What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White
What To Do When You're Stopped By Police - The ACLU & Elon James White
Know Anyone Who Thinks Racial Profiling Is Exaggerated? Watch This, And Tell Me When Your Jaw Drops.
This video clearly demonstrates how racist America is as a country and how far we have to go to become a country that is civilized and actually values equal justice. We must not rest until this goal is achieved. I do not want my great grandchildren to live in a country like we have today. I wish for them to live in a country where differences of race and culture are not ignored but valued as a part of what makes America great.
President Trump pointing to a model of the new ballroom in the Oval Office in December.Doug Mills/The New York Times
What We’re Covering Today
“White House Ballroom: A federal judge ordered construction of President Trump’s White House ballroom halted on Tuesday, saying work must come to a stop “unless and until Congress blesses this project.” Mr. Trump quickly assailed the organization that sued over the project, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, calling it “a Radical Left Group of Lunatics” on social media. Read more ›
Public Media: The executive order Mr. Trump issued last year barring the federal government from funding NPR and PBS was unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday. But the ruling’s effect will be limited: Congress cut off federal money for public broadcasters last year. Read more ›
Trump Library: A two-minute video with renderings of Mr. Trump’s planned presidential library in Miami shows a skyscraper with a golden escalator and airplanes in the lobby. The video appeared to include elements generated by artificial intelligence: In one scene, an enormous American flag on the outside of the tower appears to have 56 stars.”
The Israeli Knesset passed a bill allowing the death penalty for Palestinians convicted of terrorism in the West Bank, sparking international condemnation. Critics, including the EU, Spain, and Germany, argue the law is discriminatory and a step towards apartheid, as it would not apply to Jewish extremists. The bill, which allows for executions within 90 days of sentencing, is facing legal challenges in Israel.
EU, Spain and Germany, as well as rights groups, condemn law to execute Palestinian convicted terrorists
Demonstrators raise their hands covered in red paint during a protest near the Knesset after Israel's parliament passed the death penalty law on Monday. Photograph: Ammar Awad/Reuters
A vote in the Israeli Knesset approving a bill sanctioning the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, but not Jewish extremists accused of similar crimes, has been greeted with widespread international condemnation.
“The death penalty bill in Israel is very concerning to us in the EU,” the EU spokesperson Anouar El Anouni said in Brussels. “This is a clear step backwards – the introduction of the death penalty, together with the discriminatory nature of the law.
The Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, described the bill as “a step closer to apartheid”, joining rights groups and politicians in expressing his concern.
“It is an asymmetric measure that would not apply to Israelis who committed the same crimes. Same crime, different punishment. That is not justice. It is a step closer to apartheid,” Sánchez wrote on X.
Germany, traditionally one of Israel’s closest allies in Europe said it could not endorse the new law. “The German government views the law passed yesterday with great concern,” the government spokesperson Stefan Kornelius said in a statement.
“The rejection of the death penalty is a fundamental principle of German policy,” Kornelius said, adding: “Such a law would likely apply exclusively to Palestinians in the Palestinian territories.”
The legislation makes the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed acts of terrorism by a military court.
According to the bill, those sentenced to death will be held in a separate facility with no visits except from authorised personnel, with legal consultations conducted only by video link. Executions will be carried out within 90 days of sentencing.
Israel has rarely used the death penalty, applying it only in exceptional cases. The Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed, in 1962.
The national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, one of the bill’s strongest backers, has repeatedly worn a noose-shaped lapel pin, symbolising executions under the proposal.
A security committee made some amendments to the bill, which last week passed its first vote. Israel’s public broadcaster KAN reported that executions would be carried out by hanging.
The measure will allow courts to impose the death penalty without a request from prosecutors and without requiring unanimity, instead permitting a simple majority decision. Military courts in the occupied West Bank will also be empowered to hand down death sentences, with the defence minister able to submit an opinion.
Adam Coogle, the deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, said: “Israeli officials argue that the imposing the death penalty is about security, but in reality it entrenches discrimination and a two-tiered system of justice, both hallmarks of apartheid.
