The Department of Justice appears to be gaining fresh momentum in its criminal investigation into the 2016 Trump-Russia collusion narrative, with a significant overhaul of the team handling the case in southern Florida.

According to investigative journalist Julie Kelly’s reporting at Declassified.live, longtime Trump legal advisor Joe diGenova – a former U.S. Attorney and prominent commentator – will be sworn in Monday as counsel to the attorney general. He will assume leadership of the ongoing grand jury probe based in Fort Pierce, the district overseen by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. That same courthouse was the site of Cannon’s landmark July 2024 ruling dismissing Special Counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents case against President Trump after she found Smith’s appointment unconstitutional. The grand jury has been active in Fort Pierce since January, Kelly reports.

DiGenova’s wife, Victoria Toensing, has also served as a key Trump legal counselor for years. In a notable earlier move, the Biden Justice Department seized Toensing’s cellphone in April 2021 during a separate inquiry tied to Rudy Giuliani’s efforts to examine the Biden family’s overseas dealings.

But wait, there’s more…

The addition of DiGenova isn’t the only retooling. Earlier this week, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche removed the career prosecutor previously in charge of the investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan, who played a key role in concocting the Trump-Russia collusion scheme in 2016. According to CNN, assistant U.S. Attorney Maria Medetis Long was ousted “after she resisted pressure to quickly bring charges against the former CIA director and prominent critic of President Donald Trump.” Meditis Long notified lawyers representing several individuals who have received subpoenas or interview requests related to the investigation that she was off the case, the New York Times reported on Friday. -Declassified Live

Blanche has also sent one of his senior aides, Christopher-James DeLorenz – who clerked for Judge Cannon during the documents litigation – to the Fort Pierce team.

These changes come shortly after President Trump dismissed former Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this month, citing dissatisfaction with the pace of the Russiagate accountability effort. In a pointed press conference days later, Blanche—whom Trump immediately named acting attorney general—made clear the department’s direction. “The president has said time and time again that he wants justice,” Blanche told reporters. “If you look at what happened to him, his family, his administration, the agents who protected him, people who just happened to walk by him on a given day, they got subjected to…massive investigations by this department.”

Blanche speaks from direct experience: he defended Trump in both the Florida documents case and the Manhattan hush-money prosecution brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

Earlier this year the Justice Department did secure indictments against a small number of figures tied to the lawfare campaign, including former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Those cases were later dismissed, however, after a judge ruled that the appointment of the acting U.S. Attorney who filed them, Lindsey Halligan, was improper. That decision is now under appeal in the Fourth Circuit.

Still, many Trump supporters are demanding deeper accountability. While the initial charges brought some satisfaction, the expectation is for more significant action. A potential indictment of Brennan – who many view as a top target – now looks increasingly likely. He was recently subpoenaed in connection with his 2023 congressional testimony, in which he denied that the discredited Steele dossier influenced his 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment alleging Russian election interference on Trump’s behalf.

Brennan’s legal team has reacted with alarm. In a highly unusual letter sent last December to the chief judge of the 11th Circuit, his attorneys urged the court to block the probe from proceeding in Fort Pierce—viewed as a more conservative venue than Miami—and to bar Judge Cannon from any involvement. The letter claimed that Cannon’s prior rulings created the appearance of favoritism toward Trump and accused prosecutors of deliberately steering the case to her courtroom in line with what they called the president’s political retribution agenda.

If diGenova’s role expands beyond Brennan to encompass a wider “grand conspiracy” review – potentially covering everything from the roots of Russiagate through January 6, the Mar-a-Lago raid, and the conduct of the now-disqualified special counsel – additional high-profile targets could come into focus. Among them are individuals already the subject of criminal referrals sitting with the DOJ, including Thomas Windom (referred by House Judiciary Chairman James Jordan for alleged obstruction during congressional depositions) and January 6 committee witness Cassidy Hutchinson, accused of fabricating testimony about an incident in the presidential vehicle. This week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard also referred two former officials—Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson and analyst Eric Ciaramella – for their roles in advancing the 2019 Ukraine-related impeachment allegations against Trump. Both men have documented connections to the original Russiagate players.

Even Jack Smith may not be fully in the clear. Recent reporting from CBS News indicates that Florida prosecutors are examining documents linked to Smith’s prior investigation of the president. Smith could additionally face scrutiny for allegedly continuing to hold himself out as special counsel in court filings long after Cannon disqualified him, raising questions of contempt and potential false statements to Congress.

As Julie Kelly observed in her Declassified.live piece, diGenova—still energetic and far from retirement age—may be exactly the experienced, no-nonsense figure needed to bring decisive momentum to the Florida investigation and deliver the accountability many have long awaited.

Authored by Jesse Coghlan via CoinTelegraph.com,

Traditional finance giants Charles Schwab and Citadel Securities are both considering entering prediction markets, with each separately weighing up how they wish to get involved in the fast-growing sector.

“I think at some point we likely will have prediction markets,” Rick Wurster, the CEO of the banking and investing titan Schwab, told investors during a call on Thursday.

He added that prediction markets weren’t “of tremendous interest” when he recently asked a group of Schwab clients about them, but it was an area the company would “take a hard look at, and it would be quite straightforward for us to offer.”

Charles Schwab CEO Rick Wurster speaking to CNBC after the company launched Bitcoin and Ether trading on Thursday. Source: CNBC

Prediction markets such as the popular Kalshi and Polymarket have exploded in use over the past few months, with both platforms seeing a record combined total monthly trading volume of $23.6 billion in March, according to Token Terminal.

