american people

WASHINGTON — Elections this week that energized Democrats and angered President Trump have cast a chill over efforts to end the record-breaking government shutdown, raising fresh doubts about the possibility of a breakthrough despite the punishing toll of federal closures on the country.

Trump has increased pressure on Senate Republicans to end the shutdown — now at 37 days, the longest in U.S. history — calling it a “big factor, negative” in the poor GOP showings across the country. Democrats saw Trump’s comments as a reason to hold firm, believing his involvement in talks could lead to a deal on extending health care subsidies, a key sticking point to win their support.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune opened what’s seen as a pivotal day in efforts to end the government shutdown by saying the next step hinges on a response from Democrats to an offer on the table.

“It’s in their court. It’s up to them,” Thune told reporters Thursday.

But Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer held firm in opening remarks Thursday, saying voters “fired a political torpedo at Trump and Republicans” in Tuesday’s election.

“Donald Trump clearly is feeling pressure to bring this shutdown to an end. Well, I have good news for the president: Meet with Democrats, reopen the government,” Schumer said on the Senate floor.

Trump is refusing to meet with Democrats, insisting they must open the government first. But complicating the GOP’s strategy, Trump is increasingly fixated instead on pushing Republicans to scrap the Senate filibuster to speed reopening — a step many GOP senators reject out of hand. He kept up the pressure in a video Wednesday, saying the Senate’s 60-vote threshold to pass legislation should be “terminated.”

“This is much bigger than the shutdown,” Trump said. “This is the survival of our country.”

Senate Democrats face pressures of their own, both from unions eager for the shutdown to end and from allied groups that want them to hold firm. Many see the Democrats’ decisive gubernatorial wins in Virginia and New Jersey as validation of their strategy to hold the government closed until expiring health care subsidies are addressed.

“It would be very strange for the American people to have weighed in, in support of Democrats standing up and fighting for them, and within days for us to surrender without having achieved any of the things that we’ve been fighting for,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.

Meanwhile, talks grind on, but the shutdown’s toll deepens. On Wednesday, the Federal Aviation Administration announced plans to reduce air traffic by 10% across 40 high-volume markets beginning Friday to maintain safety amid staffing shortages. Millions of people have already been affected by halted government programs and missed federal paychecks — with more expected as another round of paydays approaches next week.

Progressives see election wins as reason to fight

Grassroots Democratic groups nationwide touted Tuesday’s election results as voter approval of the shutdown strategy — and warned lawmakers against cutting a deal too soon.

“Moderate Senate Democrats who are looking for an off-ramp right now are completely missing the moment,” said Katie Bethell, political director of MoveOn, a progressive group. “Voters have sent a resounding message: We want leaders who fight for us, and we want solutions that make life more affordable.”

Some Senate Democrats echoed that sentiment. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats and a leading voice in the progressive movement, said Democrats “have got to remain strong” and should secure assurances on extending health care subsidies — including “a commitment from the speaker of the House that he will support the legislation and that the president will sign.”

Still, how firmly the party remains dug in remains to be seen. Some Democrats have been working with Republicans to find a way out of the standoff, and they held firm after the election that it had not impacted their approach.

“I don’t feel that the elections changed where I was,” said Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo. “I still feel I want to get out of the shutdown.”

Some Republicans also shared in Trump’s concerns that the shutdown is becoming a drag on the party.

“Polls show that most voters blame Republicans more than Democrats,” said Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican. “That’s understandable given who controls the levers of power.”

Trump sets another shutdown record

While some Democrats saw Trump’s comments on the shutdown Wednesday as evidence he’d soon get more involved, he’s largely stayed out of the fray. Instead, the talks have intensified among a loose coalition of centrist senators trying to negotiate an end to the shutdown.

Trump has refused to negotiate with Democrats over their demands to salvage expiring health insurance subsidies until they agree to reopen the government. But skeptical Democrats question whether the Republican president will keep his word, particularly after his administration restricted SNAP food aid despite court orders to ensure funds are available to prevent hunger.

Trump’s approach to the shutdown stands in marked contrast to his first term, when the government was partially closed for 35 days over his demands for money to build a U.S.-Mexico border wall. At that time, he met publicly and negotiated with congressional leaders. Unable to secure the money, he relented in 2019.

This time, it’s not just Trump declining to engage in talks. The congressional leaders are at a standoff, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., sent lawmakers home in September after they approved their own funding bill, refusing further negotiations.

Johnson dismissed the party’s election losses and said he’s looking forward to a midterm election in 2026 that’ll more reflect Trump’s tenure.

In the meantime, food aid, child care money and countless other government services are being seriously interrupted. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers have been furloughed or are expected to work without pay.

Senators search for potential deal

Central to any resolution will be a series of agreements that would need to be upheld not only by the Senate but also by the House and the White House, which is not at all certain in Washington.

Asked if the House would guarantee a vote on extending health care subsidies if the Senate struck a deal, Johnson said Thursday, “I’m not promising anybody anything.”

Senators from both major parties, particularly the members of the powerful Appropriations Committee, are pushing to ensure the normal government funding process in Congress can be put back on track. Among the goals is guaranteeing upcoming votes on a smaller package of bills to fund various aspects of government such as agricultural programs and military construction projects at bases.

More difficult, a substantial number of senators also want some resolution to the standoff over the funding for the Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire at year’s end.

With insurance premium notices being sent, millions of people are experiencing sticker shock on skyrocketing prices. The loss of enhanced federal subsidies, which were put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic and come in the form of tax credits, are expected to leave many people unable to buy health insurance.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has promised Democrats at least a vote on their preferred health care proposal, on a date certain, as part of any deal to reopen government. But that’s not enough for some senators, who see the health care deadlock as part of their broader concerns with Trump’s direction for the country.

Cappelletti, Mascaro and Jalonick write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The government shutdown has entered its 36th day, breaking the record as the longest ever and disrupting the lives of millions of Americans with program cuts, flight delays and federal workers nationwide left without paychecks.

President Trump has refused to negotiate with Democrats over their demands to salvage expiring health insurance subsidies until they agree to reopen the government. But skeptical Democrats question whether the Republican president will keep his word, particularly after the administration restricted SNAP food aid despite court orders to ensure funds are available to prevent hunger.

Trump, whose first term at the White House set the previous government shutdown record, said this one was a “big factor, negative” in the GOP’s election losses Tuesday and he repeated his demands for Republicans to end the Senate filibuster as a way to reopen the government — something senators have refused to do.

“We must get the government back open soon,” Trump said during a breakfast meeting Wednesday with GOP senators at the White House.

Trump pushed for ending the Senate rule, which requires a 60-vote threshold for advancing most legislation, as a way to steamroll the Democratic minority on the shutdown and pass a long list of other GOP priorities. Republicans now hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and Democrats have been able to block legislation that would fund the government, having voted more than a dozen times against.

“It’s time for Republicans to do what they have to do, and that’s terminate the filibuster,” Trump told the senators.

That push is likely to go unmet by Republican senators but could spur them to deal with the Democrats.