“The death penalty is irreversible and cruel. Combined with its severe restrictions on appeals and its 90-day execution timeline, this bill aims to kill Palestinian detainees faster and with less scrutiny.”
Shaista Aziz, Oxfam’s campaign engagement lead, said: “This bill is another horrifying act of violence. Israel is violating international law. This new law effectively ensures that the death penalty in Israel will apply only to Palestinians, even as the illegal Israeli occupation has lately seen a surge in the coordinated attacks and executions of Palestinians by settler militias and military.
“Israel holds more than 9,000 Palestinians in its jails – many unlawfully and subject to inhumane conditions, starvation and torture as state policy.”
In Israel, the new law is already facing legal challenges. Several Israeli human rights groups and three members of parliament filed petitions to the supreme court seeking to overturn it.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel said the law created “two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians” and should be struck down on constitutional grounds.“
“The state and more than 20 others restrict therapists from trying to change the gender identity or sexual orientation of L.G.B.T.Q. clients under the age of 18.
Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor, at her office in Colorado Springs in September. Mrs. Chiles filed suit in 2022 over Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy for minors.Rachel Woolf for The New York Times
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sided with a Christian therapist, rejecting a Colorado law that prohibited mental health professionals from trying to change the sexual orientation or gender identity of L.G.B.T.Q. minors.
The court’s decision has implications for more than 20 other states that have similar laws barring so-called conversion therapy, which critics say is ineffective and potentially dangerous for young people.
In its decision, the court said the law, as applied to talk therapy, impermissibly interferes with free speech.
“Colorado may regard its policy as essential to public health and safety,” Justice Neil M. Gorsuch wrote for himself and seven other justices from across the ideological spectrum. “But the First Amendment stands as a shield against any effort to enforce orthodoxy in thought or speech in this country.”
Only Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, reading a lengthy summary of her opposition from the bench.
Justice Jackson warned of the broader implications for medical care that she said could be “catastrophic” if states cannot regulate some kinds of speech by licensed professionals.
“This decision might make speech-only therapies and other medical treatments involving practitioner speech effectively unregulatable,” she wrote, criticizing her eight colleagues for having made “this momentous decision without adequately grappling with the potential long-term and disastrous implications.”
Colorado’s statute, adopted in 2019, prohibits “any practice or treatment” that tries to change a minor’s “gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attraction or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”
State officials have never enforced the measure, which includes fines of up to $5,000 for each violation and possible suspension or revocation of a counselor’s license. The law includes a religious exemption for those “engaged in the practice of religious ministry.”
Kaley Chiles, an evangelical Christian, sued the state over the law in 2022, contending it prevented her from working with young patients who want to live a life “consistent with their faith.”
In her court filings, Mrs. Chiles said she was not seeking to “cure” clients of same-sex attractions or to “change” their sexual orientation, but rather to help patients with their own stated goals, which sometimes include “seeking to reduce or eliminate unwanted sexual attractions.”
Mrs. Chiles’s legal team told the court that the law should be subject to a demanding standard of judicial scrutiny that would require the state to show that its law advances a compelling government interest and is narrowly devised to do so. They say that if the law were subject to that higher standard, known as strict scrutiny, courts would find that it surely violates the Constitution. The therapist's position was backed in court by the Trump administration.
Colorado’s Democratic attorney general, Phil Weiser, defended the law, saying states have long regulated medical practices, including treatments carried out through speech, to protect patients from substandard care. He warned that a Supreme Court ruling against Colorado would undercut the ability of states to regulate other professions and make it harder to sue all kinds of professionals, including doctors and lawyers, for giving bad advice.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has issued a series of decisions in favor of religious people, notably conservative Christians. In 2023, the court sided with a web designer in Colorado who said the First Amendment allowed her to refuse to design wedding websites for same-sex couples. In 2022, the court said a high school football coach had a constitutional right to pray at the 50-yard line after his team’s games.
