The US President is due to arrive in Ireland on Saturday, as his son insisted the family receives ‘love and respect’ from the Irish people

Advertisement

Donald Trump’s son said the President is willing to open his arms to anyone, but also ready to go head-to-head with anyone, ahead of his expected arrival in Ireland.

Eric Trump was speaking before President Trump touches down in Dublin on Saturday morning amid a major security operation.

In an interview with Irish national broadcaster at Trump International Golf Club in Doonbeg, Co Clare, on Friday, he confirmed his father is “definitely coming”.

A number of protests are expected at President Trump’s presence in Ireland at the weekend, and he is to meet with Irish president Catherine Connolly who previously took part in a protest against him during a visit to Ireland in 2019.

Asked how he thought the meeting with Ms Connolly will go, Mr Trump said: “Honestly, I leave it to them. I have seen so much political nonsense over the last 12 years where one day two people hate each other and the next day the two people are hugging.

“What I’ll say is my father is willing to open his arms to anyone, and he is also willing to go head-to-head with anyone. You’ve seen that in the Oval Office and around the world.

“As a person who loves his country, do I hope that the meeting goes exceptionally well, and is that what I expect, of course. That’s normally the respect that you have if a person goes to the US or if another foreign leader comes here, that’s normally the respect that they have for one another.

“It’s pretty rare that it goes off the rails, so I don’t expect it to.”

Mr Trump also said he believes some protesters are “paid to protest”.

“I’ve dealt with so many of these protests over the years where most of the time half the people are paid to actually protest,” he said, adding he could give “plenty” of examples of this in the United States.

He also dismissed comments by entertainer Rosie O’Donnell that President Trump “won’t get any welcome” in Ireland.

“Rosie O’Donnell is irrelevant, she has no career, she has no following, she left America because generally speaking no one liked her, I’m not really sure if she is the spokesperson for the Irish people,” he said.

“Go down to Morrissey’s tavern in Doonbeg and hear from a real Irish person as to whether or not they like President Trump and the Trump family, go have them attest to what we’ve done for the country and what we’ve invested in the country and the love and respect that our family has always shown them.”

He also described Ireland as one of his favourite places on earth, recalled his childhood nanny who hailed from Co Cavan and visiting with her.

“It (the golf resort) needed a lot of money, and now we’re the largest employer on the west side of Ireland … I put every ounce of my heart and soul into rebuilding it and making it incredible,” he said.

“I’ve always loved the Irish people, there’s always been an incredible warmth to them, when you smell the peat burning, and I know that’s become controversial for the eco-terrorists out there.

“The love between the two nations, it’s truly one of my favourite places on earth, especially Trump Doonbeg, it is a place I adore.”

READ MORE: Tiny urn containing ‘human ashes’ lost on London train to Aberdeen

READ MORE: Strathclyde University professor sacked over student sexual harassment allegations

However, Mr Trump criticised “how long” it takes to “get things done” in Ireland, with reference to a plan to build a ballroom at Doonbeg.

“I think the one criticism I have of this country, and really of Europe in general, is it’s very hard to get anything done and it turns off a lot of investment,” he said.

“Building a ballroom for a beautiful hotel should not be controversial, and when you look at the hundreds of millions of dollars of economic impact between the cost of the ballroom which would be 20-30-40million dollars easily to build, and the jobs.

“It hurts economic investment in the entire nation and somebody should intervene and say enough is enough.”

He added he would “love to” build a Trump tower in Dublin “at the right time at some point in the future”.

Ensure our latest stories always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

Newly declassified documents show that three years before 9/11, US intelligence officials were discussing the possibility that al-Qaeda “may fly an explosive airplane into a US city”.

On Friday, the 25th anniversary of hijacked planes being crashed into the World Trade Center, Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, the CIA released 71 daily presidential briefs spanning from early 1998 to the day after the attacks.

Another document, dated 12 September 2001, said the plot’s existence was “widely known” in extremist circles.

President’s Daily Briefs are among the most secretive intelligence analyses in the US government, and typically remain classified for 40 or 50 years after publication.