Trump has remained largely on the sidelines throughout the shutdown, keeping a robust schedule of global travel and events, including at his private Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. Instead, talks have intensified among a loose coalition of centrist senators trying to negotiate an end to the stalemate.

Expectations are high that the logjam would break once election results were fully tallied in the off-year races widely watched as a gauge of voter sentiment over Trump’s second term. Democrats swept key contests, emboldening progressive senators who want to keep fighting for healthcare funds. Moderate Democrats have been more ready to compromise.

The top Democrats in Congress demanded that Trump meet with Capitol Hill leaders to negotiate an end to the shutdown and address healthcare.

“The election results ought to send a much-needed bolt of lightning to Donald Trump that he should meet with us to end this crisis,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York.

Trump sets another shutdown record

Trump’s approach to the shutdown stands in marked contrast to his first term, when the government was partially closed for 35 days over his demands for money to build the U.S.-Mexico border wall. At that time, he met publicly and negotiated with congressional leaders. Unable to secure the money, he relented in 2019.

This time, it’s not just Trump declining to engage in talks. The congressional leaders are at a standoff and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sent lawmakers home in September after they approved their own funding bill, refusing further negotiations.

A “sad landmark,” Johnson said at a news conference Wednesday. He dismissed the party’s election losses and said he is looking forward to a midterm election in 2026 that will more reflect Trump’s tenure.

In the meantime, food aid, child-care money and countless other government services are being seriously interrupted. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers have been furloughed or expected to come to work without pay.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy predicted there could be chaos in the sky next week if air traffic controllers miss another paycheck. Labor unions put pressure on lawmakers to reopen the government.

“Can this be over now?” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said as he returned from the White House breakfast. “Have the American people suffered enough?”

Thune also said there is not support in the Senate to change the filibuster. “It’s not happening,” he said.

Senators search for potential deal

Central to any resolution will be a series of agreements that would need to be upheld not only by the Senate, but also the House, and the White House, which is not at all certain in Washington.

Senators from both parties, particularly the members of the powerful Appropriations Committee, are pushing to ensure the normal government funding process in Congress can be put back on track.

Among the goals is guaranteeing upcoming votes on a smaller package of bills where there is already widespread bipartisan agreement to fund various aspects of government such as agricultural programs and military construction projects at bases.

“I certainly think that three-bill package is primed to do a lot of good things for the American people,” said Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), who has been in talks.

Healthcare costs skyrocket for millions

More difficult, a substantial number of senators also want some resolution to the standoff over the funding for the Affordable Care Act subsidies that are set to expire at year’s end.

With insurance premium notices being sent, millions of people are experiencing sticker shock on skyrocketing prices. The loss of enhanced federal subsidies, which were put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic and come in the form of tax credits, are expected to leave many people unable to buy health insurance.

Republicans are reluctant to fund the healthcare program, also known as Obamacare, without changes, but negotiating a compromise with Democrats is expected to take time, if a deal can be reached at all.

Thune has promised Democrats at least a vote on their preferred healthcare proposal, on a date certain, as part of any deal to reopen government. But that’s not enough for some senators, who see the healthcare deadlock as part of their broader concerns with Trump’s direction for the country.

Mascaro and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. AP writers Kevin Freking, Stephen Groves, Joey Cappelletti and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

GYEONGJU, South Korea — President Trump said Wednesday that “it’s too bad” he’s not allowed to run for a third term, conceding the constitutional reality even as he expressed interest in continuing to serve.

“If you read it, it’s pretty clear,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One enroute from Japan to South Korea. “I’m not allowed to run. It’s too bad.”

The president’s comments, which continue his on-again, off-again musings about a third term, came a day after House Speaker Mike Johnson said it would be impossible for Trump to stay in the White House.

“I don’t see the path for that,” he told reporters at the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday.

Johnson, the Republican leader who has built his career by drawing closer to Trump, said he discussed the issue with the president, and he thinks Trump understands the situation.

“He and I have talked about the constrictions of the Constitution,” he said.

The speaker described how the Constitution’s 22nd Amendment does not allow for a third presidential term and changing that, with a new amendment, would be a cumbersome, decade-long process winning over states and votes in Congress.

“But I can tell you that we are not going to take our foot off the gas pedal,” he said. “We’re going to deliver for the American people, and we’ve got a great run ahead of us — he’ll have four strong years.”

Trump stopped short of characterizing his conversation with Johnson, and his description of the prohibition on third terms was somewhat less definitive.

“Based on what I read, I guess I’m not allowed to run,” he said Wednesday. “So we’ll see what happens.”

Trump has repeatedly raised the idea of trying to stay in power. Hats saying “Trump 2028” are passed out as souvenir keepsakes to lawmakers and others visiting the White House, and Trump’s former 2016 campaign chief-turned-podcaster Stephen Bannon has revived the idea of a third Trump term.

Trump told reporters Monday on Air Force One on his trip to Japan that “I would love to do it.”

He went on to say that his Republican Party has great options for the next presidential election — in Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who was traveling with him, and Vice President JD Vance, who visited with senators at the Capitol on Tuesday.

“All I can tell you is that we have a great group of people,” Trump said.

Pressed if he was ruling out a third-term bid, Trump demurred. Asked about a strategy where he could run as vice president, which could be allowed under the laws, and then work himself in the presidency, he dismissed the idea as “too cute.”

“You’d be allowed to do that, but I wouldn’t do that,” he said.

The chit chat comes as Trump, in his words and actions, is showing just how far he can push the presidency — and daring anyone to stop him.

He is sending National Guard troops to cities over the objections of several state governors; accepting untold millions in private donations to pay the military and fund the new White House ballroom, picking winners and losers in the government shutdown.

Johnson, the Louisiana Republican who rose swiftly to become House speaker with Trump’s blessing, dismissed worries about a potential third term by the president’s critics whose “hair is on fire.”

“He has a good time with that, trolling the Democrats,” Johnson said.

Megerian and Mascaro write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Navy admiral who oversees military operations in the region where U.S. forces have been attacking alleged drug boats off Venezuela will retire in December, he and the Defense Secretary announced Thursday.

Adm. Alvin Holsey became the leader of U.S. Southern Command only in November, overseeing an area that encompasses the Caribbean Sea and waters off South America. These types of postings typically last between three and four years.

The news of Holsey’s upcoming retirement comes two days after the U.S. military’s fifth deadly strike in the Caribbean against a small boat accused of carrying drugs. The Trump administration has asserted it’s treating alleged drug traffickers as unlawful combatants who must be met with military force.

Frustration with the attacks has been growing on Capitol Hill. Some Republicans have been seeking more information from the White House on the legal justification and details of the strikes, while Democrats contend the strikes violate U.S. and international law.

Holsey said in a statement posted on the command’s Facebook page that it’s “been an honor to serve our nation, the American people and support and defend our Constitution for over 37 years.”

“The SOUTHCOM team has made lasting contributions to the defense of our nation and will continue to do so,” he said. “I am confident that you will forge ahead, focused on your mission that strengthens our nation and ensures its longevity as a beacon of freedom around the globe.”

U.S. Southern Command did not provide any more information beyond the admiral’s statement.

