Romanian pleads guilty to 'swatting' US lawmakers and top officials
By Raphael Satter
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A Romanian man has pleaded guilty to participating in a years-long series of dangerous hoax phone calls and bomb threats targeting American legislators, law enforcement leaders, and government officials, the U.S. Justice Department said Monday.
In a statement, the department said that Thomasz Szabo, 26, who was extradited to the United States last year, admitted targeting more than 75 officials, four religious institutions, and multiple journalists in his campaign of intimidation. Officials said Szabo targeted private residences, including the homes and families of senior government officials.
Authorities say Szabo routinely phoned in bomb threats and reports of ongoing violence or hostage situations at his targets' homes or places of work, a technique called 'swatting' because it is meant to elicit the emergency deployment of heavily armed police officers.
Emails seeking comment from Szabo's lawyers were not immediately returned.
Justice officials described Szabo as the leader of a group that made a series of false reports to U.S. law enforcement, including a December 2020 threat to commit a mass-shooting at New York City synagogues and a January 2021 threat to detonate explosives at the U.S. Capitol and kill then-President-elect Joe Biden.
The department said that, in a two-month period alone, members of Szabo's gang targeted at least 25 members of Congress or their family members, six then-current or former senior U.S. federal officials, "including multiple cabinet-level officials," at least 13 then-current or former senior federal law enforcement officials, including the heads of multiple federal law enforcement agencies. Others targeted included members of the federal judiciary, state government officials, and members of the media.
It was during that time that one of Szabo's subordinates boasted of "creating massive havoc" in the United States, the department said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth says ‘Iran has a choice,' US not seeking regime change
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Sunday morning that Iran faces a choice between a negotiated settlement or an escalating conflict with the U.S. after strikes hit three nuclear sites in the country on Saturday. 'Now is the time to come forward for peace,' Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon along with Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan 'Razin' Caine. 'And I think Tehran is certainly calculating the reality that planes flew from the middle of America and Missouri overnight, completely undetected over three of their most highly sensitive sites, and we were able to destroy nuclear capabilities,' he added. Caine said the damage assessment was ongoing but that all three nuclear sites targeted in the strikes sustained 'severe damage and destruction.' Trump on Saturday said the facilities had been 'obliterated.' Iran signaled little interest in diplomacy in the hours after the strikes, dubbed as Operation Midnight Hammer. 'The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences,' Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Aragaci posted on the social media site X shortly after the strikes. 'In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people.' Hegseth said Saturday's strikes were limited in scope, but pointed to President Trump's warning on Truth Social that 'any retaliation by Iran against the United States will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight.' The Pentagon chief said the operation was 'not and has not been about regime change' in Iran. He said it had set back Iran's nuclear timeline. Caine also provided new details about the operation during Sunday's briefing, which he called the largest B-2 bomber operation in history. He said the U.S. dropped 75 guided weapons on the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear enrichment and research sites. This included 14 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, the first operational use of the weapon, and two dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from a submarine, he said. A total of 125 aircraft were involved in the mission. The B-2 bombers involved in the operation flew 37 hours non-stop from their base in Missouri, refueling in the air. Caine said that a group of the bombers had been deployed west over the Pacific Ocean as a decoy. The weapons were dropped in a window from 6:40 p.m. to 7:05 p.m. Eastern time. Trump announced the strike via a Truth Social post about 45 minutes later. The American forces appear to have gone undetected in Iranian airspace. Caine said no shots were fired at American aircraft, nor did Iran's missile defense system notice them. 'Throughout the mission, we retained the element of surprise,' he said. Hegseth said Congress was only notified of the attacks after warplanes had dropped their payload and exited Iranian airspace. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle accused the administration of violating the Constitution, which requires congressional approval before entering foreign wars. 'This is not Constitutional,' Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted as the news broke. Massie sponsored a House resolution earlier this week to require Congressional authorization for any strike in Iran. Vice President Vance, a veteran and frequent skeptic of foreign intervention, congratulated the troops and others involved in the strike on Sunday morning. 'I think what they did was accomplish a very core American national objective. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapons program,' said in an interview on ABC News.