The Colorado therapist’s case was heard a few months after the court’s conservative majority upheld a Tennessee law barring certain medical treatments for transgender youths that the state deemed unsafe. In January, the justices also heard challenges to state laws in West Virginia and Idaho prohibiting transgender athletes from participating in girls and women’s sports. A ruling in that case is expected by this summer.
In general, the First Amendment prevents the government from restricting speech because it dislikes the content or message. But the Supreme Court has said certain restrictions aimed at governing a person’s conduct are permissible even if they incidentally burden speech.
In its opinion on Tuesday, the court rejected Colorado’s claim that the law represented the traditional licensing of the practice of medicine and only incidentally prohibited Mrs. Chiles’s speech.
“Instead, the state’s law trains directly on the content of her speech and permits her to express some viewpoints but not others,” Justice Gorsuch wrote.
The majority acknowledged that the question of “‘how best to help minors’ struggling with issues of gender identity or sexual orientation is presently a subject of ‘fierce public debate.’” But it concluded that Colorado’s law clearly censors speech in violation of the First Amendment.
“Every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth,” the opinion said. “However well intentioned, any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.”
The issue had split the lower courts. An appeals court in Florida found a set of similar local laws restricting therapy in the state was unconstitutional. A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit sided with Colorado, finding that talk therapy provided by a mental health professional is a medical treatment that can be regulated as part of the state licensure process.
Ann E. Marimow covers the Supreme Court for The Times from Washington.“
“The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstandingvalues. It is separate from the newsroom.
The Constitution grants sweeping pardon powers to the president, which means that public opinion has historically been the only check on that power. The risk of a backlash is the reason that presidents have waited until their last days in office to issue many pardons and commutations, especially dubious ones to family members (like Hunter Biden) or political allies (like Caspar W. Weinberger, whom George H.W. Bush pardoned). The potential for a backlash also made presidents cautious about the number of pardons they issued. They understood that there could be an outcry if somebody who received a pardon later committed a new crime. The pardon system has also relied on the decency of American presidents.
President Trump has abandoned this approach. His self-serving pardons are so numerous that public attention cannot keep up with them. It is a version of the strategy that his former adviser Steve Bannon has described as “flood the zone”: Do so much so fast that people cannot follow the consequences.
He has created a veritable pardon industry, in which people with White House connections accept payments from wealthy convicts. Among those on whom he has bestowed freedom are dozens of people convicted of fraud. He has also pardoned Juan Orlando Hernández, a former president of Honduras, who helped traffic hundreds of tons of cocaine into the United States, and Ross Ulbricht, who was serving a life sentence for running Silk Road, a sprawling criminal enterprise that sold drugs. There seems to be no crime too ugly for a Trump pardon.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning.
Worst of all, Mr. Trump granted clemency on the first day of his second term to everyone who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. He did not distinguish between rioters who were relatively peaceful and those who attacked police officers, as Vice President JD Vance said should be the case. About 1,500 Jan. 6 rioters received a clean slate, regardless of their actions.
The results have been disastrous. At least 12 of the pardoned rioters have since been charged with other serious crimes, including child molestation, assault, harassment, murder plots and charges related to a vicious dog attack. The outcome was predictable. Critics, including this board, had warned that Mr. Trump’s pardons would embolden the rioters by signaling that crime has no consequences. One does not have to be a criminologist to predict that people who commit a violent act and are absolved of any punishment might become repeat offenders.
The American public deserves to understand the mayhem that the Jan. 6 pardons have unleashed. Among the 12 serious recidivists whom we are aware of, four were in jail or prison at the time of the pardon, and they quickly went on to commit more crimes:
On March 5, a court in Florida sentenced Andrew Paul Johnson to life in prison for molesting a 12-year-old boy and a girl of the same age. To keep the children quiet, Mr. Johnson is said to have promised to bequeath to them part of a Jan. 6 restitution payment from the federal government that he claimed he would receive. He used the online gaming platforms Discord and Roblox to reach out to the children after Mr. Trump freed him from prison. On Jan. 6, Mr. Johnson entered the Capitol through a broken window and accosted police officers.
