• Police seek suspects in deadly birthday party shooting
  • Lawmakers launch inquires into U.S. boat strike
  • Nov. 29, 2025, 10:07 PM EST / Updated Nov. 30, 2025,…
  • Mark Kelly says troops ‘can tell’ what orders…

Be that!

contact@bethat.ne.com

 

Be That ! Menu   ≡ ╳
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics Politics
☰

Be that!

More than 130 arrested in Charlotte immigration raids

admin - Latest News - November 19, 2025
admin
15 views 25 secs 0 Comments



The Department of Homeland Security said some of those arrested previously faced charges including DUI and assault, but the agency did not specify how many of those detained have criminal histories. Across the city, chaotic encounters are stoking fears in immigrant communities. NBC News’ Ryan Chandler reports.



Source link

TAGS:
PREVIOUS
Source: Singer D4vd identified as suspect in connection with teen’s death
NEXT
Karen Read files lawsuit saying she was framed
Related Post
November 13, 2025
Nov. 13, 2025, 2:48 PM ESTBy Matt Dixon and Allan SmithPresident Donald Trump’s once unquestioned grip on his MAGA political base is showing signs of strain as some of his supporters have started pushing back on White House policy proposals they see as contrary to his long-held promises on immigration and the economy.As Trump takes heat from even the most loyal segments of his political base, he has remained defiant.“MAGA was my idea. MAGA was nobody else’s idea,” Trump told Fox News host Laura Ingraham in an interview that aired Monday. “I know what MAGA wants better than anybody else, and MAGA wants to see our country thrive.”Trump remains popular with Republicans, and he’s still able to make or break candidates in Republican primaries — 88% of Republican registered voters approved of Trump in the latest NBC News poll, conducted in late October, before the latest elections. Among voters who consider themselves part of the MAGA movement, it’s even higher — 96% — highlighting the loyalty he commands from core supporters. But there’s a belief among some of Trump’s MAGA supporters that is spilling out online that the president is increasingly swayed by wealthy donors who have access to him at private White House events, his exclusive Mar-a-Lago club and the luxury boxes he sits in when he attends sporting events, including a Washington Commanders football game on Sunday. “President Trump is instinctually America First, but things are seriously askew,” said Paul Dans, the architect of Project 2025 who is running against Trump-endorsed Sen. Lindsey Graham in South Carolina’s GOP primary. “America First is experiencing a hijacking right now. He’s [Trump’s] getting bad advice and is being kept in a bubble.”It’s a shift in focus that some on the right say can be traced back to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the influential conservative leader of Turning Point USA who was gunned down in September.“Charlie Kirk was the last person who could walk into the Oval Office and speak on behalf of the base,” Mike Cernovich, a prominent MAGA social media personality, posted on X. “Now it’s all donors.”The White House pushed back on the idea that Trump is distancing himself from the ethos of his MAGA agenda on key policy planks, such as on H-1B visas.“In record time, President Trump has done more than any president in modern history to tighten our immigration laws and put American workers first,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said.On Wednesday, the Trump administration had to contend with another issue that has divided and frustrated his base: the case of Jeffrey Epstein. The House Oversight Committee released more than 20,000 pages of Epstein emails — some of which discussed Trump. A bipartisan pair of House lawmakers also secured enough signatures — including from some Trump allies — to force a vote in the coming days compelling the Justice Department to release all of its documents in the Epstein case against Trump’s wishes. Democrats release Epstein emails mentioning Trump02:28A Trump ally said that if the issues prompting loud online pushback continue, there could be broader political problems electorally for Trump and Republicans. But, they said, they are not convinced that point has been reached yet, because past base concern has often been overblown.“Sure, could this all end up adding up and become a real problem? Yes, it could,” said the person, who, like others in this article, was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “But that, I do not think, is the point we are at yet. Worth watching, sure, but I think much of this will pass.”’What an atrocious thing to say’The right-wing backlash intensified this week following Trump’s interview with Ingraham, which aired Monday and Tuesday. Trump batted away concerns about affordability as a Democratic “con job,” and he said a controversial new proposal for 50-year mortgages was “not even a big deal.” He also talked up having 600,000 Chinese students study at U.S. universities and said the U.S. needed to bring in more workers from overseas through the H-1B visa program because native-born Americans lack “certain talents.” “What an atrocious thing to say,” actor and Trump supporter Kevin Sorbo posted on X