WASHINGTON — President Trump told a crowd in Texas on Wednesday night that he would not allow Iran to attack San Diego or Los Angeles, a comment that came two days after he made off-the-cuff remarks suggesting the West Coast cities could be struck.
“You want to see a horror show? You want to see problems? Let them hit San Diego, let them hit Los Angeles,” Trump said at a rally. He then assured the crowd: “We are not going to let that happen. We protect our cities. We protect our country.”
The San Antonio crowd cheered the remarks.
Trump’s decision to return to the subject capped two days in which the White House had been on the defensive, and it appeared aimed at tamping down the fallout from remarks he made Monday night that quickly spread online.
Speaking to a crowd in Nebraska, Trump had said: “They can take out a city, let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”
The comments drew swift condemnation from California leaders, even as the White House communications director, Steven Cheung, insisted the president’s remarks had been taken out of context.
“The media freakout over President Trump’s comments is not rooted in reality,” Cheung wrote Tuesday. “He was clearly stating U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped. America is safer because of the president. Iran has no nuclear, no navy, no air force, and no money.”
But the remarks were enough to rattle many in California and drew backlash from the state’s leaders, including Republican Jim Desmond, a Navy veteran running in a highly competitive U.S. House race.
“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments,” Desmond wrote on social media. “America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday opened the state emergency operations center to assess potential threats following Trump’s remarks. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass also condemned the president for potentially compromising the safety of their cities.
“San Diego is not collateral damage,” Gloria posted on social media. “We are not expendable. And we are never a ‘small price to pay.’ Keep our city out of your reckless war talk.”
Business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Teachers Assn. and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California oppose the proposal.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton, who are running to replace Newsom, also have spoken out against it.
Opponents describe the wealth tax as a “flawed experiment” that will harm California’s economy because companies and rich people will flee the state.
“If they leave, it will create a huge hole in our budget, threatening core services like education, healthcare and public safety,” arguments against the proposition say.
Opponents of the measure say the proposal is an ineffective attempt to address the long-term effects of the healthcare cuts and would harm California’s economy and budget.
The state budget in California already is largely dependent on income taxes paid by its highest earners. Because of that, revenues are prone to volatility, hinging on capital gains from investments, bonuses to executives and windfalls from new stock offerings, and are notoriously difficult for the state to predict.
Billionaires such as Palmer Luckey, the co-founder of defense tech startup Anduril Industries, and entrepreneur Mark Cuban have pushed back against the proposal on social media. Some tech executives have been relocating or moving their assets to try to avoid the potential tax. Google co-founder Sergey Brin has been cutting ties to California, relocating to Nevada while funding groups such as Building a Better California that are backing ballot measures that could nullify the billionaire tax.
More than $187 million has been spent opposing the proposition, with the bulk coming from Building a Better California, cryptocurrency company Ripple Labs and its co-founder Chris Larsen, data from the secretary of state show.
Proposition 39 is opposed by leading state Democrats, major civil rights organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union and major labor unions in the state, who say the measure would disenfranchise eligible voters and expose voters to identity theft by forcing them to write personal ID numbers on mail ballot envelopes.
According to campaign finance reports, the ACLU of Northern California has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeating the measure. Quinn Delaney, a major Democratic donor and fundraiser for former President Obama, and Patty Quillin, a major philanthropist and wife of Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, both have given $1.5 million.
The Service Employees International Union Local 2015, which represents long-term caregivers, provided $1 million, the SEIU California State Council for Working People gave $500,000, and the California Teachers Assn., through its independent expenditure committee, gave another $500,000.
Arnulfo De La Cruz, president of SEIU California and SEIU Local 2015, said in a statement that the group’s members “know our nation is stronger when working people make their voices heard and have their ballots counted,” and that strict voter ID laws “are part of Trump and MAGA extremists’ agenda to rig the election system so they can cling onto their own power and get richer from corporate corruption.”
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) recently convened a news conference where a slate of Democratic leaders — including state Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón (D-Goleta) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) — called on Californians to vote no on Proposition 39.
The Democrats called the measure a “dirty trick” from “Trump acolytes” akin to historic poll taxes designed to disenfranchise Black voters, and a power grab that would seriously harm millions of eligible voters, especially in Black and Latino communities.
“Proposition 39 is a direct assault on everything California stands for. Our people, our values and our fundamental belief that every eligible voter here in California deserves to have their voice heard and deserves to have their vote counted,” Rivas said.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath presented a motion Tuesday calling for “bold action” to better protect victims of domestic violence and stalking, seeking to help them more effectively navigate the county’s restraining order system and obtain court-ordered protection.
Horvath cited recent Los Angeles Times reporting on the challenges victims face when obtaining and enforcing restraining orders as an inspiration for the Board of Supervisors motion, which was co-authored by board chair Hilda Solis. The supervisors are scheduled to consider the measure during the board’s Nov. 10 meeting.
“A recent story from the L.A. Times spoke to the process of domestic violence restraining orders and the work done and not being done across the county to support survivors in need of this critical support,” Horvath said.
The Times’ reporting identified at least 63 women killed in 2024 and 2025 in L.A. County whose cases involved a former partner or close relative arrested or charged with their murder. The deaths accounted for more than 40% of the 156 women killed during that period. At least 10 of those women had filed for restraining orders.
In July 2024, the county Department of Public Health’s Office of Violence Prevention issued a report with more than a dozen recommendations for reducing domestic violence homicides by improving access to restraining orders. Today, most of those recommendations have not yet been implemented.
The office said the delay was the result of insufficient funding and challenges with coordinating between the many agencies responsible for the county’s restraining order system.
If passed, the motion would mandate reports from the county’s chief executive, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and the departments of Public Health, Mental Health, Consumer and Business Affairs, Public Social Services, and Homeless Services to assess current efforts, improvement plans and additional funding needs.
“We know that domestic violence restraining orders protect survivors and I believe the board must take every step possible to better support and protect our survivors,” she said. “The county,” she added, “must step up and lead in this space.”
The motion calls for allocating millions of dollars annually to fully fund nine county-run self-help legal centers that assist people navigating the restraining order process.
It would also officially identify “Gender-Based Violence and Intimate Partner Violence” as a priority for the Board of Supervisors, and require a presentation from the Sheriff’s Department on how the agency plans to improve its handling of restraining orders.
The Office of Violence Prevention would be required to develop a plan for a “peer navigator model” to guide survivors through the restraining order system.
The Department of Homeless Services and Housing would be asked for an assessment of what additional resources would be necessary to provide emergency beds for all people fleeing intimate partner violence.
SACRAMENTO — A private prison company is challenging a new California law requiring detention centers to provide medical care, privacy and other civil rights to people detained by federal immigration authorities.
GEO Group, a for-profit prison company, filed a complaint in federal court over Senate Bill 942, also called the Civil Detainees’ Bill of Rights Act of 2026. It mandates that immigrant and other detainees are afforded privacy, safety, hygienic living conditions and other rights.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the law last week as part of a package of bills to push back on the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement, which the Democratic governor described as “Orwellian.” GEO Group filed its complaint the day after Newsom signed the law.
SB 942 declares that detainees at state, local and privately run facilities have the right to medical, dental and mental health care; physical exercise; clean drinking water and functioning toilets; and other rights. It allows the attorney general to bring civil action against private and public entities that allegedly violate those rights.
GEO Group attorneys argue in the federal complaint that while California elected officials “may disagree with federal immigration policy,” the state “may not impose its preferred immigration-detention standards on federal detention operations, whether those standards would tighten, loosen, supplement, or otherwise alter the federal framework.”
According to its website, the company operates six detention facilities in California, four of which are housing detainees under contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That includes a shuttered state prison that began holding ICE detainees earlier this year.
GEO Group has had some previous success challenging laws seeking to undermine the private prison industry’s role in federal immigration enforcement. A federal court struck down a 2019 law that attempted to bar any “private detention facility within the state” after the company filed suit.
Representatives for GEO Group did not respond to a request for comment. Spokespeople for Newsom, Atty Gen. Rob Bonta and state Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Salinas), who authored the bill, did not immediately comment on the lawsuit.
WASHINGTON — The Democratic National Committee on Wednesday sued President Trump’s administration for recent television advertisements that promoted his political message while costing taxpayers millions of dollars.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that the ads are illegal government-sponsored propaganda and accuses Trump of personally directing them. It asks the court to declare the ads illegal and stop the use of federal funds to pay for them.
Trump has faced bipartisan backlash for the ads, which glorify him and echo his campaign pitch as voters cast early ballots with the midterm elections less than a month away.
The spots, which began airing in September, already have cost more than $12 million to run, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact, and a total of $20 million in Homeland Security Department funding has been tapped to pay for them.
Responding Monday to the criticism, Trump defended the ads as “positive promotion for our Great U.S.A.” but said he’d pay for them using his MAGA Inc. super PAC going forward.
But on Tuesday, the fifth ad in the campaign began airing with the notice “paid for by the U.S. Government,” promoting Trump’s military actions in Venezuela earlier this year. The same day, Trump made it clear he hasn’t committed to reimbursing any money that has already been spent, telling reporters “we’ll decide.”
DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement that Trump is misusing taxpayer dollars in “a last-ditch attempt to save Republicans in November.”
“Americans deserve better than to have their hard-earned tax dollars used for Trump’s illegal schemes,” he added.
Legal experts have suggested the ads run afoul of a federal statute against congressionally appropriated money being used for “publicity or propaganda,” and potentially other federal laws. The Homeland Security money tapped for the ads comes from a $175 million package Congress gave to the department as part of Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda.
The White House has defended the ads as public service announcements akin to what past administrations have done to promote various policies. Legal experts have said the recent ads differ from many past public service announcements because they aren’t aimed at helping members of the public benefit from specific government programs.
The defendants in the lawsuit — Trump, the White House, DHS and the Office of Management and Budget — didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
ATHENS — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for the nations of the West to return to their civilizational roots and restore the values that drove the rise of Europe and North America to global dominance for centuries.
In Athens to discuss deepening economic, energy and security cooperation with Greece, Rubio delivered a speech later Wednesday near the ruins of the Acropolis, a widely recognizable symbol of the city’s ancient civilization associated with the creation of popular participatory government and the social contract.
Rubio aimed to remind listeners of qualities he says were born in Greece and later defined the West, such as curiosity, courage, ambition, a restless spirit of exploration and a drive to discover the unknown.
“It has become fashionable today to believe that enlightened foreign policy means prioritizing the ‘global community’ over one’s own people. And I think here, too, we have much more to learn from the men of Ancient Greece. They knew that there was nothing selfish or wrong about loyalty to your nation, nor anything selfish or wrong about fighting to defend its interests above all else,” Rubio said.
Rubio urges Europe to uphold its traditional values
“Today, we find ourselves at a crossroads,” he said. “The next decade will write the story of the next century. The course we take will determine whether the West maintains its place at the head of the world, or resigns itself to a future of atrophy, and servitude, and decline. We will either choose to act now or lose the choice to act at all.”
Rubio is seen by many as the gentle face of the Trump administration and has been frequently dispatched to clarify or otherwise address concerns about the president’s frequently undiplomatic statements.
Rubio, along with Vice President JD Vance, is seen as one of the leading contenders to assume Trump’s mantle at the top of the Republican Party, which faces stiff challenges in next month’s congressional midterm elections. Republican Party, which faces stiff challenges in next month’s congressional midterm elections.
The Trump administration has repeatedly accused countries in Europe of backsliding on their traditional values and democratic principles by stifling the free speech of conservatives and falling short on commitments to international partners like the United States.
Many of those countries have rejected the complaints and accused the U.S. under Trump of being guilty of similar behavior and worse with its staunch anti-immigration stance that some believe is racist.
Left-wing groups protest across Greece
Ahead of his visit to Athens, about 1,500 people gathered to protest Rubio’s presence and the war in Iran, chanting “American killers!”
The demonstration was organized by a communist labor union and other left-wing groups and was held ahead of extensive road closures planned in Athens. Organizers said similar protests were held in at least 12 other Greek cities. Police banned public demonstrations Wednesday in central.
Rubio seeks to reassure NATO allies
Rubio is on the second leg of a three-nation tour of NATO allies that has already taken him to Iceland and will end in Portugal on Thursday. The trip is aimed at reassuring U.S. partners that the Trump administration is committed to their success and security despite what has been an often brusque and sometimes rude approach to traditional friends that has stirred unease.
Rubio began emphasizing historical themes on Thursday, when he met Iceland’s foreign minister at the site of the landmark 1986 summit between former President Ronald Reagan and then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, a meeting that many believe marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War and was a catalyst for the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union.
It remains unclear what impact Rubio’s visits will have, although on Tuesday in Reykjavik, he sought to reassure Iceland that President Trump’s administration has no designs on the island. Rather, he said the U.S. shares Iceland’s deep concerns about Arctic security as tensions between the U.S. and Russia rise in the High North and elsewhere.
Iceland has been uneasy about Trump’s intentions toward it after he posted a map showing the colors of the U.S. flag sprawling across all of North America and extending to Iceland and Greenland. That wariness has persisted despite an agreement last month to increase the U.S. presence in the neighboring Danish territory of Greenland that appears to have ended Trump’s demands for the U.S. to take full control of the island.
But after Rubio’s talks in Reykjavik, those tensions appeared to be on the wane. Rubio said the United States would not do anything in Iceland without Iceland’s consent.
Visit follows allegations of misconduct by U.S. ambassador
Before delivering his speech in Athens, Rubio declined to comment when he was asked about allegations of misconduct leveled at U.S. Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle.
At a joint news conference with the Greek foreign minister, Rubio said he would not address the matter while visiting a foreign country, but added: “Suffice it to say our embassy here is doing a great job. Our ambassador has been a strong ambassador here.”
The top Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs committees, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. Gregory Meeks, have initiated probes into claims reported last month by the Wall Street Journal that Guilfoyle acted improperly while serving as the top U.S. envoy to Greece.
The Journal reported that Guilfoyle told guests at a reception that the U.S. could undermine the Greek government if it chose to, promoted the business interests of one particular Greek construction and energy company, and allowed its lobbyist into private diplomatic meetings.
Guilfoyle, a former Fox News Channel host and California prosecutor who was once engaged to Trump’s son Donald Jr., has denied any wrongdoing, and Rubio has defended her before.
Lee writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Derek Gatopoulos in Athens contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — Republicans are entering the final month of the midterm campaign increasingly anxious that the $1 billion at their disposal may not be enough to fend off sweeping losses as the party reckons with President Trump’s unpopularity, persistent cost concerns and the fallout from the war in Iran.
The cash advantage, spread out across a half-dozen groups, is driven largely by the Trump-aligned MAGA Inc., which had nearly $416 million in cash on hand at the end of August and began stepping up its spending on critical races in September.
But that money may have come too late, forcing the president’s group to pay much higher rates because of the shrinking availability of air time. Four Republican Senate campaign officials said groups that reserved advertising time last spring paid much lower rates than MAGA Inc. and its affiliated groups.
Instead, by waiting until September, Trump-connected organizations are sometimes paying more than five times what they would have spent if they acted earlier.
A representative of MAGA Inc. familiar with the group’s strategy said its spending has allowed Republicans to keep races more competitive than they would have been otherwise. In some cases, the group has been the only one on the air criticizing Democratic candidates.
The MAGA Inc. representative and the Republican Senate campaign officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal strategy.
The challenge is acute in places like Texas, where Trump will travel on Wednesday for the second time in a week to stump for Republican Ken Paxton’s Senate campaign. The state hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1988, yet MAGA Inc. has spent more than $22 million in the past month, according to the ad tracking firm AdImpact.
Another group, Texas PAC, which is aligned with Senate Majority Leader John Thune, has spent more than $83 million on advertising in the past month, an extraordinary amount to protect what’s normally a safe Republican seat.
One of those advertisements, which featured Paxton’s estranged wife saying she’s supporting the full Republican ticket, aired across the United States last weekend during a football game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Houston Texans.
Candidates are charged a lower advertising rate than outside groups, so the late infusion of super PAC cash has come at a steep price.
MAGA Inc., which is running ads primarily on streaming services, has been charged roughly $894 per airing, according to AdImpact, while Texas PAC has been charged roughly $809 for a mix of broadcast and streaming. That compares with about $290 for Democratic nominee James Talarico’s campaign, also on broadcast and streaming.
Those averages mask some of the more glaring disparities. For example, during a football game last month, Texas PAC was charged $450,000 to air a single spot in the Austin market. Talarico’s campaign paid $50,000 for a spot during the same game in the same market, according to AdImpact.
Elections are a referendum on the power of money
The 2026 campaign is shaping up as a referendum on the power of money in American politics. Democrats freely acknowledge their disadvantage, relying instead on anti-Trump sentiment among voters and targeted messaging on issues like corruption. Some Republicans, meanwhile, are open about the challenge of trying to spend their way out of a tough campaign at this late stage.
Neil Newhouse, a longtime Republican pollster, echoed concerns that his party was deploying its cash too late.
“After the votes are counted, I think we’re going to find the most effective advertising in terms of communicating message and moving voters and poll numbers, the most effective time was advertising that happened well before Labor Day, not after it,” he said. “A million dollars of advertising in October is a drop in the bucket.”
Thune’s group began pulling back in North Carolina last week, a sign of the party’s challenge in the Senate race there. The state’s outgoing Sen. Thom Tillis has been increasingly vocal about his party’s vulnerabilities and recently said that, even with a strong cash advantage, “in the last month, you pretty much have to place your bets.”
“If we have endless resources, then we should spend endlessly in every state,” he said. “Absent endless resources, you’ve got to make data-driven decisions about where you can win.”
The midterms mark the first national election since the Supreme Court in June erased limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president, injecting even more money into a political system already awash in cash.
Money alone doesn’t translate into victory
There’s plenty of evidence that money alone doesn’t translate into victory.
Democrat Kamala Harris entered the final stretch of the 2024 campaign with significantly more money than Trump but went on to lose every critical swing state and the White House. Elon Musk’s $25 million didn’t lift his preferred candidate to a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat last year. And Tom Steyer didn’t advance to the general election in the California governor’s race despite pumping $216 million of his own money into the campaign.
The $1 billion that Republicans have amassed compares with roughly $579 million held by a comparable collection of major Democratic groups.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said his party is facing an “obscene” amount of spending that could swamp them in the midterms.
“We’re never going to have as much money as them,” he said in an interview. “I sum up the election in this sentence: Can a massive Republican advantage in money beat a massive Democratic advantage in better candidates and political climate? I bet it can’t.”
In addition to Texas, Democrats have mounted competitive Senate campaigns in states like Ohio, Maine, Iowa and Michigan. A similar dynamic has emerged in governors’ races from Florida and Georgia to Wisconsin, Ohio and Nevada.
Former President Barack Obama is stepping up his involvement in the midterms and will headline a fundraiser for Senate candidates on Wednesday.
In the House, Democrats are growing so confident they can retake the majority that they’re expanding their targets deeper into traditionally Republican districts in Arkansas and Tennessee. But a lack of money could limit their gains.
“We absolutely need to spend enough to get our message out,” said Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “And district by district, we are.”
Trump turns to his bond with supporters
From his earliest days as an unlikely political figure, Trump has consistently overcome expectations. Facing daunting prospects heading into the final weeks of his last midterm, he’s betting he can again outwit political gravity, relying in large part on the deep bond he’s built with supporters.
He has stepped up his campaign rallies in recent weeks, traveling to deep red territory to galvanize the party faithful. At events like the one this past weekend in Vandalia, Ohio, the crowd was enthusiastic and cheered at the lines that have become Trump staples over the years, particularly when he dips into profanity. The high school gymnasium that held the event was packed, though crowds began emptying out about halfway through the 90-minute rally.
In the closing minutes of a speech Monday in Grand Island, Nebraska, the president revived his plea that supporters who have stood so fervently by him pretend as if he is on the ballot one more time.
“In a true way, I am running,” he said. “We have to keep it going.”
Sloan and Beaumont write for the Associated Press. Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa. AP writers Seung Min Kim in Vandalia, Ohio, and Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington contributed to this report.
She was part of a generation whose parents were from the rancho of El Cargadero, Zacatecas, and started families in el Norte while waiting out the Mexican Revolution in the 1910s and the Cristero Revolt in the 1920s. Many returned to their home village when things calmed down.
After growing up in Mexico, my grandmother moved to California with my grandfather and their children in the 1960s. Only the American government considered her a native-born U.S. citizen, while society dismissed her as a Mexican. We grandchildren always considered our Mama Chela a doña — a grand Mexican dame who never wore pants and frequently covered her hair with a veil out of modesty. All she remembered from her early childhood in Arizona were snippets of the nursery rhymes “Did You Ever See a Lassie?” and “The Bear Went Over the Mountain.”
