep. Jared Polis, who introduced a bill in Congress on Jan. 30 asking for Vizguerra to be given an immigration visa or to be granted the opportunity to apply for permanent residence. “Jeanette Vizguerra’s case is a perfect illustration of the broken system of immigration enforcement in this country,” Polis told The Colorado Independent. “Countless stories like Jeanette’s run contrary to our values as a nation and are one of the many reasons that we must reform our immigration system now.” But still, Vizguerra worried because of what happened to Garcia de Rayos, the Arizona mom. Garcia de Rayos and Vizguerra have a lot in common. They both came to the United States illegally more than 20 years ago. They’d both been checking in regularly with ICE for several years. And they both knew the expanded power given to immigration officers by President Donald Trump’s executive order could affect them. Related article Deported mom becomes face of debate on Trump immigration policy The Obama administration had prioritized expulsion of undocumented immigrants who threatened public safety or national security, had ties to criminal gang activity, committed serious felony offenses or were habitual misdemeanor criminal offenders. Trump’s order goes beyond that, laying out categories of undocumented immigrants who should be prioritized for removal. Experts say the definitions include virtually every person in the country illegally and the orders give broad latitude to individual immigration officers to decide who should be detained for deportation. “It made me really angry to see what happened to Guadalupe,” Vizguerra said. “She’s someone who’s been reporting for regular check-ins with ICE for several years and hasn’t had any problems. But I think more than fear, what it gave me was concern, worry for my children.” Unlike Garcia de Rayos, however, Vizguerra had appealed on multiple fronts to stay in the country, including on a U visa – a type of visa “set aside for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity,” according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Meyer, Vizguerra’s lawyer, said that his client should qualify for such a visa, and that she included testimonials from law enforcement as part of her application for one. CNN was not given details of the criminal investigation Vizguerra is said to have helped with. Meyer said the U visa helps law enforcement tackle crime by encouraging undocumented immigrants to come forward and cooperate. “It takes courage to have policy that reflects the nuanced reality,” he said. On Tuesday night, Vizguerra gathered with her family, friends and other supporters at the First Unitarian church in Denver. The church’s pastor, Mike Morran, said it was “immoral” and “unconscionable that she still has to live in fear of being ripped from her children and deported to a country she hasn’t been in for almost two decades.” Vizguerra vacillated between hope and despair. As the hours ticked down, she fretted. At her pastor’s invitation, Vizguerra opted to spend Tuesday night in a makeshift bedroom at her church, her three youngest children cuddled up at her side. She wished for a life “without fear of being detained or deported, and the fear of being separated from my children.” The next morning, just before 11:30 a.m. ET, Meyer, the lawyer, walked past about 50 of Vizguerra’s supporters gathered outside the ICE office in Centennial, Colorado. He made his way through the door. Vizguerra was not at his side. Armed officials greeted Meyer at the door, he said. They handed him the paperwork. “This letter is in response to your recent correspondence requesting a stay of removal for your client, Jeanette Vizguerra-Ramirez,” the letter read. “After a careful review of the evidence you submitted and the immigration file, your request for a stay of removal is denied.” ICE statement on Jeanette Vizguerra case pic.twitter.com/7k7rhdjTyF Vizguerra didn’t go to the check-in because Meyer suspected ICE agents would arrest her. As soon as he learned her fate, the phone rang inside the First Unitarian Society church. Vizguerra and her children were just finishing up their showers, getting ready for the day. A friend who’d come to keep vigil with the family answered the call. Vizguerra broke down. Jeanette Vizguerra comforted by her daughter as she finds out the stay on her deportation order was denied https://t.co/P217Grona0 pic.twitter.com/O06fgrB32b On the phone with Meyer, she spoke in Spanish to the crowd outside the ICE office. She said she felt she made the right decision. Zury passed her mom a tissue. Meyer said he will talk with Vizguerra about next steps, legally. He said he’s optimistic her U visa application will be granted, though he said he thinks ICE’s denial of the stay request owes to the fact that “we are living in Trump’s administration.” For now, Vizguerra plans to continue seeking refuge at her church. Ana Cabrera and Sara Weisfeldt in Denver contributed to this story.


Japanese architect Shigeru Ban is one of the world's great humanitarian architects His signature works employ simple recyclable materials to help victims of natural disaster Winning top architecture award has given Ban more freedom to choose projects It has been over a year and a half since Japanese architect Shigeru Ban won architecture’s highest award. Now, the 58-year-old’s body of work poses a peculiar question: how long can paper houses last? Ban’s signature humanitarian buildings – constructed using cardboard tubing, designed and built fast in response to natural catastrophes, and often not intended for indefinite use – have continually outlasted their period of need. “Temporary” paper log houses, constructed in response to earthquakes in Turkey and Haiti, were inhabited for months and years, even after rebuilding efforts began providing for more permanent residences. In Chengdu, China, an elementary school built as a stop-gap after a 2008 earthquake is still in daily use. And his cardboard church in Kobe, Japan, built for the city’s Catholic community in the aftermath of a 1995 earthquake, was shipped to Taiwan in 2008, where it still stands. But since he received the 2014 Pritzker Architecture Prize – inducting him into a prestigious elite that includes the names Oscar Niemeyer, Frank Gehry and Norman Foster – Ban says he’s noticed new interest in his work. (A new edition of Ban’s Complete Works has recently been published.) Offers have recently flooded in from commercial property developers to design luxury complexes. His interiors at New York’s Cast Iron House have shown his capabilities on a grander budget, with apartments on sale last year for between $5 million and $12 million. In London, Ban’s commissioned design for millionaire property entrepreneur John Curran, in the shadow of Tower Bridge, will likely become the capital’s most impressive timber home, if planning approval is granted later this year. But many less wealthy individuals across the world – from Nepal to the Philippines – are already living in structures designed by the Japanese architect. For these low cost houses, which now find themselves part of the blooming cultural legacy of a Pritzker laureate, the future is often unclear. Acclaim is no guarantee of a protection, even in less volatile environments, and architectural conservationists decry the loss of scores of Frank Lloyd Wright houses  and many of skyscraper pioneer Louis Sullivan’s greatest monuments. For Ban, construction is the easy part. In disaster zones, he is freed of the responsibility of seeking government approval for structures, provided he can vouch for their safety by his own calculations, and by working with a structural engineer. Talking during a trip to Paris, Ban says there’s no danger of his paper structures crumbling. “There is no difference between paper and wood,” he claims, explaining that timber, if used improperly, will not last long either. “Waterproofing and fireproofing is a technical issue which can be solved, because it is an industrial material.” From his perspective: “There is no difference between temporary and permanent.” Instead, the expiration date on his buildings – such as his recent rubble-walled housing designed this summer after the catastrophic earthquake in Nepal – is set by the client, which is usually the local government authority charged with disaster response efforts. These bodies dictate how long any relief structure will stand after an event. But, as with the school in Chengdu, governments are loathe to evict occupants from perfectly sound buildings. As the architect made clear this June, in a speech to students at his alma mater, Cooper Union’s School of Architecture in New York, concrete construction is no more a guarantee of long life, and poorly designed and unloved concrete buildings are being demolished across the world. Here, Ban’s elegant, minimal design could be his creations’ saving grace: “Even if a building is made out of paper, if people love them, then they will become permanent,” he said. Ban says the prize has brought changes. There’s a new burden of responsibility that comes with taking a place among architecture’s leading figures, he admits, but a freedom too, to pursue the projects he wants, and to say no to others. Ban is no stranger to large corporate and cultural buildings: a new headquarters for Swiss watchmakers Swatch and Omega is in the works; he’s designed a tea plantation-inspired terminal for an airport at the foot of Mount Fuji; and his wooden-sided art museum in Aspen opened last summer, to a mixed reception from local billionaires. Ban says in the past he has tried to “balance” his pro bono work on humanitarian causes with necessary and interesting work elsewhere. But he now feels that the two are one and the same. “Just that this is a different type of requirement: either for the rich client or the victim of an earthquake. The only difference is whether I’m paid or not, otherwise the project is a project.” He says it’s hard to say whether big money projects directly inform his work for the dispossessed. But in both he maintains a priority on sustainability and taste for geometric forms in timber carpentry and paper tubes. The booming interest from monied developers has not changed his perspective, he says, and he’s not about to start churning out “big commercial buildings.” “I don’t want to make my office bigger,” says Ban, whose Pritzker win was viewed by many as a pledge of the industry’s commitment to a future where social consciousness is valued alongside glitzy spectacle. “I don’t want to be too busy. I need enough time to design everything by myself, to control the quality, as well as work in disaster areas.” Ban says his personal priorities are the same. “Even before the award, the importance of my projects has nothing to do with the scale of the project, nothing to do with the budget of the project. Challenging projects interest me, not the high budget or not the big project.”


