POLITICS

WASHINGTON — Making his first appearance before Congress since the Trump administration went to war in Iran, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced withering questioning from skeptical Democrats Wednesday over a costly conflict being waged without congressional approval.

The war has cost $25 billion so far, according to Pentagon numbers presented to the House Armed Services Committee during the contentious hearing, ostensibly focused on the administration’s 2027 military budget proposal, which would boost defense spending to a historic $1.5 trillion.

While Republicans focused on the details of military budgeting and voiced support for the operation, Democrats pivoted to the ballooning costs of the war, the huge drawdown of critical U.S. munitions and the bombing of a school that killed children. Some lawmakers also questioned President Trump’s dealings with allies and his shifting justification for the conflict.

Hegseth dismissed the criticism as political and rebuked lawmakers who pushed him for answers.

“The biggest challenge, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless, feckless and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans,” Hegseth said.

Democrats press about reasons for war

Wednesday’s hearing stretched nearly six hours as Democrats and some Republicans questioned Hegseth over the war and his ouster of several top military leaders.

In one tense exchange, Hegseth told Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) that Iran’s nuclear facilities were obliterated in a 2025 attack by the U.S., prompting Smith to question the Trump administration’s reasoning for starting the Iran war less than a year later.

“We had to start this war, you just said 60 days ago, because the nuclear weapon was an imminent threat,” said Smith, the ranking Democrat on the committee. “Now you’re saying that it was completely obliterated?”

Hegseth responded by saying that Iran “had not given up their nuclear ambitions” and still had thousands of missiles.

Smith said the war “left us at exactly the same place we were before.”

Democrats accused Hegseth of misleading Americans about the reasons for the conflict and said rising gas prices are now threatening the pocketbooks of millions of people in the U.S.

“Secretary Hegseth, you have been lying to the American public about this war from day one and so has the president,” said Rep. John Garamendi of Walnut Grove, who called the war “a geopolitical calamity,” a “strategic blunder” and a ”self-inflicted wound to America.”

Hegseth blasted Garamendi’s remarks.

“Who are you cheering for here?” he asked the lawmaker. ”Your hatred for President Trump blinds you” to the success of the war.

Hegseth defends firings of officers

The Defense secretary faced intense questions from Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Pa.) about his decision to oust the Army’s top uniformed officer, Gen. Randy George, one of several top military officers to be dismissed since Trump’s reelection.

Houlahan said George was deeply respected by both members of the military and Congress and asked why Hegseth fired him. Hegseth’s response that “new leadership” was needed failed to satisfy Houlahan.

“You have no way of explaining why you fired one of the most decorated and remarkable men —” Houlahan began before Hegseth interrupted her. “We needed new leadership,” he repeated.

The Pentagon announced this month that Navy Secretary John Phelan was stepping down. Hegseth previously removed Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the Navy’s top uniformed officer, and Gen. Jim Slife, the Air Force’s No. 2 leader, while Trump fired Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown Jr. as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska said that while Hegseth is empowered to make personnel changes, he shares what he called “bipartisan concern” about the firings.

“We had a huge bipartisan majority here that had confidence in the Army chief of staff and the secretary of the navy,” Bacon said. “And I would just point out it may be constitutionally right … but it doesn’t make it right or wise.”

Hegseth has said the changes are part of building a “warrior culture” at the Pentagon.

Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina defended Hegseth’s personnel moves, saying he is “trying to innovate and trying to change the way we do business.”

“I’m glad that you’re firing people,” Mace said. “There are people there that are getting in your way. They need to go.”

Republicans back Trump on Iran

During the extended hearing, Hegseth detailed plans to increase pay for service members and upgrade munitions while also announcing that, as of Tuesday, the Pentagon had authorized $400 million in military aid for Ukraine in its fight against Russia.

But the debate and the questions were dominated by the war in Iran.

While a fragile ceasefire is now in place, the U.S. and Israel launched the war Feb. 28 without congressional oversight. House and Senate Democrats have failed to pass multiple war power resolutions that would have required Trump to halt the conflict until Congress authorizes further action.

Republicans say they back Trump’s wartime leadership, for now, citing Iran’s nuclear program, the potential for talks to resume and the high stakes of withdrawal. Still, GOP lawmakers are eager for the conflict to end, and some are eyeing future votes that could become an important test for the president if the war drags on.

Democrats questioned Hegseth over the war’s economic impact and rising gasoline costs, noting Trump’s promise to lower consumer costs. Hegseth responded by citing the threat posed by Iran.

“What is the cost of Iran having a nuclear weapon that they wield?” he said.

Republicans expressed support for Trump’s decision to strike Iran, including Mace, who in late March had expressed concerns about the justification for the war. “The longer this war continues, the faster it will lose the support of Congress and the American people,” she wrote in a social media post.

On Wednesday, Mace noted her past concerns but said she is “impressed with where we are today.” She told Hegseth: “Everything I have seen, you have surpassed all of my expectations.”

Iran’s closing of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping corridor for the world’s oil, has sent fuel prices skyrocketing and posed problems for Republicans ahead of the midterm elections. The U.S. has imposed a naval blockade of Iranian shipping and three American aircraft carriers are in the Middle East for the first time in more than 20 years.

The countries appear locked in a stalemate. Trump told Axios on Wednesday that he is rejecting Iran’s proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for lifting the U.S. blockade.

Finley, Groves, Klepper and Toropin write for the Associated Press.

According to Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche and other top administration officials, the U.S. Secret Service did a fine job protecting President Trump and Cabinet members from the gunman who breached the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner Saturday.

“That horrible act was stopped because of the courage and professionalism of law enforcement — the officers who responded without hesitation and did their jobs as they were trained to do,” Blanche said Monday.

However, according to a detailed accounting filed Wednesday by federal prosecutors in the criminal case against suspect Cole Tomas Allen, the performance of the nation’s preeminent protection agency was marred by inattentiveness and misfires and saved by “extraordinary good fortune” and the gunman falling to the ground.

“The defendant, armed with a 12-gauge shotgun, a .38 caliber pistol, two knives, four daggers, and enough ammunition to take dozens of lives, was apprehended by [Secret Service] officers mere feet away from the ballroom where his primary target was located, along with other members of the Cabinet,” prosecutors wrote Wednesday, in a filing arguing for Allen to be held in detention pending trial on one charge of trying to kill the president and two firearms charges.

Contradicting a prior claim by Blanche that officers had “promptly tackled and detained” Allen, prosecutors wrote that the 31-year-old tutor from Torrance simply “fell to the ground” after blowing past a team of agents just two open flights of stairs from the ballroom.

They wrote that one officer fired at Allen five times, but never hit him.

The same officer saw Allen fire his shotgun “in the direction of the stairs leading down to the ballroom,” prosecutors wrote, and officers later discovered “one spent cartridge in the barrel and eight unfired cartridges in the magazine tube.”

Prosecutors said nothing about the Secret Service officer who Blanche said was shot in his ballistic vest during the incident — adding to speculation that the officer may have been shot not by Allen, but by a fellow officer, or not at all.

Agency critiqued before

In all, the court filing brought further into focus a chaotic Secret Service response that appeared flawed from the start, including in a video Trump posted shortly after the incident in which agents appeared to be idling around an unobstructed entrance when Allen ran past them.

It added to concerns that law enforcement, security experts and members of Congress had raised about the performance of an agency that has been repeatedly called on to improve after previous attempts on Trump’s life. At a 2024 campaign rally in Butler, Pa., a gunman fired a bullet that grazed Trump’s ear, and that same year, another assailant prepared to shoot him from the unsecured perimeter of a Florida golf course.

Robert D’Amico, a former FBI deputy chief of operations for hostage rescue teams who is now a security consultant, said the security failures he saw in the Secret Service’s preparation for Saturday’s dinner — including its failure to set up basic barriers to prevent people from sprinting into the secured area — were stunning, especially given the past threats and the fact the nation is at war with Iran.

“It’s for a person like Trump, who’s had two assassination attempts before and is at war with Iran, which has terrorist training and proxies up, and you still don’t have the basics?” D’Amico said. “It’s unfathomable.”

Other concerns have been voiced by members of Congress, including Republicans.

The House Oversight Committee has requested a briefing from the Secret Service, and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has called for a hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which also investigated the Butler incident.

In a letter urging the hearing, Hawley said the latest incident “raises questions about presidential security arrangements, potential resource needs, and the degree to which reforms previously proposed by Congress have been adopted.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told Fox News that from “a layman’s perspective,” event security “looked a little lax in terms of getting into the building,” and that it “doesn’t sound like it was sufficient.”

Sean M. Curran, director of the Secret Service, has been on Capitol Hill in recent days briefing lawmakers.

He told CBS News that agents did a “great job,” but also that the incident remains under review. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles would be leading discussions on potential updates to Secret Service plans for securing the president.

Fear of graver threats

Blanche has argued that proof of the Secret Service’s effectiveness at the press gala was in the result: Allen was stopped, Trump and other officials were unharmed and no one was killed, despite Allen’s alleged intent.

However, the concerns being raised have to do with the vulnerabilities that were exposed as much as those that were exploited.

Because the dinner was not designated a major “national special security event” — such as a political convention — there were no trained counterassault agents on standby to prevent a breach or to take down a person with a weapon, officials have said.

Law enforcement experts said that was clearly a mistake given so many top officials — Trump, Johnson, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, among others — were in the room.

Such a gathering could have been targeted by foreign adversaries or others with far more experience, less regard for human life and much greater firepower than Allen, experts said.

“Most of my military friends are all saying the same thing,” said D’Amico, who is also a former infantry platoon commander in the U.S. Marines. “If you had had a team of three or four [gunmen], they would have gotten to [Trump].’”

In the initial criminal complaint against Allen, prosecutors included the text of an email Allen sent to family just as he was preparing to rush the security perimeter, in which he allegedly wrote that he had chosen to use buckshot in order to “minimize casualties” and prevent bystanders from being wounded by more powerful bullets penetrating walls.

He also allegedly wrote that he was willing to “go through most everyone” at the event to get to top administration officials, but that guests and hotel staff were “not targets at all.”

In Wednesday’s filing, prosecutors describe Allen’s actions as “premeditated, violent, and calculated to cause death,” and say he was “laden with weapons” as he breached security. But none of those weapons included assault-style rifles that can fire multiple bullets rapidly and have been used to kill civilians in mass shootings across the country for years.

The filing described Allen — a Caltech graduate and high school tutor — not as some trained tactical expert, but as an ideologue who spent part of his Amtrak journey from California to Washington waxing poetic about the landscape around him, describing Pennsylvania’s woods as “vast fairy lands filled with tiny trickling creeks in spring.”

Could have been worse

D’Amico said he and other Marines learned early on in Iraq that entrances to secured locations have to be designed in a “serpentine” fashion, forcing anyone approaching to move more slowly through the area and giving security officers more time to assess their intentions. And at an event the size of the correspondents’ dinner, with so many top officials gathered in a public hotel, you would want to make entrances “even more difficult.”

And yet no barriers seemed to be in place at the event, he said — something anyone trained more than Allen could have capitalized on.

“If they just had come through in a team of three or four who were coordinated and trained, there absolutely would have been penetration into the ballroom,” D’Amico said. “It would have been a gunfight.”

Allen himself questioned the security at the event, according to court records, allegedly writing that he had walked into the Washington Hilton with multiple weapons and no one considered “the possibility that I could be a threat.”

He wrote that if he “was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen,” he “could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed” — referring to a powerful machine gun.