However, Kalshi, Polymarket and other prediction market platforms have also caught the ire of some US state regulators, who have accused them in court of offering unlicensed sports betting.

Some federal lawmakers have also vowed to crack down on prediction markets, claiming the platforms weren’t doing enough to stamp out insider trading.

Wurster said Schwab’s potential offering would steer away from allowing bets on areas such as sports, politics and pop culture as it looks to position itself as a partner for building long-term wealth.

“Prediction markets that are not aligned to that are not something that we want to pursue,” he said.

“If you look at the stats on the success of gamblers, they’re not strong, and people generally lose money.”

Citadel “keeping an eye” on prediction markets

Meanwhile, Citadel Securities president Jim Esposito said at a Semafor conference in Washington, DC, on Thursday that the company is “absolutely keeping an eye on developments” in prediction markets. 

Citadel Securities president Jim Esposito speaking at the Semafor World Economy conference on Thursday. Source: YouTube

“We’re not there yet, there’s not that much liquidity,” he added, but said that the market is likely to “ramp and scale,” and it was “certainly possible” that the market-making firm would potentially look to get involved.

Esposito said Citadel was “not looking at sports at the moment at all, I don’t see us entering that market,” but did signal an interest in some event contracts.

He added that Citadel could see its retail and institutional clients use some event contracts as a hedge for risks to their investments, such as contracts for elections, which have been known to move markets.

“That’s going to be some of the biggest risks to investors’ portfolios that they’re going to have to grapple with,” Esposito said. “Having a clean and distinct way to hedge certain risks, I think there’s a good use case and industrial logic to it.”

Local Mexican outlet Milenio reports an “armed attack” at the Teotihuacan archaeological site, located in central Mexico about 25 miles (40 kilometers) northeast of Mexico City, in the State of Mexico.

Details are scant, but preliminary reports say the attacker climbed the Pyramid of the Moon and fired at tourists.

“Confirmed that the fatality from the armed attack at the Teotihuacan Archaeological Zone is of Canadian nationality,” Milenio wrote on X around 1513 local time.

🔴 #ÚLTIMAHORA | Confirman que víctima mortal por ataque armado en Zona Arqueológica de Teotihuacan es de nacionalidad canadiense

📺 La información con @taniadiazs pic.twitter.com/g1FXmGdpvG

— Milenio (@Milenio) April 20, 2026

Live feed from the outlet:

Ahora | #MILENIONoticias con @taniadiazs

https://t.co/dVNwbKoBYj

— Milenio (@Milenio) April 20, 2026

Preliminary reports provided no further information on whether the attack was linked to drug cartels.

If you’re traveling to Mexico, it’s probably smart to get K&R insurance.

*Developing… 

Confirming the Schrodinger nature of the notorious waterway, the Strait of Hormuz is now just closed even more than before Iran and the US said the vital oil channel had been reopened.

Traffic through the strait on Sunday and Monday was reduced to a trickle following a Saturday surge, after Tehran rejected a continuing US naval blockade and moved to seal the waterway again. The reduced movement underscores just how quickly hopes unraveled that cargoes could once again resume.

On Friday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the strait was “completely open” for commercial shipping, while US President Donald Trump said Iran was removing sea mines from the waterway. That prompted oil prices to plunge and dozens of tankers to race toward the strait at the mouth of the Persian Gulf. But Iran quickly declared that the passage was closed again as it emerged that the US operation in place since April 13 would not be lifted.

And rejected: the two tankers taking the neutral route, Minerva Evropi and Nissos Keros, have turned around; the Sanmar Herald which appears to be taking the Iran-sanctioned Larak island route is proceeding. https://t.co/aceBI7ki0B pic.twitter.com/gmkM37iA1U

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 18, 2026

The Hormuz crisis flared again over the weekend after the US Navy seized an Iranian vessel, during a turbulent period marked by Iranian forces firing at ships and reimposing controls across the strait. The developments pushed oil and natural gas prices higher after Friday’s big declines, reflecting fears of prolonged supply constraints.

The chaotic, start-stop nature of ship traffic through the strait underscores just how difficult it will be to fully restore oil and gas flows that are vital to the global economy, where energy producers need to have visibility months in advance before restarting production.

According to Bloomberg, just two liquefied petroleum gas carriers and two oil product tankers moved through the strait in both directions on Monday. The previous day, two LPG vessels and a cruise liner sailed out of the gulf, while no inbound transits were seen.

The Gas Harmony, an LPG carrier, went dark inside the gulf on Saturday morning but reappeared off the coast of Oman on Monday, indicating that the vessel transited the strait in the interim. The Liberia-flagged ship is owned and managed by Athens-based Gas Harmony Shipping Ltd., according to maritime database Equasis.

Greek and Iranian LPG ships departed the gulf on Sunday along with the European passenger liner, not listed in the charts. Subsequent observations until Monday afternoon, London time, identified further outbound movement by an Iranian product tanker and a second LPG ship.

At least three Mediterranean Shipping Co. containerships and a MSC cruise liner, along with a handful of other passenger vessels, appeared to have exited the gulf on Saturday, hugging the Omani coastline. That was a deviation from the corridor approved by Iran during the short-lived opening of the waterway. Another MSC containership remains off-grid after it stopped signaling inside the gulf. The company didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Six cruise ships clear Strait of Hormuz during brief reopening

A flotilla of cruise ships stranded in Gulf ports since late February has now cleared the Strait of Hormuz, taking advantage of a brief reopening of the waterway before tighter controls returned.

