It is the completeness of the destruction in this small town that hits you first.
We’d seen the images and we’d spoken to some of the evacuees, but only by being here is it possible to absorb the enormity of it all. There is almost nothing left.
Greenville, California: population 1,000; swept away in the largest single forest fire this state has ever seen.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Wildfire leaves US town burned to ashes
The people whose town this was were almost all evacuated. They have their lives but have lost everything else.
Businesses and livelihoods are gone and with them, memories and dreams.
Advertisement
The local restaurant is only recognisable by the tables and chairs still set. The town’s offices are marked just by their metal filing cabinets. And dotted chimney stacks are all that’s left of the town’s homes.
Beyond the starkness of all this, it is the silence that hits you. It’s beyond eerie.
More on California
How different it must have sounded as the fire swept through late last Wednesday night.
With this all around, you look for hope. And down the road, by some miracle, there was some.
Image: Greenville in California has been devastated by wildfires
One house survived unscathed; not a scratch, while all around the land is scorched.
It belongs to Sheri and Terry Wert.
The residents are not allowed back yet, and honestly, most won’t want to see it. But it’s a boost certainly for these two.
The wonders of technology allowed us, via video call, to show them their little miracle.
Image: Terry and Sheri Wert
“Oh my gosh. Terry, you gotta come…” Sheri says. “Oh, it looks perfect….”
She asks us to walk around the side of the house. Their son’s van is undamaged. So too is the chicken coop. The wind vane still turns.
Driving down the mountain, the smoke is thick for miles. The fire is still raging not far away.
The state governor, Gavin Newsom, has said it is the largest single fire in Californian history. More than 8,000 firefighters are working round the clock to contain it and at the moment they are not winning.
It’s an hour down to the town where the evacuees now wait. Terry and Sheri among them.
“Our home is still there and we are one of the very few lucky people and our heart just goes out to our community,” Sheri tells me.
We talk about what caused all this. It’s clear there are serious local concerns about forest management. Managed, controlled fires were stopped years ago and locals have long argued that a misguided fire suppression policy for almost a century has caused huge build-up on the forest bed.
It’s become a tinderbox and a warming climate is the catalyst for the fires.
“Now it’s an annual thing. It ruins every summer. It takes people’s homes away. It’s taken people’s lives,” Sheri says.
She explains that the summers are definitely getting warmer and the winters are less cold.
“We are not getting anywhere near the amount of rain, precipitation that we used to get, nor the snowpack, even up high,” she says.
Image: Thousands of firefighters were drafted to Greenville, which has a population of just 1,000
What about the sustainability of places like Greenville, I ask. In the years ahead can it remain a viable place to live?
“This is our home,” Terry tells me. “We’ll rebuild Greenville.”
They have done it before. Way back in 1881, a fire destroyed the town. But still, the viability of communities like this feels ever more precarious and dependent on our relationship with the environment, both local and global.
Donald Trump says he has ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in the “appropriate regions” in a row with former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.
It comes after Mr Medvedev, who is now deputy chair of Russia‘s Security Council, told the US president on Thursday to remember Moscow had Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities of last resort.
On Friday, Mr Trump wrote on social media: “Based on the highly provocative statements of the Former President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that.
“Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:37
Trump: ‘We’re going to protect our people’
Speaking outside the White House later in the day, Mr Trump was asked about why he had moved the submarines and replied: “We had to do that. We just have to be careful.
“A threat was made and we didn’t think it was appropriate, so I have to be very careful. So I do that on the basis of safety for our people. A threat was made by a former president of Russia and we’re going to protect our people.”
The spat between Mr Trump and Mr Medvedev came after the US president warned Russia on Tuesday it had “10 days from today” to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine or face tariffs, along with its oil buyers.
Moscow has shown no sign that it will agree to Mr Trump’s demands.
Trump’s move appears to signal a significant deterioration in relationship with Putin
Normally it’s Moscow rattling the nuclear sabres, but this time it’s Washington in what marks a dramatic escalation in Donald Trump’s war of words with the former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.
More importantly, it appears to signal a significant deterioration in his relationship with Vladimir Putin.
The US president’s patience with the Kremlin was already at its thinnest earlier this week, when he shrank his deadline for progress towards a peace deal from 50 days to 10.
But Russia’s lack of outward concern with this stricter ultimatum – which has swung from dismissive to (in Medvedev’s case) insulting – seems to have flicked a switch.
For this is the first time Trump’s pressure on Moscow has amounted to anything more than words.
We don’t know where the subs are, or how far they had to move to get closer to Russia, but it’s an act that sits several rungs higher than the usual verbal threats to impose sanctions.
How will Russia respond? I’m not sure Vladimir Putin has ever caved to an ultimatum and I doubt he’ll start now.
But I don’t think he’ll want the situation to deteriorate further. So I suspect he’ll make another offer to the US, that’s dressed up as a concession, but in reality may prove to be anything but.
It’s a tactic that’s worked before, but the stakes have suddenly got higher.
On Thursday, Mr Medvedev reminded Mr Trump that Russia possessed a Soviet-era automated nuclear retaliatory system – or “dead hand”.
Mr Medvedev, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was referring to a secretive semi-automated Soviet command system designed to launch Russia’s missiles if its leadership was taken out in a decapitating strike.
He made the remarks after Mr Trump told him to “watch his words” after Mr Medvedev said the US president’s threat of hitting Russia and its oil buyers with punitive tariffs was “a game of ultimatums” and added that “each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war” between Russia and the US.
Image: Dmitry Medvedev. Pic: Reuters
Mr Medvedev served as Russia’s president from 2008 and 2012, when Mr Putin was barred from seeking a third consecutive term, but then stepped aside to let him run again.
As deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, he has become known for his provocative and inflammatory statements since Moscow invaded Ukraine in 2022.
Donald Trump has said “nobody has asked” him to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, but insisted he has “the right to do it” as US president.
Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend is currently serving a 20-year sentence after being convicted of helping the paedophile financier traffic and sexually abuse underage girls in 2021.
Prosecutors have said Epstein’s sex crimes could not have been done without Maxwell, but her lawyers have maintained that she was wrongly prosecuted and denied a fair trial, and have floated the idea of a pardon from Mr Trump.
Last week, they asked the US Supreme Court to take up her case.
When pressed on the possibility of pardoning Maxwell, Mr Trump told reporters: “I’m allowed to do it, but nobody’s asked me to do it.”
He continued: “I know nothing about it. I don’t know anything about the case, but I know I have the right to do it. I have the right to give pardons, I’ve given pardons to people before, but nobody’s even asked me to do it.”
Mr Trump also said he would not pardon Sean “Diddy” Combs, who was convicted in July on two charges of transportation to engage in prostitution.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:28
Trump ‘never visited Espstein island’
His comments came shortly after the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) said Maxwell has been moved to a minimum-security prison camp in Texas.
She was being held at a low-security prison in Tallahassee, Florida, that housed men and women, but has now been transferred to a prison camp in Bryan, Texas.
When asked why Maxwell was transferred, BOP spokesperson Donald Murphy said he could not comment on the specifics, but that the BOP determines where inmates are sent based on such factors as “the level of security and supervision the inmate requires”.
Maxwell’s lawyer confirmed the move but also declined to discuss the specific reasons for it.
The Texas camp houses solely female prisoners, the majority of whom are serving time for nonviolent offences and white-collar crimes, Sky’s US partner NBC News reports.
Image: Trump and Epstein at a party together in 1992. Pic: NBC News
Minimum-security federal prison camps house inmates considered to be the lowest security risk and some facilities do not even have fences.
A senior administration official told NBC: “Any false assertion this individual was given preferential treatment is absurd.
“Prisoners are routinely moved in some instances due to significant safety and danger concerns.”
Maxwell has received renewed attention in recent weeks, after the US Justice Department said it would not be releasing the so-called ‘Epstein files’.
The department said a review of the Epstein case had found “no incriminating ‘client list'” and “no credible evidence” the jailed financier – who killed himself in prison in 2019 – had blackmailed famous men.
Officials from the Trump administration have since tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case.
Last month, they lodged a request to unseal grand jury transcripts – which was denied – and Maxwell was last week interviewed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.
Epstein survivor’s family criticises move
Maxwell’s move to a lower security facility has been criticised by the family of Epstein abuse survivor Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, and accusers Annie and Maria Farmer.
They said in a statement: “It is with horror and outrage that we object to the preferential treatment convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has received.
“Ghislaine Maxwell is a sexual predator who physically assaulted minor children on multiple occasions, and she should never be shown any leniency.
“Yet, without any notification to the Maxwell victims, the government overnight has moved Maxwell to a minimum security luxury prison in Texas.”
The statement concluded: “This move smacks of a cover up. The victims deserve better.”
A jury has ruled that Tesla is partly to blame for the death of a young woman who was hit by an electric car on Autopilot.
Naibel Benavides was stargazing at the time of the collision, which sent her flying 22m (75ft) through the air in Florida.
Her boyfriend was seriously injured in the 2019 incident, while her body was discovered in a wooded area.
Image: The Tesla Model S pictured after the crash. Pic: NBC/Florida Highway Patrol
The company has now been ordered to pay $243m (£183m) in damages to Ms Benavides’ family, and to her partner Dillon Angulo.
Jurors concluded that not all of the blame could be put on a reckless driver who admitted he was distracted by his phone before he hit the young couple.
The motorist, George McGee, reached a separate settlement with the victims’ families in an earlier case.
Brett Schreiber, who represented the victims, said: “Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans.
More on Elon Musk
Related Topics:
“Today’s verdict represents justice for Naibel’s tragic death and Dillon’s lifelong injuries.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:33
Tesla bruised by Musk-Trump fallout
Tesla – and Elon Musk – have said it will appeal the verdict, labelling it “wrong” and a setback for automotive safety.
The verdict would also work to “jeopardise Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology”, the company warmed.
Tesla had claimed Mr McGee was solely to blame for the fatal crash because he had reached down to pick up a dropped mobile phone as his Model S sped through an intersection in Key Largo, Florida, at about 62mph.
Mr McGee allegedly did not receive alerts as he ran a stop sign and a red light – and the plaintiffs’ lawyer argued that the driver’s assistance should have warned the driver and braked before the collision.
The collision sent Ms Benavides Leon flying 22m (75ft) through the air, with her body later being discovered in a wooded area, while Mr Angulo suffered serious injuries.
“To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash,” Tesla said. “This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs’ lawyers blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.”
Lawyers for the plaintiffs also alleged that Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the collision.
They showed the court that the company had the evidence all along, despite repeated denials, after hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up.
After being shown the evidence, Tesla said it made a mistake and honestly hadn’t thought it was there.
Image: Elon Musk hopes to convince people that his cars are safe to drive on their own. Pic: Reuters
Past cases against Tesla were dismissed or settled, so the verdict in this case could encourage more legal action.
Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in this trial, added: “This will open the floodgates. It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.”
The verdict comes as Mr Musk plans to roll out a driverless taxi service, hoping to convince people his vehicles are safe enough to drive on their own.
Improvements to the company’s driver assistance and partial self-driving features have been made in recent years – but in 2023, 2.3 million Tesla vehicles were recalled amid fears Autopilot was failing to sufficiently alert drivers not paying attention to the road.