The El Cargadero diaspora, which mostly settled in Anaheim, saw our forebears’ American birth as a stroke of provenance allowing them to legally enter the U.S. and give their progeny a head start that other Mexicans could only dream of. It’s a story I’ve repeatedly told over my decades-long journalism career, and no one has yet challenged my description of my grandmother as an immigrant.
If they did, I’d think they had too much time on their hands, or maybe that they were a wackjob contrarian.
Cue Steve Hilton.
The Republican candidate for California governor is trying to make a scandal out of his Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra, portraying himself as the son of Mexican immigrants. Twice last week during their CNN debate, Becerra said his parents came to California “with $12.” In previous interviews during his decades in the political spotlight, Becerra has shared that his father, Manuel, was born in Sacramento in 1928 and moved to Mexico as a child during the Great Depression, eventually returning to the land of his birth.
Hilton, who has been endorsed by President Trump, has as much a chance of becoming the Golden State’s next governor as Stephen Miller. But he and his supporters have latched on to Becerra’s statement like it was the borderlands version of stolen valor. Critics combed through Becerra’s family genealogy like Indiana Jones searching for the Holy Grail, then posted their findings online — Becerra’s dad grew up in Tijuana before coming back to California, then married in Guadalajara before returning in the 1950s to Sacramento, where Xavier was born — to claim that Becerra is one giant, pandering fraudster.
“Unlike Xavier Becerra, I am an immigrant,” the British-born son of Hungarian refugees harrumphed on social media. He followed up by declaring that Becerra is “LYING” about his family’s American experience “in order to score identity points.”
What more proof do California voters need that Hilton is laughably out of touch with how we live? Many Mexican Americans, including my cousins and me, consider family members raised in Mexico to be immigrants, even if they were born in the U.S. Growing up down south forever shapes your language, work ethic, appreciation for how hard life can be and so much more. When they return to the U.S., such people often find themselves ostracized as paisa — country — and must learn the mores of American life, just like those born abroad.
To argue that calling them immigrants is technically wrong is like getting angry at people who don’t pronounce Los Feliz the Spanish way. For Becerra’s critics to claim he’s stretching his immigrant roots to appeal to Latino voters is an insult to Latinos. We know a cultural faker when we see one, and the Becerra family story isn’t an anomaly; it’s our lives.
Gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton addresses patrons at Victorio’s Ristorante in North Hollywood in September.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)
“It’s a weird gotcha,” said Cal State Fullerton Chicano studies professor Alexandro José Gradilla, whose wife’s grandmother was born in California and raised in Mexico, then bounced between the two countries for the rest of her life. “What’s the dis? Where’s the dunk? It’s so normative, especially of that generation. We cannot have the 2026 definition of immigration, the border and policy apply to a completely different landscape.”
Becerra’s critics subscribe to “this very American bias that an immigrant only moves once to the U.S., the land of opportunity, of hope — all that mythology,” Gradilla continued. During the Ellis Island era, he noted, European immigrants returned to their home countries with their U.S.-born children, and then those children faced many of the same hardships as first-time arrivals when they came back to the U.S. as adults.
“‘We don’t call those people expats or returnees — ‘immigrant’ is the only intelligible label we understand,” the profe concluded. “Until we come up with a better label, Becerra’s dad is an immigrant.”
There are many legitimate reasons to bash Becerra, from his refusal to participate in more debates to his paltry number of public rallies to a platform that sounds like more of what created California’s current woes. His family history isn’t it.
Hilton’s fixation on Becerra’s immigrant bona fides shows how desperate he is to gain some traction, any traction, with Latino voters. He at least has picked up on Latinos’ regard for immigrant success stories. But after bragging about being the candidate of legal immigrants, for Hilton to hold being born here against someone who went back and forth between the U.S. and Mexico is a weak salsa pendejada.
Hilton would have been better off with his conservative base if he had labeled Becerra the son of an anchor baby.
At a press conference with elected officials to oppose Proposition 39, which would mandate voter identification, my colleague Nicole Nixon asked Becerra about Hilton’s attacks on his dad. Becerra finally unlocked the inner cholo so many of us have been waiting to see, instead of the Chicano Ned Flanders he’s been projecting for decades.
“So this is what happens when people who don’t understand immigration start to pontificate,” he responded, summarizing his family story once again and pointing out the discrimination his father faced as someone of Mexican heritage, birthright citizenship be damned.
“Steve Hilton may not know that [Mexican American history] because he’s not from the U.S.,” Becerra said. “Steve Hilton may not know that because even though he’s an immigrant, he hasn’t taken the time to research.”
Wow, the brown Democratic candidate calling the white Republican candidate a dumb immigrant — California politics sure have changed!
But Becerra’s smackdown had a point. Conservatives deeply misunderstand what it is to be Mexican American. We’ve never fit into the American assimilation story and so have created our own narrative, one that people like Hilton refuse to accept at their own peril.
Hilton needs to take a Chicano studies class, where discussions about the fluidity of Mexican identity inevitably come up.
And, wouldn’t you know it, Gradilla planned to bring up that very subject with his students this week — he didn’t even know about Hilton’s attacks against Becerra until I told him.
“For Hilton, anyone of Mexican heritage in this country needs to be grateful, you need to be loyal, and you need to be here,” Gradilla said. “Who would ever want to leave the U.S.? Well, some people have to.”
Your prospect of winning is small. So small, you could peer through a microscope, blink and miss it. How, then do you draw voters to your candidacy and boost your chances?
Actually, let’s not pretend. A very real flesh-and-blood Republican, Steve Hilton, is running for California governor and if your idea for grabbing attention doesn’t involve a make-believe lesbian couple, double entendre and a soft-core porn vibe, you’re very clearly lacking in imagination.
Hilton ran an ad featuring just such elements, garnering coast-to-coast notice, millions of views and ensuring the tagline — “Now lick it” — while not as resonant as, say, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” will forever live in political infamy.
What the spot tries to do, convince folks in this left-leaning redoubt to be venturesome and vote for Hilton, is not the least offensive, though your friendly political columnist, hardly a prude, found the execution a bit, well, icky.
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Expert columnists cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service, which include arbitration and a class action waiver. You agree that we and our third-party vendors may collect and use your information, including through cookies, pixels and similar technologies, for the purposes set forth in our Privacy Policy such as personalizing your experience and ads.
Being a cis white male of a certain age, however, means perhaps we shouldn’t be the one to judge. We’re certainly not the target audience. So we turned to two of the youngish, hippest people we know, Daughters No. 1 & 2, who are both well-accomplished 30-somethings and truly upstanding citizens.
What follows is their spontaneous reaction.
Daughter No. 1: “Stupid, infantilizing.”
Daughter No. 2: “Wtf is this fake woke AI ad? Ew.”
(For the record, Hilton said the ad was not AI generated. He apologized, sort of, to those who took offense.)
We also asked the Fabulous Mrs Z. — who has impeccable judgment, notwithstanding all the years she’s stayed married to your friendly political columnist — for her response. “It’s just so strange and stupid,” she said. “Why would he approve this ad? It makes me question his judgment.”
What do the pros say?
Of course, that’s just four people — one of whom doesn’t even live in California — so it’s not much of a sample.
For more insight, we turned to some political professionals.
And who better to weigh in than Fred Davis, the madcap genius behind another infamous California campaign spot, the so-called Demon Sheep ad he concocted for Carly Fiorina’s 2010 U.S. Senate campaign. The Felliniesque production included lightning bolts, a Roman column and a man covered in sheepskin crawling on all fours and leering with a glowing red eye — the point being that Fiorina’s rival, Tom Campbell, was supposedly a profligate wolf in fiscal-conservative sheep clothing.
Strange, yes, but definitely more memorable than an accountant in green eyeshade laboring over the books.
Anyway, Davis — who’s featured Paris Hilton, bad hair and a giant rat in a crown as part of his out-there oeuvre — loved the new Hilton campaign spot, calling it “super attention-getting, super interesting.” (Which is not the least surprising from a man whose chosen epitaph is, “If you don’t notice it, why bother?”)
“I think it’s a brilliantly done ad,” Davis said, “wonderfully written.” And, he added, “I can’t imagine it gaining him one vote.”
Which was sort of the point, no?
Kevin Spillane also appreciates Hilton’s effort, given his own Sisyphean struggles as a Republican strategist in California.
A screen grab from Steve Hilton’s “Just Try It” ad. Columnist Mark Z. Barabak found execution of the spot a bit, well, icky.
(Steve Hilton for Governor)
“They’re doing something out there and on the edge. I don’t fault them for that,” said Spillane, who supports Hilton and has contributed to his campaign. “It’s a clever concept of trying to get people to do something that they’re not used to doing.”
Which is to say vote for a Republican for statewide office in California.
But Spillane, too, questioned the execution. “I actually was fine with the ad until they got to the ‘lick it’ line,” he said, insisting he is also no prude. “That’s just a little too explicitly sexual.”
Running, not advancing
To his credit, Hilton has been running hard for governor. Much harder than his Democratic rival and the prohibitive front-runner, Xavier Becerra. Hilton has issued an abundance of policy proposals and spoken before pretty much any group or microphone-wielding reporter or podcaster who’ll have him.
None of which has garnered Hilton anywhere near the publicity captured by his racy “Just Try It, California” ad.
Hilton’s edgy attitude and pugnacious put-downs would place him right at home among the network’s collection of trolls, provocateurs and Democrat-bashing gargoyles.
But Hilton should leave the advertising to someone else.
California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton dove deep into his housing platform and lobbed a few attacks at his Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra, during a town hall with Los Angeles news outlets Tuesday.
Hilton also pointed to some disagreements with President Trump, providing daylight between himself and a president who remains deeply unpopular in California, during the event hosted and livestreamed by the Los Angeles Times and LAist.
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s final term ends in early January, providing California voters the opportunity to select a new governor at a time of conflict between the state and the Trump administration over environmental policies, immigration, healthcare and other pressing issues.
Ballots already have started to arrive in California voters’ mailboxes ahead of the Nov. 3 election.
Here are the top takeaways from the discussion with Hilton:
Walking the tightrope on Trump
Republicans running for statewide office already have an uphill battle because of California’s heavily Democratic electorate. It’s an acute challenge this year, campaign experts say, because many Democratic voters are itching to help their party regain control of Congress and neutralize Trump’s agenda.
Trump endorsed Hilton in April, which helped the former Fox News host pull ahead of his GOP rival, Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco, and secure the second-place spot in the primary election, behind Becerra.
On the campaign trail, Hilton has remained supportive of Trump and said Democratic policies, not the war in Iran, are to blame for high prices.
The Republican said those differences are rooted in his strong support for states’ rights.
“The broader point I want to make, and you can track this back to the commentary and what I’ve written over the years, is I’m a strong believer in decentralizing power,” he said. “I think there’s far too much involvement of the federal government in our affairs in California, and I’m going to be a very strong advocate for bringing those powers back in all sorts of ways.”
Gas prices, taxes and housing permits
Hilton described California’s cost of living as “a nightmare” and a major contributor to residents and businesses moving out of the state.
He laid out an affordability plan, which he refers to as “Califordable,” that he would prioritize if elected governor. His plan includes:
Ending income taxes for Californians who earn $150,000 or less.
Slashing oil industry regulations and clean energy mandates for utility companies to achieve $3 gas and lower electric bills.
Ushering in a new construction boom of single-family homes, including by developing 10 new cities around the state, and capping government fees on newly constructed houses.
He blames the state’s affordability woes on Democrats, who have controlled the state legislative seats and held every elected statewide office since 2009.
“It’s not just that it’s time for some change in California, it’s time for balance. It’s time to try something different after 16 years of doing it the same way,” he said.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton said he does have some policy differences with President Trump during a town hall at the Los Angeles Times Building on Tuesday in El Segundo.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
Hilton said he would stop enforcing laws requiring communities to meet housing production goals and instead focus on building in undeveloped areas of the state that want new homes.
“We’ve got this attitude that the only place you can build is inside what’s currently developed, and that’s motivated by a desire to stop traffic and sprawl and all these things. But the consequence of that is that you end up finding [it] almost impossible to build anything” because of permitting battles and lawsuits, he said. “My plan is to open that up so that we build outwards, not just upwards, increasing the amount of space we use for housing.”
How he would pay for it all
Hilton said that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers have gotten accustomed to spending big and that he wants to return California’s state budget to its pre-pandemic size.
Earlier this year Newsom signed a budget just shy of $352 billion. His first budget as governor, in 2019, clocked in at nearly $215 billion.
The growth occurred during a time “when around 2 million people on net have moved out of the state,” Hilton said. “So we’re spending twice as much for a big reduction in population and worse results.”
He said he could offset the tax cuts by ending funding for high-speed rail, trimming state agencies by 5% and cracking down on Medicaid fraud. Together, he estimates those cuts would save about $25 billion annually. He has also promised to end state-funded healthcare for undocumented immigrants and to hollow out agencies that regulate the state’s air quality and coastlines.
Another round of attacks on Becerra
While he largely stayed focused on policy, Hilton criticized Becerra’s record as U.S. Health and Human Services secretary and dinged him for skipping the town hall.
“Looking forward to perhaps one day having another chance to sit down with my competitor in this race, Xavier Becerra. We’ve had one debate. He promised that there would be debates, plural. Not to be today. But hopefully we can have that conversation because Californians deserve a conversation about the future of our state,” he said during his opening remarks.
On Monday, Hilton attacked Becerra for having “pulled out” of the debate, though the Democratic candidate never agreed to attend a debate proposed by The Times and LAist. Becerra’s spokesperson said the campaign declined the invitation because of a full campaign schedule.
In the weeks following the June primary election, Becerra made himself scarce on the campaign trail and attended few public events. In August, he told reporters there would be multiple debates. He and Hilton faced off last week in an hourlong debate on CNN but no other debates have been announced.
Offshore wind projects “grotesque,” Hilton says
At a time when the Trump administration has systematically dismantled climate and environmental policies, Hilton took care to cast himself as an environmentalist who is concerned about climate change.
He criticized many of the policies favored by Democrats, however, as a “very one-dimensional way of thinking” and offered a more business-friendly approach to addressing climate change:
Planting 3 billion trees and restoring wetlands.
Expanding the use of climate-friendly geothermal energy near places such as the Salton Sea and Sonoma and Modoc counties.
Expanding oil production in California, which he said reduces the need to import foreign oil on tanker ships that spew carbon emissions.
“So that’s a way of reducing carbon emissions that doesn’t burden working people and small businesses with the highest energy costs in the country. We’ve got to get the balance right,” Hilton said.
Hilton aligns with Trump’s vehement opposition to offshore wind projects, a potential source of abundant renewable energy. This year, the Trump administration announced deals to pay wind project developers billions to abandon U.S. wind leases off the coasts of California, North Carolina, New York and New Jersey.
“I think offshore wind is an absolute abomination. I mean, you look at beautiful Morro Bay or Humboldt up in the northern part of our state,” Hilton said. “The industrialization of our coastline that offshore wind would create, I think, is just grotesque, and I’m dead against it.”
Working across the aisle
When asked how he would work with a Democratic majority in the state Legislature, Hilton said he has experience doing it — as an advisor to former United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron, he shared an office with a member of the opposite party.
“We worked together very well. Didn’t agree on everything,” he said. “That would be my attitude. I’m very open. I’m not tribal. I’m not particularly partisan. I’m a pragmatic, problem-solving kind of person, and I’m looking forward to working with the Legislature.”
He said he would press the Legislature to cut spending and “the endless number of bills that they pass every year. … But I want to work together to reduce costs for Californians.”
Hilton also found alignment with Democrats who ran in the gubernatorial primary, including former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, San José Mayor Matt Mahan and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
“Katie Porter in the primary … actually endorsed my tax plan. Matt Mahan and I agree on a lot of things to help” cut costs and speed up housing constriction, he said. “Antonio Villaraigosa, we agreed on a lot of things to do with energy policy. So I think there are Democrats who we’ll be able to work with to get consensus on some of the things that we need to get done.”
Citing lingering concerns about the potential misuse of police license plate readers, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to delay an agreement that would enable the deployment of hundreds of the controversial devices until officials are satisfied that the technology will be wielded responsibly.
By a 10-4 vote, the council opted to overrule approval of the 10-year, $235-million contract between the Los Angeles Police Department and Axon Enterprise, halting a deal that had previously been signed off on by the Board of Police Commissioners.
Axon is seeking to outfit hundreds of LAPD patrol squads with plate scanners, which track the movements of vehicles around the city. Under the agreement, the company would also replace thousands of body-worn cameras, supply new Tasers, provide cloud video storage, and roll out a program that uses artificial intelligence to assist officers in writing police reports.
In addition, Axon is seeking to launch a pilot program that would attach plate scanners to streetlights around Los Angeles, offering the LAPD a souped-up version of its current systems by using AI to identify vehicles, license plates, pedestrians and objects that appear on streets and sidewalks.
The council’s decision — which was preceded by several fiery comments from members of the public who oppose the use of license plate readers — sends the contract back to the Police Commission for reconsideration.
A commission spokesperson said that the board’s members weren’t immediately available for comment.
Several council members voiced unease about proceeding without a better sense of the LAPD’s internal policy on license plate reader use. Delaying the contract, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez said, would give the public and city leaders more time to review the safeguards and policies written into the LAPD’s proposed memorandum of understanding with Axon.
Councilmember Traci Park, a staunch supporter of plate reader technology, said there is an urgent need to get the devices “up and running.”
Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez shot back that it would be irresponsible to deploy the technology, citing news reports about officers misusing plate readers to stalk romantic partners and track women seeking reproductive health services.
Earlier this year, the LAPD allowed its agreement with one of Axon’s chief competitors, Flock Safety, to lapse over concerns that the Trump administration is using the data it collects to locate immigrants targeted for deportation. Police officials say they no longer have access to the company’s cameras, many of which are owned by homeowners associations and other private groups.
LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell and other department leaders have pushed to expand the use of license plate readers, saying they are a valuable tool for solving crimes, enabling investigators to more easily locate stolen vehicles and fugitives.
Hernandez noted that other police technologies, such as a robot dog used in situations involving barricaded suspects, had quietly moved from a pilot to a full-fledged program without input from the council.
Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he still had privacy concerns about license plate readers, while noting that their deployment along the Figueroa corridor had assisted in the rescue of dozens of juvenile sex trafficking victims.
“Now having said that, if I’m honest I don’t know what else the cameras are doing,” he said.
Councilmember Monica Rodriguez said that as the license plate reader technology is adopted by other, non-police agencies such as sanitation and street services, the city needs a universal policy governing its use.
The matter will next be heard by the public safety committee — likely at its Oct. 20 meeting — before being taken up by the full council later that week.
In a presentation to the Police Commission last month, the LAPD’s technology czar, Dean Gialamas, said that the department understood the privacy and civil liberty concerns raised about companies such as Flock. This summer, the department announced it was pausing its relationship with the Atlanta-based firm, but police officials have said they are still hopeful to negotiate a new deal with the company that would include more data-sharing safeguards.
Much like the initial debate over the use of forensic DNA testing, Gialamas said, the answer wasn’t to abandon the technology but to create safeguards to “ensure responsible and trusted use.”
Gialamas told commissioners that Axon had agreed to terms that would give the LAPD complete ownership of the data captured and bar the sharing of data with federal authorities. The proposed deal, he said, would also limit the use of plate readers to criminal investigations, missing persons cases and other “serious public safety matters.” Investigators, for instance, would not be able to conduct searches based solely on protests or other 1st Amendment-protected activities, he said.
Under the proposed contract, investigators would no longer be given “unfettered access” to license plate data and the retention period would be significantly cut down, he said. The department would also be permitted to conduct regular audits to flag officers who use the system frequently or conduct unusual searches.
A report issued last month by the LAPD inspector general’s office found numerous “limitations” in the department’s existing agreements with its three plate reader vendors — Flock, Axon and Motorola — including a lack of clear language about how long data are retained and how they are shared with third parties or other law enforcement agencies.
The inspector general recommended that the department update its current license plate reader contracts to address data security and privacy concerns, conduct regular audits and develop standardized rules for traffic stops based on plate reader hits.
Editorial decisions at ABC News are being influenced by the Federal Communications Commission’s early license review of its TV stations, the network’s legal team told a U.S. District Court judge Tuesday.
The Disney-owned network is seeking a restraining order to stop the FCC’s action, which its attorneys said was unprecedented and an attempt by the Trump White House to chill free speech.
Disney attorney Beth Wilkinson said the FCC’s action is having an impact on ABC News coverage in the weeks leading up to the midterm elections, as the network tries to avoid further action from the agency that regulates over-the-air broadcast TV licenses.