Editor’s Note: Mark Preston is CNN’s executive director of political programming and senior political analyst. He hosts “Full Stop with Mark Preston” on SiriusXM POTUS 124. The full interview can be heard on Saturday at 12 p.m. ET, Sunday at 1 a.m. ET, and Sunday at 5 p.m. ET. Follow him at @prestonCNN. Mark Preston: Climate change and nuclear weapons keep accomplished statesman George Shultz up at night The former secretary of state for Ronald Reagan thinks Trump and Congress should tackle these issues with a greater sense of urgency Without hesitation, George Shultz leaned forward in his chair and named two issues in a solemn tone: nuclear weapons, climate change. The subjects may seem oddly paired, unless you knew I had just asked him, “What keeps you up at night?” “Well, there are two things that can wipe us out,” said Shultz. “One is nuclear weapons and the other is climate change. I worry about both of those things.” It was surreal to hear Shultz, credited with helping President Ronald Reagan bring an end to the Cold War, offer such a blunt assessment about two issues dominating news coverage. Except Shultz didn’t raise the alarm about nuclear war and climate change this week. Rather, Shultz, who has held the positions of secretary of state, secretary of treasury, secretary of labor and director of the office of management and budget, delivered this warning in late May during a rare interview in his office at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. While President Donald Trump’s rhetoric on North Korea may be a bit extreme, he appears to recognize the existence of threat – even if he hasn’t developed a clear strategy to address it. However, when it comes to the issue of climate change, there is much he has to learn. My unsolicited advice to our President: Shultz has a wealth of information and knowledge. He may just be able to offer insight into how to deal with some of these difficult subjects. At 96 years old and 2,500-plus miles away from Washington, Shultz is still dialed into the major problems facing the US government, and he continues to work to try and find solutions. As President Ronald Reagan’s secretary of state, Shultz played point on negotiations with the then-Soviet Union, China, the Middle East and many other hot spots and crises the United States encountered in the 1980s. Related video Shultz: Everywhere you look today is instability The challenges and problems may have changed over the years, but the actors have not. That is why I was surprised when Shultz said his telephone was not ringing off the hook with calls from congressmen and the Trump administration seeking his advice and expertise. “Actually, I don’t get very many requests from Washington,” Shultz said in an interview that will air for the first time this weekend on SiriusXM’s “Full Stop with Mark Preston.” I don’t think about it much. I got plenty to do here.” “Well, North Korea is a huge problem, and there isn’t any obvious solution,” he said. “I think we have to work at it, and you have to be able to work at it with China. And I know from contacts I have that China is ready to work on it. But it has to be done on a quiet basis, where you have two or three people on each side who quietly work at it and are authoritative and can make deals.” Listen here This week, it was reported North Korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that fits inside its missiles. This prompted Trump to warn that “North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.” Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, questioned Trump’s warlike statement. “Don’t threaten unless they’re ready to act, and I’m not sure President Trump is ready to act,” he said. Related article 12 things Trump should know about North Korea In the May interview, Shultz seemed to channel McCain’s thoughts on making bold declarations – the former secretary of state said he learned as a young Marine not to make them unless you were willing to follow through. “I remember the day the sergeant handed me my rifle and said, ‘Take good care of this rifle. This rifle is your best friend,’” said Shultz, recalling his time in boot camp. “‘And remember one thing, never point this at anybody unless you’re willing to pull the trigger. No empty threats.’ I told that story to President Reagan. He liked it, and he said, ‘We’ll be very careful. We’ll mean what we say, and people (will) know that we’re serious, we’re willing to pull the trigger.’ And if people know that, you probably don’t have to pull it.” Shultz added, “Words matter if … they’re serious words. If you draw a red line and then you don’t do anything when it’s crossed, your words lose their meaning and nobody pays attention anymore.” Listen here As secretary of state, Shultz was in the middle of the diplomatic effort to try and strengthen relations between the United States and the Soviet Union, as well as put in place arms control agreements. Now, as he views the current relations between the United States and Russia, Shultz said there needs to be a better working arrangement between the two countries. But he added that Washington should send a strong signal to Moscow about Ukraine. “Somehow we need to find our way to having a decent problem-solving type of relationship with Russia, and I think the way is, first of all, to put a big red light up in the Ukraine,” Shultz said. “We still haven’t provided the Ukrainian armed forces with lethal weaponry. We should do that, in my opinion, and let Russia see that there is a big stop sign. When they see that, maybe they’ll change their tune a little and then we can start to engage.” Listen here Perhaps some people were listening. The New York Times and The Washington Post reported earlier this month that arming Ukraine is under consideration, but it is unclear if Trump will follow through. Related article What Donald Trump doesn't get about diplomacy Unlike just about everybody – Republicans and Democrats alike – the President is reluctant to criticize Russia, and he recently said that US-Russia relations are at “an all-time & very dangerous low.” Trump cast blame on Congress for forcing him to sign a very tough sanctions bill punishing Russia, saying it will only contribute to the deteriorating situation. Trump’s unwillingness to publicly take on Russia comes as multiple congressional committees and an independent counsel investigate to see if his campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 presidential election. Shultz, for his part, has never kept his eye off of his goal of reducing the number of nuclear weapons the United States and Russia stockpile. He recalled the now-historic 1986 Reykjavík, Iceland, meeting that Shultz attended with Reagan, President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze that led to the reduction of nuclear weapons. “(S)ince that time, the numbers of nuclear weapons in the world are roughly a third of what they were then,” Shultz said. “So we got big reductions, and we ought to keep that going. Now it seems that it’s going the other way, there’s a proliferation process taking place. Shultz added, “Well there’s a lot of loose talk about nuclear weapons, and so people don’t appreciate the implications of using them. When we had the first Reagan and Gorbachev meeting in Geneva, out of it came a statement, ‘A nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought.’ It was a big agreement between them … if we could get Mr. Putin and Mr. Trump to have a statement, of similar sort, that would be a big step.” For Shultz, the danger that nuclear weapons pose is not viewed with the same sense of urgency as it once was and needs to be. Shultz’s clarion call on reducing nuclear weapons is only matched by his appeal for world leaders to take action on climate change and continue to fund research and development with both public and private sector investments. “Well, the CO2 that’s in the atmosphere, it’s going to stay there, but we can do a better job of keeping it down,” said Shultz, who noted the advances that have been made in perfecting solar power and electric cars. Shultz acknowledged part of the problem with addressing climate change is that the issue has become so politicized, it is difficult to reach a consensus. Oftentimes, Shultz said he thinks about how Reagan addressed the issue. Related article Americans know the climate is changing. Do they care? “In the mid-80s, we found a lot of scientists saying the ozone layer is depleting, and there were some who doubted it,” he said. “But they all agreed that if it happened, it would be a catastrophe. So President Reagan was convinced that the people who were worried were right.” “Instead of doing what we now do, which is try to destroy the people who don’t agree with you, (Reagan) put his arm around them and said ‘We respect you, but you do agree if it happened, it would be a catastrophe? So, why don’t we take out an insurance policy?’” he continued. “That didn’t get them on our side, but it got them off our back. Out of it we got the Montreal Protocol, which people now pretty much agree came along just in time, and it worked. So that’s the way to go about things.” The Montreal Protocol, signed in 1987, was the first international treaty aimed at protecting the atmosphere from the effects of global warming. Shultz’s office at the Hoover Institution is like a small museum featuring pictures of world leaders and awards he received over the years for his service to three separate presidents. But he considers his family life to be among his greatest achievements. “Well, I have five children, I have 11 grandchildren, and now I have five great-grandchildren,” he said. “And that’s my legacy.” Below are some of the highlights of my interview with Secretary Shultz. This Q&A has been edited for brevity, clarity and flow. Mark Preston: Secretary Schultz, what keeps you up at night? When you’re looking around the globe, what are some of the things that concern you when you’re thinking about your kids, your grandkids, your great grandkids? George Shultz: Well, there are two things that can wipe us out. One is nuclear weapons and the other is climate change. I worry about both of those things. And I now have five wonderful great-grandchildren, and I watch them, they’re so much fun. They’re curious about everything, and I say to myself, “What kind of world are they going to inherit? And what can I do to make it a little better?” Preston: What kind of a world do you think they’re going to inherit? Related article Trump's reaction to North Korea cannot be nuclear Shultz: Well, we’re not paying attention to nuclear weapons anymore. People have forgotten how deadly they are. But I hope we don’t have to get awakened by their use. I keep working on that subject, and maybe it will come back and people will be aware of how totally unacceptable they are. A nuclear weapon dropped somewhere in the Bay Area (San Francisco/Oakland) incinerates the area; there’s nothing left. … They have immense destructive power. If you have an outbreak, say between India and Pakistan, and a few weapons are used back and forth, it isn’t only India and Pakistan that get wiped out, it puts a cloud around the globe. And you can have global cooling on a big stage and that can make vegetation hard to grow. Preston: Should we be very concerned about the relationship between those two countries? Shultz: They are at odds with each other, particularly up at the Kashmir. We had a group of Indian and Pakistani former generals and foreign minister types here for a couple of days just to talk about it. And one of the interesting things I said, “Have you ever tried to calculate the cost in your income per capita of the enmity that you have? You live right next to each other, yet you have practically no trade. But the possibilities are great.” So, there was an economist from each country there … they agreed to make a study together and it was astonishing how big the cost to their income … and you think they would be interested in anything that would increase their income per capita. If they could cool it between them and encourage trade and mutual economic activity, they could have a big boost. Preston: The warming of relations between China and our current government – good move? Shultz: Absolutely, it is a good move, and you need to develop counterparts, a feeling of trust between you as human beings. When you do that, you can have candid conversations, because the other side knows you’re not going to blurt it to the press … and embarrass the person you’re talking to. So, you need to develop that capability. Related article Trump and Putin are locked in a hellish standoff Preston: How do you see the state of play between Russia and the United States? Shultz: Somehow we need to find our way to having a decent problem-solving type of relationship with Russia, and I think the way is, first of all, to put a big red light up in the Ukraine. We still haven’t provided the Ukrainian armed forces with lethal weaponry; we should do that … and let Russia see that there is a big stop sign. When they see that, maybe they’ll change their tune a little and then we can start to engage. But between the United States and Russia, we have most of the nuclear weapons and we need to talk about it. When we had the meeting with Reagan and I and Gorbachev and Shevardnadze at Reykjavík,the numbers of nuclear weapons in the world are roughly a third of what they were then. So we got big reductions and we ought to keep that going. Now it seems that it’s going the other way; there’s a proliferation process taking place. Preston: As we (talk) about Washington right now, and the dysfunction between Democrats and Republicans, do you think – and I don’t think this is exclusive to either party – that perhaps people aren’t taking the moral high ground on issues? That they’re just politicizing things? Sign up for CNN Opinion’s new newsletter.Join us on Twitter and Facebook Shultz: It’s been a long time since I was there. But I know quite a few of the people and … a friend of mine who is a senator said to me, “(Defense Secretary) Jim Mattis came to my office and asked me my opinion about things.” And this person couldn’t say enough about Jim Mattis. That’s the old-fashioned way. Go to the other guy, ask their opinion, be interested, be a friend. That works. Preston: Is it frustrating when you don’t see that happen? Shultz: It’s frustrating, but I understand in Washington, hardly anyone lives there anymore. Their families aren’t there. In the old days we would get together on weekends, and nothing heavy, just get to know each other and trust each other. Preston: When you look at all of presidents that you’ve served under, you must have taken away some kind of positive advice or element that helped guide you through your own life. Shultz: Well, I think the big lesson you learn from looking at the success people had was the importance of a strategy of knowing where you’re trying to go, and then doing a good job of execution.


