Article Outline

The revelation that police mishandled multiple blackmail cases targeting men on Grindr—some ending tragically in suicide—has sent shockwaves through the LGBTQ+ community and beyond. But this is not just a story about missed evidence and procedural errors. It’s about how hidden bias and a lack of understanding can leave entire communities at risk.

Hertfordshire Police are under fire for failing to properly investigate a gang blackmailing men via Grindr, with the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) questioning whether ‘homophobic assumptions’ played a role in their lackluster response. The consequences were not just administrative—at least two men, Scott Gough and Liam McHale, died after being targeted, their families left searching for answers and justice.

Why This Matters

• Digital blackmail is a rising threat—especially for LGBTQ+ individuals who already face stigma.
• Police bias, even if unconscious, can lead to devastating investigative failures.
• When law enforcement doesn’t take LGBTQ+ victims seriously, it signals to perpetrators that these crimes are low-risk.
• The emotional toll on families and communities is compounded by a lack of closure or accountability.

What Most People Miss

• These cases aren’t isolated. Blackmail and extortion via dating apps is a nationwide, often underreported epidemic.
• Victims may avoid reporting for fear of outing themselves or facing further discrimination—a vicious circle that emboldens criminals.
• Despite having clear digital footprints (phone numbers, car registration), police failed to pursue obvious leads—no DNA, no questioning of suspects, no arrests.
• Charities note that police responses to LGBTQ+ crimes are a postcode lottery: some officers are sensitive and proactive, while others display ignorance or bias.

Key Takeaways

• Police oversight bodies now demand investigations into whether homophobia influenced police work.
• Families of victims feel their cases were ‘swept under the mat’—and many are still waiting for justice.
• Dating apps like Grindr are pressured to balance privacy and user safety—collecting more identity data could help, but also risks outing vulnerable users.
• Systemic change is needed: better police training, clearer protocols for digital blackmail, and more LGBTQ+ community engagement.

Timeline: The Grindr Blackmail Scandal

1. March 2024: Scott Gough is targeted by a gang demanding his car; he dies by suicide the next day.
2. Within 10 days: Police receive more blackmail reports linked to the same phone number.
3. Two months later: Liam McHale, another victim, dies after being blackmailed in a similar fashion.
4. 2024–2025: Multiple investigations and complaints are opened, but families say progress is painfully slow and incomplete.

Expert Commentary & Industry Context

“Romance fraud, harassment or blackmail are not easy crimes to solve. There is a digital footprint but it’s not always straightforward.” — Natalie Sherborn, White-collar Defence & Investigations, Withers Law Firm

But ‘not easy’ isn’t an excuse for neglect. In a digital-first dating world, crimes like these are only set to rise. According to Stonewall, nearly 1 in 5 LGBT people have experienced a hate crime or incident in the last year.

• LGBTQ+ anti-abuse charities like Galop highlight that police understanding varies wildly, with victims’ experiences ranging from supportive to dismissive.
• Grindr itself claims to work with law enforcement but resists collecting more user data to protect closeted users from being outed—an understandable but double-edged sword.

Action Steps & Practical Implications

• If you’re a dating app user, never meet someone new in a private or unmonitored location.
• Document all interactions—screenshots, messages, phone numbers—and report threats immediately, not just to police but also to the app provider and LGBTQ+ support groups.
• Push for police accountability: Demand transparent investigations and adequate training in digital and LGBTQ+ victim support.
• Support charities lobbying for better laws and protections—change starts with community pressure.

The Bottom Line

This isn’t just about individual tragedy—it’s about systemic gaps in policing, the vulnerability of marginalized groups in the digital era, and the urgent need for reform. Until police, tech companies, and society tackle both the technology and the bias, more lives will be at risk—and more families left in the dark.

Sources:

• Source
• BBC Actionline
• Stonewall Hate Crime Statistics

In a bold move, UK regulator Ofcom slapped AVS Group Ltd—a pornographic website operator—with a £1 million fine for refusing to comply with the new Online Safety Act. But here’s the plot twist: AVS hasn’t even bothered to reply. This isn’t just a regulatory slap on the wrist; it’s a revealing moment about the challenges regulators face in the digital wild west.