“We are making different editorial decisions,” Wilkinson said during the court hearing in Washington. “We are watching everything that we do because every time we do something — even not broadcasting this presidential speech — brings out the anger in the administration and the retaliation from the agency.”
Wilkinson was referring to President Trump’s frustration over ABC’s decision not to air his July 16 speech about voter fraud. The network chose to run it on its news streaming platform. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr criticized the move and said it would be considered in the license renewal process.
Wilkinson cited Carr’s complaint as an example of how the review is being driven by Trump’s unhappiness over the network’s coverage across its news programs, its late-night show “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and its topical daytime chat show “The View.” The FCC’s action, she said, is the administration “retaliating with their government power against ABC’s right to protected speech.”
Assistant U.S. Atty. Dimitar P. Georgiev argued for the FCC that ABC is trying to avoid the commission’s regulatory process by taking the case to the U.S. District Court. Georgiev said the license renewal was initiated because of a dispute over documents in the commission’s investigation into alleged discriminatory hiring practices at Disney.
Judge Loren L. AliKhan did not issue a ruling. She asked the FCC to provide further documentation on its claim. Disney will have until Oct. 14 to respond.
Trump has frequently threatened to have TV station licenses pulled when he believes he is treated unfairly on news and talk programs. He has also successfully extracted multimillion-dollar settlements from CBS and ABC after suing the networks over news content he said had treated him unfairly.
ABC is the first network to take the FCC to court over the threats.
Wilkinson noted that Carr said during a visit to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., that “broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions, also known as fake news, have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up.”
The licenses for eight ABC-owned TV stations, including KABC in Los Angeles, were originally scheduled for renewal between 2028 and 2031.
Carr has said ABC’s daily talk show “The View” should not be exempt from the FCC’s equal time rule that requires broadcasters to bring on opposing candidates to provide balanced coverage. Wilkinson noted that the program — which was given the exemption in 2002 — has avoided using clips of politicians during its popular “Hot Topics” segment at the top of the program.
Carr also said earlier this year that stations could be subject to discipline if they “don’t operate in the public interest” after criticisms from the White House about coverage of the Iran war.
Carr called for the ABC license review in April, days after Kimmel delivered gags about the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner attended by Trump for the first time as president and described First Lady Melania Trump as having a “glow like an expectant widow.”
The satirical remarks drew criticism after a man later breached security at the Washington Hilton event while armed with a shotgun, handgun and several knives. The dinner was cut short and rescheduled.
WASHINGTON — As President Trump zigzags across the country in the final weeks before the midterm elections, he has made California his favorite foil as he tries to fire up his base.
On Monday, he blamed the Golden State for the rising cost of gas prices, claimed without evidence that its elections are rigged, and at a Nebraska rally suggested Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego.
“It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump said. “They can take out a city, let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”
The president’s team on Tuesday said his remarks were misunderstood, arguing the president “clearly” stated that U.S. cities would have been threatened “if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped.” Trump declined to clarify what he meant by his statements when asked by a reporter Tuesday.
But by then, Trump’s remarks had already drawn fierce condemnation from California leaders, including Republican Jim Desmond, a Navy veteran running in a highly competitive race that is key to helping Republicans retain control of the House.
“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments,” Desmond wrote on social media. “America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland.”
The backlash exposed the risk of Trump’s closing midterm strategy. Bashing California is a reliable applause line in red states like Nebraska, Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma, where the president has been holding rallies trying to ensure his supporters get out to vote. But in this modern era, an incendiary comment can travel fast online and leave Republicans running in competitive districts in awkward spots, trying to distance themselves from Trump.
Overall, political observers see the episode as an example of how the president’s political strategy can be unpredictable at a time when Republicans are trying to control the message the most.
“Whether you like Trump or not, he is good at getting his message out and coming up with a message that can resonate and catch fire,” said Mindy Romero, founder and director of the nonpartisan Center for Inclusive Democracy. “I think the question now is: Is he starting to fail himself when it comes to his messaging?”
California Democrats were quick to use Trump’s remarks as a line of attack against him. Gov. Gavin Newsom called him “deranged and dangerous” and opened the state emergency operations center to assess potential threats. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria told Trump to “keep our city out of your reckless war talk.” And Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said his comments could “potentially compromise our safety.”
Trump’s remarks about the California cities on Monday were the most striking example yet of the president using California as a foil to rally a base in GOP strongholds.
In Nebraska and other red states in recent days, Trump has repeatedly cast California as a political boogeyman as a means to motivate voters to cast their ballots for the GOP candidates.
At an Oklahoma rally last week, Trump told the crowd that Republicans need to keep the party in control of Congress so that his administration can continue the work of combating fraud in blue states, like California. The administration’s efforts, led by Vice President JD Vance, have sometimes been overestimated or nebulous.
But Trump tells supporters that in places like California, the administration is seeing “billions and billions of dollars of fraud.”
In a social media post Monday, Trump began blaming the cost of fuel — a defining issue for voters this election cycle — on states like California.
“What’s driving up Gasoline is no longer the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump wrote. The issue, he said, is refineries being “closed up in Blue States, like California, by the Dumocrats.”
Hours later, while rallying in Nebraska, Trump seemed to contradict himself as he promised the crowd that fuel costs would go down once the war in Iran was over.
“That will end very quickly, one way or the other, very soon, maybe a little after the election, maybe a little before, but it is going to end very soon,” Trump said. “When that happens, the oil will come tumbling down.”
Trump’s messaging underscores how the war with Iran, which has gas prices topping $6 a gallon, has emerged as a potential liability for Republicans that the president is trying to address in subtle ways.
Polling on Trump’s handling of the economy has remained low, even among Republicans. A University of Massachusetts Amherst poll last month found that only 22% of Americans perceive the economy in a good or fair state.
The softening of Trump’s approval even among those who still support his performance could translate into lower GOP turnout in the state’s few competitive races, the poll’s director, Mark DiCamillo, said.
Trump’s strategy in the final stretch before the midterms has largely focused on rallying the base in hopes that they will turn out to vote. Part of that strategy includes using California as a punching bag.
One particular line of attack has been disparaging the state’s voting systems. He suggested Monday that Democrat-led cities are trying to cheat in November as he touted the fast count of ballots in foreign countries.
“In Detroit, Philadelphia, California and numerous other U.S. Cities and States, the results, with much smaller numbers, will often take weeks to Rig, I mean, calculate,” Trump wrote on Monday. “Voting in America is CORRUPT!!!”
In another social media post, he said: “California: Took 38 days with 16.1 million ballots in 2024.”’
Trump using California as a foil for any given issue could be a risky strategy, Romero said.
“He’s expanding the types of things that he’s blaming California for, like the gas crisis,” she said, arguing that such statements could “start to lose credibility with those people that he has credibility with.”
For Republican voters in California, the ploy may be even riskier, especially when Trump suggests Iran could “take out” their cities.
“I don’t think that message necessarily plays well here because Californians are Californians,” DiCamillo said. “There is a certain pride in being a Californian, certainly not held by everybody … but I would think that the mainstream would be defending the state.”
A former FBI intelligence analyst has alleged that President Trump ordered the FBI to launch unconstitutional investigations into immigration enforcement protesters from the Los Angeles area, according to a whistleblower report made public Tuesday by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).
She also contended that substantial FBI resources were diverted to such probes, and that she was retaliated against for questioning their legality.
The White House and the top federal prosecutor in Los Angeles both denied the allegations.
Jill Fields, a former supervisory intelligence analyst based in L.A., said in a letter addressed to Congress from her attorneys that she was told Trump had ordered FBI Director Kash Patel to launch the probes after seeing a social media video of protests against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection operations in Alhambra in February 2025.
Fields said an initial assessment “determined that the protesters’ actions — video recording, use of a megaphone, and verbal objection — were constitutionally protected under the First Amendment and never crossed the line into impeding arrest or being a threat,” but that she and others were nonetheless directed to open investigations.
She said that a supervisor — whose name was redacted in the released report — said the investigation was moving forward because “the President wants this investigation.”
Separately, Fields alleged that she was informed that then-Acting Deputy Atty. Gen. Emil Bove — Trump’s former lawyer and now a federal appellate court judge — had instructed FBI leaders in Los Angeles to investigate “any anti-ICE and CBP protesters demonstrating at federal buildings in Los Angeles,” which surprised her because “investigations against protestors solely for First Amendment activity are explicitly illegal and contrary to FBI policy.”
She said she refused to participate and isn’t sure if the investigations were formally launched, but that she “observed that personnel and analytical resources were immediately diverted from ongoing criminal investigations to address the Alhambra matter.”
Fields said she was reassigned after taking her concerns beyond her direct chain of command, and ultimately resigned.
She alleges that the conduct “had significant consequences for constitutional rights, and the integrity and effective operation of the FBI,” and that her reassignment “created a chilling effect within the workforce” by signaling to other employees that “raising constitutional or legal concerns could carry professional consequences.”
Lauren Bis, a White House spokesperson, denied the allegations.
“The First Amendment does not protect violent rioting, obstructing law enforcement, and assaulting law enforcement. Assaulting and obstructing law enforcement is a crime,” she said in a statement. “This administration has been clear: anyone who assaults or obstructs law enforcement will be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
The FBI and the Justice Department said in a joint statement that under Trump, “the Department of Justice will continue to vigorously uphold the First Amendment rights of all Americans,” but that “violence is not protected by the First Amendment” and that “politically motivated attacks will not deter us from doing our job.”
They said “conspiracies to impede federal law enforcement and assaults on federal officers are against the law.”
The Los Angeles region was a hotbed of protest amid an intense immigration crackdown by the Trump administration last year.
Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles have pursued a slew of criminal cases against protesters involved in those demonstrations, though many of the cases have been dismissed, reduced to misdemeanor charges or rejected by grand juries. Legal experts have said the failure rate raised concerns about the strength of the cases being brought by First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, whose leadership of the Los Angeles prosecutors office without Senate confirmation is being challenged in court, but high-ranking Justice Department officials have praised Essayli’s work.
Essayli called Fields’ claims false, including in response to a social media post Tuesday by Padilla recounting them.
“The FBI investigated those obstructing law enforcement and engaging in assault, such as punching and spitting (my office charged more than 100 individuals with such crimes),” Essayli wrote. “There is no First Amendment right to violently resist federal officers enforcing immigration laws passed by Congress.”
Padilla wrote a letter to Patel and Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche on Monday demanding answers to a slate of questions about Justice Department investigations of protesters, their origins and outcomes, and any involvement from the White House.
He wrote that Blanche and Patel have told Congress that “cases would be based only on the facts and the law, free from political interference,” but that the whistleblower report “depicts an FBI and DOJ willing to surveil individuals solely for First Amendment activity criticizing the Administration — at the behest of the White House and Trump loyalists, over the objection of senior staff, and in contravention of agency policy and the Constitution.”
The video from Alhambra that Fields said she was told prompted Trump to demand investigations, and which Padilla shared, was posted to TikTok by the League of United Latin American Citizens on Feb. 26, 2025. LULAC did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
The video depicts protesters on megaphones calmly reminding others who appear to be the focus of nearby immigration enforcement about their legal rights and the fact that agents need a legitimate, court-issued warrant to enter their homes — and telling them not to open their doors if the agents don’t have one.
I went to bed at a decent hour Monday night and got a pretty good sleep.
I woke up refreshed Tuesday morning, only to see the news that President Trump seemed to have told a crowd in Nebraska that it wouldn’t be such a bad thing if Iran attacked Southern California.
“Let ’em take out Los Angeles. Let ’em take out San Diego,” he said in a typically meandering speech, perhaps trying to justify a war he has repeatedly claimed is keeping the U.S. safe, even as gas prices have spiked. “This is a very small price to pay.”
“San Diego is not collateral damage,” said San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria.
Such “dangerous” remarks could “potentially compromise our safety,” said L.A. Mayor Karen Bass.
“He is deranged and dangerous,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom.
President Trump throws a pen into the crowd after he signed an executive order during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center in Grand Island, Neb., on Oct. 5, 2026.
(Kent Nishimura / AFP via Getty Images)
About 8 a.m., I took my dog Philly out for our morning walk. This is usually a lovely time for us. I clear my head. For Philly, a 3-year-old beagle, these are essentially business trips.
I got to thinking about the similarities in the daily routines of Philly and the president of the United States.
The thing is, I carry bags with me and clean up after Philly. The president to my knowledge has nobody on his staff doing this. We are at a point in American politics at which we must consider posting signs, everywhere Trump travels, that say, “Please Curb Your President.”
Not that it would be easy to clean Trump’s daily messes. You’d need the equivalent of those parade attendants in overalls who run along behind the horses with shovels.
The White House does not use poop bags. Instead, it uses denial and spin.
Critical reactions to Trump’s Nebraska comments were “not rooted in reality,” said White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung, who claimed Trump was misrepresented.
We’ve got to respect Cheung’s opinion. Does anyone in the world have more experience when it comes to analyzing comments not rooted in reality?
Some of you may know there are two topics I often revisit in my column. One is the effects, good and bad, of aging. The other is failure of leadership.
So I feel eminently qualified to psychoanalyze the president.
I don’t mean to generalize, but as people age, it’s not unusual for them to undergo behavioral changes. Some folks mellow, they abide, they lean into the ride. Others can become churlish, combative or grouchy.
Not only is Trump the poster boy for the latter group, but as things go wrong, he becomes more obstinate.
And things have definitely gone wrong.
The war in Iran is a disaster. The president is personally responsible for rising gas prices. He’s ruined the economy with his tariffs. He’s picked a fight with Canada. He may cost his party the House and the Senate because his almost daily outrages have pumped oxygen back into the blood of long-slumping Democrats.
A normal person would have the good sense to scale back or shrink away.
President Trump at the campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on Oct. 5, 2026, in Grand Island, Neb.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)
Trump keeps doubling down, wants to put his name on everything, and lashes out the way someone does when it’s not clear what’s bigger — their ego or their insecurity.
I’ve been to Nebraska, by the way. Nice place, met a lot of lovely people.
I enjoy corn, on or off the cob.
Popcorn. Caramel corn.
Not wild about “Children of the Corn,” the slasher movie based on Stephen King’s short story. But thank you very much, Nebraska, for Fred Astaire, Johnny Carson and Henry Fonda, who, by the way, was born in Grand Island, where Trump made his cracks Monday about California.
Did it occur to any of the shuckers who cheered Trump’s throwaway line about an attack on San Diego and L.A. that:
A: It wasn’t funny.
B: San Diego has one of the nation’s largest military installations, with thousands of personnel currently deployed to the Middle East because of the war in Iran.
C: Maybe we should expect more from someone serving as president and commander in chief.
In defending Trump, the White House said news outlets had misunderstood and misrepresented the president’s comments in what amounted to a “media freakout.” A White House media post singled out an L.A. Times post that said Trump suggested “letting Iran take out” L.A. and San Diego.
“No, he didn’t, you buffoons,” said the White House. “He was saying the U.S. is fighting to STOP Iran from having the ability to take out LA and San Diego with a nuclear weapon — which they would if they had the chance.”
Please.
This buffoon would like to point out that this is yet another case of Trump using California as a punching bag to prop up support for the war and nail down what’s left of his diminishing base. But even some of his longtime disciples know that he has said on dozens of occasions that the war had ended, was ending, or had been won, and not once were any of those words rooted in reality.
It’s not clear whether we’re any safer in the U.S. as a result of the war, although it is clear that we have paid with lives and higher costs.
So maybe a gratuitous and unfunny line about anyone taking out American cities is better left unsaid.
I’m fresh out of muzzles, but I do have extra poop bags.
Democrat Xavier Becerra, the frontrunner to become the state’s next governor, often invokes the story of his parents’ humble beginnings as immigrants from Mexico who, through hard work, built happy and productive lives in California.
“My parents came to California with $12 in their pocket. They lived the California dream,” Becerra said during last week’s gubernatorial debate with Republican rival Steve Hilton, aired nationally on CNN.
Becerra for years has described himself as the “son of immigrants” when talking about his upbringing, but that claim has come under scrutiny by Hilton and other critics who accuse Becerra of embellishing his family history. Becerra’s mother is from Guadalajara, Mexico, but his father was born in Sacramento and raised in Tijuana — making him a U.S. citizen and not a legal immigrant.
“Unlike Xavier Becerra, I am an immigrant. Unlike Xavier Becerra, my father was an immigrant. My stepfather too. My whole family,” Hilton wrote in a post on X.
Hilton is an immigrant from the United Kingdom and is the son of Hungarian immigrants who fled their homeland during a revolution in 1956.
Richard Grenell, a former Trump administration official, accused news outlets of letting a lie “continue for decades” throughout Becerra’s tenure as California attorney general and then as a Cabinet official in the Biden administration.
Becerra has openly discussed the details of his parents’ story, which unfolded on both sides of the border and in many ways reflects Mexican immigrant trajectories during the historical period of the 1920s and 1930s.
During speeches and in interviews Becerra has described how his father, Manuel, was born in Sacramento in 1928 and taken back to Tijuana as a young boy, with few jobs for Americans during the Great Depression, and even fewer jobs for Mexicans working in the U.S. His father traveled between the two countries often, and, as an older child, he would look for work in the U.S.
Becerra on Tuesday accused Hilton of “casting lies” about his family’s background, saying that the Republican failed to understand the struggle that many Mexican immigrants and Mexican Americans faced in this county decades ago. He said his dad would tell of the days when he couldn’t walk into some establishments that had posted signs that read “No dog, Negros or Mexicans allowed.”
“This is what happens when people who don’t understand immigration start to pontificate,” Becerra said Tuesday after a morning rally against Proposition 39, a voter identification measure, at Guelaguetza, a Oaxacan restaurant in Los Angeles’ Pico-Union neighborhood.
“I am very proud of my parents, and I consider them immigrants because even though my dad was born in the U.S. — in a country that wouldn’t treat him the way it would treat other U.S. citizens — my dad was a proud immigrant,” Becerra said. “I am proud that I am their son. I am the son of immigrants.”
G. Cristina Mora, a UC Berkeley professor of sociology studying attitudes toward immigration, said Becerra’s critics misunderstand a common phenomenon at the time, when immigrants moved back and forth across a southern border that was much more porous — very different from the militarized border of today.
Beyond the dwindling jobs and precarious economics of the 1930s serving as a push factor for many Mexican families, a wave of xenophobia also helped send hundreds of thousands back to Mexico. A wave of mass deportations across the Southwest states resulted in more than 1 million Mexicans and their descendants being forced out of their homes and loaded on trains out. More than 60% were U.S. citizens.
Mora, who also serves as co-director of the UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies, said “it was a time of very great anti-Mexican fervor.” Many sought to later return. Some were deported multiple times.
“There are many types of immigrants. There’s so much nuance,” Mora said. “To think there’s only one immigrant story would just be to not know California.”
Becerra’s campaign spokesperson Jonathan Underland in a statement accused Hilton of hypocritically attempting to capitalize on an immigrant narrative.
“Steve Hilton doesn’t seem to have a problem with immigrants who look like him — but openly attacks immigrants who look like Xavier Becerra,” Underland said. “Trump ignited a deep anti-immigrant animus among MAGA voters, and Hilton is tapping into that as he scrambles to distract from his bizarre ad campaign that alienated some of his closest allies.” Last week, Hilton’s campaign put out a provocative, sexually suggestive ad that drew criticism from his fellow Republicans.
Becerra, both on Tuesday and throughout his long political career, has often described his parents’ upbringing.
He said his father’s family moved back to Tijuana during the Great Depression. His father, he said, was the eldest child and was forced to leave school after the sixth grade to help support the family. He began working as a preteen, bouncing back and forth between the U.S. and Tijuana. He would tell stories about being a shoe shiner, at times of celebrities and movie stars. He also worked in the farm fields with his dad and sometimes with his uncles.
In the early 1950s he married Becerra’s mother, Maria Teresa, who lived in Guadalajara.
“When they decided to make a go of it outside of Guadalajara, they went to Tijuana. They didn’t have great success, so that’s when they decided to come to the U.S.,” Becerra said on Tuesday. “So when I say my parents came to California with $12 in their pocket, it’s because, Steve Hilton, my parents came to California with $12 in their pocket.”
Becerra’s father later began a construction career that lasted 30 years, while his mother worked as a clerical worker and later purchased rental properties.
Times researcher Cary Schneider contributed to this report.
NEW YORK — The Russian oligarch who helped bankroll Donald Trump Jr.’s wedding celebration says the president’s eldest son has paid back the money.
“Yes, he did,” Umar Kremlev told an International Boxing Association press conference in Istanbul on Tuesday. “He did repay the money I spent on the present.” Still, he said he felt the repayment was unnecessary.
