DOJ reaches agreement in principle to settle lawsuit brought by family of Ashli Babbitt
Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Justice has reached an agreement in principle to settle a lawsuit brought by the family of Ashli Babbitt, a pro-Trump rioter who was shot by a U.S. Capitol Police officer during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
The details of the proposed settlement were not made clear during a Friday hearing before federal Judge Ana Reyes, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Babbitt’s family members sued the government in January 2024 seeking $30 million for what they allege was her wrongful shooting death by Capitol Police Officer Michael Byrd.
Byrd was cleared of any wrongdoing following an internal investigation into the actions leading up to his shooting of Babbitt as she tried to climb through a broken window that led to the House Speaker’s Lobby, where several lawmakers and their staff were sheltering from rioters.
Babbitt’s attorneys disclosed the agreement in principle was reached during the hearing, which was convened on an emergency basis after one of Babbitt’s prior attorneys sought a preliminary injunction on Friday to ensure he received payment for his work on the case if a settlement was formally announced.
Robert Sticht, the lawyer for Babbitt’s family, said he expected the family to sign the formal settlement agreement within the next three weeks.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed his solidarity with Babbitt’s family and called for “justice” for what he has said was her “murder” at Byrd’s hands — in line with his broader vocal support for the pro-Trump rioters who attacked the Capitol to overturn his 2020 election loss.
In March, Trump said in an interview with Newsmax he wasn’t aware of the lawsuit brought by Babbitt’s family but promised he would “look into” it.
“I’m a big fan of Ashli Babbitt, OK, and Ashli Babbitt was a really good person who was a big MAGA fan, Trump fan, and she was innocently standing there — they even say trying to sort of hold back the crowd,” Trump said. “And a man did something unthinkable to her when he shot her, and I think it’s a disgrace. I’m going to look into that. I did not know that.”
(WASHINGTON) — After a devastating missile attack on the Ukrainian city of Sumy appeared to have killed dozens of civilians gathered for Palm Sunday celebrations, President Donald Trump downplayed the incident as a “mistake” — and lashed out with recriminations.
He continued to insist that the broader war was started by Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and that President Joe Biden failed to stop it — rather than blaming Russian President for causing the conflict.
“The mistake was letting the war happen,” Trump said, when asked to clarify his initial comments at the White House on Monday.
“I’m not saying anybody’s an angel, but I will tell you, I went four years, and it wasn’t even a question,” he continued, asserting again that Putin wouldn’t have dared invade Ukraine when he was in power.
“It was the apple of his eye, but there was no way that he would have done it,” Trump said of Putin.
But as the months of Trump’s second term continue to pass, the president’s repeated claims that he has significant sway over Putin seem to be falling flat. His administration has so far failed to draw any meaningful concessions from the Kremlin as part of its efforts to end the war.
Trump, who has been faulted for failing to put any real pressure on Russia as he angles for a peace deal, again attacked Zelenskyy more harshly than Putin.
“You don’t start a war with someone 20 times your size and then hope people give you some missiles,” he said of the Ukrainian leader.
“You have millions of people dead, millions of people dead because of three people,” Trump went on. “Let’s say Putin number one. But let’s say Biden, who had no idea what the hell he was doing, number two, and Zelensky. And all I can do is try and stop it.”
Zelenskyy responded to the comments during a Monday evening address, saying “Russian state propagandists are preparing their audience for the idea that diplomacy will not bring any results.”
“If there is not strong enough pressure on Russia, they will keep doing what they are used to — they will keep waging war,” he said.
While Trump did not seize on the Sumy attack as an opening to ramp up diplomatic pressure on Russia, other corners of his administration and some of his political allies were more outspoken in the aftermath.
Retired Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump’s Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine, said the strike “crosses any line of decency.”
“There are scores of civilian dead and wounded. As a former military leader, I understand targeting and this is wrong,” he said in a post on X.
In his own social media post, South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham called the attack “barbaric” and said it “seems to be Putin’s answer to efforts to achieve a ceasefire and peace.”