According to… pic.twitter.com/nvnhG4JrkW

— MarineTraffic (@MarineTraffic) April 20, 2026

Diplomatic momentum has wavered after Tehran signaled hesitation regarding a second round of talks in Pakistan, amid the ongoing American blockade of Iranian traffic and the vessel seizure.

The commercial vessels entering Hormuz with active AIS signals during the past day were confined to a narrow northern lane near the Iranian islands of Larak and Qeshm, the route approved by Tehran.

The inbound transits on Monday included an Iranian LPG ship and a fuel tanker.

Pain at the pump might not ease up for American consumers until 2027, according to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who said on April 19 that the price of a regular gallon of gas could stay above $3 for the rest of the year.

Wright said a price of $3 per gallon of gas “could happen later this ​year, [but] that might not happen until next year” in an interview that aired on CNN’s ”State of the Union” ​program Sunday.

“But prices have ⁠likely peaked, and they’ll start going down certainly with a resolution of this conflict [in Iran],” Wright predicted while speaking about how the war has impacted energy prices.

As of April 19, the average price for a gallon of regular gas in the U.S. was $4.04, according to data from the American Automobile Association (AAA).

States on the West Coast and the Northeast have the highest prices, according to AAA.

Before the United States and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury against the Iranian regime on Feb. 28, the price for a regular gallon of gas in the U.S. was $2.98.

The Energy Information Administration’s short-term energy outlook, published on April 7, predicted the average retail price for a gallon of gasoline would be $4.30 per gallon in April.

The Energy Information Administration – designed as a nonpartisan agency within Wright’s Department of Energy – estimated the retail price for an average gallon of gasoline will be $3.46 in 2027, above the $3 level he predicted on CNN.

As the chart above shows, for pump prices to fall back to $3 a gallon, we would need to see crude oil prices back around $60 a barrel – a long way down given the disruptions from the Iran War are likely to ripple through the supply chain for months.

Finally, The Hill’s White House correspondent, Julia Manchester, reports that President Trump just told her over the phone that he disagrees with Energy Secretary Wright’s assessment that gas prices may not drop until next year. 

“No, I think he’s wrong on that. Totally wrong,” Trump said, adding that gas prices will drop “as soon as this ends.”

With the Midterms looming ever closer, Trump better hope he’s right and Wright is wrong.

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

The Iran shock erased 18% from valuations and fully recovered in two weeks. Investors who panicked missed it all. Here’s what the market lesson is about: risk management, behavior, and what to do with your portfolio right now.

The stock market selloff between February 28 and April 14 produced one of the more instructive market lessons in recent memory. It isn’t because of what the market did, but because of what investors did in response. By April 2nd, the AAII Sentiment Survey showed bearish sentiment at 51.4%, the highest reading in years, well above the historical average of 31%. Put option volume surged, and the financial media ran daily coverage of worst-case oil scenarios, recession projections, and S&P 500 targets as low as 3,800.

However, when you have that combination of bearishness, as we discussed in 5-Consecutive Weekly Declines, markets tend to perform better.

What was surprising was that the S&P 500 recovered completely in two weeks and is now setting all-time highs.

That sequence is not a reason to relax, but it is a valuable market lesson. It is also a good reason to examine what happened to investors who panicked, why the pattern repeats with such regularity, and, most importantly, what a well-constructed portfolio actually looks like when the next stock market selloff arrives. Because it will arrive. The only uncertainty is the catalyst.

The Drill & The Failure

Every major market shock is a test, a market lesson to be learned from. Not a test of whether your thesis was right, or whether you picked the right stocks. A test of whether your portfolio was built to hold under pressure, and whether your instincts are an asset or a liability when it counts.

The Iran conflict delivered a real economic shock. U.S. and Israeli forces struck Iran’s nuclear facilities. Tehran retaliated against Gulf energy infrastructure and the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply flows daily, ground to a halt. Brent crude surged from $61 at year-end to over $114 a barrel, and that spike raised inflation expectations, hammered small caps, and sent Asian equity markets into a tailspin as energy costs threatened to consume the profit margins underpinning the region’s AI and manufacturing boom.

Then, at what seemed to be the darkest moment, the market repriced all of that in two weeks. Valuations declined roughly 18% as investors adjusted for the expected impact of higher oil prices on earnings and consumer spending. That repricing was rational, but the panic layered on top of it was not. In the middle of the selloff, predictions of a structural bear market were everywhere, but none of them materialized.

That pattern of maximum fear at the exact moment prices are lowest, followed by regret as they recover, is a market lesson that repeats itself regularly. The investors who liquidated near the recent lows, as sentiment turned negative, locked in losses. But two weeks later, they face an even more difficult decision: do I reenter at prices 10% higher than the ones I sold at? Most don’t. That gap between market returns and the average investor’s actual earnings is the most expensive line item in the typical portfolio.

What Risk Is, And Isn’t

The word “risk” gets used so loosely in financial media that it has lost most of its meaning. A falling stock price isn’t the definition of “risk.” Neither is a scary headline. Volatility isn’t risk either; it’s the price of admission for participating in markets over time.

As I’ve said previously, if you aren’t willing to watch your portfolio decline 10% to 15% without doing something rash, you aren’t really an investor; you are a speculator who happens to be holding stocks.

Risk, defined precisely, is the probability of a permanent impairment of capital. Not temporary losses, or a 10% drawdown that reverses in two weeks. Risk is the permanent impairment of capital, resulting in significantly diminished future outcomes. The distinction is enormous, separating investors who compound wealth over decades from those who don’t.

