Connect with us

Business

Down Arrow Button Icon

Published

on



The U.S. Justice Department has released tens of thousands more documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, a tranche that included multiple mentions of President Donald Trump but added little new revelatory information to the long-anticipated public file on the late financier and convicted sex offender.

The release is the most voluminous so far and comes after a massive public campaign for transparency into the U.S. government’s Epstein investigations.

Many of the mentions of Trump in the file came from news clippings, though it includes an email from a prosecutor pointing out the flights that Trump took on Epstein’s private jet during the 1990s.

The two men were friends for years before a falling out. Trump has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. The Justice Department issued a statement that some documents contain “untrue and sensationalist claims” about Trump made shortly before the 2020 election.

Here are some takeaways:

Prosecutor flagged Trump’s travel on Epstein’s jet

Among the mentions of Trump in the latest batch of the Epstein files is a note from a federal prosecutor from January 2020 that said Trump had flown on the financier’s private plane more often than had been previously known.

An assistant U.S. attorney from the Southern District of New York said in an email that flight records the office received on Jan. 6, 2020, showed that Trump was on Epstein’s jet “many more times than previously has been reported (or that we were aware).”

The prosecutor who flagged the Trump mentions in the flight logs said they did so because lawyers “didn’t want any of this to be a surprise down the road.”

His travels on Epstein’s plane spanned the time that would likely be covered in any criminal charges against Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell. Trump was listed as a passenger on at least eight flights between 1993 and 1996, and on at least four of those flights, Maxwell was also there, according to the email.

On one of those eight flights, in 1993, Trump and Epstein were the only two passengers listed in the flight logs. On another flight, the three passengers listed in records are Epstein, Trump, and a redacted individual, who was 20 years old at the time. Two other flights included two women — whose names were redacted in follow-up emails — identified as potential witnesses in a Maxwell case.

Several additional Trump trips on Epstein’s plane had been previously disclosed during Maxwell’s criminal proceedings.

Asked for comment about the email, the White House pointed to a Justice Department statement saying Monday’s release contained “unfounded and false” claims against the president submitted to the FBI shortly before the 2020 election, but they were nevertheless being released for full transparency.

The Justice Department specifically raised questions about the validity of a document mentioning Trump that was styled as a letter from Epstein to Larry Nassar, the sports doctor convicted of sexually abusing Olympic athletes. The department pointed out that it was processed three days after Epstein’s death.

Meanwhile, the latest release also shows that Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s southern Florida club, was served with a subpoena in 2021 for its employment records. The disclosure came as part of an email chain in which lawyers for the Southern District of New York and an attorney in touch with representatives for the Trump Organization discussed the employment status of someone whose name was redacted.

Trump calls the files a distraction

Trump complained that the files were a distraction from the work he and other Republicans are doing for the country.

Speaking during an unrelated event at his Mar-a-Lago home in Palm Beach, Florida, on Monday, the president blamed Democrats and some Republicans for the controversy.

“What this whole thing is with Epstein is a way of trying to deflect from the tremendous success that the Republican Party has,” Trump said.

He also expressed frustration about the famous people shown with Epstein in photos released by the Justice Department — people who he said may not have known him but ended up in the shot anyway.

“You probably have pictures being exposed of other people that innocently met Jeffrey Epstein years ago, many years ago. And they’re, you know, highly respected bankers and lawyers and others,” Trump said.

Other high-profile people are showing up in the files

Well-known people shown in the files include former President Bill Clinton, the late pop star Michael Jackson and singer Diana Ross. The mere inclusion of someone’s name or images in files from the investigation does not imply wrongdoing.

The latest release also includes files that put the U.K.’s former Prince Andrew back in the headlines.

Among those documents is correspondence between Maxwell and someone who signs off with the initial “A.”

The email exchange includes other references that suggest Maxwell’s correspondent may be Andrew. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The August 2001 email from someone identified only as “The Invisible Man,” said he is “up here at Balmoral Summer Camp for the Royal Family,” an apparent reference to the Scottish estate where the royal family have traditionally taken their late summer holidays.

“A” writes: “How’s LA? Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?”

The writer says he has left “the RN” and refers to the challenges of looking after “the Girls.” Andrew retired from the Royal Navy in 2001 and has two daughters.

Andrew, one of King Charles III’s younger brothers, was stripped of the right to be called a prince and his other royal titles and honors in October, amid continued publicity about his links to Epstein and concerns about the potential damage to the rest of the royal family. He is now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

Andrew has repeatedly denied committing any crimes, including having sex with Virginia Giuffre, who alleged that she was trafficked by Epstein and had sex with Andrew when she was 17.

Biggest information dump yet

Trump tried for months to keep the records sealed before relenting to political pressure, including from some fellow Republicans, though he eventually signed a bill mandating the release of most of the Justice Department’s files on Epstein.

Monday’s release was the biggest dump yet, including nearly 30,000 more pages. The data released by the law’s Friday deadline contained a fraction of that amount, mostly photographs taken during FBI searches of Epstein’s homes.