Graham also referenced proposed legislation aimed at imposing more economic penalties against Russia, saying it would be necessary “unless there is dramatic change soon.”
The attack on Sumy comes just ten days after a Russian strike on the Ukrainian city Kryvyi Rih killed 20 people, including nine children.
It also comes at an inauspicious time for the Trump administration, which deployed its top negotiator, U.S. Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff, to hold his third round of face-to-face talks with Putin approximately 48 hours before the strike.
Video emerged of a smiling Witkoff holding his hand over his heart as he greeted Putin. The Kremlin praised the meeting as “extremely useful,” but has so far shown little interest in moving toward a broader settlement in Ukraine.
Last month, the White House announced that both Ukraine and Russia agreed to temporary limited ceasefires covering strikes on energy infrastructure and naval targets in the Black Sea.
Kyiv has accused Moscow of violating the energy deal several times however, and Russia has balked at fully committing to the Black Sea deal — saying the U.S. and its allies must meet a long list of conditions before it would.
While the Kremlin’s recent attacks on civilians in Ukraine might not push Trump to turn up the heat on Russia, there are signs that his frustration over the slow clip of the diplomatic process underway might be building.
“Russia has to get moving,” Trump said in a post to his Truth Social site on Friday ahead of Witkoff and Putin’s meeting.
At the White House on Tuesday, press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked whether Russia had agreed anything with Witkoff.
“What I can tell you is that they were — a productive conversation was had,” she said. “He believes that Russia wants to end this war, and the president believes that as well. There is incentive for Russia to end this war. And perhaps that could be economic partnerships with the United States. But we need to see a ceasefire first. And the president and the presidential envoy, Witkoff, made that very clear to the Russians.”
National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth/ Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration is under scrutiny after The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg said he was inadvertently added to a Signal group chat that included top national security officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in which the officials discussed plans for a U.S. attack on Houthis in Yemen.
Goldberg revealed the mishap in a piece for the magazine on Monday and told ABC News that he was apparently added to the chat by National Security Adviser Mike Waltz.
Goldberg provided two screenshots in the magazine piece and did not provide details or quotes, only a description of the operational part of the Signal message chain.
Both the Trump administration and top officials involved have repeatedly denied that war plans or classified information were discussed, as Goldberg reported.
Below is a timeline spanning from the creation of the group chat to what has happened since.
March 11
In an interview with “ABC News Live” Monday evening, Goldberg told Linsey Davis he received a message request on the Signal app from White House national security adviser Mike Waltz, or someone “who’s purporting to be Mike Waltz” on March 11.
He said the invitation was “not an unusual thing in Washington.”
“I’m a journalist, I’ve met him in the past, so I accept it,” he told ABC News.
Goldberg said he accepted the request, with nothing occurring until several days later, when he was added to a “group of seemingly very high national security officials of the United States” including Vice President JD Vance, with Waltz apparently creating this chat.
“Mike Waltz puts this group together and says it’s a planning group for essentially upcoming action in Yemen,” Goldberg said.
Goldberg told ABC News he initially thought it was a hoax since it would be “completely absurd to me that the national security leadership of the United States would be meeting on a messaging app to discuss forthcoming military action, and that then they would also invite the editor of The Atlantic magazine to that conversation.”
March 14
Goldberg told ABC News a “long conversation” occurred between the group chat members on March 14, discussing “whether or not they should or shouldn’t take action in Yemen.”
The messages went back and forth with “a lot of resentment directed at European allies of the United States, which obviously enhanced the credibility of this chain,” Goldberg said.
He told ABC News at this point the members of the chat sounded like people he knew within the administration, but still was not sure whether or not it was a hoax.
March 15
Goldberg told ABC News he continued to track the incoming messages from the group chat, to see “who was trying to entrap me or trick me.” Then on March 15, he said it became “overwhelmingly clear” it was a legitimate group chat, he told ABC News.
At 11:44 a.m., he said he received a text in the chain from someone claiming to be Hegseth, or “somebody identified as Pete,” providing what Goldberg characterized as a war plan. The message included a “sequencing of events related to an upcoming attack on Yemen” and promised results by 1:45 p.m. Eastern time.
