Martin Shkreli is interviewed on Fox Business on Aug. 15. (Richard Drew/AP)

NEW YORK — A federal judge on Wednesday revoked the $5 million bail of Martin Shkreli, the infamous former hedge fund manager convicted of defrauding investors, after prosecutors complained that his out-of-court antics posed a danger to the community.

While awaiting sentencing, Shkreli has harassed women online, prosecutors argued, and even offered his Facebook followers $5,000 to grab a strand of Hillary Clinton’s hair during her book tour. Shkreli, who faces up to 20 years in prison for securities fraud, apologized in writing, saying that he did not expect anyone to take his online comments seriously, and his attorneys pleaded with the judge Wednesday to give him another chance.

“The fact that he continues to remain unaware of the inappropriateness of his actions or words demonstrates to me that he may be creating ongoing risk to the community,” said U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto, in revoking his bond.

“This is a solicitation of assault. That is not protected by the First Amendment.”

Shkreli, wearing a lavender button-down shirt and slacks, was taken into custody immediately after the hour-long hearing. He did not appear to react at the judge’s decision though he appeared more nervous than when he entered court and refused to ride the elevator with one reporter because they were “fake news.” He will be sent to a maximum-security prison until his sentencing hearing in January.

Shkreli, 34, is best known for raising the price of an AIDS drug by 5,000 percent but he was convicted by a Brooklyn jury of defrauding the investors in his hedge funds. Shkreli lied to obtain investors’ money then didn’t tell them when he made a bad stock bet that led to massive losses, prosecutors argued. Instead, they said, he raised more money to pay off other investors or took money and stock from a pharmaceutical company, Retrophin, he was running.

Shkreli, who has indicated that he will appeal his conviction, argued at trial that he ultimately made money for his investors and did not intend to defraud them.

Instead of shrinking from the public outrage that has followed him for two years, Shkreli has mounted an erratic and sometimes outrageous online defense of himself, appearing to revel in the negative attention.

His 70,000 Facebook followers do not take his statements seriously, said Shkreli’s attorney Benjamin Brafman. “He did not intended to cause harm,” he said. “Being inappropriate does not make you a danger to the community.”

“He says things that are stupid. I don’t think stupid makes you violent,” Brafman said.

Shkreli’s lawyers compared his online comments to the political humor of Kathy Griffin, who once held up a photograph of a faux bloody head of President Trump. They also compared him to Trump himself. During the campaign, Trump used “political hyperbole,” Shkreli’s attorneys said, when he said that Clinton, his Democratic opponent, would abolish the Second Amendment if elected. “By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know,” Trump said.

“He did not hold up the severed head of the president of the United States like Kathy Griffin,” Brafman said.

But prosecutors argued that Shkreli already had been given plenty of opportunities to act appropriately. His posts about Hillary Clinton and female journalists show an “escalating pattern of violence against women that is incredibly disturbing,” Jacquelyn Kasulis, the lead prosecutor said. “It is clear that he is reckless. He knew exactly what he was doing. He has to go in. … He doesn’t respect the rule of law.”

They noted his post was taken seriously enough that the Secret Service sought an interview with Shkreli and had to increase the security measures around Clinton.

After a person is convicted, it is up to them to prove that they should be out on bail pending sentencing, prosecutors argued. “He is not special by any stretch of the imagination. He should be incarcerated because he is a felon,” Kasulis said.

Matsumoto appeared particularly concerned that one of Shkreli’s Facebook followers could take his offer of $5,000 for a strand of Clinton’s hair seriously. Shkreli said he wanted the hair — with a follicle — to compare Clinton’s DNA to a sample he already had. His attorneys said the post was satire and could not be taken seriously.

“What is funny about that,” a visibly frustrated Matsumoto said. “He doesn’t know who his followers are. He doesn’t know if someone it going to take his offer seriously. … He is soliciting an assault on another person for $5,000.”