When the S&P 500 dropped during the Iran shock, the vast majority of that decline reflected a temporary repricing of earnings expectations under elevated oil prices. The underlying companies, their cash flows, their competitive advantages, and their earnings power didn’t change materially. The price changed, but the value didn’t. Investors who sold during that repricing didn’t escape risk; they converted a temporary paper loss into a realized one and then forfeited the recovery.

The market lesson is in the chart. Fear peaked at the moment prices were most attractive. By the time the market had recovered and all-time highs were being printed, fear had nearly returned to historical norms. The investors who acted on that peak in fear did exactly the wrong thing at exactly the wrong moment. The investors who recognized it as a contrarian signal, or who simply had the discipline to do nothing, participated in the full recovery.

The Behavior Gap: The Most Expensive Cost

Dalbar Inc. has published an annual study for over 30 years, measuring the difference between the return delivered by the stock market and the return actually earned by the average equity investor. The gap, which Dalbar calls the “behavior gap,” has consistently shown that the average investor earns two to three percentage points less per year than the indices they’re invested in. That shortfall isn’t explained by fees or bad stock selection. It’s explained entirely by timing decisions: buying after rallies and selling during selloffs.

Over 30 years, a two-percentage-point annual shortfall compounds into a staggering wealth gap. A $500,000 portfolio growing at 8% a year becomes roughly $5 million. The same portfolio growing at 6%, because the investor panicked during selloffs and missed recoveries, becomes roughly $2.9 million. That $2.1 million gap is the price of panic. And the investor who sold near the April 2nd sentiment extreme has already paid a portion of it.

After every major market shock, the “this time is different” argument gains traction. The Iran conflict gave that argument real support. It was a genuine exogenous shock with measurable economic consequences, not a technical correction or manufactured volatility. But the historical record on recovery from sharp, shock-driven selloffs is remarkably consistent, and favors the patient investor over the reactive one.

Since 1950, there have been 20 instances in which the S&P 500 rose more than 10% in a 10-day period, the kind of snapback recovery we saw in April. Over the following 12 months, the index was higher in 17 of those 20 cases, with an average gain of 19%. Nasdaq win streaks of comparable magnitude resolved higher 100% of the time over 12 months, with average gains near 26%. Those numbers don’t guarantee another selloff isn’t coming. That means the investors best positioned to capture those forward returns are the ones who stayed disciplined through the downturn. They rebalanced into weakness, and held enough cash to redeploy rather than liquidate.

Consider 2022. The Fed’s tightening cycle produced a 9-month bear market that erased ~25% from the S&P 500. The investors who sold in October 2022, when sentiment was just as dark as it was in early April 2026, missed a recovery that added nearly 60% over the next two years. The pattern repeats because human psychology repeats. The catalyst changes. The behavior doesn’t.

Build a Shock-Resistant Portfolio

Building a portfolio that survives market selloffs without requiring heroic decision-making isn’t complicated. It’s only unpopular because it involves accepting modest underperformance during the easy, low-volatility periods in exchange for not being the person who liquidates at the bottom during the hard ones.

The UBS analysis of the Iran shock made a point worth internalizing. The assets that acted as refuges during 2025’s tariff-driven selloff, such as gold, the Japanese yen, and Treasuries, provided meaningfully less protection this year. The assets that performed well in 2026, particularly the trade-weighted dollar, did little to offset losses during last year’s episode. In other words, building a portfolio to hedge against the last crisis is a losing strategy. The next one will look different.

The more durable approach focuses not on predicting which hedge will work, but on maintaining portfolio construction that allows you to hold through volatility without being forced to sell. That means genuine diversification across asset classes and geographies. It means a real cash buffer that functions as optionality. It also means rebalancing mechanically rather than emotionally, adding exposure when prices are low and trimming when they’ve run ahead of value.

The Iran conflict reframed a question many investors had avoided asking: Were they genuinely diversified? Investors with heavy commodity-linked exposure looked prescient during the decline. But that quickly fell out of favor as megacap technology stocks took center stage during the recovery. Having diversification means you had positions that performed during both the decline and the rally. Concentrated, one-sided portfolios rarely perform well over the long term.

Here are seven portfolio actions to think about today.

The six weeks between late February and mid-April gave every investor a real-world market lesson. That lesson was in both portfolio construction and behavioral discipline. It wasn’t about Iran, oil prices, or the Strait of Hormuz. The lesson was whether your portfolio was built to withstand a genuine shock. And whether you know the difference between a temporary price decline and a permanent impairment of value.

Those who held, rebalanced, and redeployed cash came out ahead. Those who sold near the lows are now deciding what to do with prices ~10% higher. Most won’t. That’s the behavior gap in real time, and it compounds across every market cycle over an investing lifetime.

After 30 years of watching this pattern repeat, I can tell you with confidence that no amount of market forecasting substitutes for a sound process. The S&P 500 is trading at roughly 20 times forward earnings, the ten-year Treasury yield is near 4.3%, and the geopolitical situation is improving, or at least markets are pricing it that way. What comes next is unknowable. What you do with your portfolio in the meantime is entirely within your control.

That’s always been the real market lesson. The Iran shock just delivered it again, free of charge and clearly labeled.

What you do with it is up to you.

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Ashraf Al Safoo from Chicago has been sentenced to 25 years in federal prison for conspiring to provide material support to ISIS, which involved recruiting members into the terror group and encouraging attacks on its enemies.