Goldberg told ABC News he was in his car and waiting with his phone to “see if this was a real thing.”
“Sure enough, around 1:50 [p.m.] Eastern time, I see that Yemen is under attack,” he said.
When the attacks seemed to be “going well,” Goldberg told ABC News that members of the chat began sending congratulatory messages along with fist, fire and American flag emojis.
“That was the day I realized this is possibly unbelievably the leaders of the United States discussing this on my messaging app,” Goldberg told ABC News. “My reaction was, I think I’ve discovered a massive security breach in the United States national security system.”
Goldberg told ABC News he removed himself from the group chat once the operation was completed.
“I watched this Yemen operation go from beginning to apparent end, and that was enough for me to learn that there’s something wrong in the system here that would allow this information to come so dangerously close to the open wild,” Goldberg said.
March 16
Waltz appeared on ABC’s “This Week” the day after the strikes on Yemen and said the U.S. airstrikes “took out” multiple leaders of the Iranian-backed Houthis, which he said differed from the Biden administration’s launches against the group.
“These were not kind of pinprick, back and forth — what ultimately proved to be feckless attacks,” Waltz said. “This was an overwhelming response that actually targeted Houthi leaders and took them out. And the difference here is, one, going after the Houthi leadership, and two, holding Iran responsible.”
March 24
Goldberg published a story in The Atlantic revealing the mishap, in a piece titled “The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans.”
Shortly after the story’s publication on Monday afternoon, White House National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes shared with ABC News the statement he provided to The Atlantic confirming the authenticity of the Signal group chat.
“At this time, the message thread that was reported appears to be authentic, and we are reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain. The thread is a demonstration of the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to our servicemembers or our national security,” Hughes said in a statement.
Speaking to reporters Monday, Hegseth denied he sent war plans in the chat.
“I’ve heard how it was characterized. Nobody was texting war plans, and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth told reporters in Honolulu while on a layover on his trip to Asia.
Hegseth called Goldberg a “deceitful and highly discredited, so-called journalist who’s made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again.”
“This is the guy that pedals in garbage. This is what he does,” Hegseth said about Goldberg.
During an event at the White House on Monday, President Donald Trump was asked about Goldberg’s article. “I don’t know anything about it. I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic,” he said.
Top Democrats including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries voiced outrage at the administration after this mishap.
“It is yet another unprecedented example that our nation is increasingly more dangerous because of the elevation of reckless and mediocre individuals, including the Secretary of Defense,” Jeffries said in a statement on Monday.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who faced scrutiny over her alleged use of a private email server while at the State Department, shared her reaction to the Signal group chat on X: “You have got to be kidding me.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also criticized this apparent breach of military intelligence, urging Senate Republicans to work with Democrats in a “full investigation” to look into how this incident occurred.
“If you were up in arms over unsecure emails years ago, you should certainly be outraged by this amateurish behavior,” Schumer said on the Senate floor, referencing the scandal over Clinton’s emails.
March 25
On Tuesday morning, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Goldberg is “well-known for his sensationalist spin” and emphasized that “no ‘war plans’ were discussed.”
“As the National Security Council stated, the White House is looking into how Goldberg’s number was inadvertently added to the thread. Thanks to the strong and decisive leadership of President Trump, and everyone in the group, the Houthi strikes were successful and effective. Terrorists were killed and that’s what matters most to President Trump,” Leavitt shared on X.
Trump told NBC News he remains confident in Waltz even after the use of an unsecured group chat.
“Michael Waltz has learned a lesson, and he’s a good man,” Trump told NBC correspondent Garrett Haake.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe were grilled by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner on Tuesday regarding the mishap. Both officials said while testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence there was no classified information on the chain.
Ratcliffe said he believed the “national security adviser intended this to be as it should have been, a mechanism for coordinating between senior level officials, but not a substitute for using high side or classified communications for anything that would be classified.”
Speaker Mike Johnson continued to downplay the mishap but admitted the breach was a “serious” mistake on Tuesday.