“Twenty-five years ago, the 9/11 attacks struck a blow to our nation, but they did not break us,” CIA Director John Ratlcliffe said in a statement

“Generations of C.I.A. officers have since dedicated their careers to securing justice for our fallen Americans and ensuring Al Qaeda would never again harm our country,” he added.

Of the 71 documents published by the CIA, 69 have never been seen by the public.

The briefs – many still heavily redacted – were created during both the Clinton and Bush administrations.

They show increasing alarm over the al-Qaeda network and its leader, Osama Bin Laden. They also echo the assessment of the official commission that reviewed what happened that day that US intelligence repeatedly warned of a potential attack, but had few details or sense of the scale of what was coming.

One briefing document, dated 10 September 1998, reported Bin Laden’s preferred location for a strike was within the US, with Washington a prime target.

The group, a CIA analyst wrote, “may fly an explosive-packed airplane into a US city”.

While the 9/11 Commission’s 2004 report noted US intelligence believed al-Qaeda was considering using an airplane in the attack, it was never clear that the warning reached then-President Bill Clinton.

Bin Laden and al-Qaeda were already well-known to the US intelligence community in1998.

In August that year, they attacked US embassies in both Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people and prompting the US to strike targets in Afghanistan and Sudan with cruise missiles.

One document written on 28 August 1998 – 21 days after the embassy attacks and eight days after the US retaliation – warned that the network remained intact and that Bin Laden was actively “considering attacks in the US”.

Only one of the presidential briefings in the release comes from after the attacks. It was sent to the White House 0400 on 12 September, just under 20 hours from when the first aircraft struck the World Trade Center in New York.

The report noted that “mounting evidence” suggested extremists in Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf “were aware” the attack had been imminent.

Another partially redacted sentence said the plot was “widely known” among extremists and that Bin Laden may have relocated to Kabul, in Afghanistan, to avoid conflict with the country’s Taliban rulers with whom he had “clashed” over the plan.

The then-head of the Taliban, Mullah Omar, was reported to have been evacuated with his family from the southern Afghan city of Kandahar immediately following the attacks. Less than a month later, the US and its allies invaded Afghanistan, seeking to destroy al-Qaeda.

Donald Trump’s administration has released more than 100 pages of declassified briefings provided to U.S. presidents in the years before September 11, 2001, marking what the CIA is calling its largest-ever disclosure of intelligence about Osama bin Laden and events leading up to the attacks over the last 25 years.

Friday’s release of 71 presidential briefs includes a document from 1998 during Bill Clinton’s administration discussing a potential operation led by Bin Laden to hijack a commercial airliner, and that two accomplices may have successfully evaded security checks in a trial run.

The heavily redacted documents also discuss “potential U.S. targets” and reports from “questionable sources” that Bin Laden was preparing for an attack on U.S. soil.

Other documents appear to trace how CIA analysts came to understand al-Qaeda’s operations and intentions under bin Laden, stressing his desire to bring “war to America,” despite what analysts characterized as limited or incomplete intelligence, as they delivered warnings to White House officials about the terror network.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe said he declassified the documents “in an act of exceptional transparency” to “honor the memory of those we lost on that tragic Tuesday.”

“Generations of CIA officers have since dedicated their careers to securing justice for our fallen Americans and ensuring al-Qa’ida would never again harm our country,” he said in a statement. “In the years that followed, numerous CIA officers made the ultimate sacrifice in the Global War on Terror. We honor their memory and service through our commitment to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat those who wish to cause us harm.”

The documents — with heavy redactions to protect the names of informants — do not appear to produce any major new revelations about the attacks but paint a fuller picture of what intelligence officials were sharing with Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush in the years leading up to 9/11, with memos from February 1998 through September 12, 2001 showing incomplete strands of intelligence presented by analysts in their typically detached style.

Those findings largely reinforce what was previously reported by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and its 2004 report that examined threats from al-Qaeda.

A memo written on September 10, 1998, reported that Bin Laden’s “preferred option is to strike the U.S. on its own soil in Washington” and “may fly an explosive-packed airplane into a U.S. city.”