Al Safoo, 41, was a leader of online organization Khattab Media Foundation, which pledged allegiance to ISIS, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said in an April 17 press release. The foundation created and spread threats and ISIS propaganda online, with Al Safoo and other members posting pro-ISIS articles, videos, infographics, and essays in coordination with the terrorist outfit.

Most of the propaganda spread by Khattab promoted violent jihad on behalf of ISIS.

The organization’s posts celebrated mass shootings and terror attacks in the United States and encouraged people to engage in “lone wolf” attacks in Western nations.

In one post, Al Safoo asked Khattab members to “cause confusion and spread terror within the hearts of those who disbelieved,” according to the DOJ press release.

In another post, Al Safoo wrote, “Work hard, brothers, edit the issue into short clips, take the pictures out of it and publish the efforts of your brothers in the pages of the apostates. Participate in the war, and spread terror, the [Islamic] State does not want you to watch it only, rather, it incites you, and if you are unable to, use it to incite others.”

Al Safoo immigrated to the United States in 2008 and was naturalized in 2013. In 2018, he was arrested and has since been in federal custody.

A bench trial was conducted last year, after which U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey found Al Safoo guilty of various charges.

On April 16, Blakey imposed a 25-year prison term for Al Safoo, followed by 10 years of court-supervised release.

The State Department designated ISIS’s predecessor group, al-Qaeda in Iraq, as a foreign terrorist organization in December 2004 under the George W. Bush administration. When ISIS was formed in 2013, the designation carried over.

Over the past several months, multiple individuals have been detained for their support of ISIS.

In December 2025, a Texas man alleged to be an ISIS sympathizer was charged with an international terrorism offense. The man allegedly provided funding and bomb making equipment to people he believed were acting on behalf of ISIS.

Earlier in November, a dual American Albanian national was arrested and charged in New York for allegedly providing support to ISIS and distributing instructions for homemade bombs.

During a testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security on Dec. 11, Michael Glasheen, operations director at the FBI, highlighted how ISIS continues to pose a threat to American interests, both domestically and abroad.

The terror outfit is able to “direct, enable, and inspire attacks through their successful use of social media and messaging applications to attract individuals. ISIS seeks direct confrontation with the United States, and almost certainly would exploit any opportunity to attack the U.S. or Western interests,” Glasheen said.

Like other foreign terrorist organizations, he said, “ISIS advocates for lone-offender attacks in the U.S. and Western countries via videos and other English-language propaganda that have specifically advocated for attacks against civilians, the military, law enforcement, and intelligence community personnel.”

The 2025 Worldwide Threat Assessment report from the Defense Intelligence Agency said that ISIS and al-Qaeda have implemented a decentralized plotting approach toward Western nations.

Story continues below advertisement

Both groups are referencing Israel’s operations in Gaza to generate revenue, hire new members, and inspire attacks against U.S., Jewish, Israeli, and European interests internationally.

“The groups are also seeking to improve their weapons capabilities, including with commercial technologies such as UAVs and artificial intelligence,” the report said, referring to unmanned aerial vehicles.

In December, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said it had initiated Operation Hawkeye Strike in Syria following an attack that killed two Army soldiers and a civilian interpreter.

CENTCOM said in a Feb. 14 update that since the launch of Operation Hawkeye Strike, “more than 50 ISIS terrorists have been killed or captured and over 100 ISIS infrastructure targets have been struck with hundreds of precision munitions during two months of targeted operations.”

Despite Orban’s loss in Hungary earlier this month, Europe’s populist right is not dead by a longshot. Official results released Monday show former President Rumen Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria coalition capturing roughly 44.6-44.7% of the vote in Sunday’s snap parliamentary elections, delivering an absolute majority of approximately 130-135 seats in the 240-seat parliament. It marks the first time since 1997 that a single political force in Bulgaria will be able to govern without coalition horse-trading.

Radev, who stepped down from the presidency in January to lead the new party, wasted no time celebrating outside his headquarters. “This is a victory of hope over distrust, a victory of freedom over fear, and finally a victory of morality,” he declared, adding that voters had rejected “the arrogance of old parties and didn’t bend to their lies and manipulations.”

The rout was total for the old guard. GERB, led by veteran ex-Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, was left in the dust at roughly 12-15%, while the pro-European reformist We Continue the Change-Democratic Bulgaria (PP-DB) coalition trailed even further behind. Turnout climbed modestly to around 47%, reflecting voter fatigue after eight elections in five years but still signaling a clear mandate for change amid widespread frustration with corruption, graft, and economic stagnation.

Radev, a eurosceptic former fighter pilot, built his campaign around calls for pragmatic ties with Moscow, resumption of Russian energy supplies and an end to military aid for Ukraine. He has repeatedly criticized EU overreach on green-energy mandates, sanctions policies and what he describes as moral posturing in a “world without rules.” While analysts note he is unlikely to jeopardize the flow of EU funds that sustain Bulgaria’s economy, the result installs a distinctly Russia-friendly government at the heart of the EU’s southeastern flank – a shift that will draw close scrutiny in Brussels, Washington and Kyiv.

As we highlighted ahead of the vote, Radev’s campaign leaned heavily into criticism of EU overreach – particularly its green-energy obsession, sanctions regime, and moral posturing in a “world without rules.” He has repeatedly called for improved relations with Moscow, resumption of Russian energy flows, and an end to military aid for Ukraine. While analysts stress he is unlikely to risk the flow of EU funds that have propped up Bulgaria’s economy, his victory installs a distinctly Russia-friendly voice at the heart of the EU’s southeastern flank – a development that will be watched closely in Brussels, Washington, and Kyiv

The result hands Radev the chance to form a stable government on his own terms – something Bulgarian voters have craved after repeated rounds of political paralysis. Whether he delivers the “pragmatism” he promised or whether entrenched interests and EU pressure blunt his agenda remains to be seen. For now, though, the message from Sofia is unmistakable: the old system has been decisively rejected, and Bulgaria is charting a new course under its former pro-Russian president.