This is not the first time prosecutors have complained to Matsumoto about Shkreli’s conduct. During the trial, Matsumoto chastised Shkreli for speaking with reporters in the courthouse where jurors could potentially hear him. Prosecutors had complained Shkreli’s comments — including mocking them as the “junior varsity” — were inappropriate and could taint the jury pool. Shkreli apologized after that incident too.

[The fascinating legal argument at the heart of the Martin Shkreli ‘Pharma Bro’ trial]

Since his conviction, the loquacious executive has kept an active — and combative — online presence. In addition to asking for someone to grab a strand of Clinton’s hair, he has offered investment advice and announced the sale of the only known copy of “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin,” a Wu Tang Clan album, that he purchased for $2 million in 2015.

“I hope someone with a bigger heart for music can be found for this one-of-a-kind piece and makes it available for the world to hear,” he added.

The most recent bid is for $1,001,300 — a potential loss for Shkreli.

President Trump on Wednesday vowed not to cut taxes for the wealthy, extolled the virtues of bipartisanship as leading to “some of the greatest legislation ever passed” and then — in a surprise move announced deep into the night — agreed to cut a deal with Democrats saving hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants from deportation.

That Trump did all of that while declaring himself “a conservative” only heightened the sense of surrealism that has wafted through the nation’s capital over the past eight days, as the president has expressed a newfound, if tentative, willingness to work across the aisle — a development that has left many Republicans chagrined and some Democrats cautiously optimistic.

Trump’s outreach suggested that an unexpected deal he reached last week with Democrats may not have been an aberration. This week’s effort began Tuesday at a bipartisan White House dinner with senators and proceeded to a gathering of House Democrats and Republicans on Wednesday afternoon.

It was finally capped off Wednesday night by a presidential meal with the nation’s two top Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), during which they reached the contours of an immigration deal and discussed Beijing trade issues over a menu of Chinese cuisine.

Calling the dinner “very productive,” Schumer and Pelosi said in a statement late Wednesday that Trump had agreed to “enshrine the protections” of a Barack Obama-era executive order into law “quickly,” protecting about 700,000 illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as children. They would also “work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides,” the statement said.

In a separate statement, the White House said the gathering was “constructive” and that it focused on immigration, infrastructure and trade.

“Bottom line: There really is a new strategy coming out of the White House,” said Rep. Henry Cuellar, a moderate Texas Democrat who had turned down previous White House invites but decided to attend Wednesday’s afternoon session. “He meets with the bipartisan senators last night. He meets with us. He meets with Pelosi and Schumer today. There is a new strategy in place.”

Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), a Trump supporter who also attended the afternoon gathering, said the president “has seen the theater up here and learned the lesson: Extremes on both the right and left are problematic to getting his agenda accomplished. You can’t run a partisan bill to the finish line, so he knows he has to have his Plan B ready.”

After eight months of pursuing a mostly hard-right, pro-Republican agenda with limited success, Trump is flirting with fulfilling his campaign promises to govern as a bipartisan dealmaker — including the possibility of legalizing thousands of undocumented immigrants after running stridently against the idea as a candidate. Trump could also be signaling the return of a recently bygone era when lawmakers of both parties dining — and working — with the president was hardly abnormal.

But, then, these are not normal times. 

“It’s up is down and down is up,” said Jim Manley, a Democrat and former longtime Senate aide. “No doubt about it.”

Last Wednesday, Trump shocked and angered Republican leaders by agreeing with Schumer and Pelosi to provide Hurricane Harvey relief while raising the federal borrowing limit and funding the government through December.

Then came Tuesday’s bipartisan dinner for senators, which included talk of infrastructure projects and featured three Democrats up for reelection in 2018 in states that Trump carried: Sens. Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Joe Manchin III (W.Va.).

After the afternoon meeting, several House Democrats expressed hope that they can work with the president.

“He was very explicit in saying that there would be no tax cut in this package for the wealthy,” said Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), referring to a pledge by Trump on Wednesday that would mark a notable departure from his previous proposals. “At one point, he said they may have to pay a little more.”