U.S. Coast Guard has only two active icebreakers in its fleet Russia has 40 icebreakers with almost a dozen more planned President Barack Obama on Tuesday will propose speeding up the timeline for purchasing and constructing new Coast Guard icebreakers in the Arctic, an area where the United States has fallen behind Russia in resources as the melting sea ice creates more opportunities for global commerce, tourism and scientific research. The United States, which once had seven icebreakers in its fleet, now has only two that are fully functional. This is compared to Russia, which has 40 icebreakers with 11 planned or under construction, according to a statement released by the White House. The President will call on Congress to approve funding for replacing a new heavy icebreaker by 2020, instead of 2022. Polar icebreakers are ships specifically designed to cut through open water ice and are in high demand as industries push closer to exploration of either of the earth’s poles, according to the Coast Guard. Obama will hike to Exit Glacier and tour Kenai Fjords National Park by boat Tuesday, the second day of his three-day trip to Alaska largely focused on climate change. The President will also announce a joint effort by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Coast Guard to increase safety in marine transportation in the region by mapping the recently opened Bering, Chukcki and Beaufort Seas. RELATED: Obama condemns climate change deniers Monday in Anchorage, the President opened the State Department sponsored GLACIER conference, challenging other world leaders as well as climate change deniers. Obama called on other nations to act quickly on climate change or “condemn our children to a world they no longer have the capacity to repair.” The President went on to say “the time to heed the critics and cynics is past. The time to plead ignorance is surely past. Those who want to ignore the science are increasingly alone, on their own shrinking island.” Before Obama embarked to Alaska, the administration announced the renaming of the highest peak in North America, Mount McKinley, to Denali, the name used by generations of Alaska Natives meaning “the great one.” The President, who has faced backlash on this decision, posted a photo of Denali on his Instagram before arriving in Anchorage on Monday. RELATED: Trump vows to reverse Obama’s Mt. McKinley name change


The family had been extensively vetted and approved for the special immigration visas Lawyer: "It was a victory in a battle that should not have been fought in the first place" The father, mother and three young children came to the United States with special immigration visas, granted because the father put himself in danger by working with American forces in Afghanistan, lawyers for the family said. They landed in Los Angeles on Thursday and planned to take a connecting flight to Seattle, where they would settle. New travel ban includes 8 countriesSupreme Court to hear argumentsMarch travel ban exempted IraqHow the March ban was different   March travel ban: The full executive orderJanuary travel ban: The full executive order New travel ban includes 8 countriesSupreme Court to hear argumentsMarch travel ban exempted IraqHow the March ban was different   March travel ban: The full executive orderJanuary travel ban: The full executive order But instead of rolling out the welcome mat, the federal government took them into custody, said Talia Inlender, a senior staff attorney for Public Counsel Law Firm. Federal agents separated the father from the others, held them four days and threatened to send them to detention centers, she said. Civil rights lawyers intervened. On Monday, four days after they were detained at the airport, a federal judge ordered the family freed from custody. “It was a victory in a battle that should not have been fought in the first place,” Robert Blume, one of the family’s lawyers,  said at a news conference Monday. “The government swung and missed on this one. They just got it wrong.” The family had been extensively vetted and approved for the special immigration visas (SIV), Blume said. They should never have been held, he said. Officials with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have not explained why the family was placed in custody. Spokespersons for both agencies declined comment. Court documents on ICE detainees are usually not available for people facing deportation because of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump. Documents filed by family lawyers say ICE and CBP never provided a reason. Related article Travel ban: What happens now in court? Inlender said the family landed at Los Angeles International Airport at midday Thursday and lawyers heard about their plight Friday. On Saturday, lawsuits were filed and custody of the family was transferred from CBP to ICE, she said. The mother and children – ages 7, 6 and 8 months – were held in a downtown hotel and the father was sent to a detention center in Orange County, she said. They’re not  identified because of security reasons and are called “Does” in the court papers. During the first two days, CBP wouldn’t allow lawyers to talk to the family, Inlender said. Also, the mother doesn’t speak English. The lawyers said the special immigration visas should have cleared the way for the family. The father worked at a US government base where the Taliban took notice of locals who worked there, Blume said. “His service put not only his own life, but also the lives of his wife and three small children, at risk,” the International Refugee Assistance Project said in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. “The US government created the SIV program specifically to allow families like petitioners to immigrate to the US and live safely.” Background checks take several years, the petition said, because the government wants to make sure the immigrants don’t pose a threat to the United States. Plus, having a valid SIV means the State Department and Homeland Security have already determined the family’s lives were at risk. IRAP court papers filed Saturday said, “Yet now, instead of gratefully welcoming Does 1-5 to the country they helped defend, the US government arrested all five family members –including an infant child – detained them for more than two days, and held them incommunicado while denying them any access to counsel who seek to advise them and inform them of their rights.” Blume said the family was freed after the court hearing in Santa Ana before federal Judge Josephine L. Staton. Video showed them getting into a van outside the courthouse. “They are now without restriction free to travel, free to find work, free to buy a cup of coffee,” Blume said.