“It is fortunate he was only armed with what he had,” said Ed Obayashi, a California law enforcement expert on use of force.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority sounded ready Wednesday to rule that the Trump administration may end the temporary protection that has been granted to more than 1.3 million immigrants from troubled countries.

Congress in 1990 authorized Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, for noncitizens who could not safely return home because their native country was wracked by war, violence or natural disasters. If those people passed a strict background check, they could stay and work legally in this country.

But President Trump came to office believing too many immigrants had been granted permission to enter and stay indefinitely.

Last year, his Department of Homeland Security moved to cancel the temporary humanitarian protection for immigrants from 13 countries, including Venezuela, Haiti, Syria, Honduras and Nicaragua. Court challenges on behalf of Haitians and Syrians were consolidated into a single case, Mullin vs. Doe, which the justices heard Wednesday.

Immigrant-rights advocates challenged those decisions as political and unjustified, and they won orders from federal judges that blocked the cancellations.

But Trump’s lawyers filed an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court arguing the judges had overstepped their authority. They pointed to a provision in the 1990 law that bars “judicial review” of the government’s decision to end temporary protection for a particular country.

The justices ruled for the administration and set aside the lower court rulings in a series of 6-3 orders.

Faced with criticism over its brief and unexplained orders, the justices agreed to hear arguments on the TPS issue on the last day of oral arguments for this term.

But the ideological divide appeared to be unchanged.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said Congress had prohibited “judicial micromanagement” of these decisions, and none of six conservatives disagreed.

UCLA law professor Ahilan T. Arulanantham, representing several thousand Syrians, said the Homeland Security secretary had failed to consult the State Department, which says it is unsafe to travel there.

He said the government “reads the statute like it’s a blank check … to give the secretary the power to expel people who have done nothing wrong.”

Chicago attorney Geoffrey Pipoply, representing more than 350,000 Haitians, said the cancellations were driven by “the president’s racial animus toward non-white immigrants.”

The court’s three liberals argued the administration failed to follow the procedural steps required under the law. But that argument failed to gain traction.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett and her husband adopted two children from Haiti who are citizens. Like most of the conservatives, she asked few questions during the argument.

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Former FBI Director James Comey appeared in court on Wednesday, kick-starting a criminal case against him that legal experts say presents significant hurdles for the prosecution and will likely be a challenge for the Justice Department to win.

Comey, who didn’t enter a plea, was indicted in North Carolina on Tuesday on charges of making threats against President Trump related to a photograph he posted on social media last year of seashells arranged in the numbers “86 47.” The Justice Department contends those numbers amounted to a threat against Trump, the 47th president. Comey has said he assumed the numbers reflected a political message, not a call to violence against the Republican president, and removed the post as soon as he saw some people were interpreting it that way.

The indictment is the second against Comey, a longtime adversary of Trump dating back to his time as FBI director, over the past year. The first one, on unrelated false-statement and obstruction charges, was tossed out by a judge last year. Now prosecutors pursuing the threats case face their own challenge of proving that Comey intended to communicate a true threat or at least recklessly discounted the possibility that the statement could be understood as a threat.

The indictment accuses Comey of acting “knowingly and willfully,” but its sparse language offers no support for that assertion. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche declined to elaborate at a news conference on what evidence of intent the government has. But broad 1st Amendment protections for free speech, Supreme Court precedent and Comey’s public statements indicating that he did not intend to convey a threat will likely impose a tall burden for the government.

“Here, ‘86’ is ambiguous — it doesn’t necessarily threaten violence and the fact that it was the FBI Director posting this openly and notoriously on a public social media site suggests that he didn’t intend to convey a threat of violence,” John Keller, a former senior Justice Department official who led a task force to prosecute violent threats against election workers, wrote in a text message.

The case was charged in the Eastern District of North Carolina, the location of the beach where Comey has said he found the shells. He is set to make his first court appearance Wednesday at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Va., the state where he lives.

What the law says on threats

The Supreme Court has held that statements are not protected by the 1st Amendment if they meet the legal threshold of a “true threat.”

That requires prosecutors to prove, at a minimum, that a defendant recklessly disregarded the risk that a statement could be perceived as threatening violence. In a 2023 Supreme Court case, the majority held that prosecutors have to show that the “defendant had some subjective understanding of the threatening nature of his statements.”

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has found that hyperbolic political speech is protected. In a 1969 case, the justices held that a Vietnam War protester did not make a knowing and willful threat against the president when he remarked that “If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J,” referring to President Lyndon B. Johnson. The court noted that laughter in the crowd when the protester made the statement, among other things, showed it wasn’t a serious threat of violence.

Regarding the current case, Merriam-Webster, the dictionary used by the Associated Press, says 86 is slang meaning “to throw out,” “to get rid of” or “to refuse service to.” It notes: “Among the most recent senses adopted is a logical extension of the previous ones, with the meaning of ‘to kill.’ We do not enter this sense, due to its relative recency and sparseness of use.”

Comey deleted the post shortly after it was made, writing: “I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence” and “I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”

What the government will try to prove

John Fishwick, a former U.S. attorney in the Western District of Virginia, said the government will likely try to prove that Comey should have known better as a former FBI director.

“I think they’re going to try to circumstantially say that you were head of the FBI, you knew what these terms meant and you said them out to the whole world as a threat to the president,” Fishwick said, though he noted that such an argument would be challenging in light of Comey’s obvious 1st Amendment defenses.

Comey was voluntarily interviewed by the Secret Service last year, and the fact that he was not charged with making a false statement suggests that prosecutors do not have evidence that he lied to agents, Fishwick said.

Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, wrote in an opinion piece published Tuesday that “despite being one of Comey’s longest critics, the indictment raises troubling free speech issues. In the end, it must be the Constitution, not Comey, that drives the analysis and this indictment is unlikely to withstand constitutional scrutiny.”

“If it did,” he added, “it would allow the government to criminalize a huge swath of political speech in the United States.”

Tucker, Richer and Kunzelman write for the Associated Press. Kunzelman reported from Alexandria, Va.

WASHINGTON — The White House is warning Congress that funding to pay Department of Homeland Security personnel will “soon run out,” sparking new threats of airport disruptions and national security concerns as the House slow-walks legislation to end what has been the longest-ever lapse in agency funding.

In a memo late Tuesday to lawmakers, the Office of Management and Budget said money that President Trump tapped to pay Transportation Security Administration and other workers through executive actions will be exhausted by May. It called on the House to quickly approve the budget resolution senators approved in an all-night session last week that would pave the way for full funding for the department.

“DHS will soon run out of critical operating funds, placing essential personnel and operations at risk,” the memo said.

The pressure from the Trump administration could help House Speaker Mike Johnson, whose narrow Republican majority has been stalled out, tangled in internal party disputes on a range of pending issues, including the Homeland Security funding. They have left the chamber at a virtual standstill.

The House was expected to vote as soon as Wednesday on the Senate budget resolution that is designed to unlock a multistep process to eventually fund the department. But by midday, House action again screeched to a halt. The administration has warned GOP lawmakers off making changes that could prolong passage.

“Restoring funding for the Department of Homeland Security has never been more urgent, as demonstrated by recent events,” the memo said, a nod to the situation over the weekend when a man armed with guns and knives tried to storm the annual White House correspondents’ dinner that Trump, the vice president and top Cabinet officials were attending.

Homeland Security shutdown is longest ever

Homeland Security has been operating without regular funds for more than two months after Democrats refused to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without changes to those operations after the deaths of Americans protesting Trump’s deportation agenda.

While immigration enforcement workers have largely been paid through the flush of new cash — some $170 billion — that Congress approved as part of Trump’s tax cuts bill last year, others, including TSA, have had to rely on Trump’s intervention through executive action to ensure their paychecks.

But with salaries topping $1.6 billion every two weeks, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said recently, those funds are drying up.

More than 1,000 TSA officers have quit since the shutdown began, according to Airlines for America, the U.S. airlines trade group that called Wednesday on Congress to fully fund the agency.

“The urgency to provide predictable and stable funding for TSA is growing stronger by the day,” the group said in a statement. “Time and time again, our nation’s aviation workers and customers have been the victim of Congress’ failure to do their jobs.”

Complicated budget strategy ahead

House and Senate Republicans have embarked on a go-it-alone strategy, attempting to approve funds for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol without Democrats. They want to provide $70 billion for those immigration operations for the remainder of Trump’s term to ensure no further interruptions.

It’s a cumbersome process, the same that was used last year to approve Trump’s tax cuts bill, that will play out over several weeks.

The Senate launched the process last week, and is now waiting on the House to act. Once that budget resolution is approved, both the House and Senate are expected to draft the actual funding bill, a process that can take weeks.

In the meantime, Johnson is next expected to quickly turn this week to legislation that would fund the other parts of Homeland Security, including TSA, the Coast Guard and other agencies.

That bipartisan bill has support from Democrats and already passed the Senate a month ago, when Republicans reluctantly agreed to carve out the immigration-related funds that Democrats had opposed. But it has been stalled out in the House, as Republicans in that chamber disagreed with the Senate’s approach.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Rio Yamat in Las Vegas contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The Senate Banking Committee voted on party lines Wednesday to approve Kevin Warsh as the next chair of the Federal Reserve to replace Jerome Powell, a longtime target of President Trump’s insults for not cutting borrowing costs as far as the president wanted.

The vote was 13-11, with all Republican senators voting in favor and Democrats opposed.

Warsh is a former top Fed official but has also been a sharp critic of the institution and Powell’s leadership. He has called the inflation spike to 9.1% in 2022 the central bank’s biggest policy mistake in four decades. A vote on his nomination probably won’t take place until next month, but he could be confirmed by the time Powell’s term as chair ends May 15.

The Senate Banking vote is the first of two key events surrounding the future of the Fed’s leadership. Also Wednesday, Powell is presiding over what will probably be his last meeting of the Fed’s interest rate-setting committee. At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Powell may indicate whether he will remain as a member of the central bank’s board of governors after his term as chair ends.

It would be unusual for Powell to stay, but doing so would deprive the Trump administration of an opportunity to appoint a new member to the board. Powell may choose to stay if he sees it as necessary to protect the Fed’s independence, which has become part of his legacy as its leader.

Sen. Tim Scott, a South Carolina Republican and chair of the committee, said Warsh is “battle tested” and added that, “It is incredibly important that we break the bind of Bidenomics on households across this nation.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, criticized the banking panel for voting on Warsh’s nomination. Doing so “will bring the president one step closer to completing his illegal attempt to seize control of the Fed and artificially juice the economy,” she said, citing Trump’s effort to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook and investigate Powell.

The Fed on Wednesday is widely expected to leave its key rate unchanged at about 3.6% for its third straight meeting, defying Trump’s calls for lower rates.

Warsh has called for “regime change” at the Fed and could alter many of its practices, including the economics models it focuses on, how it communicates with the public, and how large its bondholdings will be in the long run.

Those changes could affect financial markets, but otherwise won’t necessarily be visible to the general public. But Warsh has also advocated for additional interest rate cuts, which could potentially lower borrowing costs for mortgages, auto loans, and business loans. He will face barriers to implementing those cuts anytime soon, however, largely because the Iran war has caused a spike in gas prices, pushing inflation to a two-year high of 3.3%.

The Fed typically keeps rates elevated, or even raises them, to combat worsening inflation.

Most of the other 11 members of the Fed’s rate-setting committee have indicated they would prefer to wait and evaluate where inflation and the economy are headed before making any changes to rates. It could take time for Warsh to build up enough influence to push for rapid rate cuts. He will also replace Stephen Miran, a member of the Fed’s rate-setting committee who was appointed by Trump last September and is the most consistent advocate for rate reductions at the central bank.