“Frankly speaking, I do not understand why he decided to do so,” he went on. “There are all kinds of events organized by all kinds of people. It is as if I invite you to come and visit my country house. Would you expect me to issue an invoice to them afterward?” Speaking through an interpreter, he said that would be “ridiculous.”
ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative website, reported last month that Kremlev, who has close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, “footed the bill for hundreds of thousands of dollars of wedding expenses” when Trump Jr. married socialite Bettina Anderson in the Bahamas in May. That included paying to rent one of two private islands where the three-day party was held.
In a subsequent post on her Instagram page signed by the couple, Bettina Trump wrote that they had been married “surrounded ONLY by our family,” but that Kremlev, head of the boxing association, was a “dear friend” who “very generously hosted two incredible nights of celebrations for us AFTER our wedding.”
President Trump, who did not attend the nuptials, previously defended the arrangement but told reporters that the money would be paid back.
“It’s totally allowed,” he said. “But, as I understand it, he paid them back.”
“That’s very common,” he added, “I’ve given wedding parties to numerous people.”
Kremlev, who was recently honored with the Order of Friendship by Putin, also played down the significance, saying the celebration was “a shared event” and “people blew it out of proportion.”
“I mean, why can’t we be friends? We are just friends,” he went on. “We are simply friends and what unites us is love for sports.”
The focus on Kremlev comes as Russia remains at war with Ukraine following its invasion in 2022 and as Trump has failed to broker a promised peace deal between the nations.
Trump Jr. has previously been scrutinized over his ties to Russia. During the 2016 campaign, his meeting with a Russian attorney in Trump Tower to discuss potentially incriminating information about his father’s then-Democratic opponent was a critical element of investigations into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to meddle in the election to help Trump win.
WASHINGTON — Political advertising warns about Democratic plots to defund the police. Campaign events feature law enforcement unions and tough talk about law and order. Stump speeches boast about record low levels of violent crime.
From coast to coast, Republicans are focusing on public disorder, illegal immigration and violent crime in midterm campaigns as voters sour on their party’s handling of the cost of living and the war with Iran.
Democrats have tried to counter the attacks by recruiting candidates with law enforcement backgrounds and emphasizing their own anti-crime plans, but Republicans believe it’s a rare opportunity to go on the offensive in an otherwise challenging year.
“Do you know that right now we have the lowest violent crime rate in 126 years in America right now? Because we emphasize the rule of law,” House Speaker Mike Johnson recently told an audience at Louisiana State University. Crime rates have generally trended down since the 1990s with a brief spike during the COVID pandemic. “We have the most secure border we have had in the past half century.”
President Trump returned to the topic Monday night in Nebraska, warning about how the country used to be before he returned to the White House.
“We had a border with people pouring in, crime like nobody’s ever seen,” he said.
Republicans say Democrats will ‘defund the police’
In Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Texas and Wisconsin, Republican candidates for governor have attacked their Democratic rivals as weak on crime or warned they could cut police funding. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, for instance, has lambasted Democratic nominee and state Rep. Gina Hinojosa for not supporting legislation that would require judges to deny bail to illegal immigrants charged with a violent crime.
Hinojosa has campaigned on her tenure as a civil rights lawyer and criticized Abbott’s crime policies as violating civil liberties.
Rick Jackson, a billionaire healthcare executive running in Georgia, has repeatedly attacked Democratic opponent Keisha Lance Bottoms over her tenure as Atlanta mayor.
“I grew up in the type of neighborhood Keisha Lance Bottoms abandoned,” Jackson said at a summer campaign rally. “I know who gets hurt when politicians defund the police.”
In an interview with Atlanta station 11Alive, Bottoms emphasized that her administration gave pay raises to police and firefighters, and said she called for increased federal funding for public safety during her time as mayor.
Crime warnings pervade congressional races
It’s a similar story in U.S. House races.
In Virginia’s first congressional district, Rep. Rob Wittman has attacked his Democratic opponent, prosecutor Shannon Taylor, over her allegedly “soft on crime” record in office. In Michigan’s 10th district, Republican Michael Bouchard is running on his service as a Bronze Star Army captain and son of a longtime local sheriff. He’s claimed his Democratic opponent, former prosecutor Christina Hines, supports “woke, soft on crime, socialist policies.”
In Colorado’s eighth district, Rep. Gabe Evans touts his time as a police officer against Democratic challenger Manny Rutinel. And in Wisconsin’s third district, Rep. Derrick Van Orden hopes to win a third race against Democratic nominee Rebecca Cooke by painting her as a communist who wants to defund the police.
Republicans hope that by reprising warnings of crime and disorder the party can reenergize their disillusioned base and win back skeptical moderate voters who have drifted over concerns like affordability.
Democratic rivals have responded in kind. Taylor aired an ad featuring 13 local sheriffs who endorsed her campaign. Rutinel aired ads with local police and rolled out a safety plan that called for greater police funding and drug prevention programs. Hines said she’ll continue to prioritize public safety and prosecute corruption in Washington. Cooke has vowed to fully fund police departments in Congress.
Not all Republicans see crime as a winning issue
It’s yet to be seen if the strategy will prove effective.
“We’ve got to talk about it. I think that in many ways, we are the victim of our own success because it’s off the headlines a little bit more,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt, a Missouri Republican and former state attorney general. “Having a completely secure border now, no one even talks about it. But that’s a huge accomplishment from where we were at before.”
An AP-NORC poll conducted in September found that border security — which Trump and Republicans often link to crime — was a relative strength for the Republican president, with 48% of U.S. adults saying they approved of his performance on the issue. But that was still a decline from a year ago, when his approval on border security was at 55%.
Not everyone in the party is sold on Republicans rehashing the crime message.
“I don’t see that bubbling up as a major issue for the voters,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who chose not to seek reelection this year. Aiming to make the race to succeed Tillis a referendum on crime, Republicans have run ads claiming that Democratic nominee Roy Cooper went easy on convicts during his two terms in the governor’s mansion.
Black political leaders have criticized the ads as racist and reminiscent of past Republican campaigns that used dog whistles to appeal to suburban white voters. Trump made the message explicit when he invoked the infamous 1988 “Willie Horton” ad and displayed dozens of mugshots of men of color on a jumbotron during a rally stumping for Michael Whatley, Cooper’s Republican rival.
In contrast to his party’s messaging, Tillis noted his state’s safety in recent years.
“Frankly, when I hear somebody talking about crime in Charlotte, I live 25 minutes from downtown. I’m not worried about walking through Charlotte at night,” said Tillis.
Democrats accuse Trump of corruption
National Democrats contend that Republicans’ message on violent crime is undercut by the Trump administration’s hardline immigration enforcement actions, which resulted in the killing of two American protesters in January and the fatal shootings of multiple undocumented people. They accuse Trump of corruption and have hammered Republicans for alleged complicity in the president’s self-dealing.
“This is the biggest criminal organization that we’ve ever seen,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, of the current White House.
He added that, “Democrats should be pushing back with the fact that, if not for the fact that he was president, this guy would be leading some type of mafia right now.”
Lauren Bis, a White House spokeswoman, said “extreme Democrats are trying to deflect from their radical soft on crime agenda.”
Who will be the next president of the largest Latin American economy? We’ll know for sure with the run-off on October 25, but after the first-round results in Brazil’s general election, it seems it won’t be Lula da Silva. The 80-year-old socialist who was close friends with Hugo Chávez and failed to pressure Nicolás Maduro after he stole the 2024 election would need a miracle to stop Flávio Bolsonaro. The ultra-conservative populism of the candidate’s father, former president Jair Bolsonaro —currently in jail for the coup attempt of 2023—, surpassed Lula in the presidential vote and grabbed the majority of states and seats in Congress.
Unless the Workers Party has a secret weapon against Bolsonaro and recruits enough voters in extremis, Lula will end his career defeated by a family closely associated with attacks to democracy, misinformation, open dismissal of environmental concerns, militarism, and sexism.
We’ll see what millions of Brazilian voters, who are fed up with inflation and crime, will decide. But from a Venezuelan point of view, the idea of having Flávio Bolsonaro ruling over our big neighbor to the south sounds like bad news for chavismo, especially if the rest of Venezuela’s land borders touch Guyana, a rising oil producer closely protected by the US, and Colombia, where Abelardo de la Espriella, a leader who resembles Bolsonaro, is already president.
Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan. He’s not fighting socialism and trying to spread capitalist democracy.
If we add that Panama, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Peru, Chile, and Argentina have conservative presidents who declared a new war on drugs and are even joining the Trump administration’s Shield of the Americas initiative, we’ll see a map turning dark-blue hostile to the heirs of 21st-century socialism. No more silence about chavismo’s abuse. No more anti-imperialist performance in global arenas. Finally, the pendulum swung away from chavismo’s old circle. This right-wing storm on the continent is bad for Delcy Rodríguez and good for María Corina Machado. Right?
Not necessarily.
Before and after Trump
Before Trump, things were simpler. Conservative governments in Latin America were like Álvaro Uribe’s in Colombia or Felipe Calderón’s in Mexico: they tried to get along with Chávez but ended up as enemies, cutting commercial and diplomatic ties, fighting chavista diplomats in the UN and accusing their local adversaries of trying to export chavismo. Predicting a vote involving Venezuela in the OAS was easy: you just had to count how many representatives were on the right and how many on the left or the Chávez payroll, like Petrocaribe’s members.
After Trump, on the contrary, those old categories no longer matter. Ideology is not important. Not even cultural wars, which are so good for social media and for recruiting powerful allies like evangelical churches; a government can allow abortion and same sex marriage and be considered a friend by Trump, as long as this government connects with the priorities of the president’s political and corporate circles.
Hugo Chávez would be worried about the Bolsonaros’ apparent return to Brasília. Delcy Rodríguez, not so much.
Trump’s foreign relations favor those governments who are in sync with the specific matters his administration is about, like pushing China out of the region, securing markets for American companies, and, more particularly, supporting Trump’s narratives. If you lose an election, as he did with Biden, you blame socialism and try to reverse the results; if Trump says fentanyl and cocaine are coming from your country, you help the Americans to attack boats and produce viral clips on social media; if Trump says your migrants are poisoning his country, you help him to stop them before they approach the US, and even accept that your own citizens are sent to prisons in third, remote countries.
Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan. He’s not fighting socialism and spreading capitalist democracy. He’s not even treating China as a geopolitical adversary, but a corporate competitor with a CEO you can visit and have at home, as Trump just did with Xi Jinping. Trump is in worse terms with a fully democratic, pro-market government like Mark Carney’s in Canada, which did not bend to his demands, than with President Claudia Sheinbaum in Mexico, a hardcore leftist, who is more cooperative with the White House. And, in fact, Trump is allowing the existence of three socialist autocracies on the continent: Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.
Trump can coexist with socialists, as long as they do what he wants. In practice, this means that our old premises about the impact of having left- or right-leaning governments around are not as valid as they were when Chávez was alive.
New friendz n the hood
We Venezuelans can easily see how things changed in the region’s geopolitical play, and how ideology lost relevance, in the evidently comfortable relationship between Donald Trump and Delcy Rodríguez, or in the aftermath of the earthquakes in June. Many governments sent help to La Guaira, but one of the first and most spectacular rescue missions came from El Salvador, where the government is a very public enemy of chavismo. The Salvadorans’ equipment and efforts in the rubble were highlighted on President Nayib Bukele’s social media. El Salvador’s fast response helped the dictatorship to manage the disaster, not the Venezuelan opposition, which is currently led by a pro-market politician, Machado, who courted the Republican Party for years.
We have also seen how Paraguay, Argentina and Chile, all of them with right-wing leaders very close to Trump, started to restore relationships with Miraflores Palace, even if it is still in the hands of the people who perpetrated the 2024 fraud and besieged the Argentine embassy in Caracas.
Hugo Chávez would be worried about the Bolsonaros’ apparent return to Brasília. Delcy Rodríguez, not so much. She can invite big Brazilian companies in energy, retail and agribusiness, which would get deregulation and diplomatic support in a Bolsonaro government, to join the investment frenzy in the Caracas Marriott. Yes, Machado and Bolsonaro met in Chile, during Kast’s inauguration in March, and she congratulated him on social media last Sunday, but Venezuela’s democratic renewal is not an urgent priority for Flávio Bolsonaro.
A critical difference between Abelardo and Flávio is that the new Colombian government needs to put pressure on Colombian guerrillas in Venezuela.
A good proxy to estimate how Bolsonaro Jr. would behave with chavismo and Machado is Abelardo de la Espriella. The Colombian president, who used a similar mix of conspiracy theories and a macho persona to defeat the Pacto Histórico leftist coalition, has so far been as passive about Venezuela’s suspension of democratic rights as Gustavo Petro. De la Espriella has been pushing Venezuelan migrants to go home, like Trump. As experts see it from Colombia, he is just following Trump’s lead regarding his neighbor. One critical difference between De la Espriella and Bolsonaro is that the new Colombian government needs to put pressure on Colombian guerrillas in Venezuela (with American support and, probably, even Delcy’s help), a variable absent in the Brazilian case.
I’m not saying that the Bolsonaros and the rest of the Trumpian Right will support Delcy forever. My point is that we can’t see their spread over South America as a force meant to crush socialists. We must observe what Trump and their allies do, instead of just believing what they say. Trump said a lot of things about Maduro and chavismo, but at the time of writing, Venezuelan citizens remain deprived of influence, just like when Maduro stole their votes, and Maduro’s former vice president is having the time of her life.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a hero among the nation’s progressive voters, stumped in Southern California on Monday for a wealth tax on the California ballot in November that has drawn hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign spending.
“What you are showing people from coast to coast and all over is that, yes, we can take on the greed of the oligarchs,” said Sanders (I-Vt.), who called Proposition 40 the most important ballot measure in the country. “Yes, we can create an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent.”
Sanders name-checked billionaire tech founders including Elon Musk of SpaceX, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta and Google co-founder Sergey Brin, whose mentions were repeatedly met with boos from the crowd gathered at the Novo in downtown Los Angeles.
Labor leaders, speaking earlier on Monday at a union training facility in La Palma, argued that although the billionaires tax is billed as a one-time tax on the assets of the state’s wealthiest residents, it includes a loophole that would allow state lawmakers to tax the savings and retirement accounts and home equity of all Californians.
“In the trades, we know you always read the blueprints and you always read the fine print,” said Xochitl Medrano, the political director for the district council of the Ironworkers of the State of California and Vicinity. Medrano was surrounded by union workers chanting, “No on 40!”
“Our workers are not billionaires; they are working people. After 20, 30, or even 40 years of breaking their backs on the job sites, our members have the opportunity to have a decent pension, some retirement savings, and equity in a home that they’ve been working to pay off,” she said. “That’s not wealth handed to them. That’s sweat equity. … We won’t stand by and let a tax that’s supposed to target billionaires turn into a trap door for working families.”
Proposition 40 is among the most contentious issues on the Nov. 3 ballot. The measure was crafted by a healthcare union to offset $100 billion in impending federal healthcare funding cuts approved by congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump last year. Millions of Californians could lose their healthcare coverage because of those cuts.
There are two opposing measures on the November ballot, Propositions 41 and 42, that would nullify the billionaires tax if either receives more votes.
About 45% of likely voters supported Proposition 40, while 42% opposed it and 13% were undecided in a late September poll by UC Berkeley and the Los Angeles Times. That’s a decline in support compared with a poll six weeks earlier, when 48% of likely voters supported it while 41% opposed it.
The proposal has drawn more than $300 million in campaign contributions, nearly all against it. Ballot measures are not subject to caps on campaign donations.
Sanders was joined by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) and artists including the rapper Common, who called for “them billionaires to pay up” between freestyle verses. Shepard Fairey, known for his famous portrait of President Obama, unveiled banners in support of the wealth tax campaign, which served as a backdrop on the event stage.
Rally attendee Datosha Williams, an SEIU-UHW member who works in healthcare customer service, said Proposition 40 is a backstop to federal healthcare cuts, which could lead to hospital closures around the state.
“My biggest fear is that I will see some of my coworkers lose their jobs,” she said. “My biggest fear is that my 8-year-old son, who is asthmatic, will have long waits in an ER.”
At the event at the Ironworkers Training Center in La Palma organized by labor leaders to oppose the wealth tax, apprentices attended workshops about rigging and collective bargaining rights.
“We’re not opposed to making the wealthy pay their fair share. We’re not opposed to creating a high-quality and low-cost health insurance plan for Californians,” said Andrew Gonzales, the council representative for the Los Angeles and Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council. “We just don’t think Prop. 40 is the right vehicle to go about that.”
Gonzales pointed to the volatile state budget’s dependence on tax revenue from wealthy Californians, some of whom have proactively moved out of the state because of the proposal.
“That’s already having an immediate impact to the state’s budget,” he said. “So we already see the danger that can occur.”
Foes of Proposition 40 attend a rally on Monday at the Ironworkers Training Center in La Palma.
Gov. Gavin Newsom last week signed legislation cracking down on the practice of luxury-car buyers in California registering cars out of state to avoid taxes.
Senate Bill 1406, introduced by state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton), closes the so-called Montana loophole, in which tax evaders create shell companies in Montana or other states without sales tax or vehicle registration fees and use them to purchase Ferraris, Porsches and other luxury cars. The state estimate it loses millions of dollars annually because of such schemes.
The new law expands California’s definition of who is a resident under state sales tax law in an effort to weed out phony shell companies, making a company liable for state taxes when at least one member of the business is a California resident.
The law, which went into effect immediately, also authorizes the state tax agency to impose tax liability on individual members of a business.
California had already looked to enforcement efforts to investigate suspicious out-of-state car sales, which officials estimate amount to $10 million annually in lost tax revenue.
Under state law, residents were already required to pay California sales tax on vehicles unless they are first used out of state and stay out of state for at least 12 months. Dealers are required to maintain records showing sales of vehicles so that authorities can ensure vehicles sold to buyers in another state are actually delivered there.
Earlier this year, the state’s Department of Justice charged 14 people — including auto dealers and customers purchasing cars — with concealing the purchase of more than $20 million worth of high-end vehicles including Ferraris, Porsches and Lamborghinis, and evading upward of $1.8 million in state taxes.
Text messages included in the criminal complaint showed buyers seeking to conceal their purchases. One Lamborghini buyer boasted about fees avoided: “70k saved — I can’t believe Montana registration lasts for 5 years — that’s crazy. Stupid California. Paid 3k to own a 600k car for 5 years — lol in Cali that’s like 75k for 5 years. Hella dumb.”
The new law further develops criteria to help show an LLC as a shell company involved in a potential tax evasion scheme.
If the LLC lacks a specific business activity or purpose, fails to maintain a physical location outside California, fails to employ people, or fails to file federal tax returns in another state, it could now be considered as evidence of such a scheme.
Trump says he won’t let Iran strike L.A. or San Diego: ‘Not going to let that happen’
WASHINGTON — President Trump told a crowd in Texas on Wednesday night that he would not allow Iran to attack San Diego or Los Angeles, a comment that came two days after he made off-the-cuff remarks suggesting the West Coast cities could be struck.
“You want to see a horror show? You want to see problems? Let them hit San Diego, let them hit Los Angeles,” Trump said at a rally. He then assured the crowd: “We are not going to let that happen. We protect our cities. We protect our country.”
The San Antonio crowd cheered the remarks.
Trump’s decision to return to the subject capped two days in which the White House had been on the defensive, and it appeared aimed at tamping down the fallout from remarks he made Monday night that quickly spread online.
Speaking to a crowd in Nebraska, Trump had said: “They can take out a city, let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”
The comments drew swift condemnation from California leaders, even as the White House communications director, Steven Cheung, insisted the president’s remarks had been taken out of context.
“The media freakout over President Trump’s comments is not rooted in reality,” Cheung wrote Tuesday. “He was clearly stating U.S. cities would have been threatened if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped. America is safer because of the president. Iran has no nuclear, no navy, no air force, and no money.”
But the remarks were enough to rattle many in California and drew backlash from the state’s leaders, including Republican Jim Desmond, a Navy veteran running in a highly competitive U.S. House race.
“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments,” Desmond wrote on social media. “America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday opened the state emergency operations center to assess potential threats following Trump’s remarks. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass also condemned the president for potentially compromising the safety of their cities.
“San Diego is not collateral damage,” Gloria posted on social media. “We are not expendable. And we are never a ‘small price to pay.’ Keep our city out of your reckless war talk.”
Source link
California Proposition 40 election voter guide: California’s billionaire tax
Business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Teachers Assn. and Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California oppose the proposal.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton, who are running to replace Newsom, also have spoken out against it.
Opponents describe the wealth tax as a “flawed experiment” that will harm California’s economy because companies and rich people will flee the state.