Another document from August 6, 2001, to Bush notes that Bin Laden is “determined to strike” the U.S., potentially relying on al-Qaeda members living in the country. The FBI discovered activity “consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”

A document from August 28, 2001, days before the attacks, determined that Bin Laden’s operations are “expert and flexible” though vulnerable to “short-term delay and disruption.”

The document also notes that al-Qaeda stresses “careful planning, tight security practices and flexibility” throughout its operations — “sound operational practices” that allow it to pose a threat to the U.S. “even in a heightened security environment.”

But analysts also appeared to struggle with pulling together a cohesive narrative based on their limited intelligence on al-Qaeda’s operations.

A memo from August 3, 1999, suggested that al-Qaeda may have been leading “a deliberate effort to mislead us” by pitching so many different targets identified by analysts.

“The diverse targets mentioned in the reporting, combined with a high incidence of Bin Ladin-related walk-ins, suggest a deliberate effort to mislead us,” analysts wrote. Roughly a year later, on October 14, 2000, analysts said Bin Laden’s network was capable of “mounting multiple operations with no warning.”

The release of the documents comes as Americans across the country honor the nearly 3,000 people killed in the attacks, which have profoundly reshaped the U.S. and triggered a series of world-shaping events.

Bin Laden’s network of al-Qaeda terrorists struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan, the first of four attacks on September 11, 2001, that killed nearly 3,000 people and set in motion a series of profoundly world-changing events. Al-Qaeda hijackers took over three other flights, targeting the World Trade Center’s South Tower, the Pentagon and another location in Washington, D.C. Passengers on that flight, United Airlines Flight 93, fought back against the hijackers and the plane was steered into a field in rural Pennsylvania.

The costs of nearly all goods and services – from gas and groceries to childcare and car insurance – have spiked dramatically in the last five years as Americans continue to grapple with high prices.

Overall, consumer prices have risen more than 30 percent in the past seven years — two and a half times the increase seen in the years before the pandemic between 2012 and 2019, according to analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data by The New York Times.

While food and gas prices often fluctuate, it is more unusual that prices are rising across the board, including on rent, car insurance and dining out, the outlet reports.

The cost of childcare was one of the most stark examples, rising 62 percent since 2012. Had prices risen in line with the trend between 2012 and 2019, the increase since 2012 would have been 46 percent, according to the Times analysis.

Another huge expense that Americans are struggling with is the increase in rent. It has rocketed in price by 75 percent since 2012, up from 26 percent in 2019, the analysis found. Had prices continued on the pre-pandemic trajectory, the increase would have been 64 percent today.

The cost of car insurance has risen a staggering 115 percent since 2012, while vehicle repair has increased 81 percent. Had vehicle repair costs increased in line with the trend in 2012-2019, the price would have only increased by 30 percent in 2026.

When it comes to groceries, the price of beef and veal has risen dramatically since 2012, increasing by 96 percent. Had prices risen in line with the 2012-2019 trend, beef and veal would have only risen by 37 percent.

As the Trump administration seeks to counter voter concerns about high prices and rising interest rates with the midterm elections approaching, economists are pointing to the impact of the Iran war on inflation — the rate at which prices go up.

“America still has an inflation problem,” economist Heather Long said Friday in a post on X. “The problem for the Federal Reserve — and American households — is the inflation problem is starting to be more widespread than just an energy shock.”

Inflation has improved somewhat after falling from a peak of 9 percent in 2022 to 3.4 percent in August, according to the Consumer Price Index. But it has not returned to 2 percent, considered the normal rate.

It fell to 2.3 percent in April 2025, but shot up again after President Donald Trump ushered in his trade tariffs, which led to an increase in the cost of imported goods. As the economy was beginning to recover from the tariffs, Trump launched the war in Iran, prompting a huge rise in energy prices.

Democrats have seized on inflation figures under Trump in the run-up to the midterms.

“FACT: Inflation is HIGHER today than when President Biden left office,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said.

“Inflation just got worse, AGAIN,” said Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen. “The good news? We know what’s causing it: Trump’s illegal war in Iran has spiked prices everywhere.”