Still, Trump has done little to reach out to Democrats until the past week and has often openly derided them and Obama. Trump has begun dismantling Obama-era regulations and protections on issues including health care, labor and the environment. Last week, he also rescinded protections for 700,000 young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children and known as “dreamers” — the same group he now says he wants to protect. 

Even on Wednesday, as the president played host to two bipartisan meetings, Trump and his team continued to equivocate. He expressed support for another Republican health-care plan — spearheaded by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) — aimed at sharply curtailing Medicaid and other parts of the Affordable Care Act, commonly called Obamacare. In her daily press briefing, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders argued that Trump is always working on behalf of Republicans.

“The president is the leader of the Republican Party and was elected by Republicans,” Sanders said. “He beat out 16 other candidates to take that mantle on. And certainly I think one of the strongest voices. And so the idea that the Republican Party ideas are not represented in that room is just ridiculous.”

Trump’s reasons for engaging with lawmakers beyond the Republican leadership is deeply shaped by his experience on health-care legislation, which has so far stalled in the Senate after months of fits and starts, according to two people familiar with the issue who have spoken with him recently. Trump remains unhappy with GOP leaders for promising success earlier in the year, only to see the effort fall apart, said the people, who insisted on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly.

Trump now believes that Republicans — who control both the House and the Senate — cannot be trusted to carry bills to passage by themselves and views it as his burden to create a better environment for his legislative agenda to garner support. What matters to him, one Republican lawmaker said, is “putting wins on the board — not the specifics.”

Instead of relentlessly courting members of the conservative, and often intractable, House Freedom Caucus, as he did on health care, Trump wants them to “feel the burn a little bit,” the lawmaker added, framing the new outreach as Trump’s way of reminding conservatives in both chambers that he likes them but does not need them.

“They’re not the only player he’s willing to play with,” said Michael Steele, the former Republican National Committee chairman. “He’s saying to them, ‘I’ll be a free-range president.’ ”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who attended Tuesday’s dinner, said jump-starting talks on tax cuts and other potential changes remains at the top of Trump’s agenda. He said Trump wants to focus cuts on brackets that affect middle-class people.

“Let’s face it: If you want tax reform, you want to avoid pitfalls that make it impossible,” Johnson said of Trump’s approach on this priority. “Selling tax cuts for the wealthy is pretty impossible.”

“What I saw from the president was a genuine process to find bipartisan agreement on taxes and infrastructure,” Johnson added. “My guess is some Democrats definitely agree with him.”

Manchin said the Tuesday dinner was “a very good, productive meeting” and said he believes the president, who was once a registered Democrat, is simply entering his legislative comfort zone.

“The president seemed more at ease, more comfortable, talking about finding a bipartisan solution than trying to have to defend a rigid, one-side-only works,” Manchin said. “I think he’s able to approach legislation in a total sphere, not just one side.” 

Moderate Republicans, in particular, have cheered this development, after long feeling sidelined inside the House as Freedom Caucus members and other conservatives have rebelled against their party’s leadership. 

Trump’s conservative critics, however, said his latest gestures reflect his liberal instincts on some issues and his intense desire for popularity.

“He’s always had that itch to liberate himself from the Republican Party,” said William Kristol, a Trump critic and editor at large of the Weekly Standard magazine. “He ran against it in 2015 and 2016, and has attacked it in 2017. He wants to win and doesn’t care about the substance of winning.”

Kristol added, “Democratic voters may loathe Trump, but he could conceivably give them lots of policy victories.”

Democrats say they are focused only on working with the president on areas where they believe they can get what they want in terms of their priorities, including protections for the dreamers and federal health-care subsidies for Obamacare. They have vowed not to trade dreamer protections for Trump’s long-promised wall at the southern border — and in recent days the White House has indicated the two issues do not have to be linked.

On other issues and with this president, many Democrats remain wary.

Donnelly, despite being wooed by Trump and up for reelection next year, said he feels no pressure to vote for the Republican tax plan if he thinks it’s a bad deal. 