“If they leave, it will create a huge hole in our budget, threatening core services like education, healthcare and public safety,” arguments against the proposition say.
Opponents of the measure say the proposal is an ineffective attempt to address the long-term effects of the healthcare cuts and would harm California’s economy and budget.
The state budget in California already is largely dependent on income taxes paid by its highest earners. Because of that, revenues are prone to volatility, hinging on capital gains from investments, bonuses to executives and windfalls from new stock offerings, and are notoriously difficult for the state to predict.
Billionaires such as Palmer Luckey, the co-founder of defense tech startup Anduril Industries, and entrepreneur Mark Cuban have pushed back against the proposal on social media. Some tech executives have been relocating or moving their assets to try to avoid the potential tax. Google co-founder Sergey Brin has been cutting ties to California, relocating to Nevada while funding groups such as Building a Better California that are backing ballot measures that could nullify the billionaire tax.
More than $187 million has been spent opposing the proposition, with the bulk coming from Building a Better California, cryptocurrency company Ripple Labs and its co-founder Chris Larsen, data from the secretary of state show.
Source link
California Proposition 39 election voter guide: Voter ID requirements
Proposition 39 is opposed by leading state Democrats, major civil rights organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union and major labor unions in the state, who say the measure would disenfranchise eligible voters and expose voters to identity theft by forcing them to write personal ID numbers on mail ballot envelopes.
According to campaign finance reports, the ACLU of Northern California has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeating the measure. Quinn Delaney, a major Democratic donor and fundraiser for former President Obama, and Patty Quillin, a major philanthropist and wife of Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, both have given $1.5 million.
The Service Employees International Union Local 2015, which represents long-term caregivers, provided $1 million, the SEIU California State Council for Working People gave $500,000, and the California Teachers Assn., through its independent expenditure committee, gave another $500,000.
Arnulfo De La Cruz, president of SEIU California and SEIU Local 2015, said in a statement that the group’s members “know our nation is stronger when working people make their voices heard and have their ballots counted,” and that strict voter ID laws “are part of Trump and MAGA extremists’ agenda to rig the election system so they can cling onto their own power and get richer from corporate corruption.”
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) recently convened a news conference where a slate of Democratic leaders — including state Senate President Pro Tempore Monique Limón (D-Goleta) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) — called on Californians to vote no on Proposition 39.
The Democrats called the measure a “dirty trick” from “Trump acolytes” akin to historic poll taxes designed to disenfranchise Black voters, and a power grab that would seriously harm millions of eligible voters, especially in Black and Latino communities.
“Proposition 39 is a direct assault on everything California stands for. Our people, our values and our fundamental belief that every eligible voter here in California deserves to have their voice heard and deserves to have their vote counted,” Rivas said.
Source link
L.A. County supervisors call for improvements to restraining order system
Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath presented a motion Tuesday calling for “bold action” to better protect victims of domestic violence and stalking, seeking to help them more effectively navigate the county’s restraining order system and obtain court-ordered protection.
Horvath cited recent Los Angeles Times reporting on the challenges victims face when obtaining and enforcing restraining orders as an inspiration for the Board of Supervisors motion, which was co-authored by board chair Hilda Solis. The supervisors are scheduled to consider the measure during the board’s Nov. 10 meeting.
“A recent story from the L.A. Times spoke to the process of domestic violence restraining orders and the work done and not being done across the county to support survivors in need of this critical support,” Horvath said.
The Times’ reporting identified at least 63 women killed in 2024 and 2025 in L.A. County whose cases involved a former partner or close relative arrested or charged with their murder. The deaths accounted for more than 40% of the 156 women killed during that period. At least 10 of those women had filed for restraining orders.
In July 2024, the county Department of Public Health’s Office of Violence Prevention issued a report with more than a dozen recommendations for reducing domestic violence homicides by improving access to restraining orders. Today, most of those recommendations have not yet been implemented.
The office said the delay was the result of insufficient funding and challenges with coordinating between the many agencies responsible for the county’s restraining order system.
If passed, the motion would mandate reports from the county’s chief executive, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and the departments of Public Health, Mental Health, Consumer and Business Affairs, Public Social Services, and Homeless Services to assess current efforts, improvement plans and additional funding needs.
“We know that domestic violence restraining orders protect survivors and I believe the board must take every step possible to better support and protect our survivors,” she said. “The county,” she added, “must step up and lead in this space.”
The motion calls for allocating millions of dollars annually to fully fund nine county-run self-help legal centers that assist people navigating the restraining order process.
It would also officially identify “Gender-Based Violence and Intimate Partner Violence” as a priority for the Board of Supervisors, and require a presentation from the Sheriff’s Department on how the agency plans to improve its handling of restraining orders.
The Office of Violence Prevention would be required to develop a plan for a “peer navigator model” to guide survivors through the restraining order system.
The Department of Homeless Services and Housing would be asked for an assessment of what additional resources would be necessary to provide emergency beds for all people fleeing intimate partner violence.
Source link
Private prison company sues California over civil rights law for immigrant detainees
SACRAMENTO — A private prison company is challenging a new California law requiring detention centers to provide medical care, privacy and other civil rights to people detained by federal immigration authorities.
GEO Group, a for-profit prison company, filed a complaint in federal court over Senate Bill 942, also called the Civil Detainees’ Bill of Rights Act of 2026. It mandates that immigrant and other detainees are afforded privacy, safety, hygienic living conditions and other rights.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the law last week as part of a package of bills to push back on the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement, which the Democratic governor described as “Orwellian.” GEO Group filed its complaint the day after Newsom signed the law.
SB 942 declares that detainees at state, local and privately run facilities have the right to medical, dental and mental health care; physical exercise; clean drinking water and functioning toilets; and other rights. It allows the attorney general to bring civil action against private and public entities that allegedly violate those rights.
GEO Group attorneys argue in the federal complaint that while California elected officials “may disagree with federal immigration policy,” the state “may not impose its preferred immigration-detention standards on federal detention operations, whether those standards would tighten, loosen, supplement, or otherwise alter the federal framework.”
According to its website, the company operates six detention facilities in California, four of which are housing detainees under contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That includes a shuttered state prison that began holding ICE detainees earlier this year.
GEO Group has had some previous success challenging laws seeking to undermine the private prison industry’s role in federal immigration enforcement. A federal court struck down a 2019 law that attempted to bar any “private detention facility within the state” after the company filed suit.
Representatives for GEO Group did not respond to a request for comment. Spokespeople for Newsom, Atty Gen. Rob Bonta and state Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Salinas), who authored the bill, did not immediately comment on the lawsuit.
Source link
DNC sues Trump administration, alleging taxpayer-funded ads violate propaganda law
WASHINGTON — The Democratic National Committee on Wednesday sued President Trump’s administration for recent television advertisements that promoted his political message while costing taxpayers millions of dollars.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleges that the ads are illegal government-sponsored propaganda and accuses Trump of personally directing them. It asks the court to declare the ads illegal and stop the use of federal funds to pay for them.
Trump has faced bipartisan backlash for the ads, which glorify him and echo his campaign pitch as voters cast early ballots with the midterm elections less than a month away.
The spots, which began airing in September, already have cost more than $12 million to run, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact, and a total of $20 million in Homeland Security Department funding has been tapped to pay for them.
Responding Monday to the criticism, Trump defended the ads as “positive promotion for our Great U.S.A.” but said he’d pay for them using his MAGA Inc. super PAC going forward.
But on Tuesday, the fifth ad in the campaign began airing with the notice “paid for by the U.S. Government,” promoting Trump’s military actions in Venezuela earlier this year. The same day, Trump made it clear he hasn’t committed to reimbursing any money that has already been spent, telling reporters “we’ll decide.”
DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement that Trump is misusing taxpayer dollars in “a last-ditch attempt to save Republicans in November.”
“Americans deserve better than to have their hard-earned tax dollars used for Trump’s illegal schemes,” he added.
Legal experts have suggested the ads run afoul of a federal statute against congressionally appropriated money being used for “publicity or propaganda,” and potentially other federal laws. The Homeland Security money tapped for the ads comes from a $175 million package Congress gave to the department as part of Trump’s immigration enforcement agenda.
The White House has defended the ads as public service announcements akin to what past administrations have done to promote various policies. Legal experts have said the recent ads differ from many past public service announcements because they aren’t aimed at helping members of the public benefit from specific government programs.
The defendants in the lawsuit — Trump, the White House, DHS and the Office of Management and Budget — didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
Swenson writes for the Associated Press.
Source link
Rubio, in Greece, calls for the West to restore founding democratic principles and values
ATHENS — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for the nations of the West to return to their civilizational roots and restore the values that drove the rise of Europe and North America to global dominance for centuries.
In Athens to discuss deepening economic, energy and security cooperation with Greece, Rubio delivered a speech later Wednesday near the ruins of the Acropolis, a widely recognizable symbol of the city’s ancient civilization associated with the creation of popular participatory government and the social contract.
Rubio aimed to remind listeners of qualities he says were born in Greece and later defined the West, such as curiosity, courage, ambition, a restless spirit of exploration and a drive to discover the unknown.
“It has become fashionable today to believe that enlightened foreign policy means prioritizing the ‘global community’ over one’s own people. And I think here, too, we have much more to learn from the men of Ancient Greece. They knew that there was nothing selfish or wrong about loyalty to your nation, nor anything selfish or wrong about fighting to defend its interests above all else,” Rubio said.
Rubio urges Europe to uphold its traditional values
“Today, we find ourselves at a crossroads,” he said. “The next decade will write the story of the next century. The course we take will determine whether the West maintains its place at the head of the world, or resigns itself to a future of atrophy, and servitude, and decline. We will either choose to act now or lose the choice to act at all.”
Rubio is seen by many as the gentle face of the Trump administration and has been frequently dispatched to clarify or otherwise address concerns about the president’s frequently undiplomatic statements.
Rubio, along with Vice President JD Vance, is seen as one of the leading contenders to assume Trump’s mantle at the top of the Republican Party, which faces stiff challenges in next month’s congressional midterm elections. Republican Party, which faces stiff challenges in next month’s congressional midterm elections.
The Trump administration has repeatedly accused countries in Europe of backsliding on their traditional values and democratic principles by stifling the free speech of conservatives and falling short on commitments to international partners like the United States.
Many of those countries have rejected the complaints and accused the U.S. under Trump of being guilty of similar behavior and worse with its staunch anti-immigration stance that some believe is racist.
Left-wing groups protest across Greece
Ahead of his visit to Athens, about 1,500 people gathered to protest Rubio’s presence and the war in Iran, chanting “American killers!”
The demonstration was organized by a communist labor union and other left-wing groups and was held ahead of extensive road closures planned in Athens. Organizers said similar protests were held in at least 12 other Greek cities. Police banned public demonstrations Wednesday in central.
Rubio seeks to reassure NATO allies
Rubio is on the second leg of a three-nation tour of NATO allies that has already taken him to Iceland and will end in Portugal on Thursday. The trip is aimed at reassuring U.S. partners that the Trump administration is committed to their success and security despite what has been an often brusque and sometimes rude approach to traditional friends that has stirred unease.
Rubio began emphasizing historical themes on Thursday, when he met Iceland’s foreign minister at the site of the landmark 1986 summit between former President Ronald Reagan and then Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, a meeting that many believe marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War and was a catalyst for the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union.
It remains unclear what impact Rubio’s visits will have, although on Tuesday in Reykjavik, he sought to reassure Iceland that President Trump’s administration has no designs on the island. Rather, he said the U.S. shares Iceland’s deep concerns about Arctic security as tensions between the U.S. and Russia rise in the High North and elsewhere.
Iceland has been uneasy about Trump’s intentions toward it after he posted a map showing the colors of the U.S. flag sprawling across all of North America and extending to Iceland and Greenland. That wariness has persisted despite an agreement last month to increase the U.S. presence in the neighboring Danish territory of Greenland that appears to have ended Trump’s demands for the U.S. to take full control of the island.
But after Rubio’s talks in Reykjavik, those tensions appeared to be on the wane. Rubio said the United States would not do anything in Iceland without Iceland’s consent.
Visit follows allegations of misconduct by U.S. ambassador
Before delivering his speech in Athens, Rubio declined to comment when he was asked about allegations of misconduct leveled at U.S. Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle.
At a joint news conference with the Greek foreign minister, Rubio said he would not address the matter while visiting a foreign country, but added: “Suffice it to say our embassy here is doing a great job. Our ambassador has been a strong ambassador here.”
The top Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs committees, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. Gregory Meeks, have initiated probes into claims reported last month by the Wall Street Journal that Guilfoyle acted improperly while serving as the top U.S. envoy to Greece.
The Journal reported that Guilfoyle told guests at a reception that the U.S. could undermine the Greek government if it chose to, promoted the business interests of one particular Greek construction and energy company, and allowed its lobbyist into private diplomatic meetings.
Guilfoyle, a former Fox News Channel host and California prosecutor who was once engaged to Trump’s son Donald Jr., has denied any wrongdoing, and Rubio has defended her before.
Lee writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Derek Gatopoulos in Athens contributed to this report.
Source link
Can $1 billion power Republicans to victory in the midterms?
WASHINGTON — Republicans are entering the final month of the midterm campaign increasingly anxious that the $1 billion at their disposal may not be enough to fend off sweeping losses as the party reckons with President Trump’s unpopularity, persistent cost concerns and the fallout from the war in Iran.
The cash advantage, spread out across a half-dozen groups, is driven largely by the Trump-aligned MAGA Inc., which had nearly $416 million in cash on hand at the end of August and began stepping up its spending on critical races in September.
But that money may have come too late, forcing the president’s group to pay much higher rates because of the shrinking availability of air time. Four Republican Senate campaign officials said groups that reserved advertising time last spring paid much lower rates than MAGA Inc. and its affiliated groups.
Instead, by waiting until September, Trump-connected organizations are sometimes paying more than five times what they would have spent if they acted earlier.
A representative of MAGA Inc. familiar with the group’s strategy said its spending has allowed Republicans to keep races more competitive than they would have been otherwise. In some cases, the group has been the only one on the air criticizing Democratic candidates.
The MAGA Inc. representative and the Republican Senate campaign officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal strategy.
The challenge is acute in places like Texas, where Trump will travel on Wednesday for the second time in a week to stump for Republican Ken Paxton’s Senate campaign. The state hasn’t elected a Democratic senator since 1988, yet MAGA Inc. has spent more than $22 million in the past month, according to the ad tracking firm AdImpact.
Another group, Texas PAC, which is aligned with Senate Majority Leader John Thune, has spent more than $83 million on advertising in the past month, an extraordinary amount to protect what’s normally a safe Republican seat.
One of those advertisements, which featured Paxton’s estranged wife saying she’s supporting the full Republican ticket, aired across the United States last weekend during a football game between the Dallas Cowboys and the Houston Texans.
Candidates are charged a lower advertising rate than outside groups, so the late infusion of super PAC cash has come at a steep price.
MAGA Inc., which is running ads primarily on streaming services, has been charged roughly $894 per airing, according to AdImpact, while Texas PAC has been charged roughly $809 for a mix of broadcast and streaming. That compares with about $290 for Democratic nominee James Talarico’s campaign, also on broadcast and streaming.
Those averages mask some of the more glaring disparities. For example, during a football game last month, Texas PAC was charged $450,000 to air a single spot in the Austin market. Talarico’s campaign paid $50,000 for a spot during the same game in the same market, according to AdImpact.
Elections are a referendum on the power of money
The 2026 campaign is shaping up as a referendum on the power of money in American politics. Democrats freely acknowledge their disadvantage, relying instead on anti-Trump sentiment among voters and targeted messaging on issues like corruption. Some Republicans, meanwhile, are open about the challenge of trying to spend their way out of a tough campaign at this late stage.
Neil Newhouse, a longtime Republican pollster, echoed concerns that his party was deploying its cash too late.
“After the votes are counted, I think we’re going to find the most effective advertising in terms of communicating message and moving voters and poll numbers, the most effective time was advertising that happened well before Labor Day, not after it,” he said. “A million dollars of advertising in October is a drop in the bucket.”
Thune’s group began pulling back in North Carolina last week, a sign of the party’s challenge in the Senate race there. The state’s outgoing Sen. Thom Tillis has been increasingly vocal about his party’s vulnerabilities and recently said that, even with a strong cash advantage, “in the last month, you pretty much have to place your bets.”
“If we have endless resources, then we should spend endlessly in every state,” he said. “Absent endless resources, you’ve got to make data-driven decisions about where you can win.”
The midterms mark the first national election since the Supreme Court in June erased limits on how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for Congress and president, injecting even more money into a political system already awash in cash.
Money alone doesn’t translate into victory
There’s plenty of evidence that money alone doesn’t translate into victory.
Democrat Kamala Harris entered the final stretch of the 2024 campaign with significantly more money than Trump but went on to lose every critical swing state and the White House. Elon Musk’s $25 million didn’t lift his preferred candidate to a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat last year. And Tom Steyer didn’t advance to the general election in the California governor’s race despite pumping $216 million of his own money into the campaign.
The $1 billion that Republicans have amassed compares with roughly $579 million held by a comparable collection of major Democratic groups.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said his party is facing an “obscene” amount of spending that could swamp them in the midterms.
“We’re never going to have as much money as them,” he said in an interview. “I sum up the election in this sentence: Can a massive Republican advantage in money beat a massive Democratic advantage in better candidates and political climate? I bet it can’t.”
In addition to Texas, Democrats have mounted competitive Senate campaigns in states like Ohio, Maine, Iowa and Michigan. A similar dynamic has emerged in governors’ races from Florida and Georgia to Wisconsin, Ohio and Nevada.
Former President Barack Obama is stepping up his involvement in the midterms and will headline a fundraiser for Senate candidates on Wednesday.
In the House, Democrats are growing so confident they can retake the majority that they’re expanding their targets deeper into traditionally Republican districts in Arkansas and Tennessee. But a lack of money could limit their gains.
“We absolutely need to spend enough to get our message out,” said Rep. Suzan DelBene of Washington, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “And district by district, we are.”
Trump turns to his bond with supporters
From his earliest days as an unlikely political figure, Trump has consistently overcome expectations. Facing daunting prospects heading into the final weeks of his last midterm, he’s betting he can again outwit political gravity, relying in large part on the deep bond he’s built with supporters.
He has stepped up his campaign rallies in recent weeks, traveling to deep red territory to galvanize the party faithful. At events like the one this past weekend in Vandalia, Ohio, the crowd was enthusiastic and cheered at the lines that have become Trump staples over the years, particularly when he dips into profanity. The high school gymnasium that held the event was packed, though crowds began emptying out about halfway through the 90-minute rally.
In the closing minutes of a speech Monday in Grand Island, Nebraska, the president revived his plea that supporters who have stood so fervently by him pretend as if he is on the ballot one more time.
“In a true way, I am running,” he said. “We have to keep it going.”
Sloan and Beaumont write for the Associated Press. Beaumont reported from Des Moines, Iowa. AP writers Seung Min Kim in Vandalia, Ohio, and Mary Clare Jalonick in Washington contributed to this report.
Source link
What Steve Hilton doesn’t get about Xavier Becerra’s parents
My maternal grandmother, Marcela Miranda, was born in Arizona’s copper country in 1914 and lived in the United States until she was about 7.
She was part of a generation whose parents were from the rancho of El Cargadero, Zacatecas, and started families in el Norte while waiting out the Mexican Revolution in the 1910s and the Cristero Revolt in the 1920s. Many returned to their home village when things calmed down.
After growing up in Mexico, my grandmother moved to California with my grandfather and their children in the 1960s. Only the American government considered her a native-born U.S. citizen, while society dismissed her as a Mexican. We grandchildren always considered our Mama Chela a doña — a grand Mexican dame who never wore pants and frequently covered her hair with a veil out of modesty. All she remembered from her early childhood in Arizona were snippets of the nursery rhymes “Did You Ever See a Lassie?” and “The Bear Went Over the Mountain.”
The El Cargadero diaspora, which mostly settled in Anaheim, saw our forebears’ American birth as a stroke of provenance allowing them to legally enter the U.S. and give their progeny a head start that other Mexicans could only dream of. It’s a story I’ve repeatedly told over my decades-long journalism career, and no one has yet challenged my description of my grandmother as an immigrant.
If they did, I’d think they had too much time on their hands, or maybe that they were a wackjob contrarian.
Cue Steve Hilton.
The Republican candidate for California governor is trying to make a scandal out of his Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra, portraying himself as the son of Mexican immigrants. Twice last week during their CNN debate, Becerra said his parents came to California “with $12.” In previous interviews during his decades in the political spotlight, Becerra has shared that his father, Manuel, was born in Sacramento in 1928 and moved to Mexico as a child during the Great Depression, eventually returning to the land of his birth.