* * * Earlier

Just as Europe’s neoliberal establishment was celebrating the downfall of Hungary’s Orban and his replacement with… another hard-line ant- immigrationist, it got some bad news on Sunday, as Bulgaria’s pro-Russian former President Rumen Radev was set for a runaway victory in the election and may even secure a parliamentary majority in the poorest EU state, ‌exit polls showed, potentially ending years of weak coalition governments and altering the European Union member’s foreign policy.

An updated exit poll conducted by Sofia-based Alpha Research showed Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria with 44%, far ahead of the long-dominant GERB party, led by former Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, at 12.5%.

If confirmed, the performance, which outstripped opinion polls, would mark one of the strongest results by ​a single party in a generation, sideline a party that has ruled on and off for decades, and may see an end to the ​instability that has resulted in eight elections in five years.

“Progressive Bulgaria won decisively. This is a victory of hope over ⁠distrust, a victory of freedom over fear, and finally, if you will, a victory of morality,” Radev said of the exit poll results during a press conference.

Radev, ​a eurosceptic and former fighter pilot who opposes military support for Ukraine’s war effort against Moscow, stepped down from the presidency in January to run in the parliamentary election, ​which comes after mass protests forced out the previous government in December.

According to Reuters, Radev rode a wave of frustration with political instability in the Balkan country of 6.5 million people, where voters are sick of corruption and veteran parties that have dominated politics for decades. Alpha Research put turnout at 47% with one hour of voting to go, up from the 39% total in ​the last election in October 2024.

“There is now an opportunity for the things people have been hoping to see change to actually become visible,” Evelina Koleva, a ​manager at digital marketing company in Sofia, told Reuters.

Final election results are expected on Monday.

In his campaign, Radev drew comparisons with Hungary’s pro-Kremlin former Prime Minister ‌Viktor Orban ⁠when he talked about improving relations with Moscow and resuming the free flow of Russian oil and gas into Europe. He also criticized the EU for relying too heavily on renewable energy.

It is not clear how much his views will impact the foreign policy of Bulgaria, a NATO member on the EU’s southeastern flank which joined the euro zone in January – a move Radev has criticised.

He said he would be willing to work on judicial reform with the pro-European reformist We Continue ​the Change-Democratic Bulgaria (PP-DB) coalition, which came third ​in the Alpha Research exit polls ⁠with 11.3%. A minority government was also an option in the 240-seat parliament, Radev said.

“Bulgaria will make efforts to continue its European path,” he said. “But a strong Bulgaria and strong Europe… needs pragmatism because Europe has fallen victim to its own ​ambition to be a moral leader in a world without rules.”

GERB’s Borissov appeared to concede in a post on ​Facebook, but added a ⁠note of caution: “To win the elections is one thing; to govern is quite another. Elections decide who comes first, but negotiations will decide who governs.”

Bulgaria has developed rapidly since the fall of communism in 1989 and joined the European Union in 2007. Life expectancy has risen sharply, unemployment is the lowest in the EU, and the economy has ⁠greater safeguards ​since joining the euro zone in January. But it lags behind other EU countries in many metrics, ​and graft remains endemic, including in elections, where vote-buying is rife.

The cost of living has become a particular issue since Bulgaria adopted the euro. The previous government fell amid protests against a new ​budget proposing tax increases and higher social security contributions.

FBI Director Kash Patel filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit Monday against The Atlantic magazine and its national-security reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick, escalating a high-profile clash over a Friday article that alleged Patel’s “erratic behavior,” excessive drinking, and unexplained absences have alarmed colleagues and raised national-security concerns.

In the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Patel accuses the publication and Fitzpatrick of publishing the story “with actual malice” despite being “expressly warned, hours before publication, that the central allegations were categorically false,” having access to “abundant publicly available information contradicting those allegations,” and ignoring “obvious and fatal defects in their own sourcing,” CNN reports.

The Atlantic article, titled “The FBI Director Is MIA,” relied on more than two dozen anonymous sources – including current and former FBI officials, members of Congress, and hospitality-industry workers – to portray Patel’s leadership as a “management failure” and his personal conduct as a potential vulnerability. It detailed claims of “bouts of excessive drinking” at venues such as the private club Ned’s in Washington, D.C., and the Poodle Room in Las Vegas, rescheduled meetings due to late-night drinking, and incidents in which Patel’s security detail allegedly struggled to wake him and once requested breaching equipment to access a locked room. The piece also suggested Patel is deeply paranoid about being fired and that President Trump has privately expressed displeasure over his behavior, including a viral video of him chugging beer with the U.S. men’s hockey team.⁠

Patel’s attorney, Jesse R. Binnall, sent a detailed pre-publication letter to The Atlantic and Fitzpatrick on April 17, disputing the claims point-by-point and demanding the outlet refrain from publishing. Binnall later posted the letter publicly on X, writing: “They were on notice that the claims were categorically false and defamatory. They published anyway. See you in court.”

This is the letter we sent to The Atlantic and Sarah Fitzpatrick BEFORE they published their hit piece on FBI Director @FBIDirectorKash. They were on notice that the claims were categorically false and defamatory. They published anyway.