“If the tax package makes sense, I’ll support,” Donnelly said. “If not, I’ll pass.”

The halting forays into bipartisanship have proved a new experience for many. At Tuesday’s dinner, Manchin was presented with yet another surprise in a week full of them: an apple strudel topped with what looked to be a delicate white egg. 

“I’m thinking, ‘Boy, what do I do with this?’ ” Manchin said. “But I’m thinking, ‘When in Rome,’ so I take a bite, and, lo and behold, it’s ice cream.”

Such is the dilemma facing Democrats in this moment of Trumpian outreach: The perks are enticing, but they are not entirely sure what they’re dipping their spoon into. 

Donnelly, however, said he had no doubt. “I knew it was ice cream from the start,” he said.

Mike DeBonis, Ed O’Keefe and David Nakamura contributed to this report. 

The Supreme Court agreed with the Trump administration Tuesday and put on hold a lower-court decision that would have allowed more refugees to enter the country.

The court issued a one-paragraph statement granting the administration’s request for a stay of the latest legal maneuvering involving the president’s executive order on immigration. There were no recorded dissents to the decision.

At issue is whether the president can block a group of about 24,000 refugees, who have assurances from sponsors, from entering the United States. A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit had interpreted a Supreme Court directive this summer to mean that such refugees should be allowed in, but the government objected.

The latest court actions are part of a complicated legal battle that began in January when President Trump issued his first version of an entry ban. The Supreme Court is to consider the merits of his actions at a hearing Oct. 10.

The current case grows out of a Supreme Court decision in June that approved a limited version of a presidential order that temporarily blocked refugees and citizens of six majority-Muslim countries.

[Supreme Court allows limited version of Trump’s travel ban to take effect and will consider case in fall]

The justices said Trump could impose a limited version of the measure, but not on a person with a “bona fide” connection to the United States, such as having family members here, a job offer or a place in a U.S. university.

It is the interpretation of a “bona fide” tie to the United States that is being debated.

The government initially declined to include grandparents and other members of the extended family as meeting that standard, as well as refugees with formal assurances. A federal district judge said the government’s reading was too broad and stopped it.

The Supreme Court largely upheld that ruling in July, although it put on hold the portion dealing with refugees.

[Supreme Court allows Trump refugee ban but backs broader exemptions for relatives]

Last week, a panel of the 9th Circuit weighed in, deciding that the administration could block neither grandparents nor refugees with assurances.

The Justice Department this week asked the Supreme Court to step in again — although only to block refugees, not grandparents and other relatives beyond the nuclear family. Even those refugees with formal assurances from a resettlement agency lack the sort of connection that should exempt them from the ban, the Justice Department argued in its new filing to the Supreme Court.

“The absence of a formal connection between a resettlement agency and a refugee subject to an assurance stands in stark contrast to the sort of relationships this court identified as sufficient in its June 26 stay ruling,” acting solicitor general Jeffrey B. Wall wrote in his filing.

“Unlike students who have been admitted to study at an American university, workers who have accepted jobs at an American company, and lecturers who come to speak to an American audience, refugees do not have any free-standing connection to resettlement agencies, separate and apart from the refugee-admissions process itself, by virtue of the agencies’ assurance agreement with the government,” the filing said.

In response, the state of Hawaii, which is challenging the entry ban, told the Supreme Court that the government’s argument made no sense.

“Refugees with formal assurances are the category of foreign nationals least likely to implicate the national security rationales the government has pointed to in the past,” wrote Washington lawyer Neal Katyal, who is representing Hawaii.

“By the government’s own admission, these refugees have already been approved by the Department of Homeland Security. It is therefore exceedingly unlikely that they represent a security threat.”

Time is beginning to become a factor in the broader fight over Trump’s entry ban. The measure was supposed to have been temporary — lasting 90 days for citizens of the six affected countries, and 120 days for refugees. If the measure is considered to have taken effect when the Supreme Court allowed partial implementation, the 90 days will have passed by the time the justices hear arguments Oct. 10, and the 120 days are very likely to have passed by the time they issue a decision.