Editor’s Note: Polish-American architect Daniel Libeskind was CNN Style’s guest editor for July 2015. Exploring the theme of architecture and emotion, he commissioned a series of features on the relationship between the buildings we create and the way they make us feel. Many people don’t see architecture as important, even very smart people. They leave it to somebody else. But to me, there’s nothing more important than architecture. It creates your world and influences how you feel both mentally and spiritually. So, if you live in a horrible place, you’ll be impaired mentally. Let’s say you live in a dark environment with no windows and with nothing but a blank wall behind you. You’d be in a prison, and that would have a detrimental impact on your mental health. The most neutral architecture is often the most aggressive. But in buildings that move us, there’s an element of care. It’s not a question of whether a building makes us feel good or bad. It’s about being moved. That’s what the word emotion means. What we feel is the sense of intensity, passion and involvement. It’s something that goes very deep. Look at a Frank Gehry building, for instance, and you can see the love and care and infinite labor it took to bend that piece of steel. You can see it in high-tech architecture like that of Norman Foster, the love for an incredible suspended piece of glass and how difficult it is to make a piece of glass look like it’s floating. It’s also why people love going to old medieval towns or beautiful villages – because they inspire us to feel moved. In great cities, the great buildings tell you things you don’t know and remember things which you’ve forgotten. It’s a collective wisdom, an engine superior to your own intelligence. Architecture is the biggest unwritten document of history. We are certainly writing a new chapter today. Places that were just caravans in the desert are suddenly high-density cities with incredible buildings. Cities that were neglected are now competing with other major cities: Shanghai vs. Beijing, Beijing vs Frankfurt, Frankfurt vs. New York. Nobody could have predicted 50 years ago that it would be cities competing with each other rather than nations. And it’s important for a city to have incredible variety. I don’t like oppressive cities that offer no relief. We see this in authoritarian attempts at controlling architecture, whether it was enlightenment thinkers or Stalin or Hitler or Mussolini. They tried to rebuild the world in their image, and their idea of playing God failed because of our irrepressible individuality. I often wish the city was more creative, that the sidewalk was a more fantastic experience, because life is short and you don’t want to walk through a dull-witted place. The great cities we really admire have this perplexing variety of thoughts, forms, colors, dialects, spiritual ideas. As an architect, it’s my responsibility to make a personal connection – not just with the physical environment but how it triggers our memories and emotional responses. When I explored the site for the Jewish Museum in Berlin, I put myself into the souls of those who are not there, into the emptiness I felt. I tried to see how it would feel to be there when you’re not there. What does it mean to create a space for those who were murdered, who disappeared in the smoke? You could feel that emotion here in New York after 9/11, the souls of those who are lost at ground zero. You don’t have to be a mystic or religious in any way. Everybody would feel it. You come to the bedrock, the slurry wall, the emptiness, and you are suddenly enveloped in a space that isn’t just what you see on the ground. You’re in connection with this place and its history, and that connection speaks to you. It tells you what the limits are, the taboos. You cannot treat it as if you were just walking on another kind of ground. This place is unique. There is a delicacy about it that has to be protected. That’s all part of exploring the site. I would call it a spiritual journey. Even with a regular site, you have to be interested in it and sensitive to it. If not, you can do whatever you want. Architecture is already violent – you always have to dig a foundation – and we can tell when somebody does something just for a quick buck. We can feel that carelessness and the silence it produces. When I first came here in 2001 it was a ghost town. Once in a while I would see two or three people standing in the rain looking at the site. Every day I have seen this site transform itself, but transform itself with a memory – not by hiding what happened. The talk about ground zero also changed very slowly. It was like something coming up out of an abyss, not different from my experience in Berlin. When I started working on ground zero, the developers were speaking of large floor plates for trading floors, and my idea was very different — that this is not going to be Wall Street again, it’s going to be a new neighborhood. To me the proof of its success is how many people have moved into that neighborhood. A hundred thousand people have moved to Lower Manhattan since I started working here. It’s a rebirth of a zone of a city that was very functionally Wall Street. Now it’s a place for creativity. There are both the profane and the sacred in architecture. But sacred does not preclude celebration. So eating an ice cream or even throwing a Frisbee at ground zero is not in contradiction with the space, because it’s the space that allows you to do certain things. It takes a long time for a public space to shape itself. For ground zero, it’s taking more than two hundred years. At first, New York was just a few streets laid out on a map. But incarnated in that initial gesture was the spirit of this island, this tip, jutting out into the world. A spirit of the unexpected. That’s the optimism that is lodged in every gesture of architecture. The metaphor of life is rooted in architecture. To be born, to grow, to be, is an architectural experience. It starts from excavation, from nothing, and has only a plan that in time comes to fruition. No matter how sad, how tragic a site might be, how abused by history, architecture has the notion of a future. That sense prevents it from being something in a minor chord. Even erecting a monument to the dead, in any form – writing a book or planting a flower or a tree – has a sense of hope and redemption. To me, that is the emotion of architecture. As told to CNN’s Steven Goldberg. Video by CNN’s Tawanda Scott Sambou.


Editor’s Note: Errol Louis is the host of “Inside City Hall,” a nightly political show on NY1, a New York all-news channel. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. It’s safe to assume that the bull-in-a-china-shop style of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is precisely what his new legal client, President Donald Trump, wants in a defender. But what works for Trump in the short term could prove to be a long-term political headache. In sharp contrast to former attorneys for the President – several of whom have resigned – Giuliani has dropped any pretense of cooperation with special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of possible links between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives. “Mueller should now bring this to a close,” Giuliani said this week in a Fox News interview. “It’s been a year. He’s gotten 1.4 million documents, he’s interviewed 28 witnesses. And he has nothing, which is why he wants to bring the President into an interview.” That’s what a good lawyer would say. It happens to be not quite true. Related video Avenatti on Giuliani: None of this makes sense Over the last year, Mueller’s office has charged 19 people and three Russian companies with federal crimes. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, has pleaded guilty. So has his deputy campaign chairman, Rick Gates, and a former campaign aide, George Papadopoulos.  All three men are now cooperating with the probe. Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, has been charged and is under house arrest, facing charges including bank fraud, tax fraud and money-laundering. He’s scheduled to go on trial in July. That’s not nothing – far from it. And we still don’t know what will come of the raid in which FBI agents seized computers, phones and records from the President’s longtime personal lawyer and “fixer,” Michael Cohen. Giuliani has also strayed from the facts in his recent assertion that Mueller cannot compel Trump to respond to a subpoena and testify under oath. “They could probably require documents to be produced. That’s what was required of Nixon,” Giuliani said. “We’ve provided 1.4 million documents. They probably could require you to testify in a civil case, possibly even as a witness in a criminal case, but they can’t require you to testify in what would be your own case because, after all, it’s all about a possible impeachment.” Related video Who is Rudy Giuliani? Not so. In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that President Richard Nixon had to comply with a subpoena for tapes of conversations recorded in the Oval Office private locations. In 1998, President Bill Clinton defused a showdown with special prosecutor Kenneth Starr, who wanted to subpoena him, by agreeing to testify. There isn’t a lot of precedent to rely on, but as one law professor from Duke University put it: “It’s not accurate to say that sitting presidents never have to comply with subpoenas. They have and they do.” While it might seem like a bad idea for Giuliani to defend Trump by making outlandish assertions, the strategy has generally worked for Trump over the years. As a young man, facing charges of racial discrimination in his real estate business, Trump turned to a pit bull of a lawyer, Roy Cohn, who counseled Trump to battle the charges no matter what. In the end, the Trump Organization settled the matter without admitting guilt – the first of many times that Trump would employ a strategy of never apologizing for anything. Related article Rudy Giuliani, America's mayor, has jumped the shark Cohn died years ago, but Trump has found a successor in the form of Giuliani. In the lowest moment of the 2016 campaign, when the “Access Hollywood” video surfaced with Trump boasting of molesting women, Giuliani was one of the few campaign aides who took to the airwaves to defend him. That same attitude now leads Giuliani to concoct fanciful – and utterly erroneous – legal theories to “explain” why the Mueller probe is a failure and why presidents can’t be subpoenaed. That might buy Trump a momentary reprieve among his followers. But more than two-thirds of Americans support the Mueller probe, and no amount of bluster from the President or his pit bull attorney is likely to change that. All of which means Giuliani may be giving Trump the defense he wants – but not the end of the Mueller probe that he needs.


Secretary of Defense Ash Carter arrived on an unannounced visit to Afghanistan Tuesday to meet with the country’s leaders and visit with U.S. forces who are battling a resilient Taliban. Carter’s trip comes a week after President Barack Obama announced 8,400 troops will remain in Afghanistan through the end of 2017. The number was higher than the 5,500 troops originally planned. “The security situation in Afghanistan remains precarious,” Obama said. “The Taliban remains a threat. I strongly believe it is in our national security interest … that we give our Afghan partners the best opportunities to succeed.” Carter, who was in Baghdad on Monday, flew into Bagram Air Base near Kabul and later met with Resolute Support Mission Commander Gen. John Nicholson. The secretary also met with Afghan Minister of Defense Abdullah Khan Habibi and Interior Minister Major Gen. Taj Mohammed Jahid. RELATED: Carter announces more US troops for Iraq Carter then headed to the Presidential Palace for a meeting with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. Carter also will meet with Afghan Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah in Kabul before heading back to Bagram to meet U.S. troops. After a day-long visit, Carter flew to the United Arab Emirates. In Baghdad on Monday, Carter announced the U.S. is sending 560 additional troops to Iraq as part of the stepped-up fight against the “cancer” of ISIS. Most of the troops will be stationed at the recently recaptured Qarayyah airfield, which is about 25 miles south of Mosul and will be a key staging area for the upcoming U.S. and Iraqi effort to retake that city from the terror group.


