DOJ charges 31, including alleged Tren de Aragua members, in ATM malware case
Alleged scammers charged with planting a malware in ATM’s around the country. (DOJ)
(WASHINGTON) — The Justice Department announced Monday it has charged 31 more individuals in a scheme that allegedly stole millions from ATMs in the United States.
Many of those charged are allegedly members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, according to the Justice Department. More than 50 people have been charged in the case so far.
Court documents filed in Nebraska allege that members of the group scammed ATMs by deploying a malware known as Ploutus. Members of the conspiracy allegedly recruited members of Tren de Arauga to deploy the malware in ATMs around the country.
Groups would first see if there was a law enforcement response when an ATM was tampered with and then deploy the malware through a thumb drive in a scheme that federal authorities call “jackpotting,” according to the Justice Department.
The malware would issue unauthorized commands to the system and force withdrawals of cash, according to the Justice Department.
“A large ring of criminal aliens allegedly engaged in a nationwide conspiracy to enrich themselves and the TdA terrorist organization by ripping off American citizens. After committing bank robbery, fraud, and other serious crimes, they will be vigorously prosecuted and held accountable for their crimes,” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said. “The Justice Department’s Joint Task Force Vulcan will not stop until it completely dismantles and destroys TdA and other foreign terrorists that import chaos to America.”
The case was made by the Homeland Security Task Force in coordination with state and local authorities around the country.
US President Donald Trump arrives for a medal of honor ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, March 2, 2026. President Trump is awarding the Medal of Honor to three US Army soldiers. (Photographer: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday denied that Israel forced his hand into attacking Iran, and in another new explanation, said he ordered the U.S. strike on Iran because he concluded Tehran was going to attack the U.S. first after negotiations stalled.
Trump also acknowledged most of the individuals the U.S. favored to next lead in Tehran have been killed, including some in a new strike on Tuesday.
Hosting German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the Oval Office, Trump for the first time took questions in public on the war, now in its fourth day and expanding throughout the Middle East.
Amid scrutiny over why the U.S. military campaign against Iran was necessary, and mixed messages from the administration, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Monday that the strikes were triggered in part because the U.S. knew Israel was going to attack Iran and Iran would retaliate.
“Did [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu pull the United States into this war?” ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott asked Trump on Tuesday.
“No. I might have forced their hand,” Trump replied. “You see, we were having negotiations with these lunatics, and it was my opinion that they were going to attack first. They were going to attack. If we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. I felt strongly about that.”
“Based on the way the negotiation was going, I think they were going to attack first. And I didn’t want that to happen. So, if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand. But Israel was ready and we were ready,” Trump continued, appearing to contradict Rubio.
Rubio also told reporters Monday that, despite his comments, Israel didn’t force Trump’s hand. House Speaker Mike Johnson, after a Gang of 8 briefing on Capitol Hill on Monday, said Israel was determined to act “with or without the U.S.”
Trump did not provide evidence for why his administration believed Iran posed an imminent threat to the U.S. Previously, American intelligence agencies had found Iran would not have had missiles capable of reaching the U.S. for another nine years, until 2035.
Trump said most of Iran’s military infrastructure, including its navy and air force, has been “knocked out.”
“We’re hitting them very hard,” Trump said, later adding: “They’re going to be in for a lot of hurt.”
On what’s next for Iran and who America would like to see take over, Trump admitted most of the individuals identified to potentially replace Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have also been killed.
“Most of the people we had in mind are dead … And now we have another group, they may be dead also based on reports,” Trump said. “So, I guess you have a third wave coming in pretty soon. We’re not going to know anybody.”
“I guess the worst case would be we do this and then somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person,” Trump said. “That could happen.”
Trump also poured cold water on the idea of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled crown prince of Iran, being an option to lead the country.
“Some people like him, and we haven’t been thinking about too much about that. It would seem to me that somebody from within maybe would be more appropriate,” Trump said. “I’ve said that he looks like a very nice person. but it would seem to me that somebody that’s there that’s currently popular if there is such a person.”
Meanwhile, the war is widening in the Middle East as Iran seeks retaliation for the U.S. and Israeli attacks. Tehran has struck nearly a dozen countries in the region, which Trump said he was “surprised” by.
“They hit countries that had nothing to do with what’s going on,” Trump said, criticizing Iran for striking civilian infrastructure like hotels.