Hilton, who has been endorsed by President Trump, has as much a chance of becoming the Golden State’s next governor as Stephen Miller. But he and his supporters have latched on to Becerra’s statement like it was the borderlands version of stolen valor. Critics combed through Becerra’s family genealogy like Indiana Jones searching for the Holy Grail, then posted their findings online — Becerra’s dad grew up in Tijuana before coming back to California, then married in Guadalajara before returning in the 1950s to Sacramento, where Xavier was born — to claim that Becerra is one giant, pandering fraudster.
“Unlike Xavier Becerra, I am an immigrant,” the British-born son of Hungarian refugees harrumphed on social media. He followed up by declaring that Becerra is “LYING” about his family’s American experience “in order to score identity points.”
What more proof do California voters need that Hilton is laughably out of touch with how we live? Many Mexican Americans, including my cousins and me, consider family members raised in Mexico to be immigrants, even if they were born in the U.S. Growing up down south forever shapes your language, work ethic, appreciation for how hard life can be and so much more. When they return to the U.S., such people often find themselves ostracized as paisa — country — and must learn the mores of American life, just like those born abroad.
To argue that calling them immigrants is technically wrong is like getting angry at people who don’t pronounce Los Feliz the Spanish way. For Becerra’s critics to claim he’s stretching his immigrant roots to appeal to Latino voters is an insult to Latinos. We know a cultural faker when we see one, and the Becerra family story isn’t an anomaly; it’s our lives.
Gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton addresses patrons at Victorio’s Ristorante in North Hollywood in September.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)
“It’s a weird gotcha,” said Cal State Fullerton Chicano studies professor Alexandro José Gradilla, whose wife’s grandmother was born in California and raised in Mexico, then bounced between the two countries for the rest of her life. “What’s the dis? Where’s the dunk? It’s so normative, especially of that generation. We cannot have the 2026 definition of immigration, the border and policy apply to a completely different landscape.”
Becerra’s critics subscribe to “this very American bias that an immigrant only moves once to the U.S., the land of opportunity, of hope — all that mythology,” Gradilla continued. During the Ellis Island era, he noted, European immigrants returned to their home countries with their U.S.-born children, and then those children faced many of the same hardships as first-time arrivals when they came back to the U.S. as adults.
“‘We don’t call those people expats or returnees — ‘immigrant’ is the only intelligible label we understand,” the profe concluded. “Until we come up with a better label, Becerra’s dad is an immigrant.”
There are many legitimate reasons to bash Becerra, from his refusal to participate in more debates to his paltry number of public rallies to a platform that sounds like more of what created California’s current woes. His family history isn’t it.
Hilton’s fixation on Becerra’s immigrant bona fides shows how desperate he is to gain some traction, any traction, with Latino voters. He at least has picked up on Latinos’ regard for immigrant success stories. But after bragging about being the candidate of legal immigrants, for Hilton to hold being born here against someone who went back and forth between the U.S. and Mexico is a weak salsa pendejada.
Hilton would have been better off with his conservative base if he had labeled Becerra the son of an anchor baby.
At a press conference with elected officials to oppose Proposition 39, which would mandate voter identification, my colleague Nicole Nixon asked Becerra about Hilton’s attacks on his dad. Becerra finally unlocked the inner cholo so many of us have been waiting to see, instead of the Chicano Ned Flanders he’s been projecting for decades.
“So this is what happens when people who don’t understand immigration start to pontificate,” he responded, summarizing his family story once again and pointing out the discrimination his father faced as someone of Mexican heritage, birthright citizenship be damned.
“Steve Hilton may not know that [Mexican American history] because he’s not from the U.S.,” Becerra said. “Steve Hilton may not know that because even though he’s an immigrant, he hasn’t taken the time to research.”
Wow, the brown Democratic candidate calling the white Republican candidate a dumb immigrant — California politics sure have changed!
But Becerra’s smackdown had a point. Conservatives deeply misunderstand what it is to be Mexican American. We’ve never fit into the American assimilation story and so have created our own narrative, one that people like Hilton refuse to accept at their own peril.
Hilton needs to take a Chicano studies class, where discussions about the fluidity of Mexican identity inevitably come up.
And, wouldn’t you know it, Gradilla planned to bring up that very subject with his students this week — he didn’t even know about Hilton’s attacks against Becerra until I told him.
The profe has had to update his lectures about the forced removal of upward of a million Mexican Americans south of the border during the Great Depression. He relates that history to the present, when many undocumented Latinos are returning to the countries of their birth with their U.S.-born children, either because they’ve been deported or to avoid being arrested and locked up under Trump’s hellfire immigration enforcement regime.
“For Hilton, anyone of Mexican heritage in this country needs to be grateful, you need to be loyal, and you need to be here,” Gradilla said. “Who would ever want to leave the U.S.? Well, some people have to.”
Source link
Steve Hilton sexual ad, attack on Becerra break vulgar new ground
Let’s pretend for a moment you’re a Republican running for governor in the blue, blue state of California.
Your prospect of winning is small. So small, you could peer through a microscope, blink and miss it. How, then do you draw voters to your candidacy and boost your chances?
Actually, let’s not pretend. A very real flesh-and-blood Republican, Steve Hilton, is running for California governor and if your idea for grabbing attention doesn’t involve a make-believe lesbian couple, double entendre and a soft-core porn vibe, you’re very clearly lacking in imagination.
Hilton ran an ad featuring just such elements, garnering coast-to-coast notice, millions of views and ensuring the tagline — “Now lick it” — while not as resonant as, say, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” will forever live in political infamy.
What the spot tries to do, convince folks in this left-leaning redoubt to be venturesome and vote for Hilton, is not the least offensive, though your friendly political columnist, hardly a prude, found the execution a bit, well, icky.
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Expert columnists cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service, which include arbitration and a class action waiver. You agree that we and our third-party vendors may collect and use your information, including through cookies, pixels and similar technologies, for the purposes set forth in our Privacy Policy such as personalizing your experience and ads.
Being a cis white male of a certain age, however, means perhaps we shouldn’t be the one to judge. We’re certainly not the target audience. So we turned to two of the youngish, hippest people we know, Daughters No. 1 & 2, who are both well-accomplished 30-somethings and truly upstanding citizens.
What follows is their spontaneous reaction.
Daughter No. 1: “Stupid, infantilizing.”
Daughter No. 2: “Wtf is this fake woke AI ad? Ew.”
(For the record, Hilton said the ad was not AI generated. He apologized, sort of, to those who took offense.)
We also asked the Fabulous Mrs Z. — who has impeccable judgment, notwithstanding all the years she’s stayed married to your friendly political columnist — for her response. “It’s just so strange and stupid,” she said. “Why would he approve this ad? It makes me question his judgment.”
What do the pros say?
Of course, that’s just four people — one of whom doesn’t even live in California — so it’s not much of a sample.
For more insight, we turned to some political professionals.
And who better to weigh in than Fred Davis, the madcap genius behind another infamous California campaign spot, the so-called Demon Sheep ad he concocted for Carly Fiorina’s 2010 U.S. Senate campaign. The Felliniesque production included lightning bolts, a Roman column and a man covered in sheepskin crawling on all fours and leering with a glowing red eye — the point being that Fiorina’s rival, Tom Campbell, was supposedly a profligate wolf in fiscal-conservative sheep clothing.
Strange, yes, but definitely more memorable than an accountant in green eyeshade laboring over the books.
Anyway, Davis — who’s featured Paris Hilton, bad hair and a giant rat in a crown as part of his out-there oeuvre — loved the new Hilton campaign spot, calling it “super attention-getting, super interesting.” (Which is not the least surprising from a man whose chosen epitaph is, “If you don’t notice it, why bother?”)
“I think it’s a brilliantly done ad,” Davis said, “wonderfully written.” And, he added, “I can’t imagine it gaining him one vote.”
Which was sort of the point, no?
Kevin Spillane also appreciates Hilton’s effort, given his own Sisyphean struggles as a Republican strategist in California.
A screen grab from Steve Hilton’s “Just Try It” ad. Columnist Mark Z. Barabak found execution of the spot a bit, well, icky.
(Steve Hilton for Governor)
“They’re doing something out there and on the edge. I don’t fault them for that,” said Spillane, who supports Hilton and has contributed to his campaign. “It’s a clever concept of trying to get people to do something that they’re not used to doing.”
Which is to say vote for a Republican for statewide office in California.
But Spillane, too, questioned the execution. “I actually was fine with the ad until they got to the ‘lick it’ line,” he said, insisting he is also no prude. “That’s just a little too explicitly sexual.”
Running, not advancing
To his credit, Hilton has been running hard for governor. Much harder than his Democratic rival and the prohibitive front-runner, Xavier Becerra. Hilton has issued an abundance of policy proposals and spoken before pretty much any group or microphone-wielding reporter or podcaster who’ll have him.
None of which has garnered Hilton anywhere near the publicity captured by his racy “Just Try It, California” ad.
Even before the spot aired, Hilton broke new ground during last week’s gubernatorial debate when he noted a former member of the Biden administration had referred to Becerra as a “bitch-ass” — apparently the first time that compound adjective had been used in such a high-falutin’ setting. Hilton shortly followed with a website, “Bitch-Ass” Becerra,” that outlines the alleged failures of the Democrat as President Biden’s Health secretary and during his time as California’s attorney general.
(For the record, Susan Rice, who used the epithet and was accused of creating an “abusive and dehumanizing workplace” as head of Biden’s Domestic Policy Council, responded by stating her support for Becerra’s gubernatorial candidacy.)
It’s hard to see Hilton’s name-calling winning him a great many votes, any more than his risque campaign commercial, but maybe that’s beside the point. Maybe, as my columnizing colleague Gustavo Arellano suggested in his debate review, Hilton is merely auditioning for a return to his old commentator position on Fox News.
Hilton’s edgy attitude and pugnacious put-downs would place him right at home among the network’s collection of trolls, provocateurs and Democrat-bashing gargoyles.
But Hilton should leave the advertising to someone else.
What else you should be reading
Get smart: Meet the Fox News correspondent leading the fight for press freedom at the White House
The deep dive: Trump calls it a war, then a ‘military conflict.’ Why the Iran fighting keeps changing names
The L.A. Times Special: What’s going to happen in the midterm election? Find out here. (Maybe)
Until next time,
mzb
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.
Source link
Hilton warm on tax cuts, tepid on Trump, cold on offshore wind during town hall
California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton dove deep into his housing platform and lobbed a few attacks at his Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra, during a town hall with Los Angeles news outlets Tuesday.
Hilton also pointed to some disagreements with President Trump, providing daylight between himself and a president who remains deeply unpopular in California, during the event hosted and livestreamed by the Los Angeles Times and LAist.
Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s final term ends in early January, providing California voters the opportunity to select a new governor at a time of conflict between the state and the Trump administration over environmental policies, immigration, healthcare and other pressing issues.
Ballots already have started to arrive in California voters’ mailboxes ahead of the Nov. 3 election.
Here are the top takeaways from the discussion with Hilton:
Walking the tightrope on Trump
Republicans running for statewide office already have an uphill battle because of California’s heavily Democratic electorate. It’s an acute challenge this year, campaign experts say, because many Democratic voters are itching to help their party regain control of Congress and neutralize Trump’s agenda.
Trump endorsed Hilton in April, which helped the former Fox News host pull ahead of his GOP rival, Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco, and secure the second-place spot in the primary election, behind Becerra.
On the campaign trail, Hilton has remained supportive of Trump and said Democratic policies, not the war in Iran, are to blame for high prices.
Pressed to name an instance where he disagrees with the president, Hilton named federal funding cuts for the University of California, threats to withdraw Customs and Border Protection agents from airports in states with sanctuary policies, and the federal government buying stakes in California-based companies.
The Republican said those differences are rooted in his strong support for states’ rights.
“The broader point I want to make, and you can track this back to the commentary and what I’ve written over the years, is I’m a strong believer in decentralizing power,” he said. “I think there’s far too much involvement of the federal government in our affairs in California, and I’m going to be a very strong advocate for bringing those powers back in all sorts of ways.”
Gas prices, taxes and housing permits
Hilton described California’s cost of living as “a nightmare” and a major contributor to residents and businesses moving out of the state.
He laid out an affordability plan, which he refers to as “Califordable,” that he would prioritize if elected governor. His plan includes:
He blames the state’s affordability woes on Democrats, who have controlled the state legislative seats and held every elected statewide office since 2009.
“It’s not just that it’s time for some change in California, it’s time for balance. It’s time to try something different after 16 years of doing it the same way,” he said.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton said he does have some policy differences with President Trump during a town hall at the Los Angeles Times Building on Tuesday in El Segundo.
(Ronaldo Bolanos/Los Angeles Times)
Hilton said he would stop enforcing laws requiring communities to meet housing production goals and instead focus on building in undeveloped areas of the state that want new homes.
“We’ve got this attitude that the only place you can build is inside what’s currently developed, and that’s motivated by a desire to stop traffic and sprawl and all these things. But the consequence of that is that you end up finding [it] almost impossible to build anything” because of permitting battles and lawsuits, he said. “My plan is to open that up so that we build outwards, not just upwards, increasing the amount of space we use for housing.”
How he would pay for it all
Hilton said that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers have gotten accustomed to spending big and that he wants to return California’s state budget to its pre-pandemic size.
Earlier this year Newsom signed a budget just shy of $352 billion. His first budget as governor, in 2019, clocked in at nearly $215 billion.
The growth occurred during a time “when around 2 million people on net have moved out of the state,” Hilton said. “So we’re spending twice as much for a big reduction in population and worse results.”
He said he could offset the tax cuts by ending funding for high-speed rail, trimming state agencies by 5% and cracking down on Medicaid fraud. Together, he estimates those cuts would save about $25 billion annually. He has also promised to end state-funded healthcare for undocumented immigrants and to hollow out agencies that regulate the state’s air quality and coastlines.
Another round of attacks on Becerra
While he largely stayed focused on policy, Hilton criticized Becerra’s record as U.S. Health and Human Services secretary and dinged him for skipping the town hall.
“Looking forward to perhaps one day having another chance to sit down with my competitor in this race, Xavier Becerra. We’ve had one debate. He promised that there would be debates, plural. Not to be today. But hopefully we can have that conversation because Californians deserve a conversation about the future of our state,” he said during his opening remarks.
On Monday, Hilton attacked Becerra for having “pulled out” of the debate, though the Democratic candidate never agreed to attend a debate proposed by The Times and LAist. Becerra’s spokesperson said the campaign declined the invitation because of a full campaign schedule.
In the weeks following the June primary election, Becerra made himself scarce on the campaign trail and attended few public events. In August, he told reporters there would be multiple debates. He and Hilton faced off last week in an hourlong debate on CNN but no other debates have been announced.
Offshore wind projects “grotesque,” Hilton says
At a time when the Trump administration has systematically dismantled climate and environmental policies, Hilton took care to cast himself as an environmentalist who is concerned about climate change.
He criticized many of the policies favored by Democrats, however, as a “very one-dimensional way of thinking” and offered a more business-friendly approach to addressing climate change:
“So that’s a way of reducing carbon emissions that doesn’t burden working people and small businesses with the highest energy costs in the country. We’ve got to get the balance right,” Hilton said.
Hilton aligns with Trump’s vehement opposition to offshore wind projects, a potential source of abundant renewable energy. This year, the Trump administration announced deals to pay wind project developers billions to abandon U.S. wind leases off the coasts of California, North Carolina, New York and New Jersey.
“I think offshore wind is an absolute abomination. I mean, you look at beautiful Morro Bay or Humboldt up in the northern part of our state,” Hilton said. “The industrialization of our coastline that offshore wind would create, I think, is just grotesque, and I’m dead against it.”
Working across the aisle
When asked how he would work with a Democratic majority in the state Legislature, Hilton said he has experience doing it — as an advisor to former United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron, he shared an office with a member of the opposite party.
“We worked together very well. Didn’t agree on everything,” he said. “That would be my attitude. I’m very open. I’m not tribal. I’m not particularly partisan. I’m a pragmatic, problem-solving kind of person, and I’m looking forward to working with the Legislature.”
He said he would press the Legislature to cut spending and “the endless number of bills that they pass every year. … But I want to work together to reduce costs for Californians.”
Hilton also found alignment with Democrats who ran in the gubernatorial primary, including former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, San José Mayor Matt Mahan and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.
“Katie Porter in the primary … actually endorsed my tax plan. Matt Mahan and I agree on a lot of things to help” cut costs and speed up housing constriction, he said. “Antonio Villaraigosa, we agreed on a lot of things to do with energy policy. So I think there are Democrats who we’ll be able to work with to get consensus on some of the things that we need to get done.”
Source link
City Council puts $235-million LAPD license plate reader deal on hold
Citing lingering concerns about the potential misuse of police license plate readers, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to delay an agreement that would enable the deployment of hundreds of the controversial devices until officials are satisfied that the technology will be wielded responsibly.
By a 10-4 vote, the council opted to overrule approval of the 10-year, $235-million contract between the Los Angeles Police Department and Axon Enterprise, halting a deal that had previously been signed off on by the Board of Police Commissioners.
Axon is seeking to outfit hundreds of LAPD patrol squads with plate scanners, which track the movements of vehicles around the city. Under the agreement, the company would also replace thousands of body-worn cameras, supply new Tasers, provide cloud video storage, and roll out a program that uses artificial intelligence to assist officers in writing police reports.
In addition, Axon is seeking to launch a pilot program that would attach plate scanners to streetlights around Los Angeles, offering the LAPD a souped-up version of its current systems by using AI to identify vehicles, license plates, pedestrians and objects that appear on streets and sidewalks.
The council’s decision — which was preceded by several fiery comments from members of the public who oppose the use of license plate readers — sends the contract back to the Police Commission for reconsideration.
A commission spokesperson said that the board’s members weren’t immediately available for comment.
Several council members voiced unease about proceeding without a better sense of the LAPD’s internal policy on license plate reader use. Delaying the contract, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez said, would give the public and city leaders more time to review the safeguards and policies written into the LAPD’s proposed memorandum of understanding with Axon.
Councilmember Traci Park, a staunch supporter of plate reader technology, said there is an urgent need to get the devices “up and running.”
Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez shot back that it would be irresponsible to deploy the technology, citing news reports about officers misusing plate readers to stalk romantic partners and track women seeking reproductive health services.
Earlier this year, the LAPD allowed its agreement with one of Axon’s chief competitors, Flock Safety, to lapse over concerns that the Trump administration is using the data it collects to locate immigrants targeted for deportation. Police officials say they no longer have access to the company’s cameras, many of which are owned by homeowners associations and other private groups.
LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell and other department leaders have pushed to expand the use of license plate readers, saying they are a valuable tool for solving crimes, enabling investigators to more easily locate stolen vehicles and fugitives.
Hernandez noted that other police technologies, such as a robot dog used in situations involving barricaded suspects, had quietly moved from a pilot to a full-fledged program without input from the council.
Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he still had privacy concerns about license plate readers, while noting that their deployment along the Figueroa corridor had assisted in the rescue of dozens of juvenile sex trafficking victims.
“Now having said that, if I’m honest I don’t know what else the cameras are doing,” he said.
Councilmember Monica Rodriguez said that as the license plate reader technology is adopted by other, non-police agencies such as sanitation and street services, the city needs a universal policy governing its use.
The matter will next be heard by the public safety committee — likely at its Oct. 20 meeting — before being taken up by the full council later that week.
In a presentation to the Police Commission last month, the LAPD’s technology czar, Dean Gialamas, said that the department understood the privacy and civil liberty concerns raised about companies such as Flock. This summer, the department announced it was pausing its relationship with the Atlanta-based firm, but police officials have said they are still hopeful to negotiate a new deal with the company that would include more data-sharing safeguards.
Much like the initial debate over the use of forensic DNA testing, Gialamas said, the answer wasn’t to abandon the technology but to create safeguards to “ensure responsible and trusted use.”
Gialamas told commissioners that Axon had agreed to terms that would give the LAPD complete ownership of the data captured and bar the sharing of data with federal authorities. The proposed deal, he said, would also limit the use of plate readers to criminal investigations, missing persons cases and other “serious public safety matters.” Investigators, for instance, would not be able to conduct searches based solely on protests or other 1st Amendment-protected activities, he said.
Under the proposed contract, investigators would no longer be given “unfettered access” to license plate data and the retention period would be significantly cut down, he said. The department would also be permitted to conduct regular audits to flag officers who use the system frequently or conduct unusual searches.
A report issued last month by the LAPD inspector general’s office found numerous “limitations” in the department’s existing agreements with its three plate reader vendors — Flock, Axon and Motorola — including a lack of clear language about how long data are retained and how they are shared with third parties or other law enforcement agencies.