The White House denied a claim by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday that he had discussed an initiative with the Trump administration to annex Israeli settlements in the West Bank. White House spokesperson Josh Raffel said, “Reports that the United States discussed with Israel an annexation plan for the West Bank are false. The United States and Israel have never discussed such a proposal, and the President’s focus remains squarely on his Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative.” On Monday afternoon, Netanyahu said he had been in talks with the American administration “for some time” on applying Israeli sovereignty to West Bank settlements. Speaking at a Likud party faction meeting, Netanyahu said, “On the subject of applying the Sovereignty Law, I can tell you that for some time now, I have been holding talks on the subject with the Americans,” according to a spokesman for Coalition Chairman David Amsalem. But a statement only hours later appeared to say the American government pushed back on the idea. Related article What you need to know about the Israeli settlements “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu updated the Americans on the initiatives brought up in the Knesset, and the Americans expressed their unequivocal position by which they are committed to advancing President Trump’s peace plan,” the statement read. Moments later, the White House denied any such talks had ever taken place. The Sovereignty Law, backed by the right-wing Land of Israel Lobby, would annex Israeli settlements in the West Bank. David Keyes, spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister, told CNN he was unaware if any “concrete proposal had been discussed.” Many right-wing Israeli politicians saw under President Donald Trump a chance to advance plans to annex part or all of the West Bank into Israel. Though such a move would outrage virtually every other government, Israel’s right believed Trump could provide Israel political and diplomatic cover, blocking any attempts to sanction Israel at the United Nations were annexation to proceed. Related article Trump: Neither Israelis nor Palestinians looking to make peace In an interview published in Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom on Sunday, Trump said Israel had to “be very careful” with settlements. “The settlements are something that very much complicates, and always have complicated, making peace, so I think Israel has to be very careful with the settlements,” Trump was quoted as saying, hewing to the position of previous US administrations that settlements are an obstacle to peace. Trump, who said in the interview that neither Israelis nor Palestinians “are looking to make peace,” hedged on expectations for the White House peace plan, which has been dubbed the “Ultimate Deal.” “We are going to see what goes on,” Trump told Israel Hayom. Monday’s announcement by Netanyahu was met with derision by Palestinian Liberation Organization Secretary-General Saeb Erekat. Related article Mideast tensions get even worse “Netanyahu’s latest statement is a continuation of Israel’s policy of dictations, as well as it confirms US complicity with Israeli colonial plans,” Erekat said in a statement. “This is a confirmation that final status issues are being unilaterally decided upon by Israel in coordination with the US administration,” he added. “The Israeli-US coordination is not about achieving a just and lasting peace but about legitimizing Israeli violations of International law and UN resolutions.” Settlements are considered a violation under international law, as reaffirmed in United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, passed in the waning days of the Obama administration. US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said that if the resolution had been introduced under the Trump administration, the US would have cast its veto, blocking the resolution from passing.


"One of the most instantly recognizable pieces of pop culture" sold at auction Auction house: Droid is believed to be only complete R2-D2 unit in the public domain For decades, fans of the beloved “Star Wars” franchise have gone far and wide to pay tribute to the world that George Lucas has created. They sell out movie premieres and dress up as their favorite characters. And now some even pay millions to get their hands on a movie prop. A complete R2-D2 unit sold for $2.75 million Wednesday at a California auction, according to the Los Angeles-area auction house Profiles in History. Luke Skywalker’s 43-inch tall sidekick was assembled from components from the original “Star Wars” trilogy as well as “Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace” and “Star Wars: Episode II: Attack of the Clones,” according to the auction catalog. The films were made between 1977 and 2002. Unfortunately, this R2-D2 won’t interact with you. “No internal mechanics or workings are present,” the auction house said. The droid is constructed of aluminum, steel and fiberglass, and is believed to be the only complete R2-D2 unit in the public domain, according to Profiles in History’s auction catalog. The auction house called it “one of the most instantly recognizable pieces of pop culture in existence.” The dome in the droid dates to the original 1977 film when it was used by actor Kenny Baker. Related article The first time I saw 'Star Wars': 40 years of memories The auction catalog said R2-D2 units were upgraded as more films were made, with older components being retired. Before the auction, Profiles in History expected to fetch between $1 million and $2 million for the galaxy’s most famous interactive astromech droid, according the catalog listing. The R2-D2 sale was part of the three-day Hollywood Auction, which also included Mark Hamill’s lightsaber from “Star Wars: Episode IV: – A New Hope” and “The Empire Strikes Back,” which sold for $325,000, according to the auction house. The droid was the most expensive item sold at the auction. Los Angeles approves long-awaited George Lucas art museum The identity of the winning R2-D2 bidder was not immediately available early Thursday. The auction house cautioned bidders that special shipping arrangements would be required after the sale since the droid is in the United Kingdom.


President Donald Trump’s backslapping diplomacy with French President Emmanuel Macron gave way to an altogether more businesslike encounter with another European ally, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, at the White House on Friday. Both sides insisted relations between Germany and the United States remain strong, and Trump offered effusive praise for his counterpart, calling the longest-serving European leader an “extraordinary woman” during a news availability. But the differences between the two visits were stark, and there was little to indicate Merkel had successfully swayed Trump on an array of issues, such as Iran and trade. Related article After the hugs and kisses, Macron rips Trumpism “We need a reciprocal relationship, which we don’t have,” Trump insisted when questioned about US-German ties. “I don’t blame the Chancellor, I don’t blame Germany, or the European Union. I blame the people that preceded me for allowing this to happen.” As Trump railed against Germany’s trade surplus with the United States and what he said was lackluster spending on defense, the Chancellor appeared unmoved and insisted relations with the United States were strong. After concluding a joint news conference, there was no greater clarity on Trump’s intentions for the Iran deal, which he has derided and appears poised to exit. And he would not commit to extending an exemption on steel and aluminum tariffs, which he applied last month. “The President will decide, that is very clear,” Merkel said through a translator when asked whether Trump would continue to exempt the European Union from the tariffs. If Macron represented a friendly, if assertive, voice on matters of deep European concern, Merkel arrived at the White House prepared to act as the stern enforcer on issues such as trade and the Iran nuclear deal, even if expectations of swaying Trump remain low. When the two leaders appeared before reporters, there was none of the arm-grabbing or dandruff-flicking that colored Trump’s interactions with Macron. They did, however, manage to avoid the awkwardness of their first meeting a year ago. Speaking to reporters at the start of their talks, Trump insisted the pair’s relationship is chummier than it may appear. Related article Macron opens door to new Iran deal in talks with Trump “We actually have had a great relationship right from the beginning, but some people didn’t understand that,” he said in the Oval Office. “But we understand it, and that’s what’s important.” Indeed, the leaders appeared happy to see each other when Merkel’s limousine arrived at the West Wing. Trump kissed her twice on the cheek, and later opened his remarks by congratulating her on her narrow election victory earlier this year. Later, they shook hands twice in the Oval Office, avoiding a repeat of Merkel’s last visit a year ago, when Trump avoided a handshake. The warmth aside, the differences between Merkel’s visit and the elaborate display of friendship offered to Macron this week were apparent. Macron was treated to a grand military welcome, hours of talks, two dinners with Trump and his wife and an opera performance. Merkel, meanwhile, just came for lunch. Some officials in Berlin had hoped Merkel might be treated to a grander welcome but pressed forward with what was on offer. Merkel and Macron coordinated their approaches toward Trump before departing for Washington, according to aides. They are both pushing Trump to back off threats to scrap the Iran nuclear deal and soften his approach on trade. But unlike Macron, who participated with the US in coordinated airstrikes on Syria earlier this month, Merkel doesn’t have a major piece of teamwork to tout. On Iran, Trump refused to rule out military action should Tehran resume its nuclear program, and did not offer any indication of his intentions for withdrawing from the nuclear deal. “I don’t talk about whether or not I’d use military force. It’s not appropriate to be talking about. But I can tell you this, they will not be doing nuclear weapons, that I can tell you,” Trump said. “They’re not going to be doing nuclear weapons. You can bank on it.” Like all leaders in countries where Trump remains deeply unpopular, Merkel faces a balance in how much to embrace Trump and how much to scold him. Over the course of their rocky 15-month relationship, Merkel has largely gravitated toward scolding. Shortly after he entered office, she explained the Geneva Convention to him over the phone after he ordered a ban on US entry from certain Muslim-majority countries. And during summit talks in the spring, she forcefully pressed him to remain in the Paris climate accord. Trump has chafed at the treatment, and relations between Washington and Berlin have suffered. The two leaders went more than five months without a phone call earlier this year, an extraordinary silence that would have been unthinkable during the years when Merkel was the closest US ally in Europe. Related article Trump praises Jackson, says he was smeared People familiar with Trump’s thinking say Merkel’s well-established relationship with former President Barack Obama colored Trump’s view of her; he was more eager to develop ties to Macron since he represented a “blank slate,” without a preexisting relationship with Trump’s predecessor. The last time Merkel visited the White House, in March 2017, there were moments of distinct awkwardness. Trump appeared to refuse to shake her hand in the Oval Office, though later officials said they’d shaken hands earlier. And she stood grimly silent when Trump joked they’d both been spied on by Obama, an episode Trump griped about later to aides. Since then, Merkel’s position as the de-facto leader of Europe has been weakened. She faced an unexpectedly tough re-election battle, with challenges from the right spurred by her decision to allow large flows of refugees into Germany. Macron has largely stepped into the vacuum, but not without coordinating his steps first with Merkel. The two have developed a joint approach to Trump in the areas where their interests align, including the Iran nuclear deal and trade. Macron left Washington speculating Trump would withdraw from the Iran accord despite his entreaties, but acknowledged that no firm decision was relayed over the course of his state visit. Merkel was expected to focus more on trade, which remains the thorniest issue between her and Trump. The President has railed against Germany’s massive trade surplus and has honed in particularly on the number of German autos on American roads. The tariffs on steel and aluminum that he applied last month were meant as a remedy.