The new cache includes news clippings, emails and surveillance videos from the New York jail where Epstein was held before taking his own life in 2019, much of which was already in the public domain.

The law called for the files to be released within 30 days, but the Justice Department has instead released them in stages starting Friday. Officials have said they’re going slowly to protect victims, though some women assaulted by Epstein have spoken out publicly to call for greater transparency.

And the administration is facing fierce accusations that it is withholding too much information. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the tens of thousands of files released still left “more questions than answers.” He pointed to a 2019 FBI email that mentions 10 people under investigation as possible co-conspirators but contains few additional details.


Associated Press writer Darlene Superville in Washington and Danica Kirka in London contributed to this report.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

OpenAI says prompt injections that can trick AI browsers may never be fully ‘solved’

Published

on



OpenAI has said that some attack methods against AI browsers like ChatGPT Atlas are likely here to stay, raising questions about whether AI agents can ever safely operate across the open web. 

The main issue is a type of attack called “prompt injection,” where hackers hide malicious instructions in websites, documents, or emails that can trick the AI agent into doing something harmful. For example, an attacker could embed hidden commands in a webpage—perhaps in text that is invisible to the human eye but looks legitimate to an AI—that override a user’s instructions and tell an agent to share a user’s emails, or drain someone’s bank account.

Following the launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT Atlas browser in October, several security researchers demonstrated how a few words hidden in a Google Doc or clipboard link could manipulate the AI agent’s behavior. Brave, an open-source browser company that previously disclosed a flaw in Perplexity’s Comet browser, also published research warning that all AI-powered browsers are vulnerable to attacks like indirect prompt injection.

“Prompt injection, much like scams and social engineering on the web, is unlikely to ever be fully ‘solved,’” OpenAI wrote in a blog post Monday, adding that “agent mode” in ChatGPT Atlas “expands the security threat surface.”

OpenAI said that the aim was for users to “be able to trust a ChatGPT agent,” with Chief Information Security Officer Dane Stuckey adding that the way the company hopes to get there is by “investing heavily in automated red teaming, reinforcement learning, and rapid response loops to stay ahead of our adversaries.”

“We’re optimistic that a proactive, highly responsive rapid response loop can continue to materially reduce real-world risk over time,” the company said.

Fighting AI with AI

OpenAI’s approach to the problem is to use an AI-powered attacker of its own—essentially a bot trained through reinforcement learning to act like a hacker seeking ways to sneak malicious instructions to AI agents. The bot can test attacks in simulation, observe how the target AI would respond, then refine its approach and try again repeatedly.

“Our [reinforcement learning]-trained attacker can steer an agent into executing sophisticated, long-horizon harmful workflows that unfold over tens (or even hundreds) of steps,” OpenAI wrote. “We also observed novel attack strategies that did not appear in our human red teaming campaign or external reports.”

However, some cybersecurity experts are skeptical that OpenAI’s approach can address the fundamental problem. 

“What concerns me is that we’re trying to retrofit one of the most security-sensitive pieces of consumer software with a technology that’s still probabilistic, opaque, and easy to steer in subtle ways,” Charlie Eriksen, a security researcher at Aikido Security, told Fortune.

“Red-teaming and AI-based vulnerability hunting can catch obvious failures, but they don’t change the underlying dynamic. Until we have much clearer boundaries around what these systems are allowed to do and whose instructions they should listen to, it’s reasonable to be skeptical that the tradeoff makes sense for everyday users right now,” he said. “I think prompt injection will remain a long-term problem … You could even argue that this is a feature, not a bug.”

A cat-and-mouse game

Security researchers also previously told Fortune that while a lot of cybersecurity risks were essentially a continuous cat-and-mouse game, the deep access that AI agents need—such as users’ passwords and permission to take actions on a user’s behalf—posed such a vulnerable threat opportunity it was unclear if their advantages were worth the risk. 

George Chalhoub, assistant professor at UCL Interaction Centre, said that the risk is severe because prompt injection “collapses the boundary between the data and the instructions,” potentially turning an AI agent “from a helpful tool to a potential attack vector against the user” that could extract emails, steal personal data, or access passwords.

“That’s what makes AI browsers fundamentally risky,” Eriksen said. “We’re delegating authority to a system that wasn’t designed with strong isolation or a clear permission model. Traditional browsers treat the web as untrusted by default. Agentic browsers blur that line by allowing content to shape behavior, not just be displayed.”

OpenAI recommends users give agents specific instructions rather than providing broad access with vague directions like “take whatever action is needed.” The browser also has extra security features such as “logged out mode”— which allow a users to use it without sharing passwords— and “Watch mode”—which is a security feature that requires a user to explicitly confirm sensitive actions such as sending messages or making payments.  

“Wide latitude makes it easier for hidden or malicious content to influence the agent, even when safeguards are in place,” OpenAI said in the blogpost.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Down Arrow Button Icon

Published

on



Powerball’s $1.7 billion jackpot may create a new ultrarich winner, but financial planners say what happens after the drawing can matter more than the winning numbers. They describe a consistent set of mistakes that can quietly turn a once‑in‑a‑lifetime windfall into a long, public mess.