of Trump’s comments on American workers. “This will cost republicans the midterms.” The H-1B visa issue has split two segments of the new GOP base. The right-wing MAGA supporters who have long backed Trump oppose the program because they believe it hands over jobs to foreigners that could be filled by Americans, while the tech industry, a newly powerful political force on the right, has long supported the program as a way to recruit high-skill labor. On his “Human Events” program Wednesday, right-wing influencer Jack Posobiec scrutinized Trump’s visa policy following his interview with Ingraham and asked Tom Sauer, another influencer on the right, “what message” the administration’s posture sends to MAGA supporters. “I think it really says we don’t value you as much,” Sauer said. “We worship GDP, and we worship profits more than we do the health of the American worker and the health of the American nation.”The White House pushed back on the idea that Trump’s recent comments were not aligned with the MAGA political base, noting an executive order he signed increasing the cost it takes to obtain an H-1B visa.“The $100,000 payment required to supplement new H1-B visa applications is a significant first step to stop abuses of the system and ensure American workers are no longer replaced by lower-paid foreign labor,” Rogers, the White House spokesperson, said. Trump administration raises fee for H-1B visas to $100,00000:49The idea for a 50-year mortgage — which was not something Trump previously touted — also faced withering criticisms. Commentators said the proposal would lead to homeowners paying significantly more in interest over the life of their mortgage, something that would benefit banks that hold those mortgages. “The idea behind the 15- and 30-year mortgage is that you eventually own the home you live in, whereas the 50-year mortgage abandons this pretense altogether and fully embraces the idea of housing as a speculative asset,” right-wing activist Christopher Rufo posted on X. “Not good, unless you’re a bank.”Others defended the president, saying critics had their facts wrong while acknowledging that the White House may need to work on its messaging. Trump said during his interview with Ingraham that he is comfortable with 600,000 Chinese students studying in American universities on visas — which is roughly current levels — but angered many in his MAGA base who believe Trump promised to decrease those numbers.“This is about one interview, not any policy changes,” a former Trump campaign official said of the Ingraham interview. “On the Chinese visas, he’s not pushing for more; it’s just the status quo. On H-1Bs, he signed an executive order making them more expensive, and the Labor Department has announced probes into H-1B abuse.”“So, it’s not like he did a 180 on anything,” the former official added. “It’s just bad clips from an interview.” ‘Get out and meet with the people’Trump has run all three of his presidential campaigns as a populist, but throughout this term, he has been surrounded by billionaires. At his inauguration, some of the richest men in the world — Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and tech titan Elon Musk — had VIP seats. Musk then became one of Trump’s top advisers, wreaking havoc on the federal government by trying to get rid of large numbers of civil servants. Trump frequently spends his weekends at Mar-a-Lago. He received criticism for hosting a lavish “Great Gatsby”-inspired Halloween party — with the theme “A Little Party Never Killed Nobody” — as federal workers went without pay and low-income food benefits were set to expire for millions of people during the government shutdown. Trump has also traveled across the country less in his second administration. At this point in his first term, he had gone to 27 states; this year, he’s done just 15. He hasn’t held a rally-style event since July 3. Trump has, however, done a significant amount of international travel, going to 14 countries.Dans said that as Americans are struggling with rising electric and utility bills, property taxes and health care premiums, the president needed to go around the country and hear from more than just the “Mar-a-Lago dining set.” “I would encourage the president to get out and meet with the people and actually hear from voices who are being shut out by the inner circle,” he said. Seeming to respond to right-wing criticism that the president’s attention has drifted from key domestic issues, Vice President JD Vance posted on X after last week’s Democratic electoral romps: “We need to focus on the home front.” “The president has done a lot that has already paid off in lower interest rates and lower inflation, but we inherited a disaster from Joe Biden and Rome wasn’t built in a day,” he added.This is not the first time this year Trump has faced pointed criticism from supporters. A number of prominent voices on the right raised objections to his decision to strike Iran over the summer amid its conflict with Israel. Many too blasted the administration for pledging to release a trove of information on Epstein before suddenly pulling back. That blowback subsided. But last week’s elections reignited some concerns, after Democrats performed better than expected in key races. NBC News polling released earlier this month showed that just 34% of registered voters believe Trump has “lived up” to expectations on the economy.The president “needs to recalibrate and address the big stuff,” one Trump ally said, pointing to inflation, jobs and the overall economy. This person also said the president needs to talk up policies from his so-called big, beautiful bill, which polling has found to be unpopular as a whole.