US troops have an obligation not to follow illegal orders Trump's campaign statements indicate he might seek the use of waterboarding When Donald Trump takes office, his plate will be full with national security challenges ranging ISIS to Russia. But first up may be the issue of how top military officers deal with the new commander in chief himself. There is civilian control of the military, and there is unquestioned loyalty to any president. But Trump comes into office with a series of campaign promises that include the possibility of ordering illegal action by the US military. The issue getting perhaps the most attention is Trump’s campaign statements he might institute waterboarding of terrorism suspects. Waterboarding is considered torture, which is illegal under US and international law. Other Trump campaign promises that worry some commanders and troops include the notion of bombing with little regard for civilian casualties or taking Iraq’s oil supplies, also potential violations of international law. Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook noted on Thursday that all US troops have an obligation not to follow illegal orders. And he made clear the decades of expectations by troops and commanders that they wouldn’t be asked to do so. “I don’t think this is something we should even be discussing,” Cook said in response to a question from CNN. “They’re not going to get an order in violation of the law.” But CNN has spoken to several current senior officers who have given thought to whether they could confront this issue in a Trump administration. Each has said the plan will be to explain in detail why it’s a violation of the law, and to get military lawyers directly involved in any discussion so that’s made clear. If a commander were still to get an illegal order, the challenge would then be whether to resign. One senior military official said, though, that the most senior commanders on a four-star level would never resign. It would be seen as leaving their troops behind to deal with the problem. Instead, the official said, a four-star commander would make a President Trump publicly fire them. Related video US general counters Trump claims Violations of the Geneva Convention, or any war crime by US troops, would be disastrous, a senior retired US military officer told CNN. While the US is not a member of the International Criminal Court at The Hague, if there were illegal orders given and followed, then US military personnel would be discredited around the world and US standing would be hurt with other nations the US military must work with. In addition, those military members engaged in Geneva Convention violations would find they could not travel to countries that are members of the court because they would risk arrest and tried before it. The official added there is a longstanding view in the US military that American troops and commanders do not engage in activities that are torture or illegal because if US troops are ever taken captive, it gives the the country little leverage to challenge enemy forces engaging in similar activities against US personnel. Waterboarding, for example, is illegal under both US law and the Geneva Conventions because it is defined as torture. But that’s not how Trump or all the Republicans who endorsed him see it, though. “Waterboarding isn’t torture. We do waterboarding on our own soldiers in the military,” Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton, himself a veteran, told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. Some US troops undergo training for survival by practicing what would happen to them if they are waterboarded. Cotton also insisted that the law could be changed. The Pentagon, however, reiterated Thursday that waterboarding is not lawful. “You know the policy position of this administration, the law in fact, with regard to this. That is not something the US military is going to be conducting,” Cook said.


F-35 jets deploy from Utah for training mission in Europe Deployment part of European Reassurance Initiative The US Air Force’s newest stealth fighters arrived in the UK over the weekend as part of the Pentagon’s effort to reassure European allies in the face of Russian aggression on the continent. The F-35A jets from Hill Air Force Base in Utah landed at RAF Lakenheath on Saturday for what the Air Force said was several weeks of training with other US aircraft and crews and those from North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies. “As we and our joint F-35 partners bring this aircraft into our inventories, it’s important that we train together to integrate into a seamless team capable of defending the sovereignty of allied nations,” Gen. Tod D. Wolters, commander of US Air Forces in Europe, said in a statement. The Air Force said the F-35s were deploying to support the European Reassurance Initiative, a multibillion dollar program started under President Obama in 2014 to show support for US allies after Russia annexed the Crimea from Ukraine. The F-35s are just the latest of example of US Air Force jets sent to Europe in connection with the European Reassurance Initiative. Others have included F-22s, F-16s, F-15s and A-10s. The presence of the F-35s in Europe also helps the US show off the jets to European allies who already have them or plan to acquire their own versions, including the United Kingdom, Italy, Norway, Belgium, Denmark and Turkey. The single-engine F-35 comes in three variants. The A version is flown by the US Air Force, the B version by the Marines, and the C version will become part of the US Navy’s fleet. Marine Corps F-35Bs began their first overseas deployment earlier this year when they were dispatched to Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni in Japan. That deployment was seen as the US bolstering allies in Japan and South Korea with the latest US high-tech combat hardware. The Air Force emphasized a similar line with the weekend deployment to Britain. “The introduction of the premier fifth-generation fighter to the European area of responsibility brings with it state-of-the-art sensors, interoperability, and a broad array of advanced air-to-air and air-to-surface munitions that with help maintain the fundamental sovereignty rights of all nations,” an Air Force statement said. While the F-35s may be ready for overseas action, the aircraft has been facing a battle at home too. Related video F-35 jets unveiled at Hill Air Force Base The cost of the aircraft has generated strong headwinds of criticism, including from US President Donald Trump. The $400 billion price tag for the 2,443 planes delivered or planned is double the original budget. But earlier this year, Secretary of Defense James Mattis called the F-35 “critical” for US air superiority and praised it for its ability to integrate with allies who are buying the jet. Many US allies have “bet their air superiority on the F-35 program. It bonds us tightly together with them,” Mattis said.


Abu Khdeir's name is on the memorial wall at Jerusalem's Mount Herzl His father and a terror victim advocacy group objected to his being included in the list The Palestinian teenager was beaten and burned by three Israelis, authorities say A Palestinian teenager’s name will be removed from an Israeli memorial commemorating fallen soldiers and the victims of terrorism after his family and others complained. Mohammed Abu Khdeir’s name appeared this week on the wall at Jerusalem’s Mount Herzl, the site of the national cemetery, as the nation prepared to mark its Memorial Day on Wednesday. Abu Khdeir, 16, was beaten and burned alive by three Israelis in July, according to prosecutors. A picture on the memorial website for Abu Khdeir shows an Israeli flag with two flowers called “Blood of the Maccabees” in Israel, a symbol often used on Memorial Day, when the country honors its soldiers killed in the line of duty and victims of terrorism. But Abu Khdeir’s family objected to his inclusion on the memorial wall. His father, Hussein Abu Khdeir, said no one asked for his permission to put his son’s name on the wall. “I refuse that my son’s name will be listed between soldiers of the occupation,” he said. Almagor, an organization that works on behalf of victims of terror in Israel, also opposes Abu Khdeir’s inclusion on the memorial. Almagor described the teen’s death as a rogue attack and said he’s not a terror victim. “Somebody did here a trick, and we are going to fight to correct it,” said Almagor CEO Meir Indor.  “We will not recognize someone who was murdered in a brutal way in an individual action.” Indor’s organization wrote a letter to the National Insurance Institute of Israel – the country’s social security administration, which maintains the memorial site – demanding that Abu Khdeir’s name be removed from the memorial wall. Indor said if the teenager’s name is not taken off, members of Almagor want their own family members’ names removed. On Wednesday, Israel Radio reported that the National Insurance Institute of Israel will remove Abu Khdeir’s name from the memorial following his father’s complaints.  The teen’s name has already been removed from the organization’s website, which lists the names on the memorial wall. A panel of judges began hearing evidence in January against the three suspects in Abu Khdeir’s killing.