In the past two months, Jake Lang destroyed an ice sculpture outside the Minnesota State Capitol, leading to a felony vandalism charge, and helped organize an anti-Muslim rally in New York City that turned violent. On Jan. 6, he was caught on camera storming the Capitol with a baseball bat and a riot shield, which prosecutors said he used to attack police officers.
In May, Zachary Alam was arrested for breaking into a house in Virginia and stealing a tablet computer and a diamond necklace. On Jan. 6, he was among the first to enter the Capitol building from its west lawn and hurled items at police officers from a balcony. At his sentencing hearing, he was unrepentant: “Sometimes you have to break the rules to do what’s right.” He had previous convictions for auto theft and driving under the influence.
Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the far-right Proud Boys, scuffled with protesters at a news conference and was briefly detained on assault charges, a month after Mr. Trump freed him from a 22-year prison sentence. Mr. Tarrio was one of the leaders behind the Jan. 6 attack, but he was not in Washington on the day of the riot. He had been kicked out of the city after vandalizing a Black church after an earlier pro-Trump rally.
An additional eight Jan. 6 rioters were out of prison when Mr. Trump pardoned them and have since been charged with new crimes:
On March 25, a judge sentenced Daniel Tocci to four years in prison for possession of more than 110,000 child pornography images. During the Jan. 6 riot, he joined the mob as it broke into the Capitol and destroyed and took government property.
On March 1, Bryan Betancur grabbed a woman’s hair on the Washington Metro, leading to a charge of assault and battery. At least two women have also accused him of stalking. He was already on probation for a burglary conviction when he stormed the Capitol and helped rioters circulate furniture that most likely was used as weapons.
In October, Christopher Moynihan threatened to kill Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, and pleaded guilty to a harassment charge over the incident. On Jan. 6, he was among the first rioters to breach police barricades and eventually broke into the Senate chamber.
Robert Packer was arrested in September after his dogs attacked people, putting four in the hospital. He previously had a long criminal record that included theft and drunken driving, and during the Jan. 6 riot, he wore a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt.
John Andries violated a legal order requested by the mother of his child by repeatedly following and confronting her, leading to a sentence in June of 60 days in jail and three years of unsupervised probation. On Jan. 6, he entered the Capitol through a broken window and pushed police officers once inside.
Brent Holdridge was arrested in May for stealing tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of industrial copper wire. On Jan. 6, he was scheduled to be in jail on separate drug-related charges, but he skipped his booking and joined the mob as it breached the Capitol.
Jonathan Munafo was rearrested last year after he allegedly fled federal supervision imposed for dozens of menacing phone calls, including one in which he threatened to “cut the throat” of a 911 dispatcher. During the riots, he punched a police officer twice, stole his riot shield and used a wooden flagpole to try to break a window.
Days after he was pardoned, Matthew Huttle is said to have resisted arrest during a traffic stop, and a sheriff’s deputy shot and killed him. The police said he had a gun. On Jan. 6, he helped take over the Capitol and joined rioters in chanting, “Whose house? Our house.”
This list does not include at least 27 rioters who committed other crimes before they received their pardons. That group includes one woman who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for killing someone while driving drunk and a man who livestreamed a bomb threat while driving around Barack Obama’s neighborhood in Washington.
How can the nation hold Mr. Trump accountable for the lawlessness that he has made possible? The only answer is public opinion and its most tangible manifestation: election results.
In this year’s midterms, he and the Republican Party he leads deserve to pay a political price for the pardons. Mr. Trump continues to lionize a violent attack on Congress carried out in his name — an attack that included threats to kill the vice president of the United States and physical assaults against police officers guarding the Capitol. In the aftermath of the attacks, one officer suffered a series of strokes and died, and four other officers died by suicide.
Yet Mr. Trump still supports the rioters and lies about what happened that day. Congressional Republicans, for the most part, back him up. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said, referring to the blanket pardon, “I stand with him on it.” Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio has complained about the unpleasant nature of life in prison for the rioters before the pardons. Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado said she wanted to give the rioters a guided tour of the Capitol. Other Republicans, including the Senate majority leader, John Thune, have avoided answering questions about the pardons and said they involve “looking backward.”