Rushing big decisions

Many experts warn that acting too quickly—quitting a job, claiming the prize immediately, or committing to big purchases—is one of the most damaging errors. Articles in outlets including CNBC, NerdWallet, and USA Today emphasize slowing down, taking time to process the shock, and making no irreversible decisions until a plan is in place.

A related misstep is choosing between the lump sum and annuity on instinct instead of analysis, even though that decision locks in tax timing, investment options, and how long the money is likely to last. Financial writers note that many winners default to the lump sum without modeling scenarios with professionals and understanding that, after taxes, the headline $1.7 billion quickly shrinks.

Going public and losing privacy

Coverage in CNBC highlights that bragging about your win on social media or talking openly about it can invite lawsuits, scams, and constant money requests. Advisors repeatedly stress “keep it quiet” and, where allowed, explore ways to claim through a trust or remain anonymous to avoid becoming a target.​​

Experts also point out that winners often underestimate the emotional toll of overnight fame, which can strain marriages, friendships, and even personal safety if boundaries are not set early.

Skipping a professional team

A recurring theme across NerdWallet, Business Insider, and other outlets is that trying to DIY a nine‑ or 10‑figure fortune is a costly mistake. Financial planners urge winners to assemble a small, vetted team—typically an attorney, a tax professional, and a fiduciary advisor with experience in sudden wealth—before claiming the prize.

Winners also get into trouble when they rely on friends or relatives who “know about money” instead of credentialed experts, a pattern cited in guidance from Northwestern Mutual and others on working with lottery clients.

Overspending and assuming the money is infinite

Business Insider’s reporting on advisors who work with lottery winners notes that many clients behave as if the balance can’t be depleted, only to burn through wealth with multiple mansions, jets, and speculative investments. Experts describe unchecked lifestyle inflation and “spend, spend, spend” behavior as one of the most common paths to regret, especially for lump‑sum recipients.

Financial outlets also emphasize that winners often fail to set a sustainable withdrawal rate or diversify, ignoring the reality that the money is finite and that even ultra‑large fortunes can erode through taxes, market volatility, and ongoing costs like property taxes and maintenance.

Poor boundaries with family, friends, and causes

Advisors interviewed by Northwestern Mutual and others say another frequent mistake is giving without a plan: ad hoc loans, endless gifts, and open‑ended promises that create resentment when the answer finally becomes “no.” They suggest that winners instead define a clear gifting and philanthropy framework upfront—including who gets what and how much is reserved for charity—to avoid both over‑giving and relationship damage.

Experts further warn that feeling obligated to become a one‑person safety net or charity can derail long‑term goals and quickly consume capital, especially when requests are amplified by public attention.

Neglecting long‑term planning and purpose

Guides from major financial firms emphasize that many winners focus on immediate fantasies—houses, cars, travel—and neglect estate planning, debt strategy, and long‑term investing. Advisors recommend tackling basics like wills, trusts, and tax‑efficient structures early, so the windfall will benefit multiple generations, if desired.

Several profiles of past winners also point to a subtler mistake: not thinking about life after the headlines, which can leave people isolated, directionless, or vulnerable to bad ideas when the novelty fades. For the future holder of the $1.7 billion ticket, experts suggest that pairing technical planning with a clear sense of purpose could be the difference between a brief lucky streak and durable, generational wealth.

For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Advocacy group slams Trump’s plan to garnish wages of student loan borrowers in default

Published

on



The Trump administration said on Tuesday that it will begin garnishing the wages of student loan borrowers who are in default early next year.

The department said it will send notices to approximately 1,000 borrowers the week of January 7, with more notices to come at an increasing scale each month.

Millions of borrowers are considered in default, meaning they are 270 days past due on their payments. The department must give borrowers 30 days notice before their wages can be garnished.

The department said it will begin collection activities, “only after student and parent borrowers have been provided sufficient notice and opportunity to repay their loans.”

In May, the Trump administration ended the pandemic-era pause on student loan payments, beginning to collect on defaulted debt through withholding tax refunds and other federal payments to borrowers.

The move ended a period of leniency for student loan borrowers. Payments restarted in October of 2023, but the Biden administration extended a grace period of one year. Since March 2020, no federal student loans had been referred for collection, including those in default, until the Trump administration’s changes earlier this year.

The Biden administration tried multiple times to give broad forgiveness to student loans, but those efforts were eventually stopped by courts.

Persis Yu, deputy executive director for the Student Borrower Protection Center, criticized the decision to begin garnishing wages, and said the department had failed to sufficiently help borrowers find affordable payment options.

“At a time when families across the country are struggling with stagnant wages and an affordability crisis, this administration’s decision to garnish wages from defaulted student loan borrowers is cruel, unnecessary, and irresponsible,” Yu said in a statement. “As millions of borrowers sit on the precipice of default, this Administration is using its self-inflicted limited resources to seize borrowers’ wages instead of defending borrowers’ right to affordable payments.”


The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.