Despite multiple attempts by Ofcom to contact AVS since July, the company has responded with a digital shrug: complete silence. This resulted in an extra £50,000 penalty—and the threat of another £1,000 fine for every day compliance is delayed. If you think this is just about porn sites, think again. The ramifications ripple through the entire tech landscape.

Why This Matters

• The Online Safety Act is a landmark law designed to protect children from explicit content by requiring “highly effective age assurance”—a step up from previous, easily bypassed measures.
• AVS Group’s radio silence exposes how easily global companies can evade UK regulators, especially when they’re registered in offshore jurisdictions like Belize.
• Ofcom’s actions show regulators are finally flexing their muscles, but also highlight the limits of their reach—especially when companies play hide and seek across borders.

What Most People Miss

• Fines alone rarely change behavior for giant online platforms, especially when penalties are a rounding error compared to their profits.
• Business disruption, not fines, is the real motivator. As Baroness Kidron pointed out, unless regulators are willing to really disrupt operations, tech firms may continue to thumb their noses at the law.
• Implementation is everything. Age checks can be bypassed using simple VPNs, meaning determined users can still sidestep the rules.
• This is not a one-off. 4Chan has also ignored Ofcom fines, and a “major social media company” remains under compliance scrutiny.

Key Takeaways

• Regulatory muscle is growing, but enforcement is still tricky—especially with companies operating from legal grey zones.
• There’s a global game of cat-and-mouse between regulators and tech firms. Expect more dramatic standoffs as digital borders remain fuzzy and hard to police.
• Real impact is already visible: Pornhub, for example, saw a 77% drop in UK visitors after age checks went live.
• The Act is evolving—with new guidelines introduced to protect women and girls and a promise to “name and shame” non-compliant platforms.

Industry Context & Comparisons

• The Online Safety Act follows a broader international trend: Australia, Germany, and France have all enacted or proposed tough digital safety regulations in recent years.
• Deepfake “nudify” apps have also been fined, underscoring how regulators are targeting not just adult content but a spectrum of online harms.
• Offshore registration, as seen with AVS Group, is a classic tactic to dodge accountability—an issue regulators worldwide are still struggling to crack.

Pros and Cons of the Current Approach

• Pros: Public pressure on tech firms is rising; visible fines raise awareness; some compliance (e.g., visitor drop on Pornhub) is happening.
• Cons: Enforcement is slow; easy technical workarounds exist; penalties may not bite hard enough; global companies can simply ignore regulators.

Action Steps and Practical Implications

1. Expect stricter follow-up and possible service blockages for persistent offenders.
2. Watch for increased international cooperation as more countries coordinate digital safety enforcement.
3. For parents and educators: don’t rely solely on tech solutions—digital literacy and open conversations remain crucial.

The Bottom Line

The Ofcom vs. AVS Group saga is more than a regulatory slap-fest—it’s a wake-up call about the complexities of online safety in a borderless world. As regulators ramp up, tech companies will need to decide: comply, disrupt, or disappear from key markets. Either way, the days of unaccountable online platforms are (slowly) coming to an end.

Sources:

• Source
• BBC: Deepfake ‘nudify’ apps fined
• BBC: 4Chan refuses Ofcom fine
• BBC: Pornhub sees 77% UK traffic drop
• BBC: Safer internet for women and girls

When the US men’s soccer team beat Iran in the World Cup, headlines celebrated the victory. But if you only focus on the score, you’re missing the true story—the extraordinary courage shown by the Iranian players, who put far more on the line than just a spot in the knockout rounds.

This wasn’t just another game. For Iran’s team, every minute on the pitch carried political and personal risk. In a World Cup defined by the suppression of dissent, their choice to play, their actions, and even their silence became acts of protest and solidarity with a nation in turmoil.

Why This Matters

• Players as Protesters: Iran’s team represented more than football—they symbolized resistance. By refusing to sing the national anthem earlier in the tournament, they sent a message to millions under an oppressive regime.
• Global Spotlight: With eyes worldwide on Qatar, the bravery of Iran’s players brought attention to the struggles of ordinary Iranians, particularly women fighting for basic rights.
• Sports and Politics Collide: This match shattered the old cliché that ‘sports transcend politics.’ It proved that, sometimes, the pitch is precisely where politics play out most powerfully.