In a post on X on Thursday afternoon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth thanked Holsey for his “decades of service to our country, and we wish him and his family continued success and fulfillment in the years ahead.”

“Admiral Holsey has demonstrated unwavering commitment to mission, people, and nation,” Hegseth wrote.

Officials at the Pentagon did not provide any more information and referred the Associated Press to Hegseth’s statement on social media.

The New York Times first reported on Holsey’s plans to leave his position.

Toropin and Finley write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump rocked American politics at the outset of his first campaign when he first labeled his rivals as enemies of the American people. But the rhetoric of his top confidantes has grown more extreme in recent days.

Stephen Miller, the president’s deputy chief of staff, declared over the weekend that “a large and growing movement of leftwing terrorism in this country” is fueling a historic national schism, “shielded by far-left Democrat judges, prosecutors and attorneys general.”

“The only remedy,” Miller said, “is to use legitimate state power to dismantle terrorism and terror networks.”

It was a maxim from an unelected presidential advisor who is already unleashing the federal government in unprecedented ways, overseeing the federalization of police forces and a sweeping deportation campaign challenging basic tenets of civil liberty.

Miller’s rhetoric comes amid a federal crackdown on Portland, Ore., where he says the president has unchecked authority to protect federal lives and property — and as another controversial Trump advisor harnesses an ongoing government shutdown as pretext for the mass firing of federal workers.

Russ Vought, the president’s director of the Office of Management and Budget, plays the grim reaper in an AI video shared by the president, featuring him roving Washington for bureaucrats to cut from the deep state during the shutdown.

His goal, Trump has said, is to specifically target Democrats.

As of Monday afternoon, it was unclear exactly how many federal workers or what federal agencies would be targeted.

“We don’t want to see people laid off, but unfortunately, if this shutdown continues layoffs are going to be an unfortunate consequence of that,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Levitt said during a news briefing.

‘A nation of Constitutional law’

Karin Immergut, a federal judge appointed by Trump, said this weekend that the administration’s justification for deploying California National Guard troops in Portland was “simply untethered to the facts.”

“This country has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs,” Immergut wrote, chiding the Trump administration for attempting to circumvent a prior order from her against a federal deployment to the city.

“This historical tradition boils down to a simple proposition,” she added: “This is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law.”

The administration is expected to appeal the judge’s decision, Leavitt said, while calling the judge’s ruling “untethered in reality and in the law.”

“We’re very confident in the president’s legal authority to do this, and we are very confident we will win on the merits of the law,” Leavitt said.

If the courts were to side with the administration, Leavitt said local leaders — most of whom are Democrats — should not be concerned about the possibility of long-term plans to have their cities occupied by the military.

“Why should they be concerned about the federal government offering help to make their cities a safer place?” Leavitt said. “They should be concerned about the fact that people in their cities right now are being gunned down every single night and the president, all he is trying to do, is fix it.”

Moments later, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that though he does not believe it is necessary yet, he would be willing to invoke the Insurrection Act “if courts were holding us up or governors or mayors were holding us up.”

“Sure, I’d do that,” Trump said. “We have to make sure that our cities are safe.”

The Insurrection Act gives the president sweeping emergency power to deploy military forces within the United States if the president deems it is needed to quell civil unrest. The last time this occurred was in 1992, when California Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush to send federal troops to help stop the Los Angeles riots that occurred after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King.

Subsequent posts from Miller on social media over the weekend escalated the stakes to existential heights, accusing Democrats of allying themselves with “domestic terrorists” seeking to overturn the will of the people reflected in Trump’s election win last year.

On Monday, in an interview with CNN, Miller suggested that the administration would continue working to sidestep Immergut’s orders.

“The administration will abide by the ruling insofar as it affects the covered parties,” he said, “but there are also many options the president has to deploy federal resources under the U.S. military to Portland.”

Other Republicans have used similar rhetoric since the slaying of Charlie Kirk, a conservative youth activist, in Utah last month.

Rep. Derrick Van Orden (R-Wis.) wrote that posts from California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office have reached “the threshold of domestic terrorism,” after the Democratic governor referred to Miller on social media as a fascist. And Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) said Monday that Democrats demanding an extension of healthcare benefits as a condition for reopening the government were equivalent to terrorists.

“I don’t negotiate with terrorists,” Fine told Newsmax, “and what we’ve learned in whether it’s dealing with Muslim terrorists or Democrats, you’ve gotta stand and you’ve gotta do the right thing.”

Investigating donor networks

Republicans’ keenness to label Democrats as terrorists comes two weeks after Trump signed an executive order declaring a left-wing antifascist movement, known as antifa, as a “domestic terrorist organization” — a designation that does not exist under U.S. law.

The order, which opened a new front in Trump’s battle against his political foes, also threatened to investigate and prosecute individuals who funded “any and all illegal operations — especially those involving terrorist actions — conducted by antifa or any person claiming to act on behalf of antifa.”

Leavitt told reporters Monday that the administration is “aggressively” looking into who is financially backing these operations.

Trump has floated the possibility of going after people such as George Soros, a billionaire who has supported many left-leaning causes around the world.

“If you look at Soros, he is at the top of everything,” Trump said during an Oval Office appearance last month.

The White House has not yet made public any details about a formal investigation into donors, but Leavitt said the administration’s efforts are underway.

“We will continue to get to the bottom of who is funding these organizations and this organized anarchy against our country and our government,” Leavitt said. “We are committed to uncovering it.”

President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order that would allow hugely popular social video app TikTok to continue to operate in the United States.

TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, had been under pressure to divest its ownership in the app’s U.S. operations or face a nationwide ban, due to security concerns over the company’s ties to China.

Congress passed legislation calling for a TikTok ban to go into effect in January, but Trump has repeatedly signed orders that have allowed TikTok to keep operating in the country.

Under an agreement that Trump said was approved by China’s President Xi Jinping, TikTok’s U.S. operations will be operated through a joint venture run by a majority-American investor group. ByteDance and its affiliates would hold less than 20% ownership in the venture.

About 170 million Americans use TikTok, known for its viral entertaining videos.

“These safeguards would protect the American people from the misuse of their data and the influence of a foreign adversary, while also allowing the millions of American viewers, creators, and businesses that rely on the TikTok application to continue using it,” Trump stated in his executive order.

Trump, who years ago led the push to ban TikTok from the U.S., said at a press event that he feels the deal satisfies security concerns.

“The biggest reason is that it’s owned by Americans … and people that love the country and very smart Americans, so they don’t want anything like that to happen,” Trump said.

Trump said on Thursday that people involved in the deal include Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, Dell Technologies Chief Executive Michael Dell and media mogul Rupert Murdoch. Vice President JD Vance said the new entity controlling TikTok’s U.S. operations would have a value of around $14 billion.

Murdoch’s involvement would probably entail Fox Corp. investing in the deal, a source familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly told The Times. Fox Corp. owns Fox News, whose opinion hosts are vocally supportive of Trump.

The algorithms and code would be under control of the joint venture. The order requires the storage of sensitive U.S. user data to be under a U.S. cloud computing company.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News last Saturday that the app’s data and privacy in the U.S. would be led by Oracle.