See you in court. pic.twitter.com/Ke8cqNh8hY

— Jesse R. Binnall (@jbinnall) April 17, 2026

Patel himself responded defiantly on Fox News Sunday, calling the story “fake news” and promising legal action the next day. “We HAVE to fight back against the fake news,” he said. “If the fake news mafia isn’t hitting you with baseless info, you’re not doing your job!”⁠

🚨 WOW! FBI Director Kash Patel is SUING The Atlantic after they reported he gets drunk all the time and constantly has “unexplained absences”

“You want to attack my character? Come at me. I’LL SEE YOU IN COURT!”

“Absolutely. [The lawsuit] is coming TOMORROW. FOR DEFAMATION.”… pic.twitter.com/7X5PqQlP3p

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) April 19, 2026

The suit seeks $250 million in damages, a figure Patel’s team described as necessary to hold the outlet accountable for what they call a “sweeping, malicious, and defamatory hit piece.”

Summary

• Trump says ‘highly unlikely’ will extend ceasefire if deal not signed in Pakistan.

• Iran’s military after Sunday’s US seizure of Iran-flagged cargo ship: will “take the necessary action against the US military”

• Vance intends to depart Tuesday to Pakistan, though still unclear whether Iranians will join – Pakistanis say yes, but timeline is fluid. Trump warns “nobody’s playing games” & “lots of bombs will go off” if no deal (PBS)

• Xi to Saudi crown prince important phone call: “the first time the Chinese leader had called for the reopening of the strategically vital waterway.“

*  *  *

NYT: Iranians Making Plans to be in Pakistan 

The NYT now says the Iranians are soon expected in Pakistan, despite that for the past 12-hours they issued denials that they are ready and willing to enter a second round of talks.

“An Iranian delegation is making plans to travel to Islamabad on Tuesday for negotiations with the United States, according to two senior Iranian officials familiar with the plans. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the influential political and military figure leading the talks,” the publication writes.

Yet, talk about of Tehran is still firm and tough, signaling the two sides are in reality far away from agreeing on anything, particularly the nuclear issue. While Iranian President Pezeshkian has newly stated that “honoring commitments is the basis of meaningful dialogue” – it remains there is “historical distrust”. He has stated on X: “they seek Iran’s surrender. Iranians do not submit to force.”

Trump: ‘Highly Unlikely’ He Extends Ceasefire

Lots of contradictory messaging this morning from Washington, Tehran, and Islamabad. Trump has said he will note open the Strait of Hormuz until a deal is signed (as both sides inside they in effect control the waterway).

Trump has also asserted that it remains ‘highly unlikely’ that he extends the ceasefire with Iran, at a moment Tasnim reports that “Iran’s decision not to participate in the negotiations has not changed until this moment.”

‘Lots of Bombs Will Go Off’ If Ceasefire Ends With No Deal: Trump

President Trump says bombs will go off if the ceasefire expires (set to end by Wed April 22), PBS reports. But he also said he doesn’t know if Iran is doing the next round of talks but says it is fine if Iran is not at the Pakistan talks. So who does Washington, led by VP Vance’s team, plan to talk to… itself? Or it might just plan to keep sending messages to the Pakistanis. The US could also be seeking to ‘demonstrate’ that the Iranians have simply refused negotiations, and so this will ‘justify’ bombs away again. Here are the latest Monday statements from Trump given to PBS:

• If no deal “then lots of bombs start going off.”
• Nuclear weapons will be discussed with Iran at the talks.
• “No nuclear weapons. Very simple. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Very simple.”
• “…we’re not negotiating anything other than the fact that they will not have a nuclear weapon”
• On the remarks from Secretary Wright that gas may not go below USD 3 until late-2026 or early-2027, Trump says: “I disagree with him totally. I think it’ll come roaring down if it ends. If we end it, if Iran does what they should do, it will come roaring down.”

His latest Monday morning Truth Social post, which appears very on the defensive:

Fresh Pentagon data indicates the US blockade has thus far directed 27 vessels to turn back.

Contradictory Reports of Vance Travel

So it seems the second round of talks are actually on, after several recent contradictory headlines concerning Tehran’s intent to send a team. As of Monday morning the Iranians have been signaling the cold shoulder, even as Pakistani officials quietly leak that their arrival is expected.

The NY Post freshly reports: “Vice President JD Vance and the US delegation to the peace talks here with Iran are en route to Pakistan and expected to land within hours, President Trump on Monday told The Post — adding that he was willing to meet with senior Iranian leaders if a breakthrough is reached.” However, CNN is saying he has not actually departed yet, and may not till Tuesday, as the talks are reportedly being planned for Wednesday.

“We’re supposed to have the talks,” Trump said in an interview when asked whether talks or still happening of if they are falling apart. He added: “So I would assume at this point nobody’s playing games.” According to more:

The president confirmed that a high-level US delegation — including Vice President JD Vance, special envoy Steve Witkoff and adviser Jared Kushner — is already en route to Islamabad for the next round of negotiations.

“They’re heading over now,” Trump said shortly after 9 a.m. EST. “They’ll be there tonight, [Islamabad] time.”

NBC notes that, “Further complicating the picture, different Iranian leaders are sending contradictory messages. The IRGC vowed revenge for the seizing of an Iranian cargo ship yesterday, even as Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian continued to emphasize diplomacy.”