Mohammed Abu Khdeir's inclusion on the Israeli memorial wall


Muhammadu Buhari tells CNN's Christiane Amanpour that he will fight corruption in Nigeria Nigeria is the most populous country in Africa and is grappling with violent Boko Haram extremists Nigeria is also Africa's biggest economy, but up to 70% of Nigerians live on less than a dollar a day A day after winning Nigeria’s presidency, Muhammadu Buhari told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that he plans to aggressively fight corruption that has long plagued Nigeria and go after the root of the nation’s unrest. Buhari said he’ll “rapidly give attention” to curbing violence in the northeast part of Nigeria, where the terrorist group Boko Haram operates. By cooperating with neighboring nations Chad, Cameroon and Niger, he said his administration is confident it will be able to thwart criminals and others contributing to Nigeria’s instability. For the first time in Nigeria’s history, the opposition defeated the ruling party in democratic elections. Buhari defeated incumbent Goodluck Jonathan by about 2 million votes, according to Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission. The win comes after a long history of military rule, coups and botched attempts at democracy in Africa’s most populous nation. Related video APC Party: Nigerian Pres. Jonathan has conceded In an exclusive live interview from Abuja, Buhari told Amanpour he was not concerned about reconciling the nation after a divisive campaign. He said now that he has been elected he will turn his focus to Boko Haram and “plug holes” in the “corruption infrastructure” in the country. “A new day and a new Nigeria are upon us,” Buhari said after his win Tuesday. “The victory is yours, and the glory is that of our nation.” Earlier, Jonathan phoned Buhari to concede defeat. The outgoing president also offered a written statement to his nation. “I thank all Nigerians once again for the great opportunity I was given to lead this country, and assure you that I will continue to do my best at the helm of national affairs until the end of my tenure,” Jonathan said. “I promised the country free and fair elections. I have kept my word.” Buhari, 72, will be sworn in on May 29. He will take the helm at a critical time, as Nigeria grapples with Boko Haram, serious economic woes and corruption. This isn’t Buhari’s first time leading Nigeria, but it’s his first time in nearly 30 years. Related video Who is Nigerian President-elect Muhammadu Buhari? A military coup brought Buhari to power in late 1983, closing a brief period of popular rule by Shehu Shagari. But Buhari himself was ousted by another military coup in August 1985. Read more: Who is Nigeria’s Muhammadu Buhari? His presidential win is the result of his fourth attempt to lead the country since he was ousted 30 years ago. Buhari is a Sunni Muslim from Nigeria’s poorer North, while Jonathan comes from a Christian and animist South that is rich with oil. Buhari praised voters for exercising their right peacefully. “Your vote affirms that you believe Nigeria’s future can be better than what it is today,” he said in his statement. “You voted for change, and now change has come.” Buhari campaigned as a born-again democrat to allay fears about his strict military regime. He stressed that Nigeria’s security needs to be the next government’s focus. His campaign was also fiercely anti-corruption. He ran under the slogan of “new broom,” and his supporters were often pictured holding brooms in the lead-up to the vote. Despite years of democracy, analysts say, corruption has hindered Nigeria from building a stable economy. One of Buhari’s biggest challenges will be Boko Haram, which has been terrorizing Nigeria as it tries to institute a strict version of Sharia law in the country. In the past few years, the terror group has bombed churches and mosques, killed hundreds of people and kidnapped more than 200 teenage girls from a boarding school. Even the presidential vote had to be postponed because of the radical militants. The election was originally scheduled for February 14, but was delayed six weeks because the military needed more time to secure areas controlled by Boko Haram. Related video Expert: There is a 'thirst for change' in Nigeria Yet the violence persisted. On Saturday, residents in the northeastern state of Gombe said at least 11 people were killed in attacks at polling stations, apparently by Boko Haram extremists. Jonathan had been criticized for not doing enough to combat Boko Haram. Before the election, African affairs analyst Ayo Johnson said the vote would come down to who could make Nigeria feel safe. “Many Nigerians will not forget (Buhari) was a military leader during a dictatorship,” Johnson said. “Or maybe they will feel that they need a military leader to address fundamental problems such as terrorism.” Boko Haram isn’t the only obstacle facing the new president. The economy is another major issue. Nigeria overtook South Africa last year as the region’s largest economy. Nigeria is one of Africa’s largest oil producers and is a major supplier of crude oil to the United States. It also hosts many international oil companies and workers. But many complain that the country’s vast wealth from oil exports doesn’t trickle down to the average citizen. As many as 70% of Nigerians live below the poverty line, surviving on less than a dollar a day. Christian Purefoy reported from Lagos; Holly Yan reported and wrote from Atlanta. CNN’s Stephanie Busari, Faith Karimi and Susannah Cullinane contributed to this report.


The London Design Festival is an annual explosion of design creativity that descends upon London for just over a week, presenting an array of products and projects for all to see. In its 15 years, the festival has grown to include trade fairs, exhibitions, installations, talks and tours right across the capital, and has become a firm favorite on the global design calendar. Camille Walala’s “Villa Walala” structure next to Liverpool Street station was a riot of color and pattern. A firm believer in the power of play and creating experiences that make people smile, the designer encouraged visitors (especially workers in the surrounding office blocks) to try out with her inflatable playground. At Somerset House, new products, like Benjamin Hubert’s tech accessories, were displayed to striking effect. In contrast with the grand courtyard, plastic waste was being recycled into entirely new products in an effort to make our trash into a valuable commodity. In King’s Cross, visitors to the public Granary Square were met by “Gateways,” four cheerful, tiled arches designed by Adam Nathaniel Furman. This structure provided an entrance to Designjunction and its show of new furniture, lighting and accessories. But not everything at LDF was huge and showy. Italian designer Matteo Cibic’s show, held in a garage in a small South Kensington mews, featured new and slightly creepy ceramic and glass creatures, proving that impact comes in many shapes and sizes. Watch the video above to see all my highlights from the festival.


Trump traveled to Wisconsin Tuesday He signed an executive order there “America First, you better believe it. It’s time. It’s time, right?” Nearing the 100-day mark of his presidency, President Donald Trump posed this question to a roomful of manufacturing employees and technical students here Tuesday as he promoted a “Buy American, Hire American” executive order and flashed the populist persona that helped make him the first Republican to win this state in three decades. He pilloried the World Trade Organization as “another one of our disasters,” tied the closure of thousands of factories in recent decades to China and slammed NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, as a “complete and total disaster.” “Big things will be happening on trade with other countries in the coming months. And I mean very big,” Trump promised. Related article Trump just gave a speech underscoring how rough his first 3 months have been Trump’s words struck at the core of the hand-wringing that has taken hold of some in his political base in recent weeks who have watched warily as Trump has softened some of his positions on China and as headlines shared insider accounts of the waning influence of Trump’s chief strategist and guardian of his populist campaign promises, Steve Bannon, while the sway of moderate New Yorkers swelled. Trump’s return Tuesday to his promises of re-imagining US trade policies and reviving American manufacturing signaled how the President hopes to cap off the first 100 days of his presidency, mindful that voters are watching. The executive order he signed Tuesday is just the first of four trade-focused orders Trump is expected to sign this week, a senior administration official said. “Finishing like we started,” the official said, referring to the flurry of activity via executive actions that defined the President’s first weeks in office. But the sudden and conspicuous return to the populist roots of his campaign in his speech also signaled a recognition that his actions in office thus far have come up short of his goal of radically revamping the US trade policies and heralding a manufacturing revolution. And the executive order – which calls for stricter enforcement and launches a review of “Buy American” statutes and the doling out of skilled worker visas – will barely dent his attempts to match his bold campaign rhetoric with policy action. So far, his administration has signaled it intends to push for only modest reforms to NAFTA, rather than the bold overhaul Trump championed on the campaign trail. While he held China responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of US factory jobs since it joined the World Trade Organization, Trump has thus far shown no signs he plans to follow through with the massive tariffs he threatened to impose on the Asian powerhouse during the campaign and this month declined to label China a currency manipulator. “Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem?” Trump tweeted on Sunday. Trump has taken action on other fronts, clinching a series of accomplishments that tick off campaign promises on trade and other areas. On trade, he withdrew the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership as promised in his first week in office, put NAFTA partners on notice by initiating a review of the accord and signed a series of executive orders aimed at strengthening US trade laws. And he launched a 100-day action plan with the Chinese President to make changes to the US-China trading relationship. But beyond the international juggling Trump pointed to, the President has also faced a challenging domestic political landscape. His domestic agenda has effectively been stalled since his attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare stumbled on the starting block, dealing a blow to Trump’s political capital amid already fierce opposition from congressional Democrats. Amid an off-script tangent on his legislative challenges, Trump shed light on the frustrations he has faced, revealing a keen awareness of the 100-day marker and the extent to which he and his brash campaign rhetoric have been boxed in by the realities of the presidency. He is becoming saddled with a growing share of responsibility for the state of affairs in the country – numbers of manufacturing jobs, trade deficit totals and all. He pressed the roomful of Wisconsinites to help him move forward on his agenda the best way he knew how – inspiring supporters by sticking to his populist roots and enlisting them into the effort. “Press every one of your congressmen, press everybody,” he said.


"I happen to be a black woman, but I'm part of the press," Ryan said Spicer told Ryan to "stop shaking your head" at a White House briefing A veteran White House correspondent who engaged in a tense exchange with White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Wednesday the media is “under attack” from the Trump administration. “We are – the press is – under attack. We are under attack by this administration,” American Urban Radio Networks correspondent April Ryan said on CNN’s “New Day.” “It’s about discrediting credible media.” Spicer told Ryan at Tuesday’s briefing to “stop shaking your head” and accused her of being “hell-bent on trying to make sure that whatever image you want to tell about this White House stays,” after she asked him about the investigation into contacts between Trump campaign associates and Russian officials. Ryan, one of the few black female journalists in the press briefing room, declined to say if she thought Spicer treated women journalists differently but did highlight another recent incident involving Spicer and another female journalist. “I happen to be a black woman, but I’m part of the press,” she said. “But this is part of a series of two women this week who have been in the news over something with the press secretary.” “I just see from the weekend that reporter from Politico who he called an idiot and then this situation, it’s showing a pattern,” Ryan added. Ryan was referring to a Saturday tweet from Politico’s Tara Palmeri that said President Donald Trump is considering removing White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus. Spicer denied her report. “She is an idiot with no real sources,” Spicer told Breitbart News in an email. Spicer and Ryan had a much more positive exchange at Wednesday’s briefing when Ryan was the first journalist the press secretary called on. The two exchanged pleasantries while smiling and laughing as others in the room laughed. Ryan previously had a tense exchange in February with Trump over his desire to meet with black lawmakers. When questioned on whether he planned to meet with the Congressional Black Caucus, a group of African-American lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Trump asked Ryan if she could organize it herself. “No,” Ryan replied, adding that she was “just a reporter.”