“Inflation is UP because of Trump’s war with Iran,” House Democrats posted on X. “And families are feeling it at the grocery store, the gas pump and on their electric bills.”

The White House touted Trump’s efforts to lower costs in certain sectors in response to inflation figures.

“Putting an end to Joe Biden’s inflation crisis has been a Day One priority for President Trump, and the August CPI report reinforces how the Trump administration’s targeted policy interventions are delivering with dramatic month-over-month price reductions for beef, prescription drugs, and car insurance,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement.

Michael Carrick is currently in the midst of his first full season as Manchester United boss but Jamie Carragher has suggested he would have been overlooked by the Premier League’s elite

Jamie Carragher has savagely claimed that Michael Carrick would never have been offered a job at a European powerhouse and is still a ‘caretaker’ at Manchester United. The former midfielder took the reins at Old Trafford last season after Ruben Amorim was axed

He impressed across his interim period, winning 11 of his 16 games at the helm to lead United back into the Champions League. That saw Carrick rewarded with the full-time job as he penned a two-year deal with the option of a further campaign.

But Liverpool icon Carragher remains unconvinced and claims that the ex-Middlesbrough boss would not have been offered a job by any other elite club.

Writing in The Telegraph, he said: “My sense is that while United fans generally understand and agree with the decision to stick with Carrick, they hope he is the long-term answer to get the club back to winning the Premier League or Champions League, while the rest of the world doubts it.

JOIN US ON FACEBOOK! Latest news, analysis and much more on Mirror Football’s Facebook page

“To most, it feels like Carrick remains an interim solution in all but name, entrusted with the keys to Old Trafford until a super coach can move in during the summer of 2027. Carrick will not see it that way, of course, but there are certain perceptions which will be tough to shake off.

“He is viewed beyond Old Trafford in the same way as Ole Gunnar Solskjaer when he was handed the job full time. Their credential for getting the caretaker role in the first place was their status as club greats. Once they performed well it was a sensible and emotional choice to give them the chance to make it work long term.

“That cannot change the fact that based on their coaching CVs alone, they would never have been approached by another elite club in England or Europe, nor would others have had any sentimental attachment to consider when determining the merits of offering a permanent deal.”

Advertisement

Carrick was well backed in the summer transfer market ahead of his first full season at the helm as United spent £140m on Youri Tielemans, Carlos Baleba and Andrey Santos. But the Red Devils endured a difficult start to the season after they were beaten 2-0 by newly-promoted Hull City.

They have since followed that up with a win against Ipswich and a draw with Everton. United also got their Champions League campaign off to the best possible start with a dominant win against Sabah. Carrick’s side are sure to get their most severe examination this weekend as they welcome rivals Manchester City to Old Trafford.

Join our new WhatsApp community and receive your daily dose of Mirror Football content. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.

By JON MICHAEL RAASCH, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT

Published: 19:42 BST, 11 September 2026 | Updated: 20:31 BST, 11 September 2026

Trump’s top immigration official claims an internal investigation found that Congresswoman Ilhan Omar ‘married her brother’ and could be facing deportation.    

‘We know that she married her brother to try to bring him into the United States,’ Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said of the Minnesota Democrat. ‘We know he lives now in London.’

He was speaking about the second man Omar married, who the Daily Mail has previously reported is Ahmed Elmi. Both are originally from Somalia. 

She allegedly was still married to her first husband, Ahmed Hirsi, at the time of the second marriage, the congresswoman has told friends who relayed the account to the Daily Mail. 

Advertisement

Omar has long denied the allegations. She has since remarried a third time and is wed to political consultant Tim Mynett. 

Mullin told conservative pundit Benny Johnson that Omar’s actions amounted to ‘possible illegal activity’ and the investigation is ‘ongoing,’ breaking a standard where officials typically do not discuss active investigations. 

‘We’re investigating,’ he said before threatening to deport her should the investigation warrant such a dramatic action. 

‘There’s no expiration to that,’ he said of the potential charges. ‘If we can prove it that, maybe you shouldn’t have been here in the first place, we’ll deport you.’ 