The State Department has warned U.S. citizens to leave the region and closed several embassies. So far, six U.S. service members have died in the war and more have been wounded, according to U.S. officials.
ABC News White House Correspondent Karen Travers pressed Trump on the Americans who are currently stranded in the Middle East and why there wasn’t an evacuation plan to get them out. The president said because it “happened all very quickly.”
“I thought we were going to have a situation where we were going to be attacked. They were getting ready to attack Israel. They were getting ready to attack others,” he said.
The State Department later said it was working on securing military aircraft and charter flights for Americans who want to evacuate.
As for further impacts on Americans, Trump said oil prices could likely rise temporarily as the conflict plays out.
“People felt that it’s something that had to be done. So, if we have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe, lower than even before,” Trump said.
In the Oval Office, President Trump also notably took aim at several European allies who he said have not supported his administration’s strikes on Iran.
“This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with,” Trump said as he rebuked British Prime Minister Keir Starmer for initially not letting U.S. aircraft to use the Diego Garcia base that the U.K. controls.
Trump also threatened to cut off all trade with Spain after the country said the U.S. cannot use its joint military bases for operations against Iran.
Germany’s Merz said he would speak with Trump about the “day after” in Iran.
“We are on the same page in terms of getting this terrible regime in Tehran away,” Merz said.
Earlier Tuesday, Trump posted on social media that it is “too late” for talks with Iran and warned the U.S. has enough weapons to fight “forever.”
“Wars can be fought ‘forever,’ and very successfully, using just these supplies,” Trump wrote in a social media post, despite having said on Monday that the U.S. would “easily prevail” in the conflict and campaigning in opposition to prolonged foreign entanglements.
The president has said the war with Iran could last for several weeks.
ABC News’ Karen Travers contributed to this report.
Gavin Newsom, governor of California, during the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday, Jan. 22, 2026. (Krisztian Bocsi/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(SANTA BARBARA, Calif.) — Are there too many Democrats running for governor in California
Corrin Rankin, the chair of the California Republican Party, told ABC News on the sidelines of a Republican National Committee meeting last month, “I think the Democrats should have a few more candidates. I say, if you’re a Democrat, and you feel like running for governor? I say, jump in.”
Rankin’s taunt reflects very real anxiety among some Democrats in the state in the 2026 race to succeed term-limited Gov. Gavin Newsom.
California uses top-two primaries, in which all candidates regardless of party are on the same ballot and the top two vote-getters advance to the general election.
It’s been expected that a Democrat and Republican will advance or, given California’s blue tilt, two Democrats. But a crowded Democratic field increases the chances that two Republicans and no Democrats make it past the June primary.
“The fact that it’s a possibility at all is enough to raise eyebrows and generate concern,” Steven Maviglio, a California-based Democratic operative, told ABC News.
RL Miller, who chairs the California Democratic Party’s Environmental Caucus, told ABC News that the scenario where no Democrats advance is a bit “more of an academic exercise,” but certainly something candidates are discussing in fundraising emails.
The Democratic field was effectively frozen for months until former Vice President Kamala Harris announced she would not run. Around a dozen Democrats, including U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell, former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra, and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, are vying for the nomination.
For some candidates, it’s been tough to break through, but they say they want to stay in because they feel their experience means they’re best for the job.
Antonio Villaraigosa, a former mayor of Los Angeles and former state representative, told ABC News on the sidelines of a recent candidate forum in the city he once led that he’s pointing to himself as “a proven problem-solver … people are looking for competence, common sense and of course-correction. They want the next governor to focus on the challenges we face.”
Asked more directly how he’s trying to stand out and if he thinks the Democratic field needs to consolidate more before the primary, Villaraigosa did not say anyone should drop out but pointed again to his record.
“I’m running on a vision for California that says we can restore the California Dream… [I’m] the only one in this in this race who’s been a chief executive of a large city,” he said.
Betty Yee, California’s former state controller, told ABC News on the sidelines of that forum in Los Angeles that she is pointing to her statewide job experience and financial acumen as a way she stands out from the pack.
“I think at the end of the day voters really do want somebody who can really just get on the job and begin to do the work,” Yee said.
She also added that Democratic candidates have not had a “long runway” to run, given the focus on the Proposition 50 congressional map election last November and the uncertainty over whether Harris would run for the governorship.