What Most People Miss

• The personal stakes for Iranian players are enormous. Returning home after public acts of dissent can mean interrogation, punishment, or worse. Their courage isn’t abstract—it’s visceral.
• The US team’s diversity is a story in itself. With 12 Black players—matching the total from three prior squads combined—the US team reflects a changing America. But as one fan pointed out, the women’s team remains more successful and still paid less, highlighting ongoing gender inequities in US soccer.
• Even among fans, loyalties are complex. The bar scene described in the article shows that identity, politics, and global events shape who we root for—and why—far beyond flags and anthems.

Key Takeaways

• Iran’s players demonstrated that courage isn’t always about winning. Playing under threat, they became symbols of hope for millions.
• Sport is a powerful amplifier for social issues. The World Cup stage gave dissent a megaphone heard around the world.
• Fans’ perspectives are shifting. Many now see the game as more than competition—it’s a reflection of global injustices and a stage for solidarity.

Expert Commentary & Industry Context

Tim Weah, US player, on Iran’s team: “They displayed so much pride and love for their country and their people. They are an inspiration.”

According to human rights organizations, Iranian athletes have repeatedly faced government retaliation for supporting protest movements. The team’s silent protests echoed similar acts from athletes worldwide—think Muhammad Ali, Colin Kaepernick, and Marcus Rashford—showing how sports can drive cultural conversations.

Globally, FIFA has long tried to keep politics out of football, but events like these show that’s impossible. The real question: will sports organizations evolve to support, rather than silence, athletes taking a stand?

Timeline: Key Moments

1. Pre-tournament: Iran’s players refuse to sing the national anthem—an unprecedented act.
2. During tournament: International media spotlight and government warnings intensify.
3. Post-match: Iranian players return home facing an uncertain—and potentially dangerous—future.

The Bottom Line

The US may have won the game, but Iran’s players won global respect. Their actions were a reminder that, sometimes, the bravest thing you can do is stand up—quietly or loudly—when the world is watching, and when your own future hangs in the balance.

Sources:

• Source
• USMNT Roster Diversity – Washington Post
• Tim Weah’s Instagram Post (via Twitter)

Flight delays and cancellations are making headlines—again. But this isn’t just another bad travel season. The scale and persistence of disruption at US airports reflect deeper issues that go far beyond bad weather and overbooked planes.

Let’s cut through the noise and dig into what’s really happening, why it matters, and what you need to know if you’re planning to fly anytime soon.

Why This Matters

• The travel chaos isn’t a one-off event; it’s a symptom of systemic problems in the aviation industry.
• With over 11,000 delays and 2,000+ cancellations in just one day, the ripple effects impact not just passengers, but the entire travel economy.
• The upcoming holiday season could see even worse gridlock as airlines have already begun slashing schedules to cope.

Key Takeaways

• Extreme weather isn’t just inconvenient—it’s becoming the new norm. Dallas–Fort Worth Airport recorded 9.19 inches of rain in 24 hours, its second-wettest day ever.
• Staffing shortages are compounding the problem. When crews “clock out,” flights get canceled—even after passengers wait hours on the tarmac.
• Major hubs like Newark, Dallas–Fort Worth, and LaGuardia are most affected, creating a domino effect across the country.
• Airlines are proactively cutting thousands of flights for the fall, signaling little hope for quick improvement.

What Most People Miss

• Delays are not just about weather or angry crowds. They reveal vulnerabilities in how airlines and airports are staffed and managed, especially post-pandemic.
• Airport infrastructure is aging, making it even harder to adapt to sudden surges in demand or weather extremes.
• Passengers rarely get clear communication. Being asked to board, deplane, and reboard—only to have the flight canceled—is both demoralizing and disruptive.
• Frequent delays erode trust in air travel, pushing some travelers to consider alternatives like trains, cars, or even video calls instead of in-person meetings.

Industry Context & Comparisons

• According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, flight cancellations in the US are up 69% year-over-year since 2019.
• Europe faced similar chaos earlier in the summer, but many airlines there responded with better passenger rights and compensation.
• US airlines, under pressure to return to profitability, may be underestimating the long-term reputational cost of repeated disruptions.