Warsh also faces questions about his independence from the White House, a key issue that dogged him during a Senate Banking hearing last week. On Wednesday, Warren said, “Mr. Warsh is a Trump sock puppet who is so cowed by the president that he could not even say that Trump lost the 2020 election.”

Last December, Trump called for much lower interest rates in a social media post, and added that “anyone who does not agree with me will never be Fed chair!” And just last week he told Fox Business that he expects rates to head lower, “when Kevin gets in.”

Warsh denied at his hearing, however, that Trump had ever pressured him directly to cut rates.

Rugaber writes for the Associated Press.

Eight candidates for California governor shared a stage for 90 minutes Tuesday night, their second of three scheduled debates before the June 2 primary.

My colleagues Gustavo Arellano and Mark Z. Barabak joined me to decide who the winner was, or if there was a winner at all.

Arellano: The real MVP in this debate? State Supt. Tony Thurmond.

He brought up his family story — child of a Panamanian immigrant who lost his parents young, someone familiar with “government cheese” as sustenance growing up — in a way that didn’t sound forced or pedantic.

He usually stayed within the time limits that were barely enforced by moderators. And he kept knocking down Chad Bianco again and again, drawing applause when he brought up the Riverside County sheriff’s takeover of hundreds of thousands of ballots.

Thurmond is the only gubernatorial candidate currently holding a statewide position, a former Richmond City Council member and Assembly member. “Elect someone with a lived experience,” he told the audience in his closing statement.

So why has Thurmond polled so low again and again to the point that he keeps not getting invited to debates and therefore not getting in front of California voters?

California has never elected a Black governor — in fact, the state is notorious for not voting in Tom Bradley in 1982 even though polls showed him leading George Deukmejian all the way to Election Day (the phenomenon of voters telling pollsters what they think they want to hear instead of what they actually feel is now known as the Bradley Effect).

As California’s Black population keeps shrinking, it would’ve been wonderful to see Thurmond do better than he has.

Chabria: Gustavo is spot on with his take on Thurmond. He came across as polished, capable and knowledgeable. But also, he’s just too far down in the polls for any kind of comeback.

In my mind, though, Xavier Becerra was the clear winner. No, he didn’t blow the other candidates away.

But he landed more than one punch that will almost certainly be on social media feeds for weeks to come, especially when he went at Republican Steve Hilton. Early on, he called President Trump “Hilton’s daddy.” Later, he quipped at Hilton, “We don’t need a talking head for Fox News to tell us how the government works.”

The debate was chaotic in more than one moment, but Becerra managed to get more than his share of airtime and use it wisely. Tom Steyer, the other Democratic front-runner, mired himself in wonk-talk. He wanted to get deep into policy, and got lost in complicated issues such as oil refineries.

Steyer didn’t have a single memorable line, though his closing statement did redeem him somewhat. He called himself the “change maker,” and promised, “if you want change, there is only one person on this stage they are afraid of” — they being tech titans, oil companies and other gods of industry.

It was the same for Katie Porter and Matt Mahan, who didn’t do anything wrong, but also, didn’t break out.

But those back-and-forths of Becerra and Hilton are priceless because they’re quick and shareable. I won’t be surprised to see voters drift Becerra’s way, even if only a bit.

Barabak: No runs, no hits, no errors. Seven men — and one woman — left standing.

I didn’t see, or hear, anything that seems very likely to drastically shake up or dramatically reorder the governor’s race. No breakout performance that will launch any of the candidates into clear-cut front-runner status. No major gaffes to leave any of the contestants sprawled on the killing floor.

So to that extent, I would score Becerra as the evening’s (modest) winner. He’s clearly having a moment, surging from political near-death to the top tier in polls. (Though, let’s be clear, it’s still a muddle, with several candidates bunched in the 15%-20% support range.)

There have been suggestions Becerra needs to show a bit more fight and he did so Tuesday, in particular taking on Hilton. Some of his jabs seemed a bit forced and stagy. (That line about Trump as “Hilton’s daddy.”)

Better, as Anita noted, was the jab from the former congressman, state attorney general and Biden cabinet secretary about a Fox “talking head” explaining how government works.

I found Porter to be crisp and authoritative on policy; Steyer to be repetitive (I’m the only change agent on this stage, look how much money is being spent to stop me — though it’s a small fraction of the sum he’s sunk into his vanity-cruise campaign); Mahan and Antonio Villaraigosa to be largely afterthoughts, and Bianco to have all the warmth and appeal of the grouchy old man telling kids in the neighborhood to get off his damn lawn!

The Riverside County sheriff seemed not to be running for governor of California, but rather mayor of MAGA-ville, a strategy apparently intended to nab one of two spots in the June primary, allowing him to go on to crushing defeat in November.

I agree that perhaps the night’s most surprising performance came from Thurmond. The state schools superintendent is mired in bare single digits in polls and only just made the debate stage after being left out of last week’s meetup in San Francisco.

His chances of being California’s next governor are somewhere between zero and nil, which is why he escaped serious scrutiny. That said, he made the most of the 90 minutes on stage, laying out his compelling up-from-poverty life story and seeming to relish taking on Bianco in particular.

Too little, too late. But Thurmond certainly acquitted himself well.

What else you should be reading
The must-read: ‘This is like the Russian mafia’: L.A. judge elections see unusual drama
The deep dive: Gavin Newsom wants to break up with Elon Musk. Tesla is making that difficult.
The L.A. Times Special: John Seymour, Anaheim mayor and U.S. senator, dies at 88

Stay Golden,

Anita Chabria

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Wildfire and insurance — issues amped by climate change — along with the price of gas, took center stage at the California governor’s debate on Tuesday night.

Here are some of the candidates’ defining statements, starting left of the stage:

Tony Thurmond

The Democratic State Superintendent of Public Instruction addressed the state’s wildfire insurance crisis, where private insurers have been dropping policies as climate changes fuels more frequent catastrophic fire. The state has allowed insurers to raise rates in return for writing more policies, but so far its backup FAIR Plan, meant to provide coverage when other companies will not, continues to grow.

Thurmond said he would withhold tax credits, subsidies and benefits from non-cooperative insurers, although moderators and other candidates raised questions about the legality of this strategy.

“The governor can certainly work with the Insurance Commissioner to say there should be no rate increase unless the insurance industry is actually writing policies. They have failed California in our greatest need. They’ve taken the money for premiums and then when people needed to have support to rebuild their homes, they said, ‘whoops, we’re not going to help you.’ Then they got a rate increase. I’m sorry, where I come from, when you do a bad job, you don’t get a raise.”

Chad Bianco

The Republican Riverside County Sheriff said insurers aren’t leaving California because of climate change, but because the state has failed to pass and enforce vegetation management and defensible space policies that would reduce wildfire risk.

“It wasn’t global warming, stop believing that. It was a failed environmental policy that doesn’t allow fire departments to prevent defensible space around our homes or clear out the brush for 30 years that are building in our mountains and in our hills that took out a city. [Insurers] specifically said we were going to lose a city, and our governor said ‘we don’t care.’ And so the insurance companies left.”

Inadequate brush clearance has contributed to other fires in the state, although it’s not a factor experts cite in the Los Angeles fires specifically.

Tom Steyer

The Democratic billionaire hedge fund founder who is positioning himself as the climate candidate in the race, touted his drive to make oil companies pay for damages from climate change, including rising insurance rates and homes lost to wildfires.

“In environmentalism, I have three real rules. Number one is polluter pays. It’s absolutely critical that if people are going to pollute and damage the environment and cause harm to their neighbors, they pay. Two, we have to include environmental justice in every single environmental rule. And third is we need to start to deploy all of the clean energy stuff that’s cheaper now and get us back to the front of the world in leading it.

“There is one person that the corporations are going after, including Big Oil, who is spending millions of dollars to stop me. The electric monopolies, PG&E, millions of dollars to stop me, because I’m the person on this stage who’s the change agent.”

Steve Hilton

The former Republican Fox News commentator said insurers should be allowed to raise rates consistent with actual wildfire risk. He also advocated for “modern forest management,” removing fuel from forests, as a way to protect against wildfires, reduce carbon emissions from fire, and revive the state’s timber industry.

“We can create jobs and opportunity in rural California and reduce carbon emissions in the process, because we won’t have the mega wildfires.”

Asked if he supports the transition to electrification, he promoted natural gas: “Yes, but let’s be sensible about electric. Right now, we have a fleet of gas fired power stations generating electricity that are running at 10 to 15% of their capacity, even though we have abundant natural gas in California that we could be using to generate affordable, reliable electricity that would lower the cost of electric bills for consumers and businesses.”

According to the U.S Energy Information Administration, California’s natural gas production provides less than one tenth of what the state consumes.

Xavier Becerra

The former Health and Human Services Secretary said he would call a state of emergency as governor to require wildfire insurers to freeze rates and come to the table.

“This affordability crisis is hitting every family, and we have to act as if this were a break glass moment … Rate payers have to understand what their risk is, so they understand why they are going to pay for what they’re going to pay for their home insurance. But an insurance company has to be open and transparent about how its pricing its policies so people can afford it.”

Moderator Julie Watts noted that California home insurance rates are below the national average and questioned the legality of a freeze.

Katie Porter

The former Democratic Orange County Congresswoman was asked whether California should keep its refineries. Two of them closed in the past year, reducing the state’s refining capacity by 20 percent and causing California to lean more heavily on imports.

She said the state should keep the remaining refineries open, but also rapidly scale up green energy to meet the state’s growing electricity demand: “Right now we need to keep all of our energy sources online. That’s just the reality that we’re in. … Right now those refineries, they’re up, they’re running, they’re creating good jobs. Let’s keep them there. But I want to be really clear … The people who work at those refineries, and the people who live in Kern County also face some of the worst pollution and lower life expectancies. Green energy gets us out of that.”

She also backed an idea to have state dollars cover insurance for insurers, known as reinsurance.

Matt Mahan

Democratic San Jose Mayor called to suspend the state’s 61 cent-per-gallon gas tax, used to fund road repairs, bridges, and public transport. The state is looking at a $216.4 billion revenue shortfall over the next decade due to increasing fuel economy and electric vehicles. The other Democratic candidates support keeping the tax; Mahan has instead proposed a flat fee on all vehicles.

He said: “I’m the only candidate on this stage who has pledged to suspend and then reform the gas tax. It is the most regressive tax in California. Working people, rural people, are spending three times as much maintaining our roads as wealthier EV owners.”

On the wildfire insurance crisis he said: “The government in Sacramento created so many restrictions, including taking over a year to approve any rate changes, prohibiting insurance companies from using climate data to project future costs, that they stopped writing new policies. The answer is bring them back, force them to compete, allow them to appropriately price risk, and then hold government accountable for maintaining our wildland, reducing all that vegetation and wildfire risk so that we don’t have these catastrophic fires.”

Antonio Villaraigosa

The former Democratic L.A. mayor expressed his concerns with the readiness of the state’s infrastructure to support a transition to electric vehicles.

“We need an all of the above strategy that understands we’ve got to transition from oil and gas to renewables. But here’s an example: the 2035 mandate [to ban gas-powered car sales]. We built 167,000 charging stations in the last 10 years. We need 2 million more to get to that mandate, and if we build them, we don’t have a grid. So we ought to build the grid instead of arguing about whether or not we need an all-of-the-above policy.”

WASHINGTON — The State Department said that it is preparing a limited release of commemorative U.S. passports celebrating America’s 250th birthday that feature a picture of President Trump, who would be the first living president to be featured in the travel document.

The concept for the special passport, including a rendering of Trump’s stern-looking visage, had been under consideration for months before finally being approved late Monday and publicly announced Tuesday. Between 25,000 and 30,000 of the new passports will be available to applicants at the Washington passport office beginning shortly before July 4.

It’s the latest instance of Trump having his name and likeness added to buildings, documents and other highly visible tributes. There are efforts to put Trump’s signature on all new U.S. paper currency, also a first for a sitting president, as well as to include his image on a gold commemorative coin to celebrate the country’s founding.

The commemorative passport will be the default document for people applying in person at the Washington office, although those who want a standard passport will be able to get one by applying online or outside Washington, officials said.

“As the United States celebrates America’s 250th anniversary in July, the State Department is preparing to release a limited number of specially designed U.S. passports to commemorate this historic occasion,” State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott said.

“These passports will feature customized artwork and enhanced imagery while maintaining the same security features that make the U.S. passport the most secure documents in the world,” he said.

The limited release passport will feature Trump’s picture over a gold imprimatur of his signature to an interior page, while the cover will feature the words “United States of America” in bold gold print at the top and “Passport” at the bottom — a reversal of the standard cover.

In addition, a small gold laminate American flag, with the number 250 encircled by stars, will be at the bottom of the back cover.

The Bulwark reported earlier on the commemorative passports.

The only presidents featured in current U.S. passports are in a double-page depiction of Mount Rushmore in South Dakota — George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.

Other depictions include the Statue of Liberty, the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall in Philadelphia, and scenes of the Great Plains, mountains and islands. Current passports also contain quotations from Martin Luther King Jr. as well as Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Dwight Eisenhower.

The addition of Trump’s picture and signature to the passport book is the newest step his aides have taken to increase the president’s visibility, including adding his name to the U.S. Institute of Peace building and the Kennedy Center performing arts venue.

Trump also has made waves with his plans for a new White House ballroom and a massive arch to be built at one of the entrances to Washington from Virginia.

Lee writes for the Associated Press.

One judge claims his colleagues have adopted a “gangster mentality” in order to shut him up.

Another compared the state board accusing him of serious misconduct to “the Russian mafia.”

Judicial elections are usually sleepy affairs, subject to little political fanfare or interest. But two battles on the June ballot in Los Angeles have raised the temperature this campaign season and invited questions about the lengths members of the insular local bench will go to protect their own.

Lawyers who aspire to become judge often run for open seats. The challengers in these races, however, say they specifically targeted incumbents they believe are unfit for the office, which carries an annual salary of more than $244,000.

One of the contests could unseat 84-year-old Judge Robert Draper, who is seeking reelection despite having spent the last three years relegated to a room at the Santa Monica courthouse without a computer or caseload, which two other judges described to The Times as a “closet.”

In 2023, then-Presiding Justice Samantha Jessner said Draper was “unable to carry out the duties and responsibilities of a judge” due to deteriorating mental and physical health, according to a letter she sent to the state’s Commission on Judicial Performance.

Draper denied all wrongdoing in an interview with The Times, and said that although he has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, he remains fit for the bench. He has also been accused of sexual harassment and making improper and biased comments by the judicial commission. He is contesting those claims. A hearing that could result in his removal began Monday and is expected to last into early May.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Paul Thompson at Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center in Los Angeles.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

The other incumbent fighting to save his seat is Judge Pat Connolly, 61, a former prosecutor who has drawn support from several other sitting L.A. County judges. But his opponent, Deputy Dist. Atty. Paul Thompson, has called Connolly a “rogue judge” who needs to be replaced.

Connolly has been disciplined multiple times in his 18-year judicial tenure for improper comments toward litigants and, in one case, exhibiting bias against a defense attorney against whom he was weighing contempt charges, according to state judicial commission records.

Thompson, who gained notoriety for his role winning a rape conviction against Harvey Weinstein, purchased the rights to the domain name “patconnolly4judge.com,” which now redirects to one of the commission’s admonishments of Connolly.

“What I see is a man who repeatedly prioritizes his own goodwill over that of the community and the public he is serving … a man who has been repeatedly disciplined for prioritizing his own interests,” said Thompson, who has been endorsed by the L.A. County Democratic Party.

In a bizarre turn, the race was linked to the recent shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner after conservative influencers posted a picture of a Thompson campaign sign on the Torrance lawn of the suspected gunman, Cole Tomas Allen.

Thompson lives next door to the Allen family and described the suspect’s parents as great neighbors. He said he didn’t know their son and dismissed “internet trolls” for trying to tie his campaign to political violence.

This year’s election has sparked conversations about the unwavering support incumbent judges seem to enjoy among their colleagues.

Despite the concerns about Draper’s health, a political action committee run by fellow judges gave $72,500 to his campaign, state election finance records show. The PAC gave the same amount to Connolly.

Judge Maria Lucy Armendariz, who oversees the PAC, did not return a call seeking comment.

“The PAC has some explaining to do here. Why is there this show of support for someone who is facing so many challenges?” asked Laurie Levenson, a former federal prosecutor who now teaches at Loyola Law School. “It doesn’t reflect well on the bench.”

Deputy Dist. Atty. Tal Khan Valbuena at Grand Park in downtown Los Angeles.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Draper’s opponent is Deputy Dist. Atty. Tal Khan Valbuena, a refugee from Pakistan who works in the Hollywood mental health court. Khan Valbuena believes his lived experience as a gay Muslim who has faced bigotry will bring a compassionate perspective to a bench some complain is overrun with old-school tough-on-crime prosecutors.

But he also expressed concern about Draper’s mental decline after meeting him for lunch earlier this year.

“His honor had exemplified disorganized thought behavior, tangential thought … things I see on a day-to-day basis [in mental health court],” Khan Valbuena said, while acknowledging that he is not a doctor.

The Los Angeles County Bar Assn. issued its ratings for every judicial candidate last week. Connolly graded best among the judges in the contentious races, described as “well qualified.” Thompson and Khan Valubena were rated as “qualified.” Draper was one of only three candidates labeled “unqualified.”

In 2022, Judge Eric Taylor said he noticed a sharp change in Draper’s behavior that included sending “abusive” and “incoherent” e-mails to colleagues that contained racist and profane language, according to a letter Taylor sent to the state judicial commission.

“He has demonstrated a flagging handle on reality,” Taylor wrote.

Draper was accused of sexual harassment, making racist remarks and callous behavior all over the course of one hearing. According to the state judicial complaint and testimony at Draper’s removal hearing on Monday, the judge allegedly stroked a female lawyer’s hair after going on a tangent to a Black attorney about “Black history, Black football players, the Civil Rights Act, and the Black Lives Matter movement,” even though the case had nothing to do with those issues.

Judge Robert Draper outside the Ronald Reagan Federal Building in Los Angeles.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Later in chambers that same day, he made crude remarks to a group of female attorneys while reflecting on his time as a civil attorney, recalling how male lawyers would deride female secretaries, insisting they learn to “f— better than they could type,” according to testimony given by attorney Janice Brown at Draper’s hearing.

Brown told the review panel that Draper’s behavior left her “aghast” and “perplexed.”

Draper denied much of what was in the complaint. He says that he never touched a lawyer’s hair, and that the comments about Black culture were meant to express his pride at racial progress in America. He criticized the Commission on Judicial Performance.

“This is like the Russian mafia, it’s like Germany,” he said. “There’s no due process for any judge.”

Draper’s attorney, Ashley Posner, said his client would routinely walk up seven flights of stairs when he was assigned to the downtown Stanley Mosk courthouse and remains sharp.

“Things were set up to portray him in the worst light possible … he’s been portrayed as a bigot. He’s been portrayed as doddering and demented, which couldn’t be further from the truth,” Posner said.

In court on Monday, Posner suggested the complaint was part of a broader campaign to force Draper to retire and accused the L.A. County Superior Court’s leadership of ageism. A court spokesperson said they could not comment on personnel matters.

The race between Connolly and Thompson has also focused heavily on alleged misconduct.

Connolly’s past admonishments by the state commission include complaints that he yelled at attorneys for appearing remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge also told a recently acquitted defendant that he knew the man was guilty, records show.

“I don’t think it’s as much what I’ve said as how I have said it. I think that they have taken issue with the terms that I’ve used,” Connolly said, noting he has never been accused of ethical violations or moral impropriety.

L.A. County Superior Court Judge Pat Connolly at the Compton Courthouse.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

A legal expert raised questions in 2023 about the propriety of Connolly seeking to disqualify a fellow judge from ruling on a petition to resentence a convicted cop killer that Connolly had prosecuted in the late 2000s. The state commission is also currently reviewing two additional complaints against Connolly, according to e-mails seen by The Times. Connolly said he couldn’t comment on either situation.

In an interview with The Times, Connolly said he was surprised by the “venom” Thompson had injected into the race.

He said he sees himself as a fair jurist with a knack for finding creative solutions to cases that balance public safety and alternatives to incarceration. In 2022, court records show, he negotiated a plea deal for an NFL player facing prison time for weapons charges, ordering him to organize sports camps for underprivileged youth.

“I’m one of those who listens to both sides, who gives both sides the opportunity to voice their positions,” he said.

Connolly enjoys the support of many sitting judges and law enforcement leaders, including former Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley and the head of the court’s criminal division, Ricardo Ocampo.

Thompson says some of Connolly’s allies on the bench have come after his supporters.

When Thompson launched his campaign, he published an endorsement from L.A. County Superior Court Judge Scott Yang on his campaign website. Within weeks, Thompson said, Yang asked him to take the endorsement down, claiming he was being pressured by other judges.

Yang, who presides over a court in the Antelope Valley, said his colleagues on the bench exhibited a “gangster mentality” when they told him to withdraw his endorsement in a judicial election, according to a text message reviewed by The Times.

“They were going to target him. They were going to run at him. They were potentially going to make false disciplinary reports around him,” Thompson said.

Connolly was not accused of being involved in the alleged harassment and declined to discuss the matter. Yang did not respond to multiple requests for comment. A court spokesperson said they had not received any reports of threats made against Yang, but a law enforcement source said Yang told them he was harassed by fellow judges over his endorsement of Thompson. The source spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from the bench.

The conflict has generated whispers among L.A. County judges, one of whom requested anonymity due to concerns of backlash for speaking publicly. Word of the threats against Yang, the judge said, left some fearing they too could face retribution for breaking ranks.

“It’s totally concerning,” the judge said. “How different is that than the deputy gangs?”

John Seymour was the rare politician who didn’t mind harming his career if it meant doing right by his constituents.

As the newly elected mayor of Anaheim in 1978, he angered the city’s Police Department by suggesting the creation of a citizens oversight commission after residents complained that officers regularly harassed and beat them.

The lifelong Republican upset his party’s conservative base in the 1980s as a state senator, when he announced his support for abortion rights and opposition to offshore drilling.

“I’m not going to always be right,” Seymour told reporters in 1990. “Therefore, to expect one to never change a position on an issue … is too much to ask.”

Appointed to the U.S. Senate in 1990 after Pete Wilson was elected governor, Seymour lost his seat to Dianne Feinstein two years later and never ran for public office again. He remains the last California Republican to serve in that role.

“John was a guy who had great courage, he had great goodwill and a damn good mind,” Wilson, who was mayor of San Diego when he first met Seymour in the 1970s, said Monday. “He not only enjoyed a little combat, he was willing to give the time necessary for it.”

Seymour died on April 18 at his home in Carlsbad. He was 88, and the cause was Alzheimer’s disease, according to his son John.

