FBI searches Washington Post reporter’s home for alleged classified information, newspaper says
The Department of Justice (DOJ) seal on the J. Edgar Hoover Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) building in Washington, DC, US, on Friday, Jan. 2, 2026. Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The FBI conducted a search of a Washington Post reporter’s home Wednesday morning in search of alleged classified information, according to the newspaper.
The reporter, Hannah Natanson, was at her home in Virginia when FBI agents knocked on her door to execute the search warrant, the newspaper reported.
Agents seized a phone, two laptop computers – one of which was issued to her by the Washington Post – and a Garmin watch, according to the paper.
Investigators told Natanson that the warrant was part of an ongoing investigation into Aurelio Perez-Lugones, according to the newspaper. Perez-Lugones, whom an FBI affidavit describes as a government contractor, was charged in federal court in Maryland last week for alleged unlawful retention of national defense information, according to the affidavit.
Natanson was informed by investigators that she is not the focus of the probe, the newspaper said, adding that she “covers the federal workforce.”
The FBI did not respond to an ABC News request for information about the search. However, FBI Director Kash Patel said in a social media post Wednesday that the FBI “executed a search warrant of an individual at the Washington Post who was found to allegedly be obtaining and reporting classified, sensitive military information from a government contractor – endangering our warfighters and compromising America’s national security. The alleged leaker was arrested this week and is in custody.”
“[A]t the request of the Department of War, the Department of Justice and FBI executed a search warrant at the home of a Washington Post journalist who was obtaining and reporting classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor. The leaker is currently behind bars,” Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X Wednesday morning.
“I am proud to work alongside Secretary Hegseth on this effort. The Trump Administration will not tolerate illegal leaks of classified information that, when reported, pose a grave risk to our Nation’s national security and the brave men and women who are serving our country,” Bondi’s statement continued.
(NEW YORK) — For the first time in more than two decades, the Pentagon has begun sending conventional ground forces to Panama to train in the jungle there, returning U.S. soldiers and Marines to a three-week course once called the “Green Hell” because of its similarities to Vietnam.
The training program at Base Aeronaval Cristóbal Colón, formerly known as Fort Sherman, is relatively small in scope but is expected to ramp up over the next year, according to one defense official.
The program began earlier this year and is not intended to prepare troops for a potential mission, including inside Venezuela, the official said.
Still, the military’s interest in jungle warfare in Latin America is noteworthy given Trump’s heightened focus there. Since taking office, Trump has vowed to “take back” the Panama Canal and repeatedly threatened to attack Venezuela because of its alleged role in transiting illegal narcotics.
“If you can train and fight in one of the most difficult and challenging locations in the world, you build a really lethal, effective force,” the defense official said of the rationale behind the new training program.
Alex Plitsas, a former Pentagon official and senior fellow at The Atlantic Council, said the new training course wouldn’t likely play a role in potential operations inside Venezuela. The training effort appears to be more about building Panama’s capacity to handle security threats in the region.
But the move signals a shift in priorities by the Trump administration, he said.
“It’s an expansion of an existing military relationship, but it’s not happening in a vacuum,” Plitsas said. “It’s happening as a broader change in policy. There’s a renewed interest in South America, where the president sees the drug flow to the United States as a national security issue with the intention of potential military action.”
Jungle training hasn’t been a priority for the military since 9/11, when the nation’s focus shifted to counterterrorism operations in the Middle East. The Defense Department in recent years has relied on a smaller Army jungle training center in Hawaii and at a Marine Corps site in Okinawa, Japan.
During the Vietnam War, however, Fort Sherman was considered a prime location where most troops could hone their jungle survival skills before shipping off to war.
Conditions at the Panamanian training site are considered among the harshest in the world, including venomous snakes and several layers of thick, towering vegetation that can make it difficult to operate communications and night-vision equipment or evacuate wounded personnel.
By 1999, the training site shuttered and the last of the U.S. military departed Panama as part of an agreement ceding U.S. control of the Panama Canal.
Shortly after taking office, though, Trump expressed renewed interest in the region, declaring the U.S. would be “reclaiming” the Panama Canal. That effort has since been couched by Pentagon officials as a renewed “partnership” with Panama to prevent Chinese influence over the canal, which the U.S. relies on heavily for shipping.
Trump also has overseen an unprecedented buildup of U.S. troops to the region, deploying 10,000 troops and, more recently, the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier. The public display of force appears to be a kind of pressure campaign aimed at forcing out Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
By August, the military had set up the “Combined Jungle Operations Training Course” with Marines and Panamanian forces training as part of a pilot program. A military spokesperson said there have since been 46 graduates of the three-week course: 18 Marines, one Army soldier and 27 personnel from Panama’s National Aeronaval Service, National Border Service and National Police.
According to the Defense official, the Army plans to ramp up training over the next year, eventually sending in platoons of some 40 soldiers at a time to train.
Steve Ganyard, a retired Marine Corps colonel and ABC contributor, said the renewed interest in Panama is likely a practical one, but it also can be used to send a message.
“From a practical perspective, it’s easier to get to Panama than Okinawa. And the jungles of Central and South America have their own unique challenges,” he said. “That said, no doubt a message is being sent to Maduro by conducting combat training in his neighborhood.”
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) speaks to reporters after former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not appear for a closed-door deposition in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill on January 14, 2026 in Washington, DC. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said on Wednesday the panel plans to move forward with contempt of Congress proceedings against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she defied a subpoena for a deposition as part of the panel’s probe into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
It comes a day after Comer, a Republican, said the committee plans to hold former President Bill Clinton in contempt of Congress as well after he refused to appear for a scheduled deposition. Comer said the committee will vote next Wednesday on holding the Clintons in contempt of Congress.
“Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton joined her husband in defying a bipartisan, lawful congressional subpoena to show up today,” Comer said, later adding, “We’re going to hold both Clintons in criminal contempt of Congress.”
Comer, asked if he’d be willing to have the Clintons appear for a public hearing, said “that’s something we can talk about.”
On Tuesday, the Clintons sent the committee a scathing four-page letter that potentially signaled a protracted fight with Congress over a move they blasted as “partisan politics.”
“Every person has to decide when they have seen or had enough and are ready to fight for this country, its principles and its people, no matter the consequences,” the Clintons wrote in the letter. “For us, now is that time.”
The Clintons blasted Comer, saying in the letter that, “There is no plausible explanation for what you are doing other than partisan politics.”
“We are confident that any reasonable person in or out of Congress will see, based on everything we release, that what you are doing is trying to punish those who you see as your enemies and to protect those you think are your friends. Continue to mislead Americans about what is truly at stake, and you will learn that Americans are better at finding the truth than you are at burying it,” they wrote.
For months, Republicans on the committee have demanded that the Clintons provide testimony to lawmakers, citing the former president’s travels on Epstein’s private aircraft in the early 2000s and the Clinton “family’s past relationship” with Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. The panel initially issued subpoenas for the Clintons on Aug. 5 to appear in October.
David Kendall, a lawyer for the Clintons, has argued that the couple has no information relevant to the committee’s investigation of the federal government’s handling of investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, and should not be required to appear for in-person testimony. Instead, Kendall said, they should be permitted to provide the limited information they have to the committee in writing.
Hillary Clinton “has no personal knowledge of Epstein or Maxwell’s criminal activities, never flew on his aircraft, never visited his island, and cannot recall ever speaking to Epstein. She has no personal knowledge of Maxwell’s activities with Epstein,” Kendall wrote. “President Clinton’s contact with Epstein ended two decades ago, and given what came to light much after, he has expressed regret for even that limited association,” an Oct. 6 letter to the committee says.
Neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary Clinton has been accused of wrongdoing and denies having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. No Epstein survivor or associate has ever made a public allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior by the former president or his wife in connection with his prior relationship with Epstein.
Comer wrote in a letter to Kendall in October that the committee is “skeptical” that the Clintons have only limited information and stated it was up to the committee, not the Clintons, to make determinations of the value of the information.
Last month, in response to the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the Justice Department released several photographs of former President Clinton apparently taken during his international travels with Epstein and Maxwell from 2002 to 2003, although the released photographs contained no information identifying when or where they were taken. Following that disclosure, a spokesperson for the two-term Democratic president argued that the Trump administration released those images to shield the Trump White House “from what comes next, or from what they’ll try to hide forever.”
To hold someone in contempt of Congress, the Oversight Committee would first mark up and then vote to advance the contempt resolution. Once the committee approves the resolution, which is expected given the GOP majority, the resolution now could go to a vote in the full House.
A simple majority is needed to clear a contempt resolution on the floor. Notably, it does not require passage in the Senate.
The resolution, if passed, would direct the speaker of the House to refer the case to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia — under the Department of Justice — for possible criminal prosecution.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney speak as they pose for a photo, at a world leaders’ summit on ending the Gaza war on October 13, 2025 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. (Photo by Suzanne Plunkett – Pool / Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A top Ontario official vowed to take down a negative TV advertisement about tariffs on Friday, just hours after President Donald Trump halted trade negotiation with Canada citing the ad.
“Ontario will pause its U.S. advertising campaign effective Monday so that trade talks can resume,” Ontario Premier Doug Ford said, noting the advertisement would air over the weekend during the Major League Baseball World Series.
“The people elected our government to protect Ontario—our workers, businesses, families and communities. That’s exactly what I’m doing,” Ford said.
On Friday morning, Trump claimed, without evidence, that the ad aimed to sway the outcome of a U.S. Supreme Court case over the policy set to come before justices next month.
“TARIFFS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ECONOMY, OF THE U.S.A. Based on their egregious behavior, ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE HEREBY TERMINATED,” Trump posted on his social media platform.
“Canada is trying to illegally influence the United States Supreme Court in one of the most important rulings in the history of our Country,” Trump said on Friday morning.
Trump did not specify which law Canada had allegedly broken.
The ad campaign in question was rolled out earlier this month by the Canadian province of Ontario. The ad features audio with excerpts of a 1987 address by then-President Ronald Reagan that came as he imposed some duties on Japanese products but cautioned about the long-term economic risks of high tariffs and the threat of a trade war.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford called for a spirit of partnership between the two countries in a post on X early Friday.
“Canada and the United States are friends, neighbours and allies. President Ronald Reagan knew that we are stronger together. God bless Canada and God bless the United States,” Ford said.
The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation & Institute said in a statement on social media Thursday evening that the Canadian ad campaign used “selective audio and video” of Reagan and “misrepresents” what he said in the address.
Referring to the Canadian ad campaign, Trump said, “They only did this to interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, and other courts.”
The Supreme Court is set to decide this term whether Trump’s sweeping global reciprocal tariffs are an illegal use of emergency authority granted by Congress — and whether tens of billions of dollars collected so far must be refunded.
Earlier this month, in a White House meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump signaled optimism about a potential U.S.-Canada trade deal, saying the two sides had “come a long way” in negotiations.
In July, Trump issued a 35% tariff on most goods and raw materials from Canada.
ABC News’ Brian Hartman contributed to this report.