Ellison is a Trump ally who is the world’s second-richest person, according to Forbes.

TikTok already works with Oracle. Since October 2022, “all new protected U.S. user data has been stored in the secure Oracle infrastructure, not on TikTok or ByteDance servers,” TikTok says on its website.

Ellison is also preparing a bid for Warner Bros. Discovery, the media company that owns HBO, TNT and CNN, after already completing a takeover of Paramount, one of Hollywood’s original studios.

“The most important thing is it does protect Americans’ data security,” Vance said at a press gathering on Thursday. “What this deal ensures is that the American entity and the American investors will actually control the algorithm. We don’t want this used as a propaganda tool by any foreign government.”

TikTok, which has a large presence in Los Angeles, did not respond to a request for comment.

Terms of the deal are still unclear. Trump discussed the TikTok deal with China’s Xi Jinping in an extended phone call last week. Chinese and U.S. officials have until Dec. 16 to finalize the details.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump, once a casino owner and always a man in search of his next deal, is fond of a poker analogy when sizing up partners and adversaries.

“We have much bigger and better cards than they do,” he said of China last month. Compared with Canada, he said in June, “we have all the cards. We have every single one.” And most famously, he told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in their Oval Office confrontation earlier this year: “You don’t have the cards.”

The phrase offers a window into the worldview of Trump, who has spent his second stint in the White House amassing cards to deploy in pursuit of his interests.

Seven months into his second term, he’s accumulated presidential power that he’s used against universities, media companies, law firms and individuals he dislikes. A man who ran for president as an angry victim of a weaponized “deep state” is, in many ways, supercharging government power and training it on his opponents.

And the supporters who responded to his complaints about overzealous Democrats aren’t recoiling. They’re egging him on.

“Weaponizing the state to win the culture war has been essential to their agenda,” said David N. Smith, a University of Kansas sociologist who has extensively researched the motivations of Trump voters. “They didn’t like it when the state was mobilized to restrain Trump, but they’re happy to see the state acting to fight the culture war on their behalf.”

How Trump has weaponized the government

Trump began putting the federal government to work for him within hours of taking office in January, and he’s been collecting and using power in novel ways ever since. It’s a high-velocity push to carry out his political agendas and grudges.

This past month, hundreds of federal agents and National Guard troops fanned out across Washington after Trump drew on a never-used law that allows him to take control of law enforcement in the nation’s capital. He’s threatened similar deployments in other cities run by Democrats, including Baltimore, Chicago, New York and New Orleans. He has also moved to fire a Federal Reserve governor, pointing to unproven claims of mortgage fraud that she denies.

Trump, his aides and allies throughout the executive branch have trained the government, or threatened to, on a dizzying array of targets:

—He threatened to block a stadium plan for the Washington Commanders football team unless it readopted the racial slur it used as its team name until 2020.

—He revoked security clearances and tried to block access to government facilities for attorneys at law firms he disfavors.

—He revoked billions of dollars in federal research funds and sought to block international students from elite universities. Under pressure, Columbia University agreed to a $220-million settlement, the University of Pennsylvania revoked records set by transgender swimmer Lia Thomas, and presidents resigned from the University of Virginia and Northwestern University.

—He has fired or reassigned federal employees targeted for their work, including prosecutors who worked on cases involving him.

—He dropped corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams to gain cooperation in his crackdown on immigrants living in the country illegally.

—He secured multimillion-dollar settlements against media organizations in lawsuits that were widely regarded as weak cases.

—Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi is pursuing a grand jury review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation and appointed a special prosecutor to scrutinize New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James and U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

That’s not weaponizing government, says White House spokesperson Harrison Fields; it’s wielding power.

“What the nation is witnessing today is the execution of the most consequential administration in American history,” Fields said, “one that is embracing common sense, putting America first, and fulfilling the mandate of the American people.”

Use of power

There’s a push and a pull to power. It is both given and taken. And through executive orders, personnel moves, the bully pulpit and sheer brazenness, Trump has claimed powers that none of his modern predecessors came close to claiming.

He has also been handed power by many around him. By a fiercely loyal base that rides with him through thick and thin. By a Congress and Supreme Court that so far have ceded power to the executive branch. By universities, law firms, media organizations and other institutions that have negotiated or settled with him.

The U.S. government is powerful, but it’s not inherently omnipotent. As Trump learned to his frustration in his first term, presidential powers are limited by the Constitution, laws, court rulings, bureaucracy, traditions and norms. Yet in his second term, Trump has managed to eliminate, steamroll, ignore or otherwise neutralize many of those guardrails.

Leaders can exert their will through fear and intimidation, by determining the topics that are getting discussed and by shaping people’s preferences, Steven Lukes argued in a seminal 1974 book, “Power: A Radical View.” Lukes, a professor emeritus at New York University, said Trump exemplifies all three dimensions of power. Trump’s innovation, Lukes said, is “epistemic liberation” — a willingness to make up facts without evidence.

“This idea that you can just say things that aren’t true, and then it doesn’t matter to your followers and to a lot of other people … that seems to me a new thing,” at least in liberal democracies, Lukes said. Trump uses memes and jokes more than argument and advocacy to signal his preferences, he said.

Trump ran against ‘weaponization’

Central to Trump’s 2024 campaign was his contention that he was the victim of a “vicious persecution ” perpetrated by “the Biden administration’s weaponized Department of Injustice.”

Facing four felony criminal cases in New York, Washington and Florida, Trump said in 2023 that he yearned not to end the government weaponization, but to harness it. “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Aug. 4, 2023.

“If I happen to be president and I see somebody who’s doing well and beating me very badly, I say, ‘Go down and indict them,’” he said in a Univision interview on Nov. 9, 2023. And given a chance by a friendly Fox News interviewer to assure Americans that he would use power responsibly, he responded in December that year that he would not be a dictator “except on Day One.”

He largely backed off those threats as the election got closer, even as he continued to campaign against government weaponization. When he won, he declared an end to it.

His victory essentially ended the felony criminal indictments against him, including his role in the violent insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, which led to his second impeachment. Long-standing Justice Department policy says that sitting presidents may not be charged with crimes.

He still entered the White House in January as the only felon to ever occupy the office, after his conviction last year on fraud charges related to a hush-money payment to a porn star just before his first election, in 2016.

One of Trump’s first acts of his new term in January was to issue pardons or commutations for more than 1,500 people convicted of crimes related to Jan. 6, including sedition and attacks on police officers.

“Never again will the immense power of the state be weaponized to persecute political opponents — something I know something about,” Trump said in his second inaugural address.

A month later: “I ended Joe Biden’s weaponization soon as I got in,” Trump said in a Feb. 22 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference outside Washington. And 10 days after that: “We’ve ended weaponized government, where, as an example, a sitting president is allowed to viciously prosecute his political opponent, like me.”

Two days later, on March 6, Trump signed a sweeping order targeting a prominent law firm that represents Democrats. And on April 9, he issued presidential memoranda directing the Justice Department to investigate two officials from his first administration, Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor.