Advertisement

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said an ongoing department investigation has found that Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota ‘married her brother to try to bring him into the United States’ 

🚨BREAKING: DHS Secretary Just Confirmed That Rep. Illhan Omar Did Marry Her Brother

“We know that she married her brother to try to bring him into the United States. There may be more to this, possibly some illegal activity.”

I asked DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin about… pic.twitter.com/BuZGdpiGjJ

Advertisement

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 11, 2026

Omar has long denied that she married Elmi (pictured above)  

Mullin appeared to be alluding to potential immigration documents being falsified, which would be a deportable offense. That plan could face difficulty given Omar became a naturalized US citizen in 2000, when she was 17.

Her office did not immediately respond to the Daily Mail’s request for comment on Mullin’s latest claims. 

Advertisement

Abdihakim Osman, a past friend of Omar, told the Mail in 2020 that Omar said she wanted to get her brother papers so he could stay in the United States, at a time when she was married to her first husband Ahmed Hirsi.

But hardly anyone realized that meant marrying him.

‘No one knew there had been a wedding until the media turned up the marriage certificate years later,’ Osman exclusively told Daily Mail at the time. 

Omar married her first husband, Hirsi, in 2002 in a Muslim ceremony that, like many in the immigrant community, was not registered with the state.

Advertisement

The first report that Omar and her husband were siblings appeared on the website Somalispot in 2016.

It said of Elmi: ‘As soon as Ilhan Omar married him he started university at her alma mater North Dakota State University where he graduated in 2012.’

Omar with her current husband Tim Mynett at a White House event in 2024

Mullin said the investigation into Omar is apolitical despite the congresswoman being a longtime target of Trump. He’s posted about her in derogatory ways dozens of times on social media, and he’s pushed to have her investigated.  

Advertisement

‘When we move forward,’ Mullin said as if the case against Omar is imminent, ‘it’s not political.’

The Department of Homeland Security office did not deny Mullin’s claims that Omar did indeed marry her brother. 

‘As a matter of policy, DHS does not comment on specific investigative techniques, ongoing investigations, or potential future actions,’ a spokesperson said, seemingly coming at odds with Mullin’s disclosure. 

‘No one, including members of Congress, are above the law,’ the spokesperson added.

Advertisement

Third Rothesay Test, Edgbaston (day three of five)

Pakistan 133 (Tongue 4-42) & 449 (Masood 95, Razaullah 81, Babar 76, Awais 59)

England 453 (Brook 75, Smith 69, Lawrence 65, Gay 60, Robinson 50; Razaullah 4-148)

England need 130 runs to win

Scorecard

England face a chase of 130 to win the third Test after Pakistan debutant Razaullah produced some thrilling resistance on day three at Edgbaston.

Pakistan had battled to 318-8, still two runs behind, with potentially more than two hours of play remaining when Razaullah, the tourists’ number nine, launched a sensational assault.

The 21-year-old’s audacious 81 from 63 balls frazzled England and propelled Pakistan to 449. His nine sixes tied Ben Stokes’ record for the number of maximums in a Test innings in England.

Razaullah shared an eighth-wicket stand of 121 with Muhammad Abbas, who whacked two sixes of his own in his 42. Finally, Razaullah was stumped off Lawrence to end the day and signal the beginning of England’s chase on Saturday.

Pakistan deserved to drag the match into a weekend, restoring a modicum of pride to what has been a shambolic tour.

England might have won inside two days had it not been for bad weather on Thursday. From 55-2 overnight, 268 behind, Pakistan did not capitulate on Friday.

Shan Masood and Azan Awais extended their third-wicket stand to 125 until Awais tickled the off-spin of Dan Lawrence down the leg side for 59.

Masood added another 89 with captain Babar Azam. The left-hander was denied a century on 95 when Lawrence took a spectacular one-handed catch at gully off Gus Atkinson.

Babar was classy for his 76, yet was discomforted when England went to a short-ball plan either side of tea. His dismissal to a Josh Tongue bouncer seemed to confirm a three-day finish, but Razaullah had other ideas.