As his party swung to the right, the moderate Seymour had no problem with becoming a political afterthought.

Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, center, poses with senators on Capitol Hill in 1991. With Thomas, from left to right, are Sens. John Seymour (R-Calif.), Larry Craig (R-Idaho), Bob Dole (R-Kan.), Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), Connie Mack (R-Fla.) and Dan Coats (R-Ind.), right front.

(John Duricka / Associated Press)

“If somewhere in a footnote, history should record my public service, I would hope that they record me as one who cared more for people than for policy, one who was a no-nonsense guy who worked hard for those in need of help, but who wasn’t hesitant to knock heads of bureaucrats in order to get things done,” he told supporters at the kickoff to his Senate campaign in 1992.

Born in Chicago, Seymour settled in Southern California in the 1960s after a stint in the Marine Corps. The UCLA graduate started a real estate business in Orange County as the region transformed from farmland to suburbia. After four years on the Anaheim City Council, he became mayor in 1978.

He quickly established the pragmatic persona that would enable his rise in California politics.

Months after Seymour’s mayoral win, Anaheim police officers stormed a Latino neighborhood and beat up dozens of people in what became known as the Little People’s Park riots. At community meetings, Seymour admitted his shock at learning about the poor relations between the police and many residents.

The mayor described his approach as: “Don’t sweep it under the rug; don’t look the other way. Admit that we have a problem.”

At the same time, Seymour was negotiating with the Los Angeles Rams to move from the Coliseum to Orange County. While other O.C. officials proposed a new stadium, he convinced the Anaheim City Council to convert Angel Stadium into a multipurpose venue that he argued would create “the greatest opportunity for Anaheim since Disneyland and the California Angels.”

The Rams moved to the city in 1980. Two years later, Seymour was off to Sacramento as a state senator.

He became head of the Republican Senate caucus in his first year and bucked the stereotype of an Orange County GOP firebrand by largely eschewing culture war issues in favor of matters like higher pay for teachers and government support for poor parents that sometimes aligned him with Democrats. That made him few friends in his own party, with many finding his personal ambition grating — he once wrote a letter to then-Gov. George Deukmejian asking that he be appointed state treasurer — and a distraction from getting more of their own elected to Sacramento.

Seymour made no apologies for selling himself as a public servant while simultaneously seeking more power.

“I like to do things,” Seymour told The Times in 1987. “I’ve been a doer all my life. I don’t like to sit around sucking my thumb. I like to resolve problems.”

That year, conservative opponents deposed him as caucus chair. They snickered two years later when he announced that while he personally opposed abortion, he now supported a woman’s right to choose.

Sen. John Seymour in 1991.

(Don Boomer / For The Times)

The impetus was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that gave states more leeway to regulate abortion. Since California had legalized the procedure decades earlier, Seymour reasoned that he should respect women’s choices. He spoke with people who were for and against abortion, and with his own family, before going public with his change of heart.

Naysayers accused the state senator of trying to pick up female voters as he was campaigning for the Republican nomination for lieutenant governor against fellow Orange County legislator Marian Bergeson, who opposed abortion. The charge was bogus, according to longtime Seymour campaign advisor Eileen Padberg.

“He didn’t get talked into it — he was an effing Marine,” she said. “He had to be convinced in anything before making a decision. In my career representing hundreds of candidates, John was one of very few who consistently would say about their stances, ‘This is going to kill me, but I gotta do it.’”

Seymour lost the primary to Bergeson. Six months later, he was once again one of the most powerful Republicans in the state when he took the Senate seat Wilson had just vacated to become governor.

Seymour’s son John recalled his father getting the call from Wilson while the family was vacationing in Shasta.

“Dad knew that it was a heavy, weighted responsibility, and that it would affect the family,” John said. “But we kids said, ‘You should do this, if it makes you happy.’”

Seymour became the second Anaheim Republican to serve in the position, after Thomas Kuchel in the 1950s and 1960s.

Wilson told The Times that he originally wanted to keep his friend in Sacramento to help push through his agenda. But the governor figured he needed a trusted voice in Washington even more.

“You’re looking for people who are not only friends but are capable and experienced and understand what’s necessary,” Wilson said. “And I don’t think I was doing him a great favor, because it was a tough time for the state.”

California was weathering its worst recession in decades and a punishing drought. The state’s vaunted defense industry was shedding tens of thousands of jobs with the closure of military bases after the end of the Cold War.

The daunting task didn’t faze Seymour.

“I mean, you gotta be good to succeed in the private sector,” he told The Times in 1992. “But if you’re gonna succeed in getting things done in the public sector, you gotta be better than that! That’s the challenge!”

Seymour spent most of his short time in the Senate in triage mode. He lobbied especially hard for California’s real estate industry, calling himself the “realtors’ senator.” But the diminutive man’s plainspoken demeanor failed to gain traction with California voters — a 1991 Times profile deemed him “the unknown senator.” And his one moment in the national spotlight became fodder for opponents.

In the spring of 1992, Los Angeles erupted in deadly riots after a jury acquitted four police officers who beat Rodney King. As he once did in Anaheim, Seymour went on a listening tour across affected neighborhoods, accompanying President George H.W. Bush.

This time, Seymour was accused of seeking photo opportunities a month before his primary election and being tone-deaf to the riot’s root causes by airing television ads stating, “We can’t be tough enough on lawbreakers.” White House aides ridiculed him in the press as the “Velcro senator.” His Republican opponent, Orange County Rep. William Dannemeyer, labeled him “Senator Flip Flop.”

Seymour easily beat Dannemeyer, then faced Democrat Dianne Feinstein, the former San Francisco mayor whose narrow loss to Wilson in the governor’s race had earned her widespread name recognition. He received only 38% of the vote as Feinstein rode a Democratic wave that swept Bill Clinton into the White House and a record number of women into the U.S. Senate, including Barbara Boxer in California.

California Department of Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer worked for Seymour at the time and saw his “regular guy” boss give “one of the kindest and most gracious concession speeches I’ve ever heard.”

“Then he went down to O.C. to be with his supporters,” Palmer said. “He was true to his roots.”

Wilson soon appointed Seymour to head the California Housing Finance Agency, which helps first-time home buyers access low-rate loans. He stayed in that role for two years before becoming chief executive of the Southern California Housing Development Corp. The Inland Empire nonprofit, which managed and built affordable housing complexes, is now known as National Community Renaissance, or National CORE.

John, who is the nonprofit’s vice president of acquisitions, said his father had no regrets about leaving politics behind because “housing was his passion. He saw it as a platform for people to grow. He would say, ‘Once you’re housed, you have a big, beautiful horizon to do anything.’”

Seymour did lean on his past to urge skeptical cities and counties to allow affordable housing projects, challenging them to be like him: do the right thing regardless of political cost.

“If in fact you’re going to try to change an environment in which a mayor or city council will do what they know in their hearts is right, you need to offset the political blow,” he said at a housing conference in Cathedral City in 2002. “I challenge you to form a coalition.”

Seymour is survived by his wife of 54 years, Judy; children John, Shad, Jeffrey, Barrett, Lisa Houser and Sarena Talbert; nine grandchildren and eight great-grandchildren.

Maj. Gen. George S. Patton, a career Army officer who served in the Korean and Vietnam wars and was the son of the legendary World War II general of the same name, has died. He was 80.

Patton suffered from a form of Parkinson’s disease and died Sunday in Hamilton, Mass., said his wife, Joanne.

In a four-decade military career, Patton twice earned the Distinguished Service Cross, the nation’s second-highest medal for bravery in combat. He also earned a Purple Heart for wounds received during one of his three tours of duty in Vietnam.

Born George Smith Patton IV in Boston, he legally changed his name by dropping the Roman numeral. Patton graduated from West Point and later earned a master’s degree in international affairs at George Washington University.

His father, also a West Point graduate, led U.S. troops in North Africa and Europe during World War II.

Father and son both commanded the Army’s 2nd Armored Division, the younger taking command at Ft. Hood, Texas, in 1975. The senior Patton commanded the 2nd Armored in North Africa during World War II. He was fatally injured in a traffic accident in Europe in 1945.

The younger Patton retired in 1980 and lived in Hamilton, northeast of Boston, where he established a farm that sold blueberries, strawberries and other produce. He named the fields after soldiers who died under his command in Vietnam.

“Although he was very proud of his father, he was also very, very sensitive to comparisons and always asked that any reference to his lineage be dropped from any reports written about him,” said his son, Robert, of Darien, Conn.

But as his father did, Patton once said he believed in reincarnation.

During a training mission in Germany, he found himself at a spot where a Napoleonic battle had been fought. He was overcome with a feeling, like the ones experienced by his father during World War II, that he had once been in combat there.

Besides his wife and son Robert, he is survived by two other sons; two daughters; six grandchildren; and a great-grandson. He will be buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

It’s become predictable in this tempestuous campaign season: First Lady Michelle Obama, who has chosen fighting childhood obesity as her favorite cause, utters something that seems judgmental about healthy eating, and conservatives pounce. (Nor is her husband immune to criticism for the ruckus he causes when he steps out for a bite.)

The pattern repeated itself Tuesday, as the right-leaning chattering classes reacted to an exchange Obama had with Olympic gymnastics gold medalist Gabrielle Douglas when the two appeared Monday on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.”

Obama had already done her segment with Leno, discussing how she and her husband messed up, then redeemed, their “kiss cam” moment at a recent basketball game, and how her Secret Service detail reacted when U.S. Olympic weightlifter Elena Pirozhkova hoisted her during the London Games. (“Fortunately, they didn’t take her down,” said the first lady.)

Leno asked her to stick around for his visit with Douglas, and Obama happily obliged.

When Leno asked about whether the teensy athlete, who generally eats a restrictive, protein-heavy diet, splurged after winning her gold medal for best individual all-around gymnast, Obama’s teasing response provoked predictable criticism. “You train your whole life, you win. How did you celebrate and what did you do?” Leno asked Douglas.

Douglas, who looked adorable in a black leather jacket, said she wasn’t able to celebrate right away because she had team finals coming up. “But after the competition,” she said, “I splurged on an Egg McMuffin at McDonalds.”

“Egg McMuffin?” Leno asked brightly.

Obama leaned toward Douglas. “Yeah, Gabby, don’t encourage him. I’m sure it was on a whole wheat McMuffin.”

“Oh, on a whole wheat bun,” Leno said. “So an Egg McMuffin, very good.”

Obama pretended to chastise the gymnast: “You’re setting me back, Gabby.”

“Sorry!” Douglas replied.

The spin machinery sprang into action: “Michelle Obama Lectures Gold Medal Gymnast about Eating One Egg McMuffin,” said the headline on a blog post on Town Hall, the conservative website.

Calling her a “food cop,” Reason’s website went with “Michelle Obama Makes Gabby Douglas apologize for Celebrating her Olympic Gold Medals with an Egg McMuffin.”

Many outlets noted that an Egg McMuffin packs a mere 300 calories and is hardly a serious arterial threat, particularly as a splurge.

If the conservative reaction seems a little over the top, it should probably be noted that Obama’s anti-obesity campaign has also struck fear into the heart of the most powerful man in the free world, already known for his healthy eating habits. Monday morning, President Obama told supporters in Council Bluffs, Iowa, that he was happy to be back in the state that gave him his first important victory in the 2008 presidential campaign.

“I think I’m going to end at the state fair,” he told the crowd, referring to every presidential candidate’s obligatory stop at Iowa’s signal summer event, where crowds delight in hideously caloric fried foods and a refrigerated life-size bovine sculpture.