The violence that the pardoned rioters continue to commit puts the lie to that weak excuse. The Jan. 6 pardons undermined the law, and they undermined public order. They were an affront to police officers everywhere. Mr. Trump has a constitutional right to pardon whom he chooses. The rest of us have a right to hold him and his enablers responsible for their actions.
The editorial board is a group of opinion journalists whose views are informed by expertise, research, debate and certain longstanding values. It is separate from the newsroom.“
“On February 28, a U.S.-made Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) struck a sports hall and school near a military compound in Lamerd, Iran, killing at least 21 people. The attack, which involved a weapon untested in combat, raises questions about its intentionality and the accuracy of the targeting. The PrSM, designed to replace the Army Tactical Missile System, is capable of hitting targets up to 400 miles away.
The Pentagon used missiles untested in combat in a deadly attack that struck civilian sites near a military compound on Feb. 28, according to visual evidence examined by The Times and weapons experts.
A camera captured the explosion over the sports hall.Shiraze News, via Telegram
On the first day of the war with Iran, a weapon bearing the hallmarks of a newly developed U.S.-made ballistic missile was used in an attack that struck a sports hall and adjacent elementary school near a military facility in southern Iran, according to weapons experts and a visual analysis by The New York Times. Local officials cited in Iranian media said this strike and others nearby in the city of Lamerd killed at least 21 people.
The Feb. 28 attack occurred the same day as a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile struck a school in the city of Minab, several hundred miles away, killing 175 people. In the case of Lamerd, though, it involved a weapon that had been untested in combat.
The Times verified videos of two strikes in Lamerd, as well as aftermath footage from the attacks. Times reporters and munitions experts found that the weapon features, explosions and damage are consistentwith a short-range ballistic missile called the Precision Strike Missile, or PrSM (pronounced like “prism”), which is designed to detonate just above its target and blast small tungsten pellets outward.
Videos that capture one strike, in a residential area about 900 feet from the sports hall and school, show the weapon in flight, with a distinctive silhouette that matches the PrSM. The missile erupts in a large fireball midair.
Another video, filmed from a security camera directly across from the sports hall, shows the strike on the hall and adjacent school. While the video does not capture an incoming missile, it clearly shows an explosion just above the structure.
Photos of the aftermath show both sites were pockmarked with holes, apparently from the tungsten pellets.
There is an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, or I.R.G.C., compound directly next to the sports hall. It’s not known if it was struck in the attack.
The PrSM completed prototype testing only last year, according to an Army press release. On March 1, U.S. Central Command posted a video of a PrSM launch from the first 24 hours of the war. Days later, Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads Central Command, said the PrSM had been used in combat for the first time. The military has been touting its debut.
Since the weapon is so new, it’s more difficult to assess whether the PrSM strikes in Lamerd were intentional, stemmed from a design flaw or manufacturing defect, or were the result of improper target selection.
It’s unclear if or how the school or sports hall might be affiliated with the I.R.G.C. compound, but according to archival satellite imagery, they have been walled off from the compound for at least 15 years.
Hole from
explosion
I.R.G.C.
compound
Compounds
are separated
by walls
Residential
area
Intelligence
office
Damage from
missile
Satellite image captured by Airbus DS on March 9.Leanne Abraham/The New York Times
The sports hall, at the time of the strikes, was being used by a female volleyball team, according to Amir Saeid Iravani, Iran’s representative to the United Nations. Photos and videos posted to a social media account linked to the school show the premises were regularly used by children. The sports hall has also for years been publicly identified as a civilian-use facility on readily available digital mapping platforms, including Google Maps, Apple Maps and Wikimapia, according to a review by The Times.
Ground-level and satellite images of the aftermath show the sports hall with scorch marks and a partly collapsed roof. Footage from inside the school shows blown-out windows, fire damage and splotches of blood.
The PrSM’s intended use is to kill enemy troops and destroy unarmored vehicles, and it can fly more than twice as far as any other missile in the Army’s arsenal.
A U.S. official who spoke to The Times confirmed that the missile used in the Lamerd strike was the PrSM. The official was not authorized to comment publicly about the attack and spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Other experts consulted by The Times also provided an assessment of the weapon.
“While we knew PrSM was fired, this is the first look we’ve gotten at the business end of the system,” Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear nonproliferation expert at Middlebury College, said after reviewing videos and photos of the incident.
Mr. Lewis’s observation was supported by Frederic Gras, another munitions expert.
He said the video showing airburst detonation was very clear, and “the pattern of fragmentation damages are impressive and match with the few technical information available on the PrSM.”
Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, said in a statement to The Times on Saturday: “We’re aware of the reports and are looking into them. U.S. forces do not indiscriminately target civilians, unlike the Iranian regime.”
Mr. Lewis said the missile seen in the video also resembled another ground-launched American weapon — a guided rocket called GMLRS-ER, but since that munition has a range of only 93 miles, versus the PrSM’s 400 miles, it would have had to have been fired from inside Iran, which is highly unlikely.
In addition to the sports hall and school, and nearby residential area, a third location may have been hit in the attack. The Times verified a video that shows another plume of smoke rising close to the other strikes at the same time. Local Telegram and media reports stated a cultural center had been hit, but that couldn’t be independently verified.
The BBC reported earlier that the missiles used in Lamerd may have been PrSMs.
The strikes on Iran are being conducted by a joint Israeli-U.S. coalition, but senior American military officials made it clear that in the opening days of the conflict the United States was operating in the southern part of the country, where Lamerd is located.
The footage of the weapon in flight and subsequently exploding in the residential area was broadcast by Fars, a semiofficial news agency affiliated with Iran’s security forces, and appears to originate from security cameras.
Another camera captures the explosion over the sports hall.
A video posted by a local Iranian media outlet showed the damaged interior of the adjacent school after the strike.
Photographs taken at the scene show the sports hall’s playground peppered and pockmarked, a pattern of damage consistent with the exploding warhead on a PrSM.
A similar fragmentation pattern appears in photos and video verified by The Times at the residential area just southeast of the sports hall, where the explosion destroyed an oil truck and damaged several shops and residential buildings. No large blast craters are visible at these locations — which is also consistent with an airbursting PrSM warhead.
At least 21 people were killed in the strikes, according to Iran’s state news agency, IRNA. While that figure has not been independently verified, photos and videos posted online by local media outlets show scenes from a mass funeral the next day, March 1. An additional hundred people were injured, said Mr. Iravani, Iran’s representative to the U.N.
Some of the casualties were volleyball players who were training inside the hall when the missile struck, according to Mr. Iravani, and eyewitnesses cited by U.S.-based online media outlet Drop Site News.
Tasnim, a semiofficial Iranian news agency, published the names of the 21 people it said were killed. An Iran-based journalist, Negin Bagheri, wrote about two of the victims: Helma Ahmadizadeh, a 10-year-old fourth-grader, and Elham Zaeri, a fifth-grader, both of whom were at volleyball practice when the missile struck. Khabar-e Jonoub, an Iranian newspaper, reported on the death of a sports coach identified as Mahmoud Najafi.
The PrSM is a short-range ballistic missile designed to replace the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, in the Army and Marine Corps arsenal. Developed by Lockheed Martin in Camden, Ark., it’s capable of hitting targets at a range of approximately 400 miles. But additional details about the weapon, including its expected accuracy and the quantity of explosives it carries, remain unknown to the public.
In past wars, the Pentagon has at times deployed developmental weapons like the PrSM to active war zones for what the military calls “combat evaluation,” so long as commanders knowingly accept the attendant risk of using a munition before it has gone through more testing.
Reporting was contributed by Alexander Cardia and Eric Schmitt. Video editing was contributed by Cynthia Silva.
Christiaan Triebert is a Times reporter working on the Visual Investigations team, a group that combines traditional reporting with digital sleuthing and analysis of visual evidence to verify and source facts from around the world.
John Ismay is a reporter covering the Pentagon for The Times. He served as an explosive ordnance disposal officer in the U.S. Navy.“