“Look, they have acknowledged that there is an error, and they are correcting it. And I would’ve asked the same thing of the Biden administration,” Johnson said during a news conference Tuesday morning.
During a White House meeting with ambassadors on Tuesday afternoon, Trump said this incident is “just something that can happen” and that there was “no classified information” in the group chat.
He added that Signal is “not a perfect technology.”
“Sometimes somebody can get onto those things,” Trump said. “That’s one of the prices you pay when you’re not sitting in the Situation Room with no phones on, which is always the best, frankly.”
Waltz said the White House’s tech and legal teams are looking into the mishap.
“No one in your national security team would ever put anyone in danger,” Waltz said.
He also claimed to have never met Goldberg.
“We are looking into him, reviewing how the heck he got into this room,” Waltz said.
A spokesperson for The Atlantic released a statement on Tuesday night following the comments from Trump and his aides.
“Attempts to disparage and discredit The Atlantic, our editor and our reporting follow an obvious playbook by elected officials and other in power who are hostile to journalists and the First Amendment rights of all Americans,” the magazine said.
The statement went on to say that “any responsible national security expert would consider the information contained in this Signal chat to be of the greatest sensitivity, and would agree that this information should never be shared on non-government messaging apps.”
March 26
Schumer and other top Senate Democrats on national security committees wrote a letter to Trump seeking more information about the mishap, requesting a “complete and unredacted” transcript of the Signal group chat for the appropriate committees to review in a secure setting.
“We write to you with extreme alarm about the astonishingly poor judgment shown by your Cabinet and national security advisors,” the Senators wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by ABC News. “You have long advocated for accountability and transparency in the government, particularly as it relates to the handling of classified information, national security and the safety of American servicemembers. As such, it is imperative that you address this breach with the seriousness and diligence that it demands.”
The Atlantic on Wednesday published a new article detailing purported information about recent American strikes in Yemen it says was accidentally shared in the Signal group chat.
Shortly after the article was published, Leavitt said in a post on X “these were NOT ‘war plans.'”
“This entire story was another hoax written by a Trump-hater who is well-known for his sensationalist spin,” Leavitt said.
ABC News’ Fritz Farrow, Anne Flaherty, Luis Martinez, Isabella Murray, Allison Pecorin, Lauren Peller, Michelle Stoddart, Selina Wang and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report.
(WASHINGTON) — Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s special envoy and lead negotiator tasked with ending the war in Ukraine, has attracted criticism in Europe and Ukraine after an interview where he appeared to back a number of well-known Kremlin talking points on the conflict.
The comments, in which Witkoff seemed to accept the results of sham referenda Russia has previously held in Ukraine to justify its seizure of land there — including Crimea, will likely feed fears among European allies that the Trump administration is leaning too far toward the Kremlin’s vision.
In the interview for “The Tucker Carlson Show,” posted online on Friday, Witkoff talked about his efforts to negotiate with President Vladimir Putin, speaking warmly of the Russian leader. Witkoff said he believed the heart of the conflict was Russia’s desire to control four regions of Ukraine it partially occupied and has claimed annexed since 2022: Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.
Talking about Putin’s claims to the regions in eastern and southern Ukraine, Witkoff suggested Russia had a right to them because they were majority Russian-speaking and repeated a false Kremlin claim that fair referenda there showed residents wanted to be absorbed by Russia.
“They are Russian-speaking, and there have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule,” Witkoff told Carlson.
However, Witkoff did not acknowledge that the supposed referenda held in those territories — whether in 2014 in the case of Crimea or 2022 in the other regions — were widely dismissed by Western powers, human rights organizations and international bodies as fraudulent and illegitimate.
Russia conducted referenda in the areas it occupied in Ukraine’s Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions in the fall of 2022, several months after seizing them with its full-scale invasion launched in February that year. Putin used the referenda to justify Russia’s subsequent annexation of the regions. Russia also held a similar referendum in Crimea in 2014 following its occupation of the Ukrainian peninsula.