With that, the weaponization has come full circle. Trump is no longer surrounded by tradition-bound lawyers and government officials, and his instinct to play his hand aggressively faces few restraints.

Cooper writes for the Associated Press.

California, Oregon and Washington are joining forces to insulate vaccine guidance and other public health recommendations from political interference, a direct response to turmoil at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under President Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, Tina Kotek of Oregon and Bob Ferguson of Washington announced Wednesday the creation of the West Coast Health Alliance, a pact that aims to keep their states’ health policies unified and grounded in scientific expertise. The move comes as the nation’s top public health agency is being reshaped by Kennedy and his vaccine-skeptic allies, with key leadership fired and the agency in turmoil.

“President Trump’s mass firing of CDC doctors and scientists — and his blatant politicization of the agency — is a direct assault on the health and safety of the American people,” the three governors said in a joint statement. “The CDC has become a political tool that increasingly peddles ideology instead of science, ideology that will lead to severe health consequences. California, Oregon, and Washington will not allow the people of our states to be put at risk.”

In June, the three states issued a joint statement condemning Kennedy’s decision to remove all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Among the replacements named by Kennedy are appointees who spread vaccine misinformation and relayed conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the Associated Press.

Kennedy said the change would improve public trust by ensuring members of the committee didn’t have “any specific pro- or anti-vaccine agenda.”

Kennedy has warned that more turnover could be coming at the agency.

In the announcement for the newly formed West Coast Health Alliance, the states said the focus would be on providing evidence-based recommendations about who should receive immunizations while ensuring the public has access to credible information about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. The alliance will share immunization recommendations, but each state will also pursue independent strategies based on “unique laws, geographies, histories, and peoples.”

Dr. Erica Pan, director of the California Department of Public Health and the state health officer, said it’s imperative that California stand with medical professionals.

“The dismantling of public health and dismissal of experienced and respected health leaders and advisors, along with the lack of using science, data, and evidence to improve our nation’s health are placing lives at risk,” Pan said in a statement.

Republican and Democratic voters share common ground when it comes to the University of California: Both sides express widespread support for UC, its research, medical centers and ability to elevate the lives of students, a statewide poll shows.

Strong majorities of registered voters across demographic groups — urban and rural, racial, education levels — said UC research was good for their communities, including 62% of Californians with only high school diplomas. Voters in their 20s have the most favorable view of research.

The survey results, from the nonpartisan UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, come as the university system faces major battles with the Trump administration over deep research funding cuts and President Trump’s demand of a $1-billion fine to resolve federal charges of antisemitism at UCLA.

“In an era where the benefits of public higher education are being questioned, the polling results suggest that California’s residents see the value in a UC education and recognize the many different ways the UC system contributes positively to the state,” said G. Cristina Mora, the institute’s co-director .

For months, the University of California has been enveloped in the nationwide drive by Trump to reshape higher education, which he sees as a bastion of liberalism hostile to conservative thinking. The 10-campus UC system has faced hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts to federal research support that the Trump administration derided as wasteful spending. Last month federal officials suspended more than half a billion dollars in medical study grants to UCLA. Negotiations with the federal government to restore the grants are ongoing.

The Berkeley poll of 6,474 registered California voters showed a more nuanced political picture between Democrats and Republicans against the backdrop of White House invective that accuses selective universities of being hotbeds of race- and gender-based discrimination rooted in diversity, equity and inclusion movements that Trump says don’t match the will of the American people.

UCLA, UC Berkeley and UC Irvine have been accused by the Trump administration of illegally using race in admissions. The entire UC system is also under federal investigation for allegations that it has discriminated against Jewish employees and practiced sex- and race-based hiring discrimination.

Berkeley pollsters found strongest support for UC from Democrats, people with college degrees and state residents who are not white.

But majorities of Republicans also showed support for UC across the board:

• 58% of Republicans agreed or strongly agreed that UC “produces important research that benefits communities in California,” compared with 78% of Democrats.

• 75% of Republicans agreed or strongly agreed that UC academic health centers, such as UCLA Health, are “important to the communities they serve,” while 80% of Democrats said the same.

• 54% of Republicans agreed or strongly agreed that the UC system is “important for helping students to get ahead.” Among Democrats, 74% gave the same responses.

Mora said it was “surprising” that Californians appeared to know enough about UC research to support it.

“Usually, you may think of the UC system as one about teaching and giving degrees. But there was strong approval of research and medical centers.”

The university has six academic health centers and, in Los Angeles County alone, more than a dozen UCLA Health locations. Mora, a UC Berkeley sociology professor, said she thought people’s personal experiences with UC doctors in local communities may have contributed to positive views of UC health programs throughout the state.

IGS co-director Eric Schickler said the data were starkly different from national surveys on higher education.

“If you look at national polling, the story is pretty clear: Republican confidence in higher education has gone down a lot and there’s even some erosion among Democrats in terms of confidence or approval,” said Schickler, a UC Berkeley political science professor. “What you are seeing in California is very strong support in despite those trends.”

One prompt that showed a large gulf between the parties was on taxpayer funding for UC.

Asked whether California should give more or less money to the system, 74% of Democrats said UC should get more. Only 30% of Republicans agreed. UC gets about 9% of its budget from the state, a percentage that has declined over the years amid state budget crunches and payment deferrals.

The institute did not ask Californians about Trump or his education agenda. Instead, the questions were framed in apolitical terms focused on how respondents valued different parts of the UC experience.

Schickler said the Institute of Governmental Studies, while contained within a UC campus, does not take sides in the current political conflict over colleges and universities.

“Our philosophy has always been that the IGS poll is a nonpartisan poll,” he said. “The sample and survey has the same process as any survey we do. This is not a survey UC asked us to do.”

The poll also asked whether Californians would tell a close friend who was admitted to a UC school to enroll or not. In total, 70% of respondents said they would advise enrolling. However, there was a political split: 82% of Democrats said they would share such advice, compared with 51% of Republicans.

Researchers conducted most of the polling in early June, months into cutbacks to U.S. campus grants from the National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation and other federal agencies as the government curtailed research into racially diverse groups as well as LGBTQ+ populations, among other areas.

The surveying largely took place before the Trump administration’s conflict with UC came to a head this month, when the White House demanded $1 billion and sweeping campus changes to restore more than $500 million in research grants at UCLA.

Pollsters asked an additional question in mid-August to a separate set of 4,950 voters who were UC degree recipients. That survey took place after Trump’s latest cuts to UCLA.

It asked UC degree holders whether, “considering the costs of getting your degree from a UC school versus the benefits to you personally, in your opinion was getting your degree worth it or not?”

In response, 82% of Democrats said a UC degree was worth the money, compared with 64% of Republicans.

NEW YORK — President Trump stood among several hundred law enforcement officers, National Guard troops and federal agents at a U.S. Park Police operations center in one of Washington, D.C.’s most dangerous neighborhoods. As the cameras rolled, he offered a stark message about crime, an issue he’s been hammering for decades, as he thanked them for their efforts.

“We’re not playing games,” he said. “We’re going to make it safe. And we’re going to then go on to other places.”