Timeline: Summer 2023 Flight Headaches

1. Early summer: Surge in post-pandemic travel demand catches airlines off guard.
2. June–July: Staffing shortages and storms lead to rolling delays and cancellations nationwide.
3. August: Record rainfall at Dallas–Fort Worth triggers one of the worst days of travel chaos.
4. Fall: Airlines announce preemptive cuts to schedules ahead of holiday rush.

Pros & Cons: Should You Fly This Fall?

• Pros: Some flights may be less crowded due to schedule reductions. Airlines are increasingly transparent about delays.
• Cons: Greater risk of last-minute cancellations, missed connections, and lengthy tarmac waits. Rebooking options are limited.

Action Steps for Travelers

• Book direct flights when possible to reduce missed connections.
• Sign up for real-time flight alerts from your airline and FlightAware.
• Travel with essentials in your carry-on in case of long waits or overnight stays.
• Consider travel insurance that covers delays and cancellations.

The Bottom Line

The current wave of flight delays is a wake-up call for the entire industry. Until airlines, airports, and regulators address the root causes—staffing, infrastructure, and climate resilience—travelers will need to pack their patience along with their passports.

Sources:

• FlightAware – Cancellations Data
• National Weather Service – Record Rainfall
• First-hand passenger reports
• Source

The House Judiciary Committee, led by Rep. Jim Jordan, has made headlines for aggressively scrutinizing Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s investigation into Donald Trump. But there’s a glaring omission: no comparable attention to the red flags swirling around Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his financial ties to GOP megadonor Harlan Crow.

This selective oversight raises questions about priorities, political motivations, and the larger issue of accountability at the highest levels of government. Let’s go beyond the headlines and unpack why this matters, what most people are missing, and what history shows us about Congress’s role in judicial ethics.

Why This Matters

• Judicial integrity is the bedrock of a functioning democracy. If Supreme Court justices are perceived as compromised, trust in the entire legal system erodes.
• Congressional oversight isn’t optional—it’s a constitutional check. The House Judiciary Committee is supposed to safeguard the justice system, not selectively defend political allies while ignoring serious ethical questions elsewhere.
• The Supreme Court has no formal code of conduct—unlike every other federal court. The public relies on Congress to step in when self-policing fails.

Key Takeaways

• Clarence Thomas accepted decades of undisclosed luxury travel and real estate deals from Harlan Crow—potentially violating federal disclosure laws.
• Ethics experts widely regard Thomas’s lack of disclosure as a breach. Four told ProPublica that his omissions appear to break the law.
• The same House Judiciary Committee that historically investigated and recommended impeachment for ethical breaches (see: Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr., 2010) is now silent on Thomas.
• The Senate Judiciary Committee, meanwhile, is moving forward with hearings on Supreme Court ethics, highlighting the partisan divide in congressional oversight.

What Most People Miss

• This isn’t just a Clarence Thomas story—it’s an institutional failure story. The real scandal is that the mechanisms for accountability are being weaponized for partisan ends, not public trust.
• According to a 2023 Gallup poll, trust in the Supreme Court is at a historic low (25% of Americans express “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence).
• History shows that when Congress ignores credible ethics concerns (see the 1969 Abe Fortas resignation), it invites further erosion of public faith in the judiciary.
• The financial entanglements exposed by ProPublica are not isolated incidents—they point to the need for systemic reform in judicial ethics at the highest level.

Pros and Cons: Congressional Inaction

• Pros (for those in power): Avoids uncomfortable political battles; shields allies; keeps partisan momentum.
• Cons (for the nation): Damages credibility of oversight; sets dangerous precedent; undermines public trust in the courts.

Timeline: Congressional Responses to Judicial Ethics

1. 2010: House Judiciary Committee investigates Judge Porteous, recommends impeachment.
2. 2023: ProPublica exposes Thomas’s undisclosed gifts and real estate deals.
3. 2023: House Judiciary Committee focuses on defending Trump, ignores Thomas revelations.
4. 2023: Senate Judiciary Committee announces hearings on Supreme Court ethics standards.

Action Steps: What Can Be Done?

• Congress should hold hearings on Supreme Court ethics and update disclosure laws.
• Public pressure and media scrutiny can force transparency and accountability.
• Support bipartisan efforts to establish a Supreme Court code of conduct.

“The Committee on the Judiciary has been called the lawyer for the House of Representatives. Under Jordan, that description needs to be updated to state that the Committee on the Judiciary is now the lawyer for Donald J. Trump.”