Shipping Traffic Halt Latest

Al Jazeera and others have written the strait is at a virtual standstill currently, after the major Sunday incident which saw the US Navy intercept, fire upon, and board an uncooperative ship which was trying to pass the US-imposed blockade. It was an Iranian-flagged ship which was forcibly stopped in the Gulf of Oman, where some dozen US warships have been patrolling.

Just three ships have crossed in the past 12 hours, shipping data indicates. The same publication records that “Oil products tanker Nero, which is under UK sanctions, has left the Gulf and is sailing through the strait, according to satellite analysis from data analytics specialists SynMax and tracking data from the Kpler platform.” And: “Two other ships – a chemical tanker and a liquefied natural gas tanker – have also sailed into the Gulf through the critical waterway separately, the data showed.”

Reuters: Senior Iranian official says positive efforts have been started by Pakistan to end the US blockade and ensure Iran’s participation in talks.

On Monday a spokesman for Iran’s military reiterated a threat to “take the necessary action against the US military” after the Sunday US interdiction. He described that that Iran’s military exercised restraint over the incident, not taking immediate action, in order to protect the ship’s crew, but will act “once it is ensured that the lives of the families and crew of the vessel attacked by the United States are safeguarded.” Apparently the crew’s family members are accompanying them aboard the vessel, the statement suggests.

⚡️ US military releases footage of “seizure of Iranian ship Touska in Strait of Hormuz” pic.twitter.com/d7qk7G5oeC

— War Monitor (@WarMonitors) April 19, 2026

Important Xi Jinping Statement on Hormuz

China’s President Xi Jinping on Monday demanded the uninterrupted passage of vessels through the Strait of Hormuz in a phone call with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, state news agency Xinhua reports. He urged the normalization of shipping traffic after about 50 days of disruption which obviously and significantly impacts Chinese oil imports.

“Normal navigation through the Strait of Hormuz should be maintained, this is in the shared interests of regional countries and the international community,” Xi said. He called for an immediate, comprehensive ceasefire and insisted disputes be resolved through political and diplomatic means.

South China Morning Post observes that it was “the first time the Chinese leader had called for the reopening of the strategically vital waterway, which has been repeatedly blockaded since US-Israeli strikes on Iran began on February 28.” China imported 5.86 million tons of crude oil from Saudi Arabia, down 10% from February, according to customs data released Monday.

Second Pakistan Talks Imminent? 

After the Sunday dramatic US seizure of the Iranian-flagged ship, Iran’s Foreign Ministry has said the country currently no plans regarding a new round of talks, however, it also said it is reviewing the latest Washington proposal related to a second round of Pakistan-hosted talks. With that, by Monday it reasserted that the transfer of enriched uranium out of the country or into US custody has never been on the table. Tehran is insisting that it won’t be transferred anywhere.

This firm stance is after President dramatically shifted his tone over the weekend from strangely and surprisingly somewhat praising Iran’s leadership (with statements such as the US could work with them and possibly trust them) to once up again ramping up threats, posting “No more Mr. Nice Guy” on social media. 

Currently there are conflicting reports on whether the Iranian side will actually be there for reported possible Tuesday talks. Pakistan officials say the timing of the talks remains fluid. According to the latest via Associated Press Iranian authorities have expressed willingness to send a delegation to Islamabad, citing two Pakistan officials. The officials reports “cautious optimism that delegations from both Iran and the United States could travel to Islamabad.”

Some confused and conflicting signaling, likely purposely so…

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei:

We have no plans for the next round of negotiations. pic.twitter.com/CFb16qt8vM

— Clash Report (@clashreport) April 20, 2026

The NY Times has declared that JD Vance will try again:

The vice president is scheduled to lead an American delegation back to Islamabad, Pakistan, this week for another round of in-person negotiations with Iran after failing to secure a deal just over a week ago.

Whether the talks even occur seems in dispute. Hours after President Trump announced the trip on Sunday, Iranian state media said that Tehran had not yet agreed to any such meeting. Later, Mr. Trump announced that a Naval destroyer had attacked an Iranian-flagged cargo ship that tried to skirt the U.S. blockade on Iranian ports in the Strait of Hormuz.

President Trump has been threatening major escalation should there be no negotiated settlement, at a moment the two sides’ position are very distant especially on the nuclear issue.

Zero Sum Positions on Nuclear Issue

The problem, according to University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape is the zero sum logic of it all. “In a matter of a day, the system snapped back to escalation,” he wrote over the weekend. “This is not a story about fragile diplomacy or poor sequencing. It is a story about zero-sum conflict, where the core issues cannot be divided, traded, or deferred without forcing one side to accept a strategic loss—a direct contest over relative power.”

“At the center of the war is a fact that cannot be negotiated away: Iran either retains a nuclear capability on the threshold of weapons, or it does not,” Pape continues. “There is no stable middle ground that satisfies both sides.”

POTUS is laying out two courses of action—a negotiated settlement, or a major escalation.

There is a third option, and he should take it: recognize there is no way to force a positive outcome and simply leave.

The region is not ours to fix. President Reagan chose this path in… pic.twitter.com/5ovi05FdwE

— Joe Kent (@joekent16jan19) April 19, 2026

And more from the analysis: “The same zero-sum logic applies—more visibly and more immediately—to the Strait of Hormuz. Before the war, Hormuz functioned as a global commons, carrying roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply. That assumption is now broken. Iran has demonstrated that it can shift from disruption to conditional control, allowing passage under its terms while restricting or denying access when it chooses. The United States, in response, is attempting to preserve open navigation through blockade and interdiction. But these positions cannot be reconciled.”