“I’ve watched the right wing implode over the last two weeks and the reason we are is because many are afraid to legitimately criticize the admin,” Savanah Hernandez, a conservative political commentator, posted on X on Tuesday. “It’s our job to openly put the pressure on when we don’t feel the country is headed in the right direction.”But the former campaign official said on one of Trump’s core promises, immigration, he has been consistent. They noted that those who have been let into the country of late have mostly been white South Africans, a move largely backed by Trump supporters.“Obviously, refugee admissions are hilariously low and mostly white South Africans,” the person said, adding that “a lot of the loudest voices on the right online” tend to “spiral over everything.” “That is one thing hard to deal with,” they said.The most recent NBC News poll found Trump’s overall approval rating was at 43%, a 4-point dip from March, while 51% said he had lived up to their expectations on the issue of immigration and border security. Some allies pointed the finger less at Trump losing his way than how the White House has handled messaging.“The MAGA pushback on affordability wasn’t big until the H-1B visas [comment],” a Republican close to the White House said. “Now it’s a firestorm.”This person, who said the current White House messaging on the economy “appears pretty chaotic,” added that the way for the administration to turn the tide is to do a better job of informing the public how Trump’s policies are making life more affordable. “Don’t send him around the country cutting ribbons at factories,” this person said. “Come with facts.”Matt DixonMatt Dixon is a senior national politics reporter for NBC News, based in Florida.Allan SmithAllan Smith is a political reporter for NBC News.Henry J. Gomez, Jonathan Allen, Megan Shannon, Elyse Perlmutter-Gumbiner and Tara Prindiville contributed.
November 3, 2025
Airport Delays Mount Nationwide as Shutdown Enters 2nd Month
October 3, 2025
Tyrese Gibson booked on animal cruelty charges
November 18, 2025
Savewith a NBCUniversal ProfileCreate your free profile or log in to save this articleNov. 18, 2025, 5:00 AM ESTBy Jared PerloJudge Victoria Kolakowski sensed something was wrong with Exhibit 6C.Submitted by the plaintiffs in a California housing dispute, the video showed a witness whose voice was disjointed and monotone, her face fuzzy and lacking emotion. Every few seconds, the witness would twitch and repeat her expressions.Kolakowski, who serves on California’s Alameda County Superior Court, soon realized why: The video had been produced using generative artificial intelligence. Though the video claimed to feature a real witness — who had appeared in another, authentic piece of evidence — Exhibit 6C was an AI “deepfake,” Kolakowski said.The case, Mendones v. Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., appears to be one of the first instances in which a suspected deepfake was submitted as purportedly authentic evidence in court and detected — a sign, judges and legal experts said, of a much larger threat. Citing the plaintiffs’ use of AI-generated material masquerading as real evidence, Kolakowski dismissed the case on Sept. 9. The plaintiffs sought reconsideration of her decision, arguing the judge suspected but failed to prove that the evidence was AI-generated. Judge Kolakowski denied their request for reconsideration on Nov. 6. The plaintiffs did not respond to a request for comment.With the rise of powerful AI tools, AI-generated content is increasingly finding its way into courts, and some judges are worried that hyperrealistic fake evidence will soon flood their courtrooms and threaten their fact-finding mission. NBC News spoke to five judges and 10 legal experts who warned that the rapid advances in generative AI — now capable of producing convincing fake videos, images, documents and audio — could erode the foundation of trust upon which courtrooms stand. Some judges are trying to raise awareness and calling for action around the issue, but the process is just beginning.