“So now, with all that behind us, we now have the focus on the race… what I did during that time was just to engage and just do as much direct voter engagement as I could,” Yee said.
Among the Republican candidates, front-runners Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco are expressing confidence that either one of them will make it to one of the top two slots in the primary.
Hilton, a business owner and former Fox News host, told ABC News that’s because of what he said is backlash to high costs and other challenges in California, which has been dominated by Democrats in the state legislature and executive branch for years.
“There’s a majority, a clear majority, who think we need change, and that means a change from the Democrats,” he said.
Bianco, the Riverside County sheriff, told ABC News that he feels there is a crowded Democratic field because Newsom has not cultivated an heir apparent.
“So the Democrat Party below him is just [in] complete disarray, which is why you see a dozen Democrats — prominent Democrats — jumping in this race, wanting to be the next heir apparent, and it has to benefit Republicans,” Bianco said.
But Hilton expressed some skepticism about the benefits for the GOP of the top-two primary.
“Now on the Democrat side, you’re right, there’s a lot of candidates, but I think we’ve all seen how things work in California,” Hilton said, speculating that unions and donors will at some point coalesce around one candidate.
But Maviglio, the Democratic strategist, cautioned that donors and labor unions are holding back because of the crowded field, and labor groups in particular have multiple allies in the ring.
“It’s splintered,” Maviglio said.
Some Democrats have pointed to the state party’s upcoming convention in late February as a moment of truth — since candidates may drop out afterwards if it becomes clear they don’t have support to gain enough internal votes for the party’s endorsement.
But no candidate is expected, at the moment, to clear the threshold for an endorsement.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) walks through the Senate subway on December 09, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Heather Diehl/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Republican Sen. Rand Paul on Sunday criticized President Donald Trump’s military mission off Venezuela’s coast, calling the seizures of multiple oil tankers in the Caribbean Sea “a provocation and a prelude to war.”
“I’m not for confiscating these liners. I’m not for blowing up these boats of unarmed people that are suspected of being drug dealers. I’m not for any of this,” Paul told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl.
Paul also described the administration’s policy of handling suspected drug traffickers as “bizarre and contradictory.”
“And then why is the former president [Juan Orlando] Hernandez of Honduras, who was in jail for 45 years, why is he released?” Paul asked. “So, some narco-terrorists are really OK and other narco-terrorists we’re going to blow up. And then some of them, if they’re not designated as a terrorist, we might arrest them.”
Here are more highlights from Paul’s interview:
On Erika Kirk and Marco Rubio’s 2028 Vance endorsement Karl: Is JD Vance the heir apparent here?
Paul: I think there needs to be representatives in the Republican Party who still believe international trade is good, who still believe in free market capitalism, who still believe in low taxes. See, it used to separate conservatives and liberals that conservatives thought it was a spending problem. We didn’t want more revenue. We wanted less spending. But now all these pro terror protectionists, they love taxes, and so they tax, tax, tax, and then they brag about all the revenue coming in. That has never been a conservative position. So I’m going to continue to try to lead a conservative free market wing of the party, and we’ll see where things lead over time.
Karl: And that’s not JD Vance.
Paul: No.
On retaliatory strikes in Syria Paul: You know, it’s hard not to want to hit back when they kill some of our own. But I would like to go back, really, to the first Trump administration when he said he didn’t want the troops there. There’s like 900 troops, maybe a thousand, maybe 1,500. They’re not enough to fight a war. They’re not enough to be an effective strategic force. What they are is a target and a tripwire.
So we’ve done this retaliatory strike. Now, now, Donald Trump ought to do what Donald Trump proposed in the first administration, what Ronald Reagan did after the 1983 bomb. He left. There’s no reason for us to be in Syria. We need to leave Syria and not be a trip wire to getting back involved in another war.
On the potential for a one-year extension for ACA subsidies Paul: Look, we have health care in our country for poor people. It’s called Medicaid. All of the rest of this stuff has not worked. Obamacare has been a failure. President Obama said it would bring premiums down. Premiums gone through the roof. Every time we give more subsidies, the premiums go higher. I have a plan that says everybody in this marketplace, and it’s only about 4%, everybody in this marketplace should be able to go to Amazon or Costco or Sam’s Club and as a group, a large group — millions of people in the group — negotiate with Big Insurance to bring prices down. It’s the only proposal out there that — that has a chance of bringing prices down.