The Republican president is proudly promoting the work of roughly 2,000 National Guard troops in the city, lent by allied governors from at least six Republican-led states. They’re in place to confront what Trump describes as an out-of-control crime wave in the Democratic-run city, though violent crime in Washington, like dozens of cities led by Democrats, has been down significantly since a pandemic high.

Trump and his allies are confident that his stunning decision to dispatch troops to a major American city is a big political winner almost certain to remind voters of why they elected him last fall.

Democrats say this is a fight they’re eager to have.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, an Army veteran, cast Trump’s move as a dangerous political stunt designed to distract the American people from his inability to address persistent inflation, rising energy prices and major health insurance cuts, among other major policy challenges.

“I’m deeply offended, as someone who’s actually worn the uniform, that he would use the lives of these men and women and the activation of these men and women as political pawns,” Moore told the Associated Press.

Trump’s extraordinary federal power grab comes as the term-limited president has threatened to send troops to other American cities led by Democrats, even as voters voice increasing concern about his authoritarian tendencies. And it could be a factor for both sides in elections in Virginia and New Jersey this fall — and next year’s more consequential midterms.

Inside the White House strategy

The president and White House see Trump’s decision to take over the D.C. police department as a political boon and have been eager to publicize the efforts.

The White House offered a livestream of Trump’s Thursday evening appearance, and on Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made a surprise visit to Union Station, D.C.’s busy transit hub, to thank members of the National Guard over Shake Shack burgers.

Each morning, Trump’s press office distributes statistics outlining the previous night’s law enforcement actions, including total arrests and how many of those people are in the country illegally.

The strategy echoes Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, which has often forced Democrats to come to the defense of people living in the country illegally, including some who have committed serious crimes.

A White House official, speaking on background to discuss internal deliberations, dismissed concerns about perceptions of federal overreach in Washington, saying public safety is a fundamental requirement and a priority for residents.

Trump defended his efforts during an interview on “The Todd Starnes Show” on Thursday.

“Because I sent in people to stop crime, they said, ‘He’s a dictator.’ The real people, though, even Democrats, are calling me and saying, ‘It’s unbelievable’ how much it has helped,” he said.

The White House hopes to use its actions in D.C. as a test case to inspire changes in other cities, though Trump has legal power to intervene in Washington that he doesn’t have elsewhere because the city is under partial federal control.

“Everyday Americans who support commonsense policies would deem the removal of more than 600 dangerous criminals from the streets of our nation’s capital a huge success,” said White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers. “The Democrats continue to be wildly unpopular because they oppose efforts to stop violent crime and protect law-abiding citizens.”

Democrats lean in

Moore, Maryland’s Democratic governor, suggested a dark motivation behind Trump’s approach, which is focused almost exclusively on cities with large minority populations led by Democratic mayors of color.

“Once again, we are seeing how these incredibly dangerous and biased tropes are being used about these communities by someone who is not willing to step foot in them, but is willing to stand in the Oval Office and defend them,” Moore said.

Even before Trump called the National Guard to Washington, Democratic mayors across the country have been touting their success in reducing violent crime.

Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, who leads the Democratic Mayors Assn., noted that more than half of the 70 largest Democratic-led cities in the country have seen violent crime decrease so far this year.

“He’s stoking racial division and stoking fear and chaos,” Bibb said. “We need someone who wants to be a collaborator, not a dictator.”

Democratic strategists acknowledge that Trump’s GOP has enjoyed a significant advantage in recent years on the issues of crime and immigration — issues Trump has long sought to connect. But as Democratic officials push back against the federal takeover in Washington, party strategists are offering cautious optimism that Trump’s tactics will backfire.

“This is an opportunity for the party to go on offense on an issue that has plagued us for a long time,” said veteran Democratic strategist Daniel Wessel. “The facts are on our side.”

A closer look at the numbers

FBI statistics released this month show murder and nonnegligent manslaughter in the U.S. in 2024 fell nearly 15% from a year earlier, continuing a decline that’s been seen since a pandemic-era crime spike.

Meanwhile, recent public polling shows that Republicans have enjoyed an advantage over Democrats on the issue of crime.

A CNN/SSRS poll conducted in May found that about 4 in 10 U.S. adults said the Republican Party’s views were closer to their own on crime and policing, while 3 in 10 said they were more aligned with Democrats’ views. About 3 in 10 said neither party reflected their opinions. Other polls conducted in the past few years found a similar gap.

Trump also had a significant edge over Democrat Kamala Harris on the issue in the 2024 election. About half of voters said Trump was better able to handle crime, while about 4 in 10 said this about Harris, according to AP VoteCast, a survey of the American electorate.

At the same time, Americans have expressed more concern about the scope of presidential power since Trump took office for a second time in January.

An AP-NORC poll conducted in April found that about half of U.S. adults said the president has “too much” power in the way the U.S. government operates these days, up from 32% in March 2024.

The unusual military presence in a U.S. city, which featured checkpoints across Washington staffed in some cases by masked federal agents, injected a sense of fear and chaos into daily life for some people in the nation’s capital.

At least one day care center was closed Thursday as childcare staff feared the military action, which has featured a surge in immigration enforcement, while local officials raised concerns about next week’s public school openings.

Moore said he would block any push by Trump to send the National Guard into Baltimore.

“I have not seen anything or any conditions on the ground that I think would justify the mobilization of our National Guard,” he said. “They think they’re winning the political argument. I don’t give a s—- about the political argument.”

Peoples and Colvin write for the Associated Press. AP writers Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux and Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.

SACRAMENTO — Moments after California lawmakers passed a plan designed to undercut attempts by the president and fellow Republicans to keep control of Congress, Gov. Gavin Newsom said the state’s proposed partisan redistricting that favors Democrats is a necessary counterweight to President Trump’s threat to American democracy.

Trump’s assault on vote by mail and decision to send the military into U.S. cities are evidence of his authoritarian policies, and California must do its part to keep him in check, Newsom said.

By deploying federal immigration agents in roving street raids and activating thousands of members of the National Guard in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., Newsom said, Trump is amassing “a private army for Donald Trump.”

“He’s trying to rig the election, he’s trying to set up the conditions where he can claim that the elections were not won fair and square,” Newsom said. “Open your eyes to what is going on in the United States of America in 2025.”

The argument is a preview of the messaging for the ballot measure campaign that Newsom and his Democratic Party allies will be running over the next 74 days.

On Thursday, California lawmakers signed off on a Nov. 4 special election that will put partisan redistricting in front of California voters.

The ballot measure, called Proposition 50, will ask voters to discard the congressional boundaries drawn by the state’s independent redistricting commission in 2021 in favor of partisan districts that could boot as many as five California Republicans out of Congress.

“When all things are equal, and we’re all playing by the same set of rules,” Newsom said, “there’s no question that the Republican Party will be the minority party in the House of Representatives next year.”

California is “responding to what occurred in Texas, we’re neutralizing what occurred, and we’re giving the American people a fair chance,” Newsom said.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina accused Newsom of trying to “rig” the system to advance his own political career.