The inspector general recommended that the department update its current license plate reader contracts to address data security and privacy concerns, conduct regular audits and develop standardized rules for traffic stops based on plate reader hits.
Source link
ABC says it’s second-guessing news coverage decisions due to FCC’s TV license review
Editorial decisions at ABC News are being influenced by the Federal Communications Commission’s early license review of its TV stations, the network’s legal team told a U.S. District Court judge Tuesday.
The Disney-owned network is seeking a restraining order to stop the FCC’s action, which its attorneys said was unprecedented and an attempt by the Trump White House to chill free speech.
Disney attorney Beth Wilkinson said the FCC’s action is having an impact on ABC News coverage in the weeks leading up to the midterm elections, as the network tries to avoid further action from the agency that regulates over-the-air broadcast TV licenses.
“We are making different editorial decisions,” Wilkinson said during the court hearing in Washington. “We are watching everything that we do because every time we do something — even not broadcasting this presidential speech — brings out the anger in the administration and the retaliation from the agency.”
Wilkinson was referring to President Trump’s frustration over ABC’s decision not to air his July 16 speech about voter fraud. The network chose to run it on its news streaming platform. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr criticized the move and said it would be considered in the license renewal process.
Wilkinson cited Carr’s complaint as an example of how the review is being driven by Trump’s unhappiness over the network’s coverage across its news programs, its late-night show “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and its topical daytime chat show “The View.” The FCC’s action, she said, is the administration “retaliating with their government power against ABC’s right to protected speech.”
Assistant U.S. Atty. Dimitar P. Georgiev argued for the FCC that ABC is trying to avoid the commission’s regulatory process by taking the case to the U.S. District Court. Georgiev said the license renewal was initiated because of a dispute over documents in the commission’s investigation into alleged discriminatory hiring practices at Disney.
Judge Loren L. AliKhan did not issue a ruling. She asked the FCC to provide further documentation on its claim. Disney will have until Oct. 14 to respond.
Trump has frequently threatened to have TV station licenses pulled when he believes he is treated unfairly on news and talk programs. He has also successfully extracted multimillion-dollar settlements from CBS and ABC after suing the networks over news content he said had treated him unfairly.
ABC is the first network to take the FCC to court over the threats.
Wilkinson noted that Carr said during a visit to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Fla., that “broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions, also known as fake news, have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up.”
The licenses for eight ABC-owned TV stations, including KABC in Los Angeles, were originally scheduled for renewal between 2028 and 2031.
Carr has said ABC’s daily talk show “The View” should not be exempt from the FCC’s equal time rule that requires broadcasters to bring on opposing candidates to provide balanced coverage. Wilkinson noted that the program — which was given the exemption in 2002 — has avoided using clips of politicians during its popular “Hot Topics” segment at the top of the program.
Carr also said earlier this year that stations could be subject to discipline if they “don’t operate in the public interest” after criticisms from the White House about coverage of the Iran war.
Carr called for the ABC license review in April, days after Kimmel delivered gags about the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner attended by Trump for the first time as president and described First Lady Melania Trump as having a “glow like an expectant widow.”
The satirical remarks drew criticism after a man later breached security at the Washington Hilton event while armed with a shotgun, handgun and several knives. The dinner was cut short and rescheduled.
Source link
Trump loves to bash California to rally the base. ‘Let ’em take out’ L.A. is just the latest
WASHINGTON — As President Trump zigzags across the country in the final weeks before the midterm elections, he has made California his favorite foil as he tries to fire up his base.
On Monday, he blamed the Golden State for the rising cost of gas prices, claimed without evidence that its elections are rigged, and at a Nebraska rally suggested Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego.
“It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe,” Trump said. “They can take out a city, let them take out Los Angeles, let them take out San Diego. This is a very small price to pay.”
The president’s team on Tuesday said his remarks were misunderstood, arguing the president “clearly” stated that U.S. cities would have been threatened “if a nuclear Iran hadn’t been stopped.” Trump declined to clarify what he meant by his statements when asked by a reporter Tuesday.
But by then, Trump’s remarks had already drawn fierce condemnation from California leaders, including Republican Jim Desmond, a Navy veteran running in a highly competitive race that is key to helping Republicans retain control of the House.
“I vehemently disagree with President Trump’s comments,” Desmond wrote on social media. “America must stand up to Iran and defend our interests, but the first responsibility of our Commander in Chief is to protect the American people and our homeland.”
The backlash exposed the risk of Trump’s closing midterm strategy. Bashing California is a reliable applause line in red states like Nebraska, Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma, where the president has been holding rallies trying to ensure his supporters get out to vote. But in this modern era, an incendiary comment can travel fast online and leave Republicans running in competitive districts in awkward spots, trying to distance themselves from Trump.
Overall, political observers see the episode as an example of how the president’s political strategy can be unpredictable at a time when Republicans are trying to control the message the most.
“Whether you like Trump or not, he is good at getting his message out and coming up with a message that can resonate and catch fire,” said Mindy Romero, founder and director of the nonpartisan Center for Inclusive Democracy. “I think the question now is: Is he starting to fail himself when it comes to his messaging?”
California Democrats were quick to use Trump’s remarks as a line of attack against him. Gov. Gavin Newsom called him “deranged and dangerous” and opened the state emergency operations center to assess potential threats. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria told Trump to “keep our city out of your reckless war talk.” And Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said his comments could “potentially compromise our safety.”
Trump’s remarks about the California cities on Monday were the most striking example yet of the president using California as a foil to rally a base in GOP strongholds.
In Nebraska and other red states in recent days, Trump has repeatedly cast California as a political boogeyman as a means to motivate voters to cast their ballots for the GOP candidates.
At an Oklahoma rally last week, Trump told the crowd that Republicans need to keep the party in control of Congress so that his administration can continue the work of combating fraud in blue states, like California. The administration’s efforts, led by Vice President JD Vance, have sometimes been overestimated or nebulous.
But Trump tells supporters that in places like California, the administration is seeing “billions and billions of dollars of fraud.”
In a social media post Monday, Trump began blaming the cost of fuel — a defining issue for voters this election cycle — on states like California.
“What’s driving up Gasoline is no longer the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump wrote. The issue, he said, is refineries being “closed up in Blue States, like California, by the Dumocrats.”
Hours later, while rallying in Nebraska, Trump seemed to contradict himself as he promised the crowd that fuel costs would go down once the war in Iran was over.
“That will end very quickly, one way or the other, very soon, maybe a little after the election, maybe a little before, but it is going to end very soon,” Trump said. “When that happens, the oil will come tumbling down.”
Trump’s messaging underscores how the war with Iran, which has gas prices topping $6 a gallon, has emerged as a potential liability for Republicans that the president is trying to address in subtle ways.
Polling on Trump’s handling of the economy has remained low, even among Republicans. A University of Massachusetts Amherst poll last month found that only 22% of Americans perceive the economy in a good or fair state.
In California, a poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times, found that 70% of California voters disapprove of Trump’s decision to go to war in Iran, including 1 in 5 Republicans.
The softening of Trump’s approval even among those who still support his performance could translate into lower GOP turnout in the state’s few competitive races, the poll’s director, Mark DiCamillo, said.
Trump’s strategy in the final stretch before the midterms has largely focused on rallying the base in hopes that they will turn out to vote. Part of that strategy includes using California as a punching bag.
One particular line of attack has been disparaging the state’s voting systems. He suggested Monday that Democrat-led cities are trying to cheat in November as he touted the fast count of ballots in foreign countries.
“In Detroit, Philadelphia, California and numerous other U.S. Cities and States, the results, with much smaller numbers, will often take weeks to Rig, I mean, calculate,” Trump wrote on Monday. “Voting in America is CORRUPT!!!”
In another social media post, he said: “California: Took 38 days with 16.1 million ballots in 2024.”’
Trump using California as a foil for any given issue could be a risky strategy, Romero said.
“He’s expanding the types of things that he’s blaming California for, like the gas crisis,” she said, arguing that such statements could “start to lose credibility with those people that he has credibility with.”
For Republican voters in California, the ploy may be even riskier, especially when Trump suggests Iran could “take out” their cities.
“I don’t think that message necessarily plays well here because Californians are Californians,” DiCamillo said. “There is a certain pride in being a Californian, certainly not held by everybody … but I would think that the mainstream would be defending the state.”
Source link
FBI whistleblower alleges Trump ordered investigations of L.A.-area immigration protesters
A former FBI intelligence analyst has alleged that President Trump ordered the FBI to launch unconstitutional investigations into immigration enforcement protesters from the Los Angeles area, according to a whistleblower report made public Tuesday by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.).
She also contended that substantial FBI resources were diverted to such probes, and that she was retaliated against for questioning their legality.
The White House and the top federal prosecutor in Los Angeles both denied the allegations.
Jill Fields, a former supervisory intelligence analyst based in L.A., said in a letter addressed to Congress from her attorneys that she was told Trump had ordered FBI Director Kash Patel to launch the probes after seeing a social media video of protests against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection operations in Alhambra in February 2025.
Fields said an initial assessment “determined that the protesters’ actions — video recording, use of a megaphone, and verbal objection — were constitutionally protected under the First Amendment and never crossed the line into impeding arrest or being a threat,” but that she and others were nonetheless directed to open investigations.
She said that a supervisor — whose name was redacted in the released report — said the investigation was moving forward because “the President wants this investigation.”
Separately, Fields alleged that she was informed that then-Acting Deputy Atty. Gen. Emil Bove — Trump’s former lawyer and now a federal appellate court judge — had instructed FBI leaders in Los Angeles to investigate “any anti-ICE and CBP protesters demonstrating at federal buildings in Los Angeles,” which surprised her because “investigations against protestors solely for First Amendment activity are explicitly illegal and contrary to FBI policy.”
She said she refused to participate and isn’t sure if the investigations were formally launched, but that she “observed that personnel and analytical resources were immediately diverted from ongoing criminal investigations to address the Alhambra matter.”
Fields said she was reassigned after taking her concerns beyond her direct chain of command, and ultimately resigned.
She alleges that the conduct “had significant consequences for constitutional rights, and the integrity and effective operation of the FBI,” and that her reassignment “created a chilling effect within the workforce” by signaling to other employees that “raising constitutional or legal concerns could carry professional consequences.”
Lauren Bis, a White House spokesperson, denied the allegations.
“The First Amendment does not protect violent rioting, obstructing law enforcement, and assaulting law enforcement. Assaulting and obstructing law enforcement is a crime,” she said in a statement. “This administration has been clear: anyone who assaults or obstructs law enforcement will be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
The FBI and the Justice Department said in a joint statement that under Trump, “the Department of Justice will continue to vigorously uphold the First Amendment rights of all Americans,” but that “violence is not protected by the First Amendment” and that “politically motivated attacks will not deter us from doing our job.”
They said “conspiracies to impede federal law enforcement and assaults on federal officers are against the law.”
The Los Angeles region was a hotbed of protest amid an intense immigration crackdown by the Trump administration last year.
Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles have pursued a slew of criminal cases against protesters involved in those demonstrations, though many of the cases have been dismissed, reduced to misdemeanor charges or rejected by grand juries. Legal experts have said the failure rate raised concerns about the strength of the cases being brought by First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, whose leadership of the Los Angeles prosecutors office without Senate confirmation is being challenged in court, but high-ranking Justice Department officials have praised Essayli’s work.
Essayli called Fields’ claims false, including in response to a social media post Tuesday by Padilla recounting them.
“The FBI investigated those obstructing law enforcement and engaging in assault, such as punching and spitting (my office charged more than 100 individuals with such crimes),” Essayli wrote. “There is no First Amendment right to violently resist federal officers enforcing immigration laws passed by Congress.”
Padilla wrote a letter to Patel and Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche on Monday demanding answers to a slate of questions about Justice Department investigations of protesters, their origins and outcomes, and any involvement from the White House.
He wrote that Blanche and Patel have told Congress that “cases would be based only on the facts and the law, free from political interference,” but that the whistleblower report “depicts an FBI and DOJ willing to surveil individuals solely for First Amendment activity criticizing the Administration — at the behest of the White House and Trump loyalists, over the objection of senior staff, and in contravention of agency policy and the Constitution.”
The video from Alhambra that Fields said she was told prompted Trump to demand investigations, and which Padilla shared, was posted to TikTok by the League of United Latin American Citizens on Feb. 26, 2025. LULAC did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.
The video depicts protesters on megaphones calmly reminding others who appear to be the focus of nearby immigration enforcement about their legal rights and the fact that agents need a legitimate, court-issued warrant to enter their homes — and telling them not to open their doors if the agents don’t have one.
Source link
‘Take out’ L.A. or San Diego? This buffoon thinks Trump was way out of line
I went to bed at a decent hour Monday night and got a pretty good sleep.
I woke up refreshed Tuesday morning, only to see the news that President Trump seemed to have told a crowd in Nebraska that it wouldn’t be such a bad thing if Iran attacked Southern California.
“Let ’em take out Los Angeles. Let ’em take out San Diego,” he said in a typically meandering speech, perhaps trying to justify a war he has repeatedly claimed is keeping the U.S. safe, even as gas prices have spiked. “This is a very small price to pay.”
The Nebraska crowd cheered.
California electeds scolded.
“San Diego is not collateral damage,” said San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria.
Such “dangerous” remarks could “potentially compromise our safety,” said L.A. Mayor Karen Bass.
“He is deranged and dangerous,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom.
President Trump throws a pen into the crowd after he signed an executive order during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center in Grand Island, Neb., on Oct. 5, 2026.
(Kent Nishimura / AFP via Getty Images)
About 8 a.m., I took my dog Philly out for our morning walk. This is usually a lovely time for us. I clear my head. For Philly, a 3-year-old beagle, these are essentially business trips.
I got to thinking about the similarities in the daily routines of Philly and the president of the United States.
The thing is, I carry bags with me and clean up after Philly. The president to my knowledge has nobody on his staff doing this. We are at a point in American politics at which we must consider posting signs, everywhere Trump travels, that say, “Please Curb Your President.”
Not that it would be easy to clean Trump’s daily messes. You’d need the equivalent of those parade attendants in overalls who run along behind the horses with shovels.
The White House does not use poop bags. Instead, it uses denial and spin.
Critical reactions to Trump’s Nebraska comments were “not rooted in reality,” said White House Director of Communications Steven Cheung, who claimed Trump was misrepresented.
We’ve got to respect Cheung’s opinion. Does anyone in the world have more experience when it comes to analyzing comments not rooted in reality?
Some of you may know there are two topics I often revisit in my column. One is the effects, good and bad, of aging. The other is failure of leadership.
So I feel eminently qualified to psychoanalyze the president.
I don’t mean to generalize, but as people age, it’s not unusual for them to undergo behavioral changes. Some folks mellow, they abide, they lean into the ride. Others can become churlish, combative or grouchy.
Not only is Trump the poster boy for the latter group, but as things go wrong, he becomes more obstinate.
And things have definitely gone wrong.
The war in Iran is a disaster. The president is personally responsible for rising gas prices. He’s ruined the economy with his tariffs. He’s picked a fight with Canada. He may cost his party the House and the Senate because his almost daily outrages have pumped oxygen back into the blood of long-slumping Democrats.
A normal person would have the good sense to scale back or shrink away.
President Trump at the campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on Oct. 5, 2026, in Grand Island, Neb.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)
Trump keeps doubling down, wants to put his name on everything, and lashes out the way someone does when it’s not clear what’s bigger — their ego or their insecurity.
I’ve been to Nebraska, by the way. Nice place, met a lot of lovely people.
I enjoy corn, on or off the cob.
Popcorn. Caramel corn.
Not wild about “Children of the Corn,” the slasher movie based on Stephen King’s short story. But thank you very much, Nebraska, for Fred Astaire, Johnny Carson and Henry Fonda, who, by the way, was born in Grand Island, where Trump made his cracks Monday about California.
Did it occur to any of the shuckers who cheered Trump’s throwaway line about an attack on San Diego and L.A. that:
A: It wasn’t funny.
B: San Diego has one of the nation’s largest military installations, with thousands of personnel currently deployed to the Middle East because of the war in Iran.
C: Maybe we should expect more from someone serving as president and commander in chief.
In defending Trump, the White House said news outlets had misunderstood and misrepresented the president’s comments in what amounted to a “media freakout.” A White House media post singled out an L.A. Times post that said Trump suggested “letting Iran take out” L.A. and San Diego.
“No, he didn’t, you buffoons,” said the White House. “He was saying the U.S. is fighting to STOP Iran from having the ability to take out LA and San Diego with a nuclear weapon — which they would if they had the chance.”
Please.
This buffoon would like to point out that this is yet another case of Trump using California as a punching bag to prop up support for the war and nail down what’s left of his diminishing base. But even some of his longtime disciples know that he has said on dozens of occasions that the war had ended, was ending, or had been won, and not once were any of those words rooted in reality.
It’s not clear whether we’re any safer in the U.S. as a result of the war, although it is clear that we have paid with lives and higher costs.
So maybe a gratuitous and unfunny line about anyone taking out American cities is better left unsaid.
I’m fresh out of muzzles, but I do have extra poop bags.
steve.lopez@latimes.com
Source link
Becerra’s ‘son of immigrants’ story emerges as latest flash point in governor’s race
Democrat Xavier Becerra, the frontrunner to become the state’s next governor, often invokes the story of his parents’ humble beginnings as immigrants from Mexico who, through hard work, built happy and productive lives in California.
“My parents came to California with $12 in their pocket. They lived the California dream,” Becerra said during last week’s gubernatorial debate with Republican rival Steve Hilton, aired nationally on CNN.
Becerra for years has described himself as the “son of immigrants” when talking about his upbringing, but that claim has come under scrutiny by Hilton and other critics who accuse Becerra of embellishing his family history. Becerra’s mother is from Guadalajara, Mexico, but his father was born in Sacramento and raised in Tijuana — making him a U.S. citizen and not a legal immigrant.
“Unlike Xavier Becerra, I am an immigrant. Unlike Xavier Becerra, my father was an immigrant. My stepfather too. My whole family,” Hilton wrote in a post on X.
Hilton is an immigrant from the United Kingdom and is the son of Hungarian immigrants who fled their homeland during a revolution in 1956.
Richard Grenell, a former Trump administration official, accused news outlets of letting a lie “continue for decades” throughout Becerra’s tenure as California attorney general and then as a Cabinet official in the Biden administration.
Becerra has openly discussed the details of his parents’ story, which unfolded on both sides of the border and in many ways reflects Mexican immigrant trajectories during the historical period of the 1920s and 1930s.
During speeches and in interviews Becerra has described how his father, Manuel, was born in Sacramento in 1928 and taken back to Tijuana as a young boy, with few jobs for Americans during the Great Depression, and even fewer jobs for Mexicans working in the U.S. His father traveled between the two countries often, and, as an older child, he would look for work in the U.S.
Becerra on Tuesday accused Hilton of “casting lies” about his family’s background, saying that the Republican failed to understand the struggle that many Mexican immigrants and Mexican Americans faced in this county decades ago. He said his dad would tell of the days when he couldn’t walk into some establishments that had posted signs that read “No dog, Negros or Mexicans allowed.”
“This is what happens when people who don’t understand immigration start to pontificate,” Becerra said Tuesday after a morning rally against Proposition 39, a voter identification measure, at Guelaguetza, a Oaxacan restaurant in Los Angeles’ Pico-Union neighborhood.
“I am very proud of my parents, and I consider them immigrants because even though my dad was born in the U.S. — in a country that wouldn’t treat him the way it would treat other U.S. citizens — my dad was a proud immigrant,” Becerra said. “I am proud that I am their son. I am the son of immigrants.”
G. Cristina Mora, a UC Berkeley professor of sociology studying attitudes toward immigration, said Becerra’s critics misunderstand a common phenomenon at the time, when immigrants moved back and forth across a southern border that was much more porous — very different from the militarized border of today.
Beyond the dwindling jobs and precarious economics of the 1930s serving as a push factor for many Mexican families, a wave of xenophobia also helped send hundreds of thousands back to Mexico. A wave of mass deportations across the Southwest states resulted in more than 1 million Mexicans and their descendants being forced out of their homes and loaded on trains out. More than 60% were U.S. citizens.
Mora, who also serves as co-director of the UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies, said “it was a time of very great anti-Mexican fervor.” Many sought to later return. Some were deported multiple times.
“There are many types of immigrants. There’s so much nuance,” Mora said. “To think there’s only one immigrant story would just be to not know California.”
Becerra’s campaign spokesperson Jonathan Underland in a statement accused Hilton of hypocritically attempting to capitalize on an immigrant narrative.