31 minutes ago
'This Week' Transcript 6-22-25: Vice President of the United States JD Vance, Sen. Tom Cotton & Rep. Jim Himes
A rush transcript of "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" airing on Sunday, June 22, 2025 on ABC News is below. This copy may not be in its final form, may be updated and may contain minor transcription errors. For previous show transcripts, visit the "This Week" transcript archive. JONATHAN KARL, ABC "THIS WEEK" CO-ANCHOR: Mr. Vice President, thank you for joining us. The big question right now is the United States -- J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thanks, Jon. Thanks for having me. KARL: Sure thing. The big question, is the United States now at war with Iran? VANCE: No, we're not at war with Iran, Jon. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program. And I think the president took decisive action to destroy that program last night. If I could step back a little bit. We have to give an incredible amount of gratitude to the troops who did an amazing thing last night. Think about this, Jon, they threw -- they flew thousands of miles away, a 30-hour non-stop flight. They never touched down on the ground. And they dropped a 30,000-pound bomb on a target about the size of a washing machine. No military in the world has the training, the skills and the equipment to do what these guys did last night. I know the president and I are both very proud of them. And I think what they did was accomplish a very core American national objective. Iran cannot have a nuclear weapons program. The president's been very clear about this. And thanks to the bravery and competence and skill of our great pilots and everybody who supported this mission, we took a major step forward for that national objective last night. KARL: It certainly was a complex and overwhelming mission, 125 aircraft involved, we are told. Can you say definitely that Iran's nuclear program has -- has now been destroyed? VANCE: Well, Jon, I don't want to get into the sensitive intelligence here, but we know that we've set the Iranian nuclear program back substantially last night. Whether we -- whether it's years or beyond that, we know it's going to be a very long time before Iran can even build a nuclear weapon if they want to. But I actually think that raises the most important question. The president talked about this last night. We want Iran to give up their nuclear weapons program peacefully. But there is no way that the United States is going to let Iran have a nuclear weapon. And so, they really have to choose a pathway, Jon, are they going to go down the path of continued war, of funding terrorism, of seeking a nuclear weapon, or are they going to work with us to give up nuclear weapons permanently. If they're willing to choose the smart path, they're certainly going to find a willing partner in the United States to dismantle that nuclear weapons program. But if they decide they're going to attack our troops, if they decide they're going to continue to try to build a nuclear weapon, then we are going to respond to that with overwhelming force. So really what happens next is up to the Iranians. KARL: So -- but -- but let me drill down on what was accomplished, because there's a -- there's a report this morning in 'The New York Times' that Fordo, that deep, underground enrichment facility, was severely damaged, but not fully destroyed. But the president said last night the enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Can -- can we say that definitively, or are we just not sure yet? I mean, have those facilities been obliterated? VANCE: Well, Jon, severely damaged versus obliterated, I'm not exactly sure what the difference is. What we know is we set their nucleal program back substantially. KAR: Well -- well, one -- I mean -- VANCE: And I -- again, Jon, I don't want to get into very sensitive intelligence about what we know, but I feel extremely confident, and I can say to the American people with great confidence that they are much further away from the nuclear program today than they were 24 hours ago. That was the objective of the mission, to destroy that Fordo nuclear site and, of course, do some damage to the other sites as well. But we feel very confident that the Fordo nuclear site was substantially set back, and that was our goal. KARL: The -- the UN's atomic energy watchdog said that Iran had 900 pounds of highly enriched uranium. What -- do we know what has become of that? Is -- was it destroyed in this attack? Do we know? That's a big stockpile. VANCE: Well, we're going to work in the coming weeks -- yes, Jon, we're going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel. And that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about. But what we know, Jon, is they no longer have the capacity to turn that stockpile of highly enriched uranium to weapons grade uranium. And that was really the goal here. Uranium is not that difficult to come by, Jon, but enriching uranium up to the point of a nuclear weapon, that is what the president put a stop to last night. KARL: This morning, the Russian reaction caught -- caught my eye. Dmitri Medvedev, of course, the former president, prime minister of Russia, now, the deputy chairman of Russia's security council, said the enrichment of nuclear material, and now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons will continue. A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads. What do you make of that Russian response? And are they -- they off base? I mean they're -- they're saying that the nuclear program in Iran is -- is still well underway. VANCE: Well, first of all, I think it's a bizarre response, but I also don't know that that guy speaks for President Putin or for the Russian government. One of the things that we've picked up, Jon, in our conversations with the Russians over the last few months, despite our many disagreements, of course, with the state of Russia, they've been very consistent that they don't want Iran to get a nuclear weapon. And -- and this is what I think many commentators underappreciated about what the president did last night. Iran having a nuclear weapon, nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, is a disaster for pretty much everybody. It's one of the few issues where Russia, China and the United States have broad agreement is that we don't want to see a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. So, what the president did was very important. I'll -- I'll let President Putin speak to what the official Russian position on this is. But I feel very confident that both for Russia, for China, and most importantly, of course, for us, we don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. And I think that that goal is going to continue to animate American policy for the next few years. KARL: Well, President Trump, last night, also threatened additional military action if Iran retaliates or if peace does not come quickly. How quickly are we talking about? Are we talking about days? Are we talking about weeks? VANCE: Well, look, Jon, I'll let the president make those determinations, actually. But we're now going to have a serious conversation about how to get rid of Iran's nuclear weapons program permanently, meaning they have to choose not to have a nuclear weapons program, and they have to give this thing up. Now, if you go back a little bit, Jon, what we have said consistently and repeatedly is, they cannot have a nuclear weapon. We accomplished the goal of putting them back substantially last night. But there are two big things that the Iranians are going to have to choose from here. Number one, do they attack American troops in the region? If they do, as the president said, you're going to see overwhelming force from the Americans. If they continue to pursue a nuclear weapon, you're also going to see overwhelming force from the American people. So, we've got really the ball in Iran's court here. If they make smart decisions, I think they're going to find us willing to work with them. If they continue to support terrorism, nuclear weapons programs, then they're going to find overwhelming American force from the American military. That is really the choice before the Iranians. And that's a choice only they can make. KARL: So, what retaliation are you expecting? I mean I know what you're hoping for, but they have vowed retaliation. What are you prepared for? What are you expecting from the Iranians? VANCE: Well, it's always hard to guess what the other side is going to do. But what we're prepared for is, if they attack us in a maximal direction, first of all, we have got maximum defensive posture. I think that we're going to be able to defend as many of our people as possible. And, of course, I'd encourage Americans to pray for our guys in the Middle East because, yes, they are under a significant amount of duress and a significant amount of threat right now. But then, of course, Jon, if the Iranians attack us, they're going to be met with overwhelming force. And I don't think the president could be clearer about this. If -- if you look at what we did yesterday, Jon, we did not attack the nation of Iran. We did not attack any civilian targets. We didn't even attack military targets outside of the three nuclear weapons facilities that we thought were important to accomplish our goal of preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon. So, how Iran responds, I think, is ultimately the ball is in their court. But if you look at what we did, it was very precise, very narrowly tailored to our objective. And if the Iranians decide to expand this, then that's ultimately their decision. And the president of the United States will respond in kind. KARL: So -- so you're raising the real possibility that this is not the end of this conflict, but the beginning of this conflict. You know, U.S. response to -- to Iranian retaliation. There's one thing the president has been really consistent about throughout his entire life in politics, and that is the idea of no more wars. Let me play you what he said on election night and, of course, at his inauguration. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm not going to start a war. I'm going to stop wars. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps, most importantly, the wars we never get into. (END VIDEO CLIP) KARL: So -- so let me ask you, what do you say to those, including some of the president's strongest supporters who were really worried this morning that the United States is now involved in yet another protracted war, conflict, whatever you want to call it, in the Middle East? VANCE: Well, first of all, Jon, I think the president has been very clear that we are not interested in protracted conflicts in the Middle East. But there's a question about, how do you achieve peace? And we believe the way that you achieve peace is through strength. We took a very narrow and limited approach to destroying the Iranian nuclear program, Jon. That's what the president did. And I think that, more than anything, is going to ensure a peaceful resolution in that region of the world. You can't be weak. You can't sit there and allow the Iranians to achieve a nuclear weapon, Jon, and expect that's going to lead to peace. It would lead to absolutely disastrous military conflict all over the Middle East. We don't want that. Our Gulf Arab nation allies don't want that. Israel doesn't want that. And it's one of the few issues, frankly, that unites the Arabians to the Israelis is none of them want the Iranians to get a nuclear weapon, because they know that it would lead to the opposite of peace. And so, I'd say to people who are worried about a protracted military conflict is, number one, the president, more than anybody, is worried about protracted military conflicts. That is not what we're getting ourselves involved in. What we're getting ourselves involved in is a very targeted effort to eliminate the Iranian nuclear program. That will continue to be the goal of American foreign policy. And it's that goal that is going to motivate our action in the -- in the weeks and months to come. KARL: But -- but this was, as we discussed, a complex and overwhelming military action last night. And the president is vowing something bigger if the Iranians respond by retaliating. He's also raised the specter of targeting the supreme leader himself. As you know, earlier in the week he said he knew where this -- where the ayatollah is hiding and that he would be an easy target. Has the U.S. ruled out targeting the -- the supreme leader in Iran? Has the U.S. ruled out trying to achieve regime change? VANCE: Well, first of all, we don't want to achieve regime change. We want to achieve the end of the Iranian nuclear program. Jon. That's America's objective. And that's what the president has set us out to do. The president, in the very tweet you mentioned, or the Truth that you mentioned, Jon, said explicitly that he's not trying to take out the Iranian supreme leader. He's trying to take out their nuclear program. And, of course, we took a major step forward with that last night. And again, Jon, I think we have to back up and -- and -- and test some premises here. How do you achieve long term peace? How do you prevent spiraling Middle Eastern conflict? Is it through overwhelming military power targeted to an American objective, or is it by sort of walking yourself into these long-term, protracted military conflicts? I think by choosing overwhelming force and overwhelming force tied to something that is important to the American people, that is the end of the Iranian nuclear program, we can achieve peace much more fully than if we sort of sit on our hands and hope that somehow, if the Iranians get a nuclear weapon, they're going to be more peaceful. That is a stupid approach, and the president rejected it.
San Francisco Chronicle
36 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Nations react to US strikes on Iran with many calling for diplomacy
Several close U.S. allies urged a return to the negotiating table in the wake of American strikes on Iran that fueled fears of a wider conflict, while noting the threat posed by Tehran's nuclear program. Some countries and groups in the region, including those that support Iran, condemned the move while also urging de-escalation. U.S. President Donald Trump had said Thursday that he would decide within two weeks whether to get involved in Israel's war with Tehran. In the end, it took just days. Washington hit three Iranian nuclear sites early Sunday. While the amount of damage remained unclear, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the U.S. had 'crossed a very big red line,' the time for diplomacy was over and Iran had the right to defend itself. Some have questioned whether a weakened Iran would capitulate or remain defiant and begin striking with allies at U.S. targets scattered across the Gulf region. Here is a look at reactions from governments and officials around the world. United Nations U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the use of force by the United States. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,' he said in a statement on the social media platform X. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate.' 'There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy.' United Kingdom British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for Iran to return to the negotiating table to diplomatically end the crisis, saying stability was the priority in the volatile region. The U.K., along with the European Union, France and Germany, tried unsuccessfully to broker a diplomatic solution in Geneva last week with Iran. Starmer said Iran's nuclear program posed a grave threat to global security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the U.S. has taken action to alleviate that threat,' Starmer said. Russia Dmitry Medvedev, who serves as deputy head of President Vladimir Putin's Security Council, said several countries were prepared to supply Tehran with nuclear weapons. He didn't specify which countries, but said the U.S. attack caused minimal damage and would not stop Tehran from pursuing nuclear weapons. Russia's Foreign Ministry said it 'strongly condemned' the airstrikes and called them a 'a gross violation of international law, the U.N. Charter, and U.N. Security Council resolutions.' Iraq The Iraqi government condemned the U.S. strikes, saying the military escalation created a grave threat to peace and security in the Middle East. It said it poses serious risks to regional stability and called for diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the crisis. 