“Instead of fixing the homelessness, crime, drug, and cost crises crushing the Golden State, Gavin Newsom is tearing up California’s Constitution to advance his presidential ambitions,” Hudson said in a statement.

California’s new lines would neutralize efforts in Texas to redraw their congressional district maps to help elect five more GOP candidates in 2026. The Texas Legislature is expected to approve new district lines this week.

The other option, Newsom said, is for California and Democrats to “roll over and do nothing.”

“I think people all across the country are going to campaign here in California for this,” Newsom said. “They recognize what’s at stake. It’s not just about the state of California. It’s about the United States of America. It’s about rigging the election. It’s about completely gutting the rules.”

Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.

Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi’s decision to appoint an “emergency police commissioner” in Washington is just the latest attempt to change an increasingly uncomfortable subject for the White House. Last month President Trump told the American people he was never briefed on the files regarding Jeffrey Epstein, who in 2019 was charged with sex trafficking minors. We now know that Bondi told the president in May that his name appeared multiple times in those files, which traced Epstein’s operation back to the mid-1990s.

So — either you believe a city experiencing a 30-year low in crime is suddenly in need of an emergency police commissioner or you agree with Joe Rogan’s assessment: This administration is gaslighting the public regarding those files.

Now there will be pundits who will try to say Republicans are too focused on kitchen table issues to care about the Epstein controversy.

If only that were true.

According to the Consumer Price Index, goods cost more today than they did a month ago. And prices are higher than they were a year ago. It would be wonderful if Congress were in session to address kitchen table issues like grocery prices. However, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) ended the House session early to avoid a vote on the release of the Epstein files — a vote that could have displeased Trump. Those are the lengths some in the MAGA movement are willing to go to prevent the public from knowing the truth about Epstein’s clients. That is the backdrop for what is currently happening in the streets of Washington. It’s not inspired by a rise in crime, but by a fear of transparency.

It’s important to look at Bondi’s “emergency police commissioner” decision with clear, discerning eyes because the administration is purposefully conflating the issues of crime and homelessness in order to win back support from Trump’s base. While it is true that the district has made huge progress against crime, and the number of unhoused residents is far lower than a decade ago even though homeless populations nationwide have soared, the rise of conspicuous encampments around Washington is one of the reasons Virginia was almost able to lure away the city’s NBA and NHL teams. However, the nation’s capital was able to keep those sports franchises because of the leadership of Mayor Muriel Bowser.

Instead of taking over the city’s police force, perhaps Bondi should ask Bowser for some advice that could be replicated in other cities nationwide. Ask the mayor’s office what resources it might need to continue its progress on homelessness and crime. But again, this really isn’t about what benefits the people, is it? It’s really about what’s in the best interest of one person.

Now there will be pundits who will try to tell you Republicans are too focused on making this country “great” to worry about who is in the Epstein files. I ask you, when has trampling over democracy ever made us great? In Iran, we contributed to the overthrowing of Mohammad Mosaddegh in the 1950s, and we continue to be at odds with the nation. In Chile in the early 1970s, we moved against Salvador Allende, and it took 20 years to normalize our relationship again.

Here at home, in 2010, the state of Michigan took over the predominantly Black city of Benton Harbor under the guise of a financial emergency. The City Council was prevented from governing as state officials tried to save the city from a crippling pension deficit and other financial shortages. There was temporary reprieve, but Benton Harbor is still on economic life support. That’s because the issue wasn’t the policies of the local government. It was the lasting effects of losing so much tax revenue to a neighboring suburb due to white flight. The explanation for Benton Harbor’s woes lies in the past, not the present.

The same is true in Washington. The relatively young suburbs of McLean and Great Falls, Va., are two of the richest in the country. When you have the same financial obligations of yesteryear but less tax revenue to operate with, there will be shortfalls. And those gaps manifest themselves in many ways — rundown homes, empty storefronts, a lack of school resources.

Those are legitimate plagues affecting every major city. What Bondi is doing in Washington isn’t a cure for what ails it. And when you consider why she’s doing what she’s doing, you are reminded why people are so sick of politics.

YouTube: @LZGrandersonShow

It has been painfully obvious, ever since the presidential election last November, that the Democratic Party’s brand is in tatters.

This week, a Quinnipiac University poll revealed that congressional Democrats have a minuscule 19% approval rating — an all-time low in the history of that particular poll. Earlier in the week, a Harvard CAPS/Harris poll similarly found that the party as a whole has an approval rating of 40% — considerably lower than the Republican Party’s 48% approval rating found by the same poll. Nor can Democrats necessarily rely on any GOP infighting to redound, in seesaw-like fashion, to their own benefit; for all the sturm und drang generated by the “Epstein files” affair, President Trump’s approval ratings have actually increased among Republicans this month.

The issue for Democrats is that their current unpopularity is not a byproduct of the political scandals of the day or the vicissitudes of Trump’s polarizing social media feeds. Rather, the problem for Democrats is structural — and it requires a rethink and a reboot from soup to nuts. As this column argued last November, it is clear that Barack Obama’s winning 2008 political coalition — comprising racial and ethnic minorities, young people and highly educated white voters — has completely withered. “Obamaism” is dead — and Democrats have to reconcile themselves to that demise. At minimum, they should stop taking advice from Obama himself; the 44th president was Kamala Harris’ top 2024 campaign trail surrogate, and we saw how that worked out.

In order for the party to rise up anew, as has often happened throughout American history following a period of dominance from a partisan rival, Democrats are going to have to move beyond their intersectional obsessions and woke grievances that have so greatly alienated large swaths of the American people on issues pertaining to race, gender, immigration, and crime and public safety. And the good news, for conservative Americans who candidly wish the Democratic Party nothing but the worst, is that Democrats seem completely incapable of doing this.

Zohran Mamdani, the 33-year-old recent winner of New York City’s much-discussed Democratic mayoral primary, is a case in point.

The Ugandan-born Shiite Muslim Mamdani is a democratic socialist, but he is better understood as a full-fledged communist. That isn’t hyperbole: One merely needs to consider his proposed policies for New York City and review his broader history of extreme far-left political rhetoric. Mamdani won the primary, and is now seeking the mayor’s office, on a genuinely radical platform: support for citywide “free” bus rides, city-owned grocery stores, a full rent freeze on certain low-income units, outright seizure of private property from arbitrarily “bad” landlords, race-based taxation (an assuredly unconstitutional proposal), a $30 minimum wage and more. A true Marxist, Mamdani has said “abolition of private property” would be an improvement over existing inequality. And he has something of a penchant for quoting Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” too.

But Mamdani’s communism is only part of his overall political persona. He also emphasizes, and trades in, exactly the sort of woke culture warring and intersectional identity politics that have defined the post-Obama Democratic Party. Mamdani is a long-standing harsh critic of Israel who had declined to distance himself from the antisemitic rallying cry “globalize the intifada.” Most recently, he also opposed Trump’s decision to have the U.S. intervene in last month’s Israel-Iran war, condemning it as a “new, dark chapter” that could “plunge the world deeper into chaos.” (In the real world, there were zero American casualties, and the bombing run was followed promptly by a ceasefire.)