“The judiciary in general is aware that big changes are happening and want to understand AI, but I don’t think anybody has figured out the full implications,” Kolakowski told NBC News. “We’re still dealing with a technology in its infancy.”Prior to the Mendones case, courts have repeatedly dealt with a phenomenon billed as the “Liar’s Dividend,” — when plaintiffs and defendants invoke the possibility of generative AI involvement to cast doubt on actual, authentic evidence. But in the Mendones case, the court found the plaintiffs attempted the opposite: to falsely admit AI-generated video as genuine evidence. Judge Stoney Hiljus, who serves in Minnesota’s 10th Judicial District and is chair of the Minnesota Judicial Branch’s AI Response Committee, said the case brings to the fore a growing concern among judges. “I think there are a lot of judges in fear that they’re going to make a decision based on something that’s not real, something AI-generated, and it’s going to have real impacts on someone’s life,” he said.Many judges across the country agree, even those who advocate for the use of AI in court. Judge Scott Schlegel serves on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana and is a leading advocate for judicial adoption of AI technology, but he also worries about the risks generative AI poses to the pursuit of truth. “My wife and I have been together for over 30 years, and she has my voice everywhere,” Schlegel said. “She could easily clone my voice on free or inexpensive software to create a threatening message that sounds like it’s from me and walk into any courthouse around the country with that recording.”“The judge will sign that restraining order. They will sign every single time,” said Schlegel, referring to the hypothetical recording. “So you lose your cat, dog, guns, house, you lose everything.”Judge Erica Yew, a member of California’s Santa Clara County Superior Court since 2001, is passionate about AI’s use in the court system and its potential to increase access to justice. Yet she also acknowledged that forged audio could easily lead to a protective order and advocated for more centralized tracking of such incidents. “I am not aware of any repository where courts can report or memorialize their encounters with deep-faked evidence,” Yew told NBC News. “I think AI-generated fake or modified evidence is happening much more frequently than is reported publicly.”Yew said she is concerned that deepfakes could corrupt other, long-trusted methods of obtaining evidence in court. With AI, “someone could easily generate a false record of title and go to the county clerk’s office,” for example, to establish ownership of a car. But the county clerk likely will not have the expertise or time to check the ownership document for authenticity, Yew said, and will instead just enter the document into the official record.“Now a litigant can go get a copy of the document and bring it to court, and a judge will likely admit it. So now do I, as a judge, have to question a source of evidence that has traditionally been reliable?” Yew wondered. Though fraudulent evidence has long been an issue for the courts, Yew said AI could cause an unprecedented expansion of realistic, falsified evidence. “We’re in a whole new frontier,” Yew said.Santa, Calif., Clara County Superior Court Judge Erica Yew.Courtesy of Erica YewSchlegel and Yew are among a small group of judges leading efforts to address the emerging threat of deepfakes in court. They are joined by a consortium of the National Center for State Courts and the Thomson Reuters Institute, which has created resources for judges to address the growing deepfake quandary. The consortium labels deepfakes as “unacknowledged AI evidence” to distinguish these creations from “acknowledged AI evidence” like AI-generated accident reconstruction videos, which are recognized by all parties as AI-generated.Earlier this year, the consortium published a cheat sheet to help judges deal with deepfakes. The document advises judges to ask those providing potentially AI-generated evidence to explain its origin, reveal who had access to the evidence, share whether the evidence had been altered in any way and look for corroborating evidence. In April 2024, a Washington state judge denied a defendant’s efforts to use an AI tool to clarify a video that had been submitted. Beyond this cadre of advocates, judges around the country are starting to take note of AI’s impact on their work, according to Hiljus, the Minnesota judge.“Judges are starting to consider, is this evidence authentic? Has it been modified? Is it just plain old fake? We’ve learned over the last several months, especially with OpenAI’s Sora coming out, that it’s not very difficult to make a really realistic video of someone doing something they never did,” Hiljus said. “I hear from judges who are really concerned about it and who think that they might be seeing AI-generated evidence but don’t know quite how to approach the issue.” Hiljus is currently surveying state judges in Minnesota to better understand how generative AI is showing up in their courtrooms. To address the rise of deepfakes, several judges and legal experts are advocating for changes to judicial rules and guidelines on how attorneys verify their evidence. By law and in concert with the Supreme Court, the U.S. Congress establishes the rules for how evidence is used in lower courts.One proposal crafted by Maura R. Grossman, a research professor of computer science at the University of Waterloo and a practicing lawyer, and Paul Grimm, a professor at Duke Law School and former federal district judge, would require parties alleging that the opposition used deepfakes to thoroughly substantiate their arguments. Another proposal would transfer the duty of deepfake identification from impressionable juries to judges. The proposals were considered by the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules when it conferred in May, but they were not approved. Members argued “existing standards of authenticity are up to the task of regulating AI evidence.” The U.S. Judicial Conference is a voting body of 26 federal judges, overseen by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. After a committee recommends a change to judicial rules, the conference votes on the proposal, which is then reviewed by the Supreme Court and voted upon by Congress.Despite opting not to move the rule change forward for now, the committee was eager to keep a deepfake evidence rule “in the bullpen in case the Committee decides to move forward with an AI amendment in the future,” according to committee notes. Grimm was pessimistic about this decision given how quickly the AI ecosystem is evolving. By his accounting, it takes a minimum of three years for a new federal rule on evidence to be adopted.The Trump administration’s AI Action Plan, released in July as the administration’s road map for American AI efforts, highlights the need to “combat synthetic media in the court system” and advocates for exploring deepfake-specific standards similar to the proposed evidence rule changes. Yet other law practitioners think a cautionary approach is wisest, waiting to see how often deepfakes are really passed off as evidence in court and how judges react before moving to update overarching rules of evidence. Jonathan Mayer, the former chief science and technology adviser and chief AI officer at the U.S. Justice Department under President Joe Biden and now a professor at Princeton University, told NBC News he routinely encountered the issue of AI in the court system: “A recurring question was whether effectively addressing AI abuses would require new law, including new statutory authorities or court rules.”“We generally concluded that existing law was sufficient,” he said. However, “the impact of AI could change — and it could change quickly — so we also thought through and prepared for possible scenarios.”In the meantime, attorneys may become the first line of defense against deepfakes invading U.S. courtrooms. Louisiana Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal Judge Scott Schlegel.Courtesy of Scott SchlegelJudge Schlegel pointed to Louisiana’s Act 250, passed earlier this year, as a successful and effective way to change norms about deepfakes at the state level. The act mandates that attorneys exercise “reasonable diligence” to determine if evidence they or their clients submit has been generated by AI. “The courts can’t do it all by themselves,” Schlegel said. “When your client walks in the door and hands you 10 photographs, you should ask them questions. Where did you get these photographs? Did you take them on your phone or a camera?”“If it doesn’t smell right, you need to do a deeper dive before you offer that evidence into court. And if you don’t, then you’re violating your duties as an officer of the court,” he said.Daniel Garrie, co-founder of cybersecurity and digital forensics company Law & Forensics, said that human expertise will have to continue to supplement digital-only efforts. “No tool is perfect, and frequently additional facts become relevant,” Garrie wrote via email. “For example, it may be impossible for a person to have been at a certain location if GPS data shows them elsewhere at the time a photo was purportedly taken.”Metadata — or the invisible descriptive data attached to files that describe facts like the file’s origin, date of creation and date of modification — could be a key defense against deepfakes in the near future. For example, in the Mendones case, the court found the metadata of one of the purportedly-real-but-deepfaked videos showed that the plaintiffs’ video was captured on an iPhone 6, which was impossible given that the plaintiff’s argument required capabilities only available on an iPhone 15 or newer. Courts could also mandate that video- and audio-recording hardware include robust mathematical signatures attesting to the provenance and authenticity of their outputs, allowing courts to verify that content was recorded by actual cameras. Such technological solutions may still run into critical stumbling blocks similar to those that plagued prior legal efforts to adapt to new technologies, like DNA testing or even fingerprint analysis. Parties lacking the latest technical AI and deepfake know-how may face a disadvantage in proving evidence’s origin.Grossman, the University of Waterloo professor, said that for now, judges need to keep their guard up.“Anybody with a device and internet connection can take 10 or 15 seconds of your voice and have a convincing enough tape to call your bank and withdraw money. Generative AI has democratized fraud.”“We’re really moving into a new paradigm,” Grossman said. “Instead of trust but verify, we should be saying: Don’t trust and verify.”Jared PerloJared Perlo is a writer and reporter at NBC News covering AI. He is currently supported by the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism.
Comments are closed.
Scroll To Top
  • Home
  • Travel
  • Culture
  • Lifestyle
  • Sport
  • Contact Us
  • Politics
© Copyright 2025 - Be That ! . All Rights Reserved