Developers discovered the vessel in September of 2012 Taken four years to ID because of murky conditions Developers were surveying more than 3,700 square miles, when they discovered wreck A century-old wartime vessel has been identified off the coast of England. Wind farm developers were scanning the seabed off the coast of Norfolk and Suffolk when their sonar detected an unusually large object 55 miles from shore. From the outlines on the sonar scans, the object appeared to be a submarine, Paul Ferguson, a spokesperson for the energy company ScottishPowers Renewables, told CNN. Developers were surveying a part of the Southern North Sea that spanned more than 3,700 square miles, four-times the size of Greater London, their scans revealed 60 wrecks and indicated a wide variety of vessels. But this wreck was different, Teri Nicklin of ScottishPowers Renewables said. “It was a really special day. We were looking for wrecks, but what we found was a huge wreck that didn’t appear in any of the charts,” Nicklin said. The submarine was an uncharted mystery. Developers discovered the vessel in September of 2012. The energy company notified the authorities and reached out to the Royal Netherlands Navy, which was searching for a Dutch military submarine that went missing in action in June 1940, after the crew was patrolling the waters between Denmark and Norway. It’s taken about four years to identify the submarine’s origin because murky water conditions in the East Anglia region made it impossible to see the vessel. In recent months, Dutch Navy divers were able to uncover the submarine’s identity. It is named U-31, a German U-boat from World World I. The U-boat was 189 feet long, 13 feet wide and 15 feet high. The vessel appeared to have damage on the bow and stern, and it may be possible the vessel was originally longer, according to a press release by ScottishPower Renewables. Otherwise, the submarine looked relatively intact, Nicklin said. It is believed that U-31 was destroyed by a mine off England’s coast and sank with its entire crew of four officers, 31 men, Mark Dunkley, marine archaeologist at Historic England said. The English waters will be the U-boat’s final resting place, but authorities will try to contact German families who may have had relatives on the vessel, Nicklin said. One hundred years ago, there were people in Germany whose family and friends were lost on the submarine, Nicklin said.  “It’s just lovely to think that something we’re doing now for future generations has been able to end the story for a lot of people in Germany.” Developers plan to start construction of the wind farm in 2017, but will stay clear of wartime relics that are resting on the ocean’s floor.


A majority (55%) say Trump has attempted to interfere with the Russia investigation, up from 51% in January About half  (47%) approve of special counsel Robert Mueller's handling of the investigation About 6 in 10 Americans say Donald Trump is not taking seriously enough the investigation into Russian efforts to influence the US presidential election, and about the same share lack confidence the president is doing enough to prevent foreign interference in future elections, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. Almost three-quarters (72%) say they are concerned about foreign government interference in US elections generally, including 90% of Democrats, 68% of independents and 53% of Republicans, and 60% say they are not confident the president is doing enough to prevent foreign countries from influencing future American elections. Related: Read full poll results The poll followed a stretch in which special counsel Robert Mueller indicted 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities for allegedly meddling in the 2016 presidential election, including spreading false information on social media, organizing political events, and communicating with “unwitting” people tied to the Trump campaign and others in order to coordinate political activities. Trump responded to the indictments with a string of tweets emphasizing that his campaign did not collude with Russian operatives, and suggesting that Russia had created discord by prompting an investigation after the election was over, writing, “they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.” Later, while the poll was fielding, US officials said the administration had warned Russian President Vladimir Putin and other top officials in the Russian government against meddling in the 2018 election. Overall, 60% said they were not too or not at all confident in the President’s efforts to keep foreign countries from influencing future US elections; 37% were very or somewhat confident. Beyond the president’s efforts, few in the poll expressed confidence that Congress (37% confident) or tech companies such as Google, Facebook and Twitter (32% confident) are doing enough to prevent future meddling. Trump’s handling of the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election continues to garner negative reviews: Just 30% approve of his handling of it in the new poll, the lowest level in CNN polling by one point. And most, 55%, now say they think the President has attempted to interfere in the investigation, up from 51% saying so in January. Approval ratings for Robert Mueller’s handling of the investigation have held steady, with 47% saying they approve of his work and 33% disapproving. About one in five have no opinion on Mueller’s performance. Overall, 61% say the Russia investigation is a serious matter that should be fully investigated, while 34% say it’s mainly an effort to discredit Trump’s presidency. As has been the case for some time, there’s a broad partisan gap on this question, with 89% of Democrats calling it a serious matter and 71% of Republicans saying it’s mainly an effort to discredit Trump. Partisan gaps are quite wide on concern about several aspects of Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 elections. Overall, 66% are concerned about Russian operatives’ contacts with people involved in Trump’s campaign, that includes 91% of Democrats and 63% of independents but just 36% of Republicans. Likewise, Democrats and independents express greater concern than Republicans on Russian-backed campaigns to spread disinformation to US voters (88% of Democrats, 69% of independents and 47% of Republicans) and to steal and release politically meaningful information (88% of Democrats, 67% of independents and 55% of Republicans). The gap in concern is narrower, however, on the political motivations behind investigations into that Russian interference, as majorities across party lines express concern about those motivations: 78% of Democrats, 69% of independents and 56% of Republicans concerned about that. Trump’s approval rating for handling national security more generally is also low: 40% approve, 50% disapprove. The CNN Poll was conducted by SSRS February 20-23 among a random national sample of 1,016 adults reached on landlines or cellphones by a live interviewer. Results for the full sample have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points, it is larger for subgroups.


President Donald Trump bemoaned a decision not to investigate Hillary Clinton after the 2016 presidential election, decrying a “rigged system” that still doesn’t have the “right people” in place to fix it, during a freewheeling speech to Republican donors in Florida on Saturday. In the closed-door remarks, a recording of which was obtained by CNN, Trump also praised China’s President Xi Jinping for recently consolidating power and extending his potential tenure, musing he wouldn’t mind making such a maneuver himself. “He’s now president for life. President for life. No, he’s great,” Trump said. “And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll have to give that a shot some day.” The remarks, delivered inside the ballroom at his Mar-a-Lago estate during a lunch and fundraiser, were upbeat, lengthy, and peppered with jokes and laughter. But Trump’s words reflected his deeply felt resentment that his actions during the 2016 campaign remain under scrutiny while those of his former rival, Hillary Clinton, do not. “I’m telling you, it’s a rigged system folks,” Trump said. “I’ve been saying that for a long time. It’s a rigged system. And we don’t have the right people in there yet. We have a lot of great people, but certain things, we don’t have the right people.” Trump has repeatedly said that his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, should launch investigations into Clinton, and has continued to lambast Sessions on Twitter for not taking what he views as appropriate steps to probe Clinton’s actions involving her private email server. The stewing anger with Sessions has soured Trump’s mood over the past week, including on Wednesday evening, when he fumed inside the White House over his attorney general’s decision to release a statement defending himself after Trump chastised his approach to an investigation into alleged surveillance abuses as “DISGRACEFUL” on Twitter. The episode was just one irritant in a long series of upsetting moments for Trump this week. Morale at the White House has dropped to new lows, and Trump himself has seethed at the negative headlines. On Saturday, among donors gathered in the grand ballroom named for himself at Mar-a-Lago, Trump pondered the happiness of his former rival, wondering aloud whether she was enjoying life after the campaign. “Is Hillary a happy person? Do you think she’s happy?” he said. “When she goes home at night, does she say, ‘What a great life?’ I don’t think so. You never know. I hope she’s happy.” Elsewhere in his remarks, Trump went after former President George W. Bush for his decision to invade Iraq after faulty intelligence indicated the country had weapons of mass destruction. “Here we are, like the dummies of the world, because we had bad politicians running our country for a long time,” he said. Trump called the Iraq invasion “the single worst decision ever made” and said it amounted to “throwing a big fat brick into a hornet’s nest.” “That was Bush. Another real genius. That was Bush,” Trump said sarcastically. “That turned out to be wonderful intelligence. You know? Great intelligence agency there.” Trump has previously cited the WMD failure to go after US intelligence agencies, bringing up the error as a reason to doubt the same agencies conclusions’ that Russia meddled in the 2016 election.