“Steve Hilton doesn’t seem to have a problem with immigrants who look like him — but openly attacks immigrants who look like Xavier Becerra,” Underland said. “Trump ignited a deep anti-immigrant animus among MAGA voters, and Hilton is tapping into that as he scrambles to distract from his bizarre ad campaign that alienated some of his closest allies.” Last week, Hilton’s campaign put out a provocative, sexually suggestive ad that drew criticism from his fellow Republicans.
Becerra, both on Tuesday and throughout his long political career, has often described his parents’ upbringing.
He said his father’s family moved back to Tijuana during the Great Depression. His father, he said, was the eldest child and was forced to leave school after the sixth grade to help support the family. He began working as a preteen, bouncing back and forth between the U.S. and Tijuana. He would tell stories about being a shoe shiner, at times of celebrities and movie stars. He also worked in the farm fields with his dad and sometimes with his uncles.
In the early 1950s he married Becerra’s mother, Maria Teresa, who lived in Guadalajara.
“When they decided to make a go of it outside of Guadalajara, they went to Tijuana. They didn’t have great success, so that’s when they decided to come to the U.S.,” Becerra said on Tuesday. “So when I say my parents came to California with $12 in their pocket, it’s because, Steve Hilton, my parents came to California with $12 in their pocket.”
Becerra’s father later began a construction career that lasted 30 years, while his mother worked as a clerical worker and later purchased rental properties.
Times researcher Cary Schneider contributed to this report.
Source link
Russian oligarch says Donald Trump Jr. has paid him back for wedding celebration expenses
NEW YORK — The Russian oligarch who helped bankroll Donald Trump Jr.’s wedding celebration says the president’s eldest son has paid back the money.
“Yes, he did,” Umar Kremlev told an International Boxing Association press conference in Istanbul on Tuesday. “He did repay the money I spent on the present.” Still, he said he felt the repayment was unnecessary.
“Frankly speaking, I do not understand why he decided to do so,” he went on. “There are all kinds of events organized by all kinds of people. It is as if I invite you to come and visit my country house. Would you expect me to issue an invoice to them afterward?” Speaking through an interpreter, he said that would be “ridiculous.”
ProPublica, a nonprofit investigative website, reported last month that Kremlev, who has close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, “footed the bill for hundreds of thousands of dollars of wedding expenses” when Trump Jr. married socialite Bettina Anderson in the Bahamas in May. That included paying to rent one of two private islands where the three-day party was held.
In a subsequent post on her Instagram page signed by the couple, Bettina Trump wrote that they had been married “surrounded ONLY by our family,” but that Kremlev, head of the boxing association, was a “dear friend” who “very generously hosted two incredible nights of celebrations for us AFTER our wedding.”
President Trump, who did not attend the nuptials, previously defended the arrangement but told reporters that the money would be paid back.
“It’s totally allowed,” he said. “But, as I understand it, he paid them back.”
“That’s very common,” he added, “I’ve given wedding parties to numerous people.”
Kremlev, who was recently honored with the Order of Friendship by Putin, also played down the significance, saying the celebration was “a shared event” and “people blew it out of proportion.”
“I mean, why can’t we be friends? We are just friends,” he went on. “We are simply friends and what unites us is love for sports.”
The focus on Kremlev comes as Russia remains at war with Ukraine following its invasion in 2022 and as Trump has failed to broker a promised peace deal between the nations.
Trump Jr. has previously been scrutinized over his ties to Russia. During the 2016 campaign, his meeting with a Russian attorney in Trump Tower to discuss potentially incriminating information about his father’s then-Democratic opponent was a critical element of investigations into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia to meddle in the election to help Trump win.
Colvin writes for the Associated Press.
Source link
Republicans return to tough-on-crime message before difficult midterm elections
WASHINGTON — Political advertising warns about Democratic plots to defund the police. Campaign events feature law enforcement unions and tough talk about law and order. Stump speeches boast about record low levels of violent crime.
From coast to coast, Republicans are focusing on public disorder, illegal immigration and violent crime in midterm campaigns as voters sour on their party’s handling of the cost of living and the war with Iran.
Democrats have tried to counter the attacks by recruiting candidates with law enforcement backgrounds and emphasizing their own anti-crime plans, but Republicans believe it’s a rare opportunity to go on the offensive in an otherwise challenging year.
“Do you know that right now we have the lowest violent crime rate in 126 years in America right now? Because we emphasize the rule of law,” House Speaker Mike Johnson recently told an audience at Louisiana State University. Crime rates have generally trended down since the 1990s with a brief spike during the COVID pandemic. “We have the most secure border we have had in the past half century.”
President Trump returned to the topic Monday night in Nebraska, warning about how the country used to be before he returned to the White House.
“We had a border with people pouring in, crime like nobody’s ever seen,” he said.
Republicans say Democrats will ‘defund the police’
In Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Texas and Wisconsin, Republican candidates for governor have attacked their Democratic rivals as weak on crime or warned they could cut police funding. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, for instance, has lambasted Democratic nominee and state Rep. Gina Hinojosa for not supporting legislation that would require judges to deny bail to illegal immigrants charged with a violent crime.
Hinojosa has campaigned on her tenure as a civil rights lawyer and criticized Abbott’s crime policies as violating civil liberties.
Rick Jackson, a billionaire healthcare executive running in Georgia, has repeatedly attacked Democratic opponent Keisha Lance Bottoms over her tenure as Atlanta mayor.
“I grew up in the type of neighborhood Keisha Lance Bottoms abandoned,” Jackson said at a summer campaign rally. “I know who gets hurt when politicians defund the police.”
In an interview with Atlanta station 11Alive, Bottoms emphasized that her administration gave pay raises to police and firefighters, and said she called for increased federal funding for public safety during her time as mayor.
Crime warnings pervade congressional races
It’s a similar story in U.S. House races.
In Virginia’s first congressional district, Rep. Rob Wittman has attacked his Democratic opponent, prosecutor Shannon Taylor, over her allegedly “soft on crime” record in office. In Michigan’s 10th district, Republican Michael Bouchard is running on his service as a Bronze Star Army captain and son of a longtime local sheriff. He’s claimed his Democratic opponent, former prosecutor Christina Hines, supports “woke, soft on crime, socialist policies.”
In Colorado’s eighth district, Rep. Gabe Evans touts his time as a police officer against Democratic challenger Manny Rutinel. And in Wisconsin’s third district, Rep. Derrick Van Orden hopes to win a third race against Democratic nominee Rebecca Cooke by painting her as a communist who wants to defund the police.
Republicans hope that by reprising warnings of crime and disorder the party can reenergize their disillusioned base and win back skeptical moderate voters who have drifted over concerns like affordability.
Democratic rivals have responded in kind. Taylor aired an ad featuring 13 local sheriffs who endorsed her campaign. Rutinel aired ads with local police and rolled out a safety plan that called for greater police funding and drug prevention programs. Hines said she’ll continue to prioritize public safety and prosecute corruption in Washington. Cooke has vowed to fully fund police departments in Congress.
Not all Republicans see crime as a winning issue
It’s yet to be seen if the strategy will prove effective.
“We’ve got to talk about it. I think that in many ways, we are the victim of our own success because it’s off the headlines a little bit more,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt, a Missouri Republican and former state attorney general. “Having a completely secure border now, no one even talks about it. But that’s a huge accomplishment from where we were at before.”
An AP-NORC poll conducted in September found that border security — which Trump and Republicans often link to crime — was a relative strength for the Republican president, with 48% of U.S. adults saying they approved of his performance on the issue. But that was still a decline from a year ago, when his approval on border security was at 55%.
Not everyone in the party is sold on Republicans rehashing the crime message.
“I don’t see that bubbling up as a major issue for the voters,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who chose not to seek reelection this year. Aiming to make the race to succeed Tillis a referendum on crime, Republicans have run ads claiming that Democratic nominee Roy Cooper went easy on convicts during his two terms in the governor’s mansion.
Black political leaders have criticized the ads as racist and reminiscent of past Republican campaigns that used dog whistles to appeal to suburban white voters. Trump made the message explicit when he invoked the infamous 1988 “Willie Horton” ad and displayed dozens of mugshots of men of color on a jumbotron during a rally stumping for Michael Whatley, Cooper’s Republican rival.
In contrast to his party’s messaging, Tillis noted his state’s safety in recent years.
“Frankly, when I hear somebody talking about crime in Charlotte, I live 25 minutes from downtown. I’m not worried about walking through Charlotte at night,” said Tillis.
Democrats accuse Trump of corruption
National Democrats contend that Republicans’ message on violent crime is undercut by the Trump administration’s hardline immigration enforcement actions, which resulted in the killing of two American protesters in January and the fatal shootings of multiple undocumented people. They accuse Trump of corruption and have hammered Republicans for alleged complicity in the president’s self-dealing.
“This is the biggest criminal organization that we’ve ever seen,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, of the current White House.
He added that, “Democrats should be pushing back with the fact that, if not for the fact that he was president, this guy would be leading some type of mafia right now.”
Lauren Bis, a White House spokeswoman, said “extreme Democrats are trying to deflect from their radical soft on crime agenda.”
Brown writes for the Associated Press.
Source link
Venezuela’s New Neighbors May Not Behave As You Expect
Who will be the next president of the largest Latin American economy? We’ll know for sure with the run-off on October 25, but after the first-round results in Brazil’s general election, it seems it won’t be Lula da Silva. The 80-year-old socialist who was close friends with Hugo Chávez and failed to pressure Nicolás Maduro after he stole the 2024 election would need a miracle to stop Flávio Bolsonaro. The ultra-conservative populism of the candidate’s father, former president Jair Bolsonaro —currently in jail for the coup attempt of 2023—, surpassed Lula in the presidential vote and grabbed the majority of states and seats in Congress.
Unless the Workers Party has a secret weapon against Bolsonaro and recruits enough voters in extremis, Lula will end his career defeated by a family closely associated with attacks to democracy, misinformation, open dismissal of environmental concerns, militarism, and sexism.
We’ll see what millions of Brazilian voters, who are fed up with inflation and crime, will decide. But from a Venezuelan point of view, the idea of having Flávio Bolsonaro ruling over our big neighbor to the south sounds like bad news for chavismo, especially if the rest of Venezuela’s land borders touch Guyana, a rising oil producer closely protected by the US, and Colombia, where Abelardo de la Espriella, a leader who resembles Bolsonaro, is already president.
If we add that Panama, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, Trinidad and Tobago, Peru, Chile, and Argentina have conservative presidents who declared a new war on drugs and are even joining the Trump administration’s Shield of the Americas initiative, we’ll see a map turning dark-blue hostile to the heirs of 21st-century socialism. No more silence about chavismo’s abuse. No more anti-imperialist performance in global arenas. Finally, the pendulum swung away from chavismo’s old circle. This right-wing storm on the continent is bad for Delcy Rodríguez and good for María Corina Machado. Right?
Not necessarily.
Before and after Trump
Before Trump, things were simpler. Conservative governments in Latin America were like Álvaro Uribe’s in Colombia or Felipe Calderón’s in Mexico: they tried to get along with Chávez but ended up as enemies, cutting commercial and diplomatic ties, fighting chavista diplomats in the UN and accusing their local adversaries of trying to export chavismo. Predicting a vote involving Venezuela in the OAS was easy: you just had to count how many representatives were on the right and how many on the left or the Chávez payroll, like Petrocaribe’s members.
After Trump, on the contrary, those old categories no longer matter. Ideology is not important. Not even cultural wars, which are so good for social media and for recruiting powerful allies like evangelical churches; a government can allow abortion and same sex marriage and be considered a friend by Trump, as long as this government connects with the priorities of the president’s political and corporate circles.
Trump’s foreign relations favor those governments who are in sync with the specific matters his administration is about, like pushing China out of the region, securing markets for American companies, and, more particularly, supporting Trump’s narratives. If you lose an election, as he did with Biden, you blame socialism and try to reverse the results; if Trump says fentanyl and cocaine are coming from your country, you help the Americans to attack boats and produce viral clips on social media; if Trump says your migrants are poisoning his country, you help him to stop them before they approach the US, and even accept that your own citizens are sent to prisons in third, remote countries.
Donald Trump is not Ronald Reagan. He’s not fighting socialism and spreading capitalist democracy. He’s not even treating China as a geopolitical adversary, but a corporate competitor with a CEO you can visit and have at home, as Trump just did with Xi Jinping. Trump is in worse terms with a fully democratic, pro-market government like Mark Carney’s in Canada, which did not bend to his demands, than with President Claudia Sheinbaum in Mexico, a hardcore leftist, who is more cooperative with the White House. And, in fact, Trump is allowing the existence of three socialist autocracies on the continent: Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.
Trump can coexist with socialists, as long as they do what he wants. In practice, this means that our old premises about the impact of having left- or right-leaning governments around are not as valid as they were when Chávez was alive.
New friendz n the hood
We Venezuelans can easily see how things changed in the region’s geopolitical play, and how ideology lost relevance, in the evidently comfortable relationship between Donald Trump and Delcy Rodríguez, or in the aftermath of the earthquakes in June. Many governments sent help to La Guaira, but one of the first and most spectacular rescue missions came from El Salvador, where the government is a very public enemy of chavismo. The Salvadorans’ equipment and efforts in the rubble were highlighted on President Nayib Bukele’s social media. El Salvador’s fast response helped the dictatorship to manage the disaster, not the Venezuelan opposition, which is currently led by a pro-market politician, Machado, who courted the Republican Party for years.
We have also seen how Paraguay, Argentina and Chile, all of them with right-wing leaders very close to Trump, started to restore relationships with Miraflores Palace, even if it is still in the hands of the people who perpetrated the 2024 fraud and besieged the Argentine embassy in Caracas.
Hugo Chávez would be worried about the Bolsonaros’ apparent return to Brasília. Delcy Rodríguez, not so much. She can invite big Brazilian companies in energy, retail and agribusiness, which would get deregulation and diplomatic support in a Bolsonaro government, to join the investment frenzy in the Caracas Marriott. Yes, Machado and Bolsonaro met in Chile, during Kast’s inauguration in March, and she congratulated him on social media last Sunday, but Venezuela’s democratic renewal is not an urgent priority for Flávio Bolsonaro.
A good proxy to estimate how Bolsonaro Jr. would behave with chavismo and Machado is Abelardo de la Espriella. The Colombian president, who used a similar mix of conspiracy theories and a macho persona to defeat the Pacto Histórico leftist coalition, has so far been as passive about Venezuela’s suspension of democratic rights as Gustavo Petro. De la Espriella has been pushing Venezuelan migrants to go home, like Trump. As experts see it from Colombia, he is just following Trump’s lead regarding his neighbor. One critical difference between De la Espriella and Bolsonaro is that the new Colombian government needs to put pressure on Colombian guerrillas in Venezuela (with American support and, probably, even Delcy’s help), a variable absent in the Brazilian case.
I’m not saying that the Bolsonaros and the rest of the Trumpian Right will support Delcy forever. My point is that we can’t see their spread over South America as a force meant to crush socialists. We must observe what Trump and their allies do, instead of just believing what they say. Trump said a lot of things about Maduro and chavismo, but at the time of writing, Venezuelan citizens remain deprived of influence, just like when Maduro stole their votes, and Maduro’s former vice president is having the time of her life.
Source link
Sanders boosts wealth tax; labor argues it would devastate economy
Sen. Bernie Sanders, a hero among the nation’s progressive voters, stumped in Southern California on Monday for a wealth tax on the California ballot in November that has drawn hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign spending.
“What you are showing people from coast to coast and all over is that, yes, we can take on the greed of the oligarchs,” said Sanders (I-Vt.), who called Proposition 40 the most important ballot measure in the country. “Yes, we can create an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent.”
Sanders name-checked billionaire tech founders including Elon Musk of SpaceX, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta and Google co-founder Sergey Brin, whose mentions were repeatedly met with boos from the crowd gathered at the Novo in downtown Los Angeles.
Labor leaders, speaking earlier on Monday at a union training facility in La Palma, argued that although the billionaires tax is billed as a one-time tax on the assets of the state’s wealthiest residents, it includes a loophole that would allow state lawmakers to tax the savings and retirement accounts and home equity of all Californians.
“In the trades, we know you always read the blueprints and you always read the fine print,” said Xochitl Medrano, the political director for the district council of the Ironworkers of the State of California and Vicinity. Medrano was surrounded by union workers chanting, “No on 40!”
“Our workers are not billionaires; they are working people. After 20, 30, or even 40 years of breaking their backs on the job sites, our members have the opportunity to have a decent pension, some retirement savings, and equity in a home that they’ve been working to pay off,” she said. “That’s not wealth handed to them. That’s sweat equity. … We won’t stand by and let a tax that’s supposed to target billionaires turn into a trap door for working families.”
Proposition 40 is among the most contentious issues on the Nov. 3 ballot. The measure was crafted by a healthcare union to offset $100 billion in impending federal healthcare funding cuts approved by congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump last year. Millions of Californians could lose their healthcare coverage because of those cuts.
There are two opposing measures on the November ballot, Propositions 41 and 42, that would nullify the billionaires tax if either receives more votes.
About 45% of likely voters supported Proposition 40, while 42% opposed it and 13% were undecided in a late September poll by UC Berkeley and the Los Angeles Times. That’s a decline in support compared with a poll six weeks earlier, when 48% of likely voters supported it while 41% opposed it.
The proposal has drawn more than $300 million in campaign contributions, nearly all against it. Ballot measures are not subject to caps on campaign donations.
Sanders was joined by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) and artists including the rapper Common, who called for “them billionaires to pay up” between freestyle verses. Shepard Fairey, known for his famous portrait of President Obama, unveiled banners in support of the wealth tax campaign, which served as a backdrop on the event stage.
Rally attendee Datosha Williams, an SEIU-UHW member who works in healthcare customer service, said Proposition 40 is a backstop to federal healthcare cuts, which could lead to hospital closures around the state.
“My biggest fear is that I will see some of my coworkers lose their jobs,” she said. “My biggest fear is that my 8-year-old son, who is asthmatic, will have long waits in an ER.”
At the event at the Ironworkers Training Center in La Palma organized by labor leaders to oppose the wealth tax, apprentices attended workshops about rigging and collective bargaining rights.
“We’re not opposed to making the wealthy pay their fair share. We’re not opposed to creating a high-quality and low-cost health insurance plan for Californians,” said Andrew Gonzales, the council representative for the Los Angeles and Orange Counties Building and Construction Trades Council. “We just don’t think Prop. 40 is the right vehicle to go about that.”
Gonzales pointed to the volatile state budget’s dependence on tax revenue from wealthy Californians, some of whom have proactively moved out of the state because of the proposal.
“That’s already having an immediate impact to the state’s budget,” he said. “So we already see the danger that can occur.”
Foes of Proposition 40 attend a rally on Monday at the Ironworkers Training Center in La Palma.
(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)
Source link
Luxury-car buyers who use ‘Montana loophole’ to dodge California taxes are target of new law
Gov. Gavin Newsom last week signed legislation cracking down on the practice of luxury-car buyers in California registering cars out of state to avoid taxes.
Senate Bill 1406, introduced by state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton), closes the so-called Montana loophole, in which tax evaders create shell companies in Montana or other states without sales tax or vehicle registration fees and use them to purchase Ferraris, Porsches and other luxury cars. The state estimate it loses millions of dollars annually because of such schemes.
The new law expands California’s definition of who is a resident under state sales tax law in an effort to weed out phony shell companies, making a company liable for state taxes when at least one member of the business is a California resident.
The law, which went into effect immediately, also authorizes the state tax agency to impose tax liability on individual members of a business.
California had already looked to enforcement efforts to investigate suspicious out-of-state car sales, which officials estimate amount to $10 million annually in lost tax revenue.
Under state law, residents were already required to pay California sales tax on vehicles unless they are first used out of state and stay out of state for at least 12 months. Dealers are required to maintain records showing sales of vehicles so that authorities can ensure vehicles sold to buyers in another state are actually delivered there.
Earlier this year, the state’s Department of Justice charged 14 people — including auto dealers and customers purchasing cars — with concealing the purchase of more than $20 million worth of high-end vehicles including Ferraris, Porsches and Lamborghinis, and evading upward of $1.8 million in state taxes.
Text messages included in the criminal complaint showed buyers seeking to conceal their purchases. One Lamborghini buyer boasted about fees avoided: “70k saved — I can’t believe Montana registration lasts for 5 years — that’s crazy. Stupid California. Paid 3k to own a 600k car for 5 years — lol in Cali that’s like 75k for 5 years. Hella dumb.”
The new law further develops criteria to help show an LLC as a shell company involved in a potential tax evasion scheme.
If the LLC lacks a specific business activity or purpose, fails to maintain a physical location outside California, fails to employ people, or fails to file federal tax returns in another state, it could now be considered as evidence of such a scheme.
Source link