Some deadlines for reports have also seemingly passed. The Department of Homeland Security secretary was — within 20 days of the order taking effect — to have given Trump the results of a worldwide review determining what information was necessary from other countries to vet travelers. The countries that were not supplying adequate information were then to be given 50 days to begin doing so, and after that, top U.S. officials were to give Trump a list of countries whose citizens would be recommended for inclusion in a more permanent travel ban.

A Homeland Security spokesman said that a report was delivered to the White House in early July on the results of the review and that officials then went about assessing each country on the information it provided

He said Homeland Security officials were “evaluating the information received and will provide a report to the president in the coming weeks.”

CAPE CORAL, Fla. — Millions of Floridians grappled with the aftermath of Hurricane Irma on Tuesday, confronting a sweltering reality: Nearly half of Florida still lacked electricity, and for some of them, the lights might not come back on for days or even weeks.

“We understand what it means to be in the dark,” said Robert Gould, vice president and chief communications officer for Florida Power and Light (FPL), the state’s largest utility. “We understand what it means to be hot and without air conditioning. We will be restoring power day and night.”

But, he acknowledged: “This is going to be a very uncomfortable time.”

Across the nation’s third most-populous state, that discomfort played out in homes that were silent without the usual thrum of perpetual air-conditioning. It meant refrigerators were unable to cool milk, laundry machines were unable to clean clothes and, for the particularly young and old, potential danger in a state where the temperatures can range from warm to stifling.

[Irma’s final danger: Flooding in the Southeast]

Even for those who had power, some also were struggling to maintain cellphone service or Internet access, sending Floridians into tree-riddled streets in an effort to spot a few precious bars of signal to contact loved ones.

“It’s a mess, a real mess. The biggest issue is power,” said Bill Barnett, mayor of Naples, on Florida’s Gulf Coast. “We just need power. It’s 92 degrees and the sun is out and it’s smoking out there.”

Utility companies made progress as they undertook a massive recovery effort, restoring power to some. At its peak, the Department of Homeland Security said about 15 million Floridians — an astonishing three out of four state residents — lacked power.

Throughout the day Tuesday, state officials gradually lowered the number of customers without power, dropping it to 4.7 million by Tuesday evening from 6.5 million a day earlier. Because each power company account can represent multiple people, the sheer number of residents without electricity was massive: Going by the Homeland Security estimates, at one point Irma had knocked out power to one out of every 22 Americans.

It would take some time before all of them had electricity again. Duke Energy Florida said it would restore power to most customers by Sunday, a week after Irma made its first landfall in Florida. Some harder-hit areas could take longer due to the rebuilding effort.

Gould said that FPL, which powers about half of the state, expected customers on Florida’s East Coast to have power back by the end of the weekend. People in western Florida, closer to Irma’s path, should have it back by Sept. 22. That estimate does not include places with severe flooding or tornado damage, he said, and those areas could also face a longer wait to be able to switch on the lights.

Floridians reacted to the outages eclectically. Some welcomed the absence of perpetual air-conditioners. Others flocked to their local malls for a respite from the heat.

“There’s no power at home, so we might as well just stay here and stay cool,” Amanda Brack, who was with her son, Gavin, said while walking through a Brookstone at the Galleria shopping mall in Fort Lauderdale.

Blake Deerhog had walked to the mall from his powerless and steamy apartment in nearby Victoria Park, trekking some 20 minutes in the stifling heat and humidity after he Googled and learned it would be open.

“This is definitely better than being back at my apartment,” he said, adding that he planned to spend the afternoon there.

[Florida Keys are battered but bouncing back]

The outages also caused rising alarm in some places. Here in Cape Coral, an assisted care facility for patients with dementia and memory impairment that sheltered in place during the storm went without power for three days, as elderly patients suffered in the rising heat.