The Bottom Line

Congressional oversight should not be a partisan tool. The Clarence Thomas-Harlan Crow revelations demand the same rigorous scrutiny that lesser scandals have received in the past. When political leaders pick and choose which ethical breaches to address, it’s the public—and the credibility of our institutions—that pays the price.

Sources:

• Source
• ProPublica: Clarence Thomas Undisclosed Luxury Travel
• CNN: Thomas Failed to Disclose Real Estate Deal
• House Judiciary Committee: About
• Gallup: Supreme Court Confidence Poll

The world’s demand for critical minerals is heating up, but few headlines dig into the human fallout. The US and EU-backed Lobito Corridor project in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is a case in point: a multi-billion-dollar railway and infrastructure initiative promising to turbocharge copper and cobalt exports, but potentially at the expense of thousands of Congolese residents.

According to Global Witness, up to 6,500 people—many from Kolwezi’s poorest neighborhoods—face displacement as old railway lines are revived and expanded. The project sits at the intersection of green energy ambitions, local livelihoods, and global power plays between the West, China, and Gulf states. Let’s unpack why this matters and what most people miss.

Why This Matters

• Critical minerals like cobalt and copper are the backbone of electric vehicles and renewable tech, making the DRC, with the world’s largest cobalt reserves, a global hotspot.
• The Lobito Corridor is not just a railway—it’s a geopolitical chess piece. The West seeks to reduce its reliance on Chinese-controlled supply routes and mines.
• Local communities, with little political clout, risk becoming collateral damage in this global scramble. This isn’t new: resource extraction in Africa has often come at a steep local cost.

What Most People Miss

• Legal limbo and the legacy of informal settlements: Many Kolwezi residents built homes near the railway with unofficial permission or bought land from non-official sources. For decades, enforcement of buffer zones was lax, creating a gray area in property rights.
• Conflicting claims about the ‘buffer zone’: Is it 10 meters or 25 meters from the tracks? This simple question has big implications for who stays and who goes.
• The West’s push for ‘ethical minerals’ is complicated by uncertainty over compensation and resettlement. Past evictions in the area reportedly happened with little or no compensation—a red flag for current residents.
• The project is a test case for Western ‘green’ investments in Africa. Can they actually deliver higher social and environmental standards, or will they repeat old mistakes?

Key Takeaways

• Global stakes, local struggles: The minerals race could help decarbonize the planet—but at what cost to those living near the rails?
• Promises vs. reality: While EU officials tout high standards and community consultation, actual implementation often lags behind rhetoric.
• Transparency and accountability are crucial: Without clear plans for resettlement and compensation, the project risks fueling resentment and instability.
• Comparative context: Similar infrastructure projects elsewhere in Africa and Asia have frequently led to displacement without adequate safeguards—will the Lobito Corridor be different?

Timeline: The Lobito Corridor Project

1. Colonial era: Benguela railway connects mineral-rich inland DRC to Angola’s coast.
2. 1980s: Railway falls into disuse amid conflict and neglect.
3. 2023: Lobito Atlantic Railway (LAR) consortium wins a 30-year concession to rehabilitate and operate the railway.
4. 2024–2025: Major financing commitments from US, EU, and private sector; rehabilitation works begin, sparking displacement fears.

Pros and Cons Analysis

• Pros:
  • Boosts global supply of critical minerals for green tech
  • Potential for regional economic development
  • Could reduce global dependency on China
• Cons:
  • Risk of mass displacement without fair compensation
  • Potential for community conflict and instability
  • History of poor human rights protection in similar projects

Expert Commentary

“You can’t say [the residents] are ‘illegal’. No one has prevented them from building. They’ve been left to live there for 10, 20, 30 years.”
— Donat Kambola, Initiative pour la Bonne Gouvernance et les Droits Humains (IBGDH)

The Bottom Line

The Lobito Corridor is a microcosm of the challenges facing the global energy transition: how to balance urgent climate goals with the rights and needs of local communities. As the world races toward a green future, the real test will be whether projects like this can avoid repeating the injustices of the past. Will the West walk the talk on social responsibility, or will Congolese families once again pay the price for ‘progress’?