'The continuation of such attacks risks dangerous escalation with consequences that extend beyond the borders of any single state, threatening the security of the entire region and the world,' government spokesman Bassem al-Awadi said in the statement. Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia expressed 'deep concern' about the U.S. airstrikes, but stopped short of condemning them. 'The Kingdom underscores the need to exert all possible efforts to exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and avoid further escalation,' the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Saudi Arabia had earlier condemned Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and military leaders. Qatar Qatar, which is home to the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, said it 'regrets' escalating tensions in the Israel-Iran war. Its Foreign Ministry in a statement urged all parties to show restraint and 'avoid escalation, which the peoples of the region, burdened by conflicts and their tragic humanitarian repercussions, cannot tolerate.' Qatar has served as a key mediator in the Israel-Hamas war. Hamas and the Houthis Both the Houthi rebels in Yemen and Hamas have condemned the U.S. strikes. In a statement on Sunday, the Houthi political bureau called on Muslim nations to join 'the Jihad and resistance option as one front against the Zionist-American arrogance.' Hamas and the Houthis are part of Iran's so-called Axis of Resistance, a collection of pro-Iranian proxies stretching from Yemen to Lebanon that for years gave the Islamic Republic considerable power across the region. Lebanon Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the U.S. bombing could lead to a regional conflict that no country could bear and called for negotiations. 'Lebanon, its leadership, parties, and people, are aware today, more than ever before, that it has paid a heavy price for the wars that erupted on its land and in the region,' Aoun said in a statement on X. 'It is unwilling to pay more.' Pakistan Pakistan blasted the U.S. strikes as a 'deeply disturbing' escalation just days after it nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize for his diplomatic intervention with the India-Pakistan crisis. 'These attacks violate all norms of international law,' the government said in a statement. 'Iran has the legitimate right to defend itself under the U.N. Charter.' China China condemned U.S. strikes on Iran, calling them a serious violation of international law that further inflamed tensions in the Middle East. In a statement, the Chinese Foreign Ministry urged all parties — especially Israel — to implement a cease-fire and begin dialogue. 'China is willing to work with the international community to pool efforts together and uphold justice, and contribute to the work for restoring peace and stability in the Middle East,' the ministry said. European Union The European Union's top diplomat said Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, but she urged those involved in the conflict to show restraint. 'I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation,' EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said in a post on social media. Italy Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said Iran's nuclear facilities 'represented a danger for the entire area' but hoped the action could lead to de-escalation in the conflict and negotiations. European Council President Antonio Costa said he was 'deeply alarmed' by the bombings and called on all parties to 'show restraint and respect for international law and nuclear safety.' 'Too many civilians will once again be the victims of a further escalation,' Costa added. 'The EU will continue engaging with the parties and our partners to find a peaceful solution at the negotiating table.' Netherlands Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp, whose country is hosting a summit of NATO leaders including Trump on Tuesday and Wednesday, said the government's national security council would meet later to discuss the issue. He said said the U.S. attacks amounted to 'a further escalation of a worrying situation in the Middle East.' Japan Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba told reporters Sunday that it was crucial to calm the situation as soon as possible, adding that the Iranian nuclear weapons development also must be prevented. Ishiba, asked if he supports the U.S. attacks on Iran, declined to comment. The Vatican Pope Leo XIV made a strong appeal for peace during his Sunday Angelus prayer in St. Peter's square, calling for international diplomacy to 'silence the weapons.' After an open reference to the 'alarming' situation in Iran, the first American pontiff stressed that 'today more than ever, humanity cries out and invokes peace and it is a cry that demands reason and must not be stifled.' Pope Leo urged every member of the international community to take up their moral responsibility to 'stop the tragedy of war before it becomes an irreparable abyss.'