The southwest Florida facility, Cape Coral Shores, had 20 patients stay during the storm as part of an agreement with state and local officials because the emergency shelters it would normally use were both evacuated as Irma approached. Power at the facility went out, and it stayed out, even as homes and businesses all around it saw their lights come back on.

As the indoor temperature climbed to the mid-80s Wednesday morning, humidity made the hard-surfaced floors slick with condensation. Patients gathered in a small day room to catch a slight breeze from screened windows. A handful of small fans powered by a borrowed generator were all that kept the situation from devolving into a medical emergency, said Dan Nelson, Cape Coral Shores’ chief operating officer.

“People here are fragile,” Nelson said, adding that air-conditioning in such facilities is a medical necessity. “This is not just about comfort, it’s about safety. We have magnet door locks that don’t work, fire suppression equipment whose batteries have run out, assisted bed lifts that don’t work. And the temperatures today and tomorrow are headed back to the mid-90s.”

A state emergency official said Wednesday afternoon he had found a large generator and 50 gallons of gas for the facility, but there was no need: The power came back on.

[Most of Florida lost power in Hurricane Irma. Here’s what it looks like from space.]

While the Sunshine State was the hardest hit by the outages, they extended to the other states Irma raked as it headed north. Hundreds of thousands lost power in the Carolinas, Alabama and Georgia, where at one point 800,000 were experiencing outages on Tuesday, though that number declined during the day.

The deteriorating storm once known as Hurricane Irma — classified Tuesday as a post-tropical cyclone — grazed onward through the Mississippi Valley, losing essentially all of its prior strength but still drenching some areas with rainfall.

Across the southeast, even as people acknowledged that they had dodged the worst possible hit from Irma, they were still left to contend with destroyed homes, flooded cities, swollen rivers, canceled flights and debris in the streets.

The city of Jacksonville, Fla., remained flooded after the St. Johns River overflowed so severely the day before that it forced residents from their homes. Charleston, S.C., city officials said the intense flooding there on Monday closed more than 111 roads, most of which had reopened Tuesday.

Authorities said they were investigating several fatalities that came since the storm made landfall, though it was not clear how many were directly due to the storm.

Among them were a 51-year-old man in Winter Park, Fla., outside Orlando, who police said was apparently electrocuted by a downed power line in a roadway. In Georgia, the Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office said a 67-year-old woman was killed when a tree fell on her car; the mayor of Sandy Springs said a 55-year-old man was killed when a tree fell on the bedroom where he was sleeping. In other cases, fatal car crashes claimed lives as the storm loomed.

[Why Irma wasn’t far worse]

In Key West, it remained unclear when power, cellphone service or supplies would be available again.

“What you have on hand is rationed to make sure you can get through,” said Todd Palenchar, 48, noting that his supplies of food and water are designed to last for a week. “You don’t know how long it’s going to be.”

Palenchar said he is used to camping and roughing it, but his main concern right now is his property.
“I’ve already posted signs where I’m at, ‘Looters will be shot, no questions asked,'” he said as he pulled up his shirt to reveal a .380 caliber pistol.

As Irma tore through the Caribbean and approached the Keys last week, authorities had ordered millions in Florida to evacuate and, in some cases, ordered them to hit the road again as the storm’s path wobbled. On Tuesday, officials slowly began letting those people return home.

In Monroe County, which includes the Florida Keys, and other places that let residents back, officials warned that many areas are still without power, cellphone reception is questionable and most gas stations remain shut.

Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez said about half of the county’s traffic signals were out. Broward County Mayor Barbara Sharief said the number was closer to 45 percent of traffic signals there. Across the state, the explanations for the outages were visible alongside the road.

“It’s a lot of trees and power lines and snapped poles,” said Kate Albers, a spokeswoman for Collier County, which stretches across southwestern Florida and includes Marco Island, where Irma made her second landfall.

“I can tell you from driving around you see lines down all over the place,” Albers said. “You see trees thrown through power lines and you’ll see an occasional pole.”

The high number of outages across Florida were due largely to the storm’s massive size, said Ted Kury, director of energy studies for the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida.

