"🔥 DANGER ZONE! — POLICE SCRAMBLE TO KAMALA HARRIS' RESIDENCE AFTER AN ALARMING ALERT!"
Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies responded Friday night after an unidentified woman entered former Vice President Kamala Harris’ Malibu property.
Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, were not home when the incident unfolded at their Point Dume residence.
Private security personnel encountered the woman before she reached the house and contacted authorities about a suspicious person.
Deputies from the Lost Hills station were dispatched at approximately 10:30 p.m., according to law enforcement statements.
Authorities said the woman was outside the property when deputies arrived and made contact with Harris’ private security team.
The woman was warned, advised to leave the area, and departed voluntarily without any reported confrontation or arrest.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department documented the encounter by taking a trespassing report after speaking with those involved.
Deputies also planned increased patrols around the property as a precaution following the unauthorized entry.
Harris spokesperson Eduardo Negrón confirmed that security personnel stopped the individual before she could approach the residence.
“Vice-President Harris and Second Gentleman Emhoff were not present,” Negrón said while describing the circumstances surrounding the incident.
“They are grateful to the security and law enforcement personnel who responded swiftly,” Negrón added in the statement.
Authorities have not publicly identified the woman or explained why she entered the former vice president’s property.
No injuries were reported, and law enforcement has not announced criminal charges connected with the Friday-night incident.
Fox News reported the woman had appeared at the property twice before deputies were ultimately called.
That account said she initially arrived by Uber, approached security, and was told she needed to leave.
She later returned, according to the report, prompting the private security detail to request assistance from sheriff’s deputies.
The episode drew renewed attention to security arrangements surrounding Harris, who left the vice presidency in January 2025.
Former vice presidents generally receive Secret Service protection for six months after leaving office under federal law.
Officials have released no evidence of weapons, threats, property damage, or any effort to harm Harris or Emhoff.
Harris and Emhoff own an approximately $8 million residence in Malibu’s Point Dume area, according to multiple reports.
According to local reporting, the couple also owns a residence in Los Angeles’ Brentwood neighborhood.
In January 2025, authorities arrested two people near that Brentwood home during restrictions connected to the Palisades Fire.
Authorities described those earlier arrests as curfew violations rather than evidence of a targeted attempt against Harris.
Harris previously served as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, United States senator, and vice president.
She became the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024 after Biden ended his reelection campaign and ultimately lost to Trump.
Since leaving office, Harris has remained a prominent Democratic figure while keeping her future political plans largely unsettled.
Friday’s response also demonstrated the layered role private security and local law enforcement can play around former national officials.
Private personnel identified the problem first, prevented the woman from reaching the house, and then summoned county deputies.
Deputies arrived, spoke with those present, directed the woman to leave, and recorded the matter as a trespassing report.
The sheriff’s department’s decision to increase patrols indicates officials are taking additional precautions despite making no arrest.
For now, investigators have announced no motive and no further enforcement action against the unidentified woman.
Harris and Emhoff were never confronted, and authorities said the individual left peacefully after deputies issued their warning.
The incident ended without injury, but it has renewed public discussion over protection arrangements for former vice presidents.
"🚨 BRANSON'S SCATHING ATTACK! — HE BLASTS TRUMP OVER PUTIN TIES AND URGES EUROPE TO STAND FIRM!"
British billionaire Sir Richard Branson has launched a fierce public attack on Donald Trump, accusing the U.S. administration of appeasing dictators and putting personal preferences ahead of American and allied interests.
The Virgin Group founder made his criticism in a LinkedIn post published this week, questioning why Trump appeared so willing to accommodate Russian President Vladimir Putin while Ukraine continues to face Russia’s invasion.
Branson described the administration as an “appeaser to autocrats and dictators,” arguing that its approach could weaken confidence among America’s traditional allies and undermine the interests of democratic nations.
He also raised a pointed question about the president’s relationship with Putin, asking why Trump seemed to flatter the Russian leader despite the continuing war and widespread international concern over Moscow’s actions.
The remarks come amid renewed controversy over a reported agreement involving Russian diesel supplies and a temporary easing of U.S. sanctions on Russian energy exports.
Trump has defended the arrangement as beneficial to fuel markets, while critics argue that allowing Russian energy revenues to flow could indirectly help Moscow sustain its war effort.
Branson called the deal deeply hypocritical, pointing to the contrast between Washington’s previous willingness to penalize countries purchasing Russian energy and its own decision to ease restrictions.
His criticism extended beyond energy policy. He also condemned Trump’s public attacks on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, describing the administration’s treatment of Ukraine as a betrayal during a period of war and suffering.
The billionaire’s intervention follows mounting concern in Kyiv and across Europe about the durability of American support for Ukraine, particularly as diplomatic efforts have struggled to produce a lasting settlement.
Branson also expressed alarm about reports involving restrictions on Starshield services used by Ukraine, a technology issue that has raised questions about the country’s access to crucial battlefield communications.
Some of Branson’s claims about the consequences of satellite-service restrictions have not been independently confirmed, and the details of decisions involving military communications remain disputed.
He urged European leaders to respond more decisively, arguing that the continent cannot simply wait for Washington to determine the future of Ukraine’s security and its broader relationship with Russia.
His proposed response reportedly included considering the use of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine and supplying more advanced weapons, measures that would intensify the confrontation with Moscow.
The comments place Branson among a relatively small group of prominent business leaders willing to criticize Trump directly over foreign policy, despite the political and commercial sensitivities surrounding such interventions.
Branson has previously spoken out in support of Ukraine and criticized approaches that he believes would pressure Kyiv into accepting an unfavorable peace agreement with Russia.
The latest dispute also comes at a politically sensitive moment in the United States, with congressional midterm elections approaching and foreign policy increasingly intertwined with domestic debates over leadership and national priorities.
Supporters of Trump’s approach may argue that direct engagement with Moscow and energy-market flexibility can serve American interests, even when such policies provoke disagreement among allies.
Critics counter that concessions to Russia risk weakening deterrence and sending an unsettling message to countries relying on the United States for diplomatic, economic and military support.
The disagreement reflects a broader debate over whether negotiations and economic pragmatism can help end the war—or whether they could give Moscow additional leverage without securing meaningful concessions.
For Ukraine, the stakes remain immediate: continued military pressure, uncertainty over international support and the search for a settlement that preserves its sovereignty remain central concerns.
Branson’s intervention adds another prominent voice to the dispute, challenging the White House’s handling of Russia and demanding a stronger response from Europe as the conflict continues.