“Michelle has told me I cannot have a fried Twinkie,” said the president. “But I will be checking out the butter cow, and I understand this year there’s a chocolate moose. So I’m going to have to take a look at that if I can.”

He did avoid the Twinkies, but it cannot be said that he opted for a health-food alternative. He sampled pork chops — though not on a stick, an Iowa favorite — and washed them down with a beer.

Later, according to the Des Moines Register, Republican Iowa Sen. Charles E. Grassley set off another Obama food controversy when he tweeted that the president’s visit to the fair’s popular beer tent had cost its proprietor thousands of dollars in lost revenue.

“How does PresO justify havin secret service shut down the bud tent @ the state fair dn the owner told me he loses 50,000 n 1 nite,” tweeted Iowa’s senior senator.

The ticked-off proprietor, a Republican who does not plan to vote for Obama, told the Register that his losses were more like $25,000, which would have come from fairgoers attending a concert of the rock cover band Hairball on an adjacent stage. The disgruntled owner, Mike Cunningham II, told the Register’s Kyle Munson, “I was in a position to make a campaign donation against my will.”

Follow Politics Now on Twitter

robin.abcarian@latimes.com

Twitter: @robinabcarian

BELGRADE, Yugoslavia — Secretary of State James A. Baker III admitted Friday that he was unable to dissuade Yugoslavia’s independence-minded republics from breaking up the 73-year-old federation.

“What I heard here today has not allayed my concerns, nor will it allay the concerns of others” in the U.S. Administration and the international community, Baker said after spending almost 10 hours in meetings with federal officials and the presidents of all six constituent republics.

Slovenia has announced that it will declare independence next Wednesday and Croatia has indicated that it will follow suit.

“We think the situation is very serious,” Baker said. “We worry about history repeating itself.”

Baker was clearly alluding to the 1914 assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo that touched off World War I, as well as a bloody civil war between Serbs and Croats that raged during World War II.

Speaking to reporters after talks with Prime Minister Ante Markovic, Baker called on all Yugoslavs to settle their differences peacefully without “violence or bloodshed or force.”

Although clearly directed at all contending parties, Baker’s words seemed to be especially intended as a warning against the use of military force by the federal government to prevent any of the republics from breaking away.

Markovic issued a veiled warning in a speech to the federal Parliament earlier in the day that his government might call in the army to block either Slovenia or Croatia from withdrawing from the federation.

He warned that if any republic declares unilateral independence, his government would “take measures which will secure the necessary conditions for settlement of problems democratically, through negotiations.”

The federal government has conceded that the complex Balkan nation must be restructured, but it objects to any of the republics withdrawing without the approval of the others. A fruitless series of negotiations among republic leaders broke down last month after the federal presidency collapsed when Serbian delegates refused to permit the Croatian representative to take his turn as president under the country’s unique rotation procedure.

Baker called for a resumption of the dialogue and for prompt action to fill the presidency. The presidential crisis aggravates a leadership vacuum at the federal level. Although generally supported by the international community, Markovic was not elected by the public and his economic policies have been widely ignored by the republics.

“We believe that everyone is interested in finding a way, through dialogue and negotiations, to craft a new basis of unity for Yugoslavia,” Baker said.

U.S. officials said that Washington will not take sides in the debate over restructuring the federation but will oppose strongly its breakup.

Baker said flatly that the United States would not recognize Slovenian independence if the republic goes through with its plans next week.

Slovenian President Milan Kucan yielded no ground in his meeting with Baker. He later told reporters that the republic has no intention of changing its independence timetable.

A federal government official from Slovenia, Ivo Vajgl, said that Slovenia’s Wednesday independence day is “not negotiable.”

Although the other republics might be willing to permit Slovenia to leave the federation, Serbia is adamantly opposed to Croatian independence because of the 600,000-member Serbian minority in Croatia. Moreover, relations between Serbia and Croatia have been strained for centuries, reaching their low point during World War II when more than half of the 1.7 million Yugoslavs who died were killed by other Yugoslavs.

Serbia has vowed to resist with all of its force any attempt by Croatia to leave the federation.

At least 24 people have died in ethnic violence in the last two months.

Yugoslav Foreign Minister Budimir Loncar, standing at Baker’s side, said that Yugoslavia is in “a very deep crisis, of very much concern to our old friends abroad.”

Earlier, Loncar was asked if Slovenia’s withdrawal would mark the end of Yugoslavia. He said Slovenia’s action will produce important changes “but the end of Yugoslavia, it will definitely not be.”

At the same time they are trying to head off independence movements, federal officials have sought to minimize the impact of the action.

Baker visited Belgrade immediately after a meeting of foreign ministers of the 35-nation Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which adopted a statement warning Yugoslavia that it risks losing international economic and political support if it breaks up.

In his talks in Yugoslavia, Baker emphasized that European leaders would ostracize independent republics. The Europeans are concerned that civil war in Yugoslavia would produce devastating consequences for its neighbors, including a probable wave of millions of refugees.

Secession of any Yugoslav republic also could rekindle ethnic animosities in other Eastern European countries such as the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Romania.

Baker said that he would confer with European leaders before deciding on his next step.

The top candidates for California governor clashed over the high costs of gas, housing and homeowner’s insurance in a testy debate Tuesday evening, a fiery exchange that may finally draw voter attention as the June 2 primary election fast approaches.

Former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, whose campaign blossomed after former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out amid sexual assault and misconduct allegations, came under persistent attack during the 90-minute debate but also went on the offensive.

Former Fox News host Steve Hilton, a Republican who leads all candidates in the most recent opinion polls, ripped Becerra for promising to declare a state of emergency to address rising homeowner’s insurance rates, saying the governor lacks that constitutional authority.

“We can’t have a governor who doesn’t understand how the government works,” Hilton said.

Becerra, who served as California attorney general before joining the Biden administration, quickly defended himself, saying he knows the law better than Hilton does.

“We don’t need a talking head from Fox News to tell us how the government works,” he said.

And that was after Becerra got in an early dig at Hilton, who has been endorsed by President Trump, by referring to Trump as “Hilton’s daddy.”

The debate was broadcast and livestreamed by CBS stations around the state. Hundreds of people watched from Pomona College’s historic Bridges Auditorium, a Renaissance Revival-style landmark with Art Deco flourishes that was once among the premier performance venues in Southern California.

With eight major candidates from both parties participating, CBS moderators billed it as “the largest and most inclusive debate of the election.” Becerra and Hilton were joined by Republican candidate Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Democratic candidates San José Mayor Matt Mahan, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, billionaire Tom Steyer, state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

Some takeaways from the debate:

Candidates didn’t shy away from the top issues

Moderators set the theme for the first half-hour of the debate as “affordability,” a top concern among California voters, and almost immediately the candidates began sniping and talking over one another.

Almost all of them vowed to accelerate home construction in California, pivotal to reducing the state’s high cost of housing.

There was no shortage of ideas for other ways to ease the financial burdens facing Californians, but few specifics on how they would deliver on those promises given the state’s complex and arduous legislative process.

Hilton promised to cap the price of gas at $3 per gallon, and Mahan vowed to suspend the state gas tax. Bianco said Democrats have long overregulated and overtaxed Californians, and the state’s supermajority Democratic Legislature would have to get in line with him and end those things if he’s elected.

Becerra said he would reduce prescription drug prices. Thurmond said he would provide down-payment assistance grants to those trying to own their first home.

Barbs traded over climate-caused emergencies

Anchors and reporters from local CBS stations moderated the debate, including Los Angeles anchor Pat Harvey, Sacramento anchor Tony Lopez, Bay Area anchor Ryan Yamamoto and national investigative correspondent Julie Watts. They were joined by Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College and a member of California’s independent redistricting commission.

Moderators pointed to the surge in catastrophic wildfires across the state in recent years due to climate change, as well as the threat of earthquakes, and asked the candidates how they would respond to future emergencies.

As he did throughout most of the debate, Bianco responded by bashing California’s Democratic leadership, which he said created most of the ills facing the state.

Bianco said the root causes of fire disasters in the state are “not because of climate change” but due to “failed environmental activist policies” that prevented fire departments from clearing highly flammable brush around communities for years.

Mahan, after touting his actions as a Silicon Valley mayor during emergencies, quickly pivoted to take shots at Becerra and his role as U.S. Health and Human Services secretary during the pandemic.

He said Becerra had “never met a crisis that he couldn’t ignore” and accused Becerra of failing to deal with COVID-19, monkeypox and the surge of unaccompanied minors at the U.S.-Mexico border during the Biden administration.

Becerra responded by saying that his agency dealt with the crises by working with all 50 states and the federal government to quickly roll out vaccines and other resources.

“You’re not wearing a mask, are you, Matt? You’re not worried about catching monkeypox, right?” Becerra said.

Steyer also came under attack when he starting discussing his plans to “make polluters pay” for the effects of climate change. Porter criticized the former San Francisco hedge-fund founder for making millions off the oil and gas industry, and using those profits to fund his campaign for governor. Steyer has spent more than $143 million of his own money on his campaign, according to fundraising disclosures filed with the California secretary of state’s office.

“How about profiteers pay? You pay the lowest tax rate on this stage, and yet you made the billions that you’re using to fund your campaign off fossil fuels,” Porter said to Steyer.

Steyer responded that he is a “change agent” candidate opposed by special interests and pointed to campaign committees funded by utility and other industry groups opposing his bid. PG&E, the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Assn. of Realtors have put more than $29 million into a pair of committees to fund attack ads against the billionaire.

Republicans focus on blaming Democrats

Just weeks before the June 2 primary, the race to replace term-limited Newsom remains wide open, with many voters still undecided.

Republicans Hilton and Bianco have led numerous public opinion polls while the large field of Democrats have split the vote, leading to fears among Democrats that the party could get shut out of the general election, despite outnumbering Republicans nearly two-to-one among the state’s registered voters. In California’s open primary, the top two finishers advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation.

The two Republicans avoided overtly attacking each other at the debate but were regularly the targets of other candidates on the stage.

Becerra, speaking about federal healthcare funding cuts approved by President Trump and congressional Republicans last year, referred to the president’s endorsement of Hilton. “The first thing we have to do is stop Steve Hilton’s daddy,” Becerra said.

Hilton responded jokingly that his father, who was the goalie for the Hungarian national ice hockey team, hadn’t weighed in on the race. And he said Becerra’s comment pointed to what is wrong with California politics — a fixation on Trump despite Democrats controlling the state for more than a decade.

“We’ve had the same people in charge for 16 years now, and it’s such a disaster and such a high cost of living for everyone, and the highest poverty rate in the country and the highest unemployment rate in the country, and the worst business plan,” Hilton said. “All these things going wrong, they can’t do anything except blame Trump. Let’s see how many times you hear that tonight.”

Bianco grew visibly frustrated several times over the debate’s format and his opponents’ answers. At different points, he compared the event to “The Twilight Zone” and called it “the hour and a half that [viewers] are never going to get back.”

Pressed on what he would do differently if elected, the Riverside sheriff also focused on criticizing Democrats and accusing them of lying.

“We have a group of of 20-ish-year-old kids and we’re just sitting here lying to them about broken Democrat policies in California for the last 20 years, and we’re going to sit here and blame a president who’s been president for a year. This is absolutely ridiculous,” he said.

Hilton has seen a bump in his polling numbers since he was endorsed by President Trump earlier this month. A CBS News/YouGov poll of more than 1,400 registered voters released Monday showed Hilton leading with 16%, followed by Steyer with 15%, Becerra with 13%, Bianco with 10%, Porter with 9%, Mahan and Villaraigosa with 4% and Thurmond with 1%. The largest group of voters — 26% — was undecided.