Sources:

• Global Witness Report
• Mining.com: Angola’s Railway Funding
• Bloomberg: LAR Consortium Investment
• US DFC: Lobito Corridor Investments
• EU Investments in Zambia
• Source

The next chapter in the Ukraine conflict is unfolding—not on the battlefield, but in high-stakes meeting rooms from Moscow to Miami. With the US special envoy Steve Witkoff set to meet Ukraine’s top security official Rustem Umerov in Florida, just days after marathon talks with Vladimir Putin, the world is watching. But what’s really at stake here? And what are most people missing about these negotiations?

This isn’t just another diplomatic pit stop. The Miami meeting signals a new phase in a war that’s as much about geopolitics as it is about territory. The US is stepping up its behind-the-scenes diplomacy, while Europe redraws its energy and security lines, and Russia, emboldened by recent military gains, is turning up the pressure. Here’s what you need to know.

Why This Matters

• The US is taking a more hands-on approach, signaling both urgency and a willingness to find solutions outside traditional channels. The involvement of high-level envoys and even Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, hints at a more personalized, possibly unconventional diplomatic strategy.
• Moscow’s battlefield momentum is influencing negotiation dynamics. Russia claims to control nearly 20% of Ukraine, with incremental advances in the east. This emboldens its negotiating position and shapes what it’s willing to concede.
• Europe is drawing a hard line on energy independence. The EU’s new deal to end Russian gas imports by 2027 isn’t just about economics—it’s a strategic move to cut off a major Kremlin lever.

What Most People Miss

• Ukraine’s NATO membership isn’t just a bargaining chip—it’s the heart of the security debate. Russia and even the US have shown reluctance, but for Ukraine and its European allies, it’s seen as the only real deterrent against future aggression.
• The financial undercurrents are massive. The EU is proposing a €90bn support package for Ukraine, with debates about using frozen Russian assets. This could radically reshape how war reparations and post-war reconstruction are handled globally.
• Humanitarian concerns remain a flashpoint. Over 19,000 Ukrainian children have reportedly been deported to Russia, leading to an unprecedented joint UN demand for their return and an ICC warrant for Putin.

Key Takeaways & Expert Perspective

• Negotiations are far from linear. Despite “reasonably good” US-Russia talks, no breakthrough was achieved, and major sticking points remain: occupied territories and Ukraine’s future security architecture.
• Pressure is mounting on all sides: Zelensky insists that talks must be backed by pressure on Russia, while the Kremlin accuses Europe of sabotaging peace and postures for more meetings.
• Energy and economic levers are being pulled hard. The EU’s ban on Russian gas pipelines from September 2027 and LNG contracts from January 2027 is a tectonic shift. This will affect not just Russia’s economy, but global energy markets and alliances.
• Legal and financial innovation (or risk): The proposal to use frozen Russian assets for Ukraine’s aid is a legal minefield, with Belgium and the ECB voicing concerns. If it goes through, it could set a precedent for future conflicts.

Comparisons & Timeline

• Past peace efforts in conflicts like Syria and the Balkans often stalled on territorial and security guarantees—echoes seen here.
• Timeline:
  1. US and European leaders meet for initial drafts of a peace deal.
  2. Witkoff and Kushner spend five hours with Putin—no compromise reached.
  3. EU finalizes deal to cut Russian gas imports by 2027.
  4. Upcoming US-Ukraine talks in Miami, with key outcomes to watch.

The Bottom Line

Don’t expect a dramatic handshake or a ceasefire tomorrow. Instead, expect a slow, grinding process where military realities, financial engineering, and shifting alliances all play a role. What’s clear is that each side is recalibrating—militarily, economically, and diplomatically—while millions of lives hang in the balance.

Action Steps & Implications:

• Watch for concrete outcomes from the Miami talks—especially any signs of compromise on territory and security.
• Monitor how the EU’s energy divorce from Russia affects prices and geopolitics.
• Keep an eye on legal moves regarding Russian assets—this could set a global precedent.

“Right now, the world clearly feels that there is a real opportunity to end the war. But negotiations must be backed by pressure on Russia.” — Volodymyr Zelensky

Sources:

• Source
• What latest Ukraine talks reveal about Putin’s state of mind
• More than 19,000 Ukrainian children have been forcibly deported to Russia
• US Politics Unspun