“For a significant period of time, the entire state was under a hurricane warning,” Kury said. “Normally it comes through, sometimes it comes through fast and sometimes it comes through slowly. But this one hit pretty much everybody.”

Kury was among those who did not lose power but did lose Internet, cable and cellphone service, so he and his wife had to walk to the next development before his wife got enough signal to text their oldest son and her parents.

Storms that rip down power lines are frequently followed by questions about why more power lines are not buried underground, away from punishing winds.

Cost is one factor. A 2012 report for the Edison Electric Institute, a trade association representing investor-owned electrical utilities, found that it can be five to 10 times more expensive to put lines underground — otherwise known as “undergrounding” — than to hang them overhead.

The utilities also weigh issues such as how much cost they can pass on to their customers and the aesthetics of overhead wires, Kury said, noting that there is no uniform policy for power companies because diverse regions have different needs.

“It’s kind of a misstatement when folks say undergrounding power lines protects them from damage,” Kury said. “What it really does is insulates them from damage from wind events and flying debris. But it makes them more susceptible to things like flooding and things like storm surge.”

He added: “If you’re in an area where your biggest risk to the infrastructure is storm surge and flooding, putting the lines underground can actually make them more susceptible to damage and not less.”

[Richard Branson urges “Marshall Plan” for Caribbean after Irma]

Florida utility companies embarked upon a massive response effort to get the lights back on. Gould, the spokesman for FPL, said the company had dispatched 20,000 workers to work day and night restoring power, first to critical care infrastructure — like hospitals and 911 systems — and then to feeders that send juice to the most customers. Finally, they get to individual neighborhoods.

In St. Petersburg, where gas-powered generators had growled through the night, residents lit their way with battery-powered lanterns, flashlights and tea lights.

“We’ve run out of power before,” said Jeanne Isacco, 71, reaching for her walker to stand and punctuate her point. “Why do you think we live here? Excuse me! We know it’s hot.”

Berman and Zezima reported from Washington. Darryl Fears in St. Petersburg, Leonard Shapiro in Fort Lauderdale, Camille Pendley in Atlanta, Dustin Waters in Charleston, Kirk Ross in Raleigh, Scott Unger in Key West, Fla., and Brian Murphy, Angela Fritz and Carol Morello in Washington contributed to this report, which was updated throughout the day. 

Further reading:

Hurricane Irma’s impact, from the air: Florida Keys a bit battered but mostly spared

Hurricane Irma spared one Florida coast and slammed into another

Authorities in suburban Chicago are investigating a young woman’s mysterious death over the weekend, a case that’s gained national attention as her mother angrily suggested there was foul play and accused police and others of failing to act fast enough upon learning of the disappearance.

Kenneka L. Jenkins, 19, was found dead inside an industrial walk-in freezer at Rosemont’s Crowne Plaza around midnight Sunday, more than 24 hours after leaving her home on Chicago’s West Side to party with friends at the hotel and conference center near O’Hare International Airport.

“To me, I feel like they helped kill my child: the police department and this hotel,” Teresa Martin, Jenkins’ mother, told local media during a heart-wrenching interview alongside other family members. She said neither the authorities nor the hotel’s staff did enough to address her repeated pleas for help.

It remains unclear how Jenkins died. An autopsy was performed Sunday but proved inconclusive, the Chicago Tribune reported, and officials say it could be several weeks before toxicology results are available.

Rosemont police have released few details, citing an open investigation.

Jenkins’s mother said authorities told her the freezer, though in a vacant part of the hotel complex, was functioning and cold, the Tribune reported. It’s unclear who found Jenkins’s body, however, or whether there were signs of trauma.

A spokesman for the Rosemont police, Detective Joe Balogh, told The Washington Post on Monday that investigators are interviewing others who were with Jenkins at the hotel, and reviewing surveillance footage and various social media posts that have circulated since the incident.