The referenda were staged after Russia’s invasion had already forced hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians to flee, and while Russian security forces were abducting and torturing anyone expressing opposition to its takeover. In some areas, Russian soldiers were filmed accompanying vote collectors as they went from house to house.
No legitimate independent international observers monitored the referenda and they were widely dismissed as shams, including by the United States. The United Nations General Assembly rejected the referenda as illegal and violating the U.N. Charter.
In September 2022, then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. “does not, and will never, recognize any of the Kremlin’s claims to sovereignty over parts of Ukraine that it’s seized by force and now purports to incorporate into Russia.”
Witkoff made the remarks on the Russian referenda a day before a new round of talks between the U.S. and Russia in Saudi Arabia aimed at trying to make progress toward ending the war. His portrayal of the referenda as legitimate triggered some fierce criticism in Europe.
“Witkoff’s repeating of Kremlin lies about ‘russian-speakers’ [sic] wanting to ‘join Russia’ is truly chilling,” Lithuania’s former foreign minister, Gabrielius Landsbergis, wrote on X. “Hearing Americans talk like this should be an electric shock for Europe, not a wakeup call.”
Some Ukrainian members of parliament also condemned Witkoff’s comments.
Oleksandr Merezhko, head of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty that the statements were “shocking.”
“I don’t understand what this is about — ignorance, naivety, unprofessionalism?” said Merezhko, who suggested Witkoff should be removed from his negotiating role. “Because we are talking about a representative of the president, who should professionally understand this issue and know some basic things. And he doesn’t know this. He is relaying Russian propaganda.”
In the interview with Carlson, Witkoff appeared to struggle to remember the names of the Ukrainian regions. “Donbas, Crimea. You know the names,” he told the conservative media personality, who prompted him to say “Lugansk” — the Russian transliteration for Luhansk. “Lugansk, and there’s two others,” Witkoff replied.
Although Putin declared he had annexed the four regions, his troops still do not fully control most of the area. Much of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, including their regional capitals, remain unoccupied.
A wealthy real estate developer, Witkoff has emerged as the lead negotiator for Trump’s effort to end the war, twice now traveling to Moscow, where he has said he spent several hours talking with Putin.
In his interview on Carlson, Witkoff was effusive in his praise for Putin, calling him a “very smart guy” and noting Putin told him he had prayed for Trump after the assassination attempt against him during last year’s presidential campaign. Witkoff added that Putin had given him a portrait of Trump which he says the Russian leader had commissioned from a famous Russian artist.
“This is the kind of connection that we’ve been able to reestablish through a simple word called communication, which many people would say I shouldn’t have had because Putin is a bad guy. I don’t regard Putin as a bad guy,” Witkoff said.
Witkoff also told Carlson he believed Russia “does not need to absorb Ukraine,” saying, “They’ve gotten what they want. So why do they need more?” He also said he “100%” believes Russia does not want to invade Europe, saying he took Putin “at his word” on that.
Witkoff also repeated an unsupported claim made by Putin that Russian forces have surrounded a significant number of Ukrainian troops in Russia’s Kursk region. Although Ukraine was forced to retreat from Kursk earlier this month, no evidence has emerged to suggest many Ukrainian soldiers are encircled, and both independent researchers and Ukrainian officials have said it is false.
“Witkoff uncritically amplified a number of Russian demands, claims and justifications,” the Washington D.C.-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) wrote.
Witkoff’s comments could feed deep unease in Europe that the Trump administration, which is moving fast to restore relations with Russia, is more aligned with the Kremlin than NATO allies over the war in Ukraine. European officials and observers have also warned the administration, in its hurry to reach a deal, is vulnerable to manipulation by Putin.
The White House has argued its reengagement with Russia brings peace closer, but critics point out that the Kremlin has, so far, yet to make any significant concessions. Trump has claimed he isn’t “aligned” with Putin. “I’m not aligned with Putin. I’m not aligned with anybody. I’m aligned with the United States of America, and for the good of the world,” Trump said last month.
Vice President JD Vance on Monday defended Witkoff, writing on X he was doing an “incredible job.”