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta reported from Claremont. Times staff writers Kevin Rector, Dakota Smith and Blanca Begert contributed to this report.

BILLINGS, Mont. — President Trump is withdrawing his nomination of a hospitality company executive to lead the National Park Service, the White House announced Monday.

The withdrawal of nominee Scott Socha comes as the park service has been shaken by widespread firings as part of the Trump administration’s pledge to sharply reduce its size.

Socha said in a statement that he was dropping out of consideration for the post for personal reasons.

The park service is currently overseen by an acting director, agency comptroller Jessica Bowron. It did not have a Senate-confirmed director during Trump’s first term, when it was led by a series of acting directors.

Socha is president for parks and resorts at Buffalo, N.Y.-based Delaware North, which has service contracts with numerous parks and describes itself as one of the world’s largest privately owned entertainment and hospitality companies. A White House spokesperson had said when he was nominated in February that Socha was “totally qualified” to execute Trump’s plans for the park system.

But some conservation groups had questioned whether Socha’s private sector work provided the experience he would need to oversee hundreds of national parks and monuments that range from the Statue of Liberty and other cultural sites to remote sites in the Utah desert.

The Associated Press sent email messages to the White House and the Interior Department seeking comment on Socha’s withdrawal.

Thousands of employees have been fired or otherwise left the park service since Trump took office.

Emily Douce with the National Parks Conservation Assn., an advocacy group, said Monday that the next director for the service needs to “undo the damage.”

“It’s very unfortunate that our parks have gone more than a year without a permanent director at a time when they need strong, steady leadership the most,” Douce said.

The Republican administration’s proposed budget for next year would reduce staffing to 9,200 employees. That’s down almost 30% compared to 2025 levels.

The park service’s operating budget would be cut by more than $1 billion, to $2.2 billion, for the 2027 fiscal year that starts in October.

Similar cuts proposed for 2026 were blocked by lawmakers in Congress after park supporters and former employees warned the administration’s proposal would have effectively gutted the agency.

The administration also has faced blowback for the removal or planned removal of national park exhibits about slavery, climate change and the destruction of Native American culture. In February, a federal judge said an exhibit about nine people enslaved by George Washington must be restored at Washington’s former home in Philadelphia after the Trump administration had taken it down.

Administration officials have said they are removing “disparaging” messages under an order last year from Trump. Critics accuse it of trying to whitewash the nation’s history.

Under Trump’s interior secretary, Doug Burgum, the park service has started charging millions of international tourists who visit U.S. parks each year $100 each to visit sites including Yellowstone and Grand Canyon. The service also has put Trump’s image onto its annual passes for U.S. citizens, drawing a lawsuit from environmentalists who said the move was illegal.

Brown writes for the Associated Press.

BOISE, Idaho — Former Idaho Gov. and U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has died at age 74, his family said in a written statement Saturday.

Kempthorne died Friday evening in Boise, the statement said. No cause was given. He had been diagnosed with colon cancer last year.

“Beyond his public service, he was a devoted husband, father, and grandfather whose greatest joy came from time spent with family and the people he met along the way,” his family said. “He had a rare gift for truly seeing others — remembering names, stories, and the small details that made each person feel known and valued.”

Kempthorne, a moderate Republican, was elected mayor of Boise in 1985 at age 34, and he was credited with revitalizing the downtown by securing an agreement to build a convention center and promoting other development. He served seven years before winning the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Sen. Steve Symms in 1992.

During his time in Washington, he authored legislation — signed by Democratic President Clinton — to end unfunded federal mandates on state and local governments.

Rather than run for reelection in 1998, he entered an open election for governor, trouncing his Democratic opponent by garnering more than two-thirds of the vote.

President George W. Bush appointed him Interior secretary in 2006, a position he held until the end of Bush’s presidency — and during which he lived on a houseboat docked in the Potomac River.

“Dirk was one of the finest public servants I ever knew because he was one of the finest men,” former President George W. Bush said in a written statement Saturday. “He was considerate, smart, and capable. Dirk loved our lands and waters, and as Secretary of the Interior, he was an effective steward of our natural resources.”

He protected polar bears

Environmentalists often found Kempthorne too accommodating to industry, citing his efforts to push oil and gas development in the Gulf of Mexico and off Alaska. More than 100 conservation groups opposed his nomination as Interior secretary, saying that as a senator he had voted to eliminate federal money for recovery of the endangered wolf, to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, and to sell off federal public lands.

Yet in 2008, he bucked other advisers in the White House by insisting that the polar bear should be listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act because of the loss of sea ice in the Arctic. He was prepared to resign over it when Bush decided to back him.

“As Governor, Dirk left an enduring mark on our state,” Idaho Gov. Brad Little said in a written statement. With the partnership of his wife, Patricia, Kempthorne “championed children and families, strengthened public education, and led transformational investments in our transportation system that will benefit Idahoans for generations.”

After leaving the federal government, he became the chief executive of a trade association of life insurance companies.

He helped Afghan refugees

In a 2023 question-and-answer session with the George W. Bush Presidential Center, Kempthorne recalled helping evacuate nearly 400 U.S. citizens and Afghan allies from Afghanistan two years earlier, as many were being sought by the Taliban following the U.S. military’s chaotic withdrawal. Kempthorne and others worked frantically for months to raise money and garner the support of diplomatic channels to charter buses and an Airbus A340 to help resettle the evacuees in the U.S. and Canada.

At one point, with the flight fully booked, the organizers received a list of more people who needed to leave urgently.

“That night, at a total loss for answers, alone, I knelt in prayer,” Kempthorne recalled. “I said, ‘Dear God, we cannot leave these people behind, please give a path forward.’”

He said he then had a vision of Mother Mary holding the infant Jesus. It gave him an idea: The babies on the flight didn’t need their own seats, as their parents could hold them. The organizers confirmed that with the airline and were able to add an additional 50 people to the flight, Kempthorne said.

Kempthorne was born in San Diego and grew up in Spokane, Wash. His father was a regional representative for Maytag, the appliance company. His mother, a homemaker, once worked as a secretary for the Legislature in Nebraska, her home state.

Kempthorne attended San Bernardino Valley College in California before transferring to the University of Idaho, where he served as student body president and met Patricia, his future wife. After graduation he worked as executive assistant to the director of the Idaho Department of Lands before joining the Idaho Home Builders Assn. as the executive vice president.

Kempthorne is survived by his wife, as well as their children Heather and Jeff and their families.

Johnson writes for the Associated Press. Johnson reported from Seattle.

WASHINGTON — A former senior adviser to Dr. Anthony Fauci was indicted on federal charges alleging he conspired to hide his communications related to COVID-19 research as the pandemic raged across the country, the Justice Department said Tuesday.

Dr. David Morens, 78, is accused of using his private email account to intentionally circumvent public records laws while employed at the National Institutes of Health. The Justice Department alleges that he concealed or destroyed records of discussions related to COVID-19 research grants, including an effort to revive a controversial coronavirus grant.

“These allegations represent a profound abuse of trust at a time when the American people needed it most — during the height of a global pandemic,” acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said in a statement Tuesday. “Government officials have a solemn duty to provide honest, well-grounded facts and advice in service of the public interest — not to advance their own personal or ideological agendas.”

Morens faces charges of conspiracy against the United States; destruction, alteration or falsification of records in federal investigations; concealment, removal or mutilation of records; and aiding and abetting, according to a Justice Department news release. If convicted, he could face decades in prison. An attorney for Morens declined to comment.

The indictment reflects Republicans’ long-held belief that the federal government covered up key information about COVID-19 as the pandemic unfolded. Despite numerous probes, the origins of COVID have never been proven. Scientists are unsure whether the virus jumped from an animal, as many other viruses have, or came from a laboratory accident. A U.S. intelligence analysis released in 2023 said there is insufficient evidence to prove either theory.

Blanche said Morens’ alleged conduct was part of an effort to “suppress alternative theories” about COVID-19’s origins. The Justice Department also accused Morens of having an improper relationship with a collaborator, including allegedly accepting a gift of wine and discussing COVID-19 research and potential publications in a prominent medical journal.

The indictment follows a probe by House Republicans into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic that scrutinized Morens’ email communications and accused him of intentionally concealing records. In congressional testimony, Morens denied attempting to evade federal transparency laws by using his personal email.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Ron DeSantis was once the future of the Republican Party, a battle-tested conservative twice elected as governor of Florida. Then Donald Trump steamrolled him on his way back to the White House.

Now, more than two years after DeSantis ended his presidential campaign and endorsed Trump, the governor has called a special legislative session on redistricting and other issues that will put him back in the national spotlight and maybe remind Republicans that he could lead the party one day.

But there are also plenty of risks involved for the 47-year-old governor, and they became immediately apparent after lawmakers convened Tuesday.

DeSantis is pushing state lawmakers to redraw Florida’s congressional map as part of a coast-to-coast redistricting battle ahead of November’s midterm elections. His proposal, released the day before the session began, would make it easier for Republicans to win up to four more seats, equivalent to Democrats’ potential gains from last week’s referendum in Virginia.

The governor also wanted lawmakers to adopt new regulations for artificial intelligence and loosen vaccine requirements. However, his proposals quickly hit a roadblock when House Speaker Daniel Perez, a Republican but not a DeSantis acolyte, told members that he would not advance any legislation on those issues.

Perez said the governor’s maps are on a fast track, with a House vote expected Wednesday, but some Republicans are worried that a gerrymandered map will backfire and make it easier for Democrats to pick up seats, something that would be a black eye for DeSantis.

He already faces tough prospects on the national stage, even with Trump constitutionally barred from running for a third term in 2028. DeSantis has had a relatively low profile during Trump’s second presidency and would likely have Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, another Floridian, to contend with in a Republican primary.

“The window for Ron looks reasonably narrow at this point,” said Whit Ayres, who served as DeSantis’ pollster in his first campaign for governor in 2018.

DeSantis’ office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday. But the governor has at least embraced the national redistricting fight. When House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) last week dared Florida Republicans to go ahead with their special session, the governor punched back with the kind of aggressiveness he showed in the early days of his failed White House bid.

“I will pay for you to come down to Florida and campaign,” DeSantis said of Jeffries. “I’ll put you up in the Florida governor’s mansion. We’ll take you fishing.”

DeSantis wants four more Republican seats

DeSantis unveiled his proposed congressional map to Fox News on Monday even before it had been widely circulated among lawmakers. He argued that the 2020 census shortchanged the state’s population, making it necessary to redraw the lines.

The governor’s map, if approved, would reshape districts in Democratic areas around Orlando, Tampa Bay, Miami and Fort Lauderdale. The changes could cost Democratic Reps. Jared Moskowitz and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, among others, their seats.

The current maps yielded a 20 to 8 Republican tilt in 2024. DeSantis’ version would aim for an advantage of 24 to 4.

DeSantis first announced the special session in January, months after Trump started pushing Republican-run states to redraw their congressional boundaries. What followed has been a tit-for-tat battle, with each party looking for an edge in the midterms.

The Virginia referendum celebrated by Democrats is facing a court challenge. Another legal battle is playing out in Wisconsin, where Democrats also hope to pick up another seat or two.

There’s no guarantee that new maps will play out the way parties hope. For example, Texas based its revised lines largely on Trump’s performance in 2024, theoretically redistributing the president’s voters across more districts to pull them into the Republican column. But Trump’s popularity has waned since his reelection, including among Latino voters who figure prominently in the state.

Florida could face a similar conundrum. Creating more majority-Republican districts but with thinner margins could dilute GOP advantages and give Democrats more opportunities to win seats, especially if there’s an anti-Trump backlash at the polls this year.

Karl Rove, a former top political advisor to President George W. Bush, warned that if Florida Republicans get too aggressive, “they may lose a seat or two.”

Brian Ballard, an influential Florida lobbyist who has been DeSantis’ top fundraiser, said it’s worth remembering that DeSantis was the muscle behind the current map that expanded Republicans’ advantage in the state.

“He’s incredibly smart and capable,” Ballard said. “And he doesn’t get enough credit for that map. He’s done this before.”

Florida legislative leaders are not rubber stamps for DeSantis

As it did Tuesday, the Florida House has grown more willing to buck the governor in recent sessions. Perez and Senate President Ben Albritton made clear for weeks that they were not drawing their own proposals and would react only to what DeSantis put forward.

Albritton sent multiple memos to senators reminding them of Florida’s state constitutional limits on redistricting and the requirement that it not be done as a blatantly partisan act.

Perez sidestepped questions Tuesday about whether the maps violate those requirements, which Florida voters approved by a nearly 2-to-1 margin in 2010. Democrats and political advocates have promised legal challenges.

Beyond redistricting, DeSantis was effectively asking House members to approve AI and vaccine proposals that they refused even to advance out of committee earlier this year.

On AI, DeSantis wanted to require tech companies to ensure children cannot interact with chatbots without parental permission. He also wanted to prevent AI from generating harmful material for minors. That proposal put DeSantis at odds with Trump, who wants the federal government to be the regulator of AI technology. Perez said he sides with the president, calling AI a “national security issue” that is “bigger than just one state.”

On vaccines, DeSantis wanted to add a conscience-based exemption to public school vaccine requirements, similar to the existing religious exemption. That aligns him with the anti-vaccine portion of the Trump base that was instrumental in making Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the U.S. Health secretary.

Perez countered that vaccine requirements in the U.S. “have been working for decades” and said he remains uncomfortable with “children being in school without measles and mumps and polio and chickenpox vaccines.”

Political observers are watching — even at the White House

Ballard downplayed any political concerns for DeSantis. What may seem to some as strained relations with certain Republican legislative leaders, he said, is simply measuring DeSantis against the opening years of his tenure.

“I mean, he went from batting a thousand to maybe batting .600,” Ballard said, using a baseball analogy for the governor who played the sport while attending Yale. “That isn’t failure.”

During the last Republican presidential primary, DeSantis initially gave conservative establishment figures and key donors an option other than Trump, who grew frustrated by the challenge and mocked the governor as “Ron DeSanctimonious.”

But Trump seemingly forgave DeSantis when he dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump following his victory in the Iowa caucuses. He even promised to call DeSantis by his actual name.

There’s more bad blood within the White House, though. Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, a Floridian, managed DeSantis’ razor-thin 2018 victory, only for the governor to have a falling-out with her.

Wiles did not respond to a request for comment. But Ayres said he’s certain she’s paying attention.

“Donald Trump has a long memory, and Susie Wiles has a longer one,” he said. “And that doesn’t bode well for Gov. DeSantis to be Donald Trump’s Republican successor.”

Barrow writes for the Associated Press. Scott Bauer contributed to this report from Madison, Wis.

MINNEAPOLIS — Federal agents executed multiple searches in Minnesota on Tuesday, seizing records and other evidence in an ongoing fraud investigation by the Trump administration of publicly funded social programs for children, authorities said.

Few details were released, though armed agents were seen at child-care centers in the Minneapolis area. KSTP-TV said one crew even had a battering ram.

Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, who has been on the defensive amid Trump administration claims that he hasn’t done enough to root out fraud, welcomed the raids. The state child welfare agency said it shared key information with law enforcement to “hold bad actors accountable.”

“We catch criminals when state and federal agencies share information. Joint investigations work, and securing justice depends on it,” Walz said.

The searches were being conducted at daycares, businesses and some residences, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the investigation.

Tensions between Minnesota officials and the federal government were high during an extraordinary immigration crackdown that led to the deaths of two people before Operation Metro Surge was eased in February.

Before that crackdown, the government had brought fraud charges against dozens of people, many of them Somali Americans, who were accused of fleecing a federal program that was meant to provide food to children. The investigation began during the Biden administration. More than 60 people have been convicted.

Various state and federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, participated in searches Tuesday. Officers from Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension were removing boxes at some sites.

“The American people deserve to know how their taxpayer money was abused. … No stone will be left unturned,” DHS said.

Jason Steck, an attorney who represents childcare centers, said the names of targeted businesses that were shared with him show they’re operated by Somali immigrants. They were not his clients.

“A few childcare centers, a few autism centers, a few healthcare agencies of some type,” Steck said, adding that it appeared to be a “particular sweep for fraud.”

The executive director of Child Care Aware of Minnesota, a nonprofit that serves childhood educators, said the publicity will be unflattering.

“The majority are in business to do good business. You’re going to come across individuals who try to capitalize on systems that are broken and need to be fixed,” Candace Yates said.

Right-wing influencer Nick Shirley posted a video in December that caught the attention of the Trump administration. He alleged that members of Minnesota’s Somali community were running fake child care centers so they could collect federal subsidies, fueling suspicions on top of the food aid scandal. The claims were disproven by inspectors.

President Trump, meanwhile, has used dehumanizing rhetoric, calling Somali immigrants “garbage” and “low IQ.”

In February, Vice President JD Vance said the government would temporarily halt $243 million in Medicaid funding to Minnesota over fraud concerns. Minnesota sued in response, warning it may have to cut healthcare for low-income families, but a judge on April 6 declined to grant a restraining order.

Walz told Congress in March that he wanted to work with the federal government in fraud investigations, but that the immigration surge had made it more difficult.

“The people of Minnesota have been singled out and targeted for political retribution at an unparalleled scale,” he said at the time.

Vancleave and Richer write for the Associated Press. Durkin Richer contributed from Washington. AP reporters Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis and Corey Williams and Ed White in Detroit contributed to this story.

WASHINGTON — Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted Tuesday in an investigation over a social media photo of seashells arranged on a beach that officials said constituted a threat against President Trump, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The person was not authorized to publicly discuss the matter and confirmed the indictment to the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity. The charge or charges against Comey were not immediately known.

It’s the second criminal case the Justice Department has brought against the longtime Trump foe, who said he assumed the arrangement of shells he saw on a walk, reading “86 47,” was a political message, not a call to violence. Comey is among multiple foes of the Republican president to come under scrutiny by the Justice Department over the last year, as acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche aims to position himself as the right person to hold the job permanently.

Comey was interviewed by the Secret Service in May after Trump administration officials asserted that he was advocating the assassination of Trump, the 47th president. Comey deleted the post shortly after it was made, writing: “I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence” and “I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”

His lawyer did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment Tuesday.

Merriam-Webster, the dictionary used by the Associated Press, says 86 is slang meaning “to throw out,” “to get rid of” or “to refuse service to.” It notes: “Among the most recent senses adopted is a logical extension of the previous ones, with the meaning of ‘to kill.’ We do not enter this sense, due to its relative recency and sparseness of use.”

Trump, in a Fox News Channel interview in May, accused Comey of knowing “exactly what that meant.”

“A child knows what that meant,” Trump said. “If you’re the FBI director and you don’t know what that meant, that meant assassination. And it says it loud and clear.”

The fact that the Justice Department pursued a new case against the ex-FBI director months after a separate and unrelated indictment was dismissed will likely spark defense claims that the Trump administration is going out of its way to target Comey, who had overseen the early months of an investigation into whether the Republican president’s 2016 campaign had coordinated with Russia to sway the outcome of that year’s election.

The former FBI director was indicted in September on charges that he lied to and obstructed Congress related to testimony he gave in 2020 about whether he had authorized inside information about an investigation to be provided to a journalist. He denied any wrongdoing, and the case was subsequently dismissed after a judge concluded that the prosecutor who brought the indictment was illegally appointed.

Comey was the FBI director when Trump took office in 2017, having been appointed by then-President Obama, a Democrat, and serving before that as a senior Justice Department official in President George W. Bush’s Republican administration.

But the relationship was strained from the start, including after Comey resisted a request by Trump at a private dinner to pledge his personal loyalty to the president — an overture that so unnerved the FBI director that he documented it in a contemporaneous memorandum.

Trump fired Comey in May 2017 amid an FBI investigation into potential ties between Russia and Trump’s presidential campaign. That inquiry, later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller, would ultimately find that while Russia interfered in the 2016 election and the Trump team welcomed the help, there was insufficient evidence to prove a criminal collaboration.

The department, for instance, is also pursuing a criminal investigation into former CIA Director John Brennan, another key figure in the Russia investigation — one of Trump’s chief grievances and a saga for which he and his supporters have long sought retaliation.

CNN was the first to report the second indictment against Comey.

Richer and Tucker write for the Associated Press.

The Federal Communications Commission is considering an early review of the Walt Disney Co.’s broadcast TV licenses amid criticism of ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel’s provocative jokes ahead of the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner.

The order could come as soon as Tuesday, according to Semafor, which first reported that the review is expected. The licenses for ABC’s stations — which include KABC in Los Angeles — were not scheduled for renewal until 2028.

Disney has not commented on the possibility of a review.

The move was likely in the works before the latest kerfuffle over Kimmel, who is under fire for a comedic bit that satirized the annual Washington gala that Trump attended for the first time. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, who has targeted the political content on the ABC daytime talk show “The View,” told The Times on Saturday that an action related to ABC programming was coming this week.

Carr has suggested “The View” should not be exempt from the FCC’s equal time rule that requires broadcasters to bring on a politician’s rival to provide balanced coverage and multiple viewpoints.

Carr, who was at the Saturday dinner, made the remark just hours before the event was shut down after a Torrance man breached security at the Washington Hilton while armed with a shotgun, handgun and several knives. The suspect, Cole Tomas Allen, was arrested and faces three criminal charges, including attempting to assassinate President Trump.

Right-wing commentators have gone into heavy rotation with the claim that a routine by Kimmel inspired Allen to act.

During the bit that aired Thursday, a tuxedo-clad Kimmel called First Lady Melania Trump “beautiful,” saying she had “the glow of an expectant widow.” The comic explained Monday that the gag was a reference to the age difference between Trump and his wife.

“It was a very light roast joke about the fact that he’s almost 80 and she’s younger than I am,” Kimmel said. “It was not, by any stretch of the definition, a call to assassination. And they know that.”

Since becoming FCC chairman last year, Carr has repeatedly threatened to use the levers of power he has to punish TV and radio stations that irritate Trump. His behavior has alarmed free speech advocates, including the FCC’s lone Democratic appointee Anna Gomez, who noted that early station renewal reviews are exceedingly rare and largely futile.

“This is unprecedented, unlawful, and going nowhere,” Gomez said in a statement. “It is a political stunt and it won’t stick. Companies should challenge it head-on. The 1st Amendment is on their side.”

Other White House administrations have threatened to pull TV station licenses in response to negative news coverage. At the height of the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, Richard Nixon’s allies unsuccessfully attempted to challenge the TV licenses for three stations owned at the time by the Washington Post.

RKO General, a unit of the General Tire and Rubber Co., was the last company to lose broadcast TV station licenses in 1987, including Los Angeles outlet KHJ. The case was related to corporate malfeasance and not broadcast content on the stations.

The process to revoke the RKO licenses took seven years from the moment the FCC voted in favor of the move.