One, a viral Facebook Live video apparently made during the party, appears to show Jenkins and others listening to loud music inside a hotel room. Authorities have indicated the video is a key piece of evidence, telling the Tribune that they have identified most people captured in it.

The clip has fueled speculation online that the young woman’s death was no accident, with skeptics endeavoring to decode the video and surface clues that point to a potential setup.

Jenkins was last seen on the Crowne Plaza’s ninth floor, witnesses told police. When friends were unable to find her before leaving the party, they phoned Jenkins’s mother.

Jenkins’s friends, Martin said, told her the young woman disappeared after they briefly left her alone in the hotel hallway to retrieve her car keys and cellphone from inside the room.

But Martin has since questioned that account, telling local media that the friends’ description of events keeps changing.

Teresa Martin, mother of Kenneka Jenkins, is comforted by her boyfriend as she speaks about her daughter’s death. (Chicago Tribune)

“Why can’t I see my daughter?” she told reporters outside her home. “Why can’t I see how she died?”

Martin said police initially told her Jenkins was intoxicated when she entered the freezer, that “freak accidents like that do occur.” But now she questions whether her daughter, if indeed inebriated, could have summoned the strength and coordination to open the freezer’s heavy door.

Balogh, the police spokesman, told The Post that officers were following procedures while securing the crime scene and interacting with Jenkins’s family at the hotel.

“Anything further regarding what happened, in terms of her mother, we’re not really saying much about that,” he said.

Read more:

A Dallas suburb is horrified after game night turns bloody, leaving 9 dead from one house

Grisly killing stemmed from a dispute involving Chicago professor and hairdresser, police say

Falsely accused of satanic horrors, a couple spent 21 years in prison. Now they’re owed millions.

A small group of White House lawyers this summer urged that President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner step down from his White House role amid a broadening probe into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russians in the 2016 election, according to multiple people familiar with the discussion.

Some of the lawyers worried that the presence of Kushner, a senior adviser with a broad domestic and foreign policy portfolio, created potential legal complications for Trump, while the probe threatened to limit Kushner’s ability to perform his job, these people said.

Kushner had several interactions with Russian officials in the campaign and transition that have drawn interest from investigators, and some White House lawyers warned that even casual discussions between him and Trump could spark additional scrutiny.

The debate, first reported Monday night by the Wall Street Journal, took place before a July shake-up of the legal team. The idea to press Kushner to leave was ultimately rejected.

In a statement Monday night, White House lawyer Ty Cobb blamed the disclosure of the internal debate on former White House staffers seeking to tarnish Kushner, who Cobb described as “among the President’s most trusted, competent, selfless and intelligent advisers.”

“Those whose agendas were and remain focused on sabotaging him and his family for misguided personal reasons are no longer around,” said Cobb, who was brought aboard in July to specialize in the Russia inquiry. “All clandestine efforts to undermine him never gained traction.”

John Dowd, also a Trump lawyer, confirmed Monday that the subject was raised, but said he heartily disagreed with the idea.

“That’s all I have to say about it,” he said.

Cobb declined to say which former staffers he believed were trying to undermine Kushner. Former Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon, who was dismissed last month, had been a rival to Kushner in the West Wing. Bannon did not respond to requests for comment.

Other people familiar with the Trump lawyers’ debate said Kushner’s presence in the White House created risks that were logical discussion topics for the legal team as it sought to minimize risks for Trump amid a widening investigation by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. The lawyers “would have been dummies” not to consider walling the president off from another person who would become a major subject for the special counsel’s investigation, said one person briefed on the discussion. Kushner had met with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and also with an executive from a major Russian bank.

At the time of the lawyers’ debate, Trump’s legal team was preparing for a new revelation regarding Kushner that was about to be shared with Congress. From reviewing internal emails in preparation for answering investigators’ questions, the lawyers knew about a Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 that Donald Trump Jr. had arranged after being promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

The lawyers knew that Kushner had attended the meeting, and that he had not disclosed it when reporting his contacts with foreign individuals. The New York Times first reported on that meeting July 8.

Ashley Parker contributed to this report.