There is, to be sure, nothing good down this road for denizens of New York City. If Mamdani wins this fall, expect a massive exodus of people, businesses and capital from the Big Apple — probably to the Sun Belt. But even more relevant: There is nothing good down that road for the national Democratic Party, as a whole. In order to demonstrate that the party has learned anything from its 2024 shellacking and its current abysmal standing, it will have to sound and act less crazy on the tangible issues that affect Americans’ day-to-day lives.

That isn’t happening. If Mamdani’s rise is representative — and it may well be, especially as other far-left firebrands like Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) continue to make outsize noise — then Democrats seem to be moving in the exact opposite direction: full-on Marxism and woke craziness. If the party continues down this path, it will experience nothing but mid- to long-term political pain. But as one of the aforementioned conservatives who wishes the Democratic Party nothing but the worst, I’m not too upset about that.

Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. @josh_hammer

For months, CBS News has been roiled with trepidation that parent company Paramount Global would write a big check to make President Trump’s $20 billion lawsuit go away.

On Tuesday night, those fears came true.

Paramount Global agreed to pay $16 million to settle Trump’s legal salvo against “60 Minutes” over the editing of an interview with his 2024 opponent, then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

Within the news organization, there was anger over what is widely seen as a capitulation to Trump in order to clear a path for Paramount’s $8-billion merger with David Ellison’s Skydance Media. The case was labeled as frivolous by 1st Amendment experts.

But among some CBS News veterans, tempers were calmed by a sobering reality: that the outcome could have been worse.

The biggest concern inside the news division since Trump’s complaint was that the media company would be strong-armed into making an apology or statement of regret over a case that they believed had no merit. Amid the internal anger over the settlement, there is relief that that did not happen.

“Everybody knew that was a line in the sand,” said a relieved CBS News veteran not authorized to comment publicly on the matter.

Another journalist at the network, speaking on the same condition, said the thinking among many was that any financial payment of less than $20 million without an apology would count as a partial win.

As the negotiations to end the suit lingered, it became more apparent that corporate interests overrode any concerns about the appearance of caving to Trump’s demands.

Trump filed suit in October, claiming “60 Minutes” edited an interview with Harris to make her look smarter and bolster her chances in the election, which Trump won decisively. CBS denied the claims, saying the edits were routine.

“If there wasn’t a merger pending and they took this to court they would have won,” the journalist said of Trump’s case. “I think they understood that if they made an apology they would have an internal rebellion and they would have because there was nothing to apologize for.”

Some say that the departures of former “60 Minutes” executive producer Bill Owens and CBS News and stations head Wendy McMahon were enough to satisfy the Trump camp‘s desire for an apology. Both executives were adamant that CBS News did nothing improper in the handling of the Harris of interview.

Trump’s legal team claimed victory.

“President Donald J. Trump delivers another win for the American people as he, once again, holds the Fake News media accountable for their wrongdoing and deceit,” a spokesman said in a statement.

But while “60 Minutes” avoided the humiliation that would have come with a statement of contrition, the program that is the foundation of the news division now has to move forward in an era of media mistrust on the political right and disappointment on the left by those who believe courage is in short supply.

According to several CBS News insiders who spoke to The Times, no one is expected to depart “60 Minutes” in protest of the settlement decision.

Andrew Heyward, a former CBS News president who is now a consultant, said it will be up to the new owners of CBS to maintain the program’s journalistic independence. “If that’s jeopardized in the future, that would be unfortunate for CBS News and the country,” he said.

Though there is anger, many feared a bleak future for the news organization and the rest of the network if Paramount Global couldn’t close the Skydance deal. The lawsuit was seen as an obstacle to the deal, which needs approval from the Federal Communications Commission, run by Trump appointee Brendan Carr.

“We can get outraged all we want, but the fact is we were in a really precarious situation,” said one of the journalists not authorized to speak publicly. “If that merger went dead, I don’t know if anyone would have come along and bought the whole company.”

While ownership change usually generates fear and uncertainty through media organizations, insiders at CBS News say they will be happy to see Paramount Global’s controlling shareholder Shari Redstone in their rearview mirror once the Skydance deal is done.

The feelings inside the news division regarding Skydance range from hope for new investment from deep-pocketed Ellison to resignation that “it can’t get any worse.”

As for any damage to its reputation, CBS News is taking some comfort in the fact that ABC News hasn’t noticeably suffered from its own $16 million settlement over anchor George Stephanopoulos mistakenly saying Trump was convicted of rape rather than sexual abuse in the civil suit brought by E. Jean Carroll. Stephanopoulos signed a new contract at the network amid the controversy and his program “Good Morning America” hasn’t suffered a ratings loss since.

Viewers have high expectations for “60 Minutes,” which after 57 seasons still ranks as the most-watched news program on television (it’s also the most profitable show on CBS). If the program is allowed to maintain the same standard of deep reporting it’s known for, the audience will get past a bad corporate decision, according to Heyward.

“People on the right will say it’s another example of mainstream media getting what it deserves,” Heyward said. “People on the left will say it’s another example of a corporation caving to President Trump for its own selfish interests. And most people will go back to watching ’60 Minutes’ and expect strong independent reporting without fear or favor — that’s what really matters.”

Today we discuss presidential politics, window treatments and disasters of the natural and man-made variety.

Time for Gavin Newsom to start measuring those White House drapes.

Huh?

You know, president of the United States. I’m thinking something Earth-friendly, like recycled hemp.

Wait, what?

Did you catch the nationally televised speech the governor recently gave? The one about “democracy at a crossroads.”

I did.

It was a fine speech and the governor made some important points about President Trump’s reckless commandeering of California’s National Guard, his administration’s indiscriminate immigration raids and the wholly unnecessary dispatch of Marines to Los Angeles. (From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Venice Beach.)

Newsom was plenty justified in his anger and contempt. Trump, acting true to his flame-fanning fashion, turned what was a middling set of protests — nothing local law enforcement couldn’t handle — into yet another assault on our sorely tested Constitution.

Newsom’s speech certainly “met the moment,” to use one of his favorite phrases.

I’ll grant you that. Unlike a lot of extracurricular activities aimed at boosting his presidential prospects, Newsom was addressing a Trump-manufactured crisis unfolding right here at home. It was a moment that called for gubernatorial leadership.

Just the kind of leadership despondent Democrats need.

So it’s been said.

It’s not much of a leap to see Newsom leading the anti-Trump opposition clear to the White House!

Actually, that’s a bigger leap than it takes to clear the Grand Canyon.

Granted, Newsom’s speech received a lot of raves from Democrats across the country. Many are desperate for someone in a position of power to give voice to their blood-boiling, cranium-exploding rage against Trump and his many excesses. Newsom did a good job channeling those emotions and articulating the dangers of an imprudent president run amok.

But let’s not go overboard.

There is no lack of Democrats eager to take on Trump and become the face of the so-called resistance. There is no shortage of Democrats eyeing a 2028 bid for the White House. Those who run won’t be schlepping all the political baggage that Newsom has to tote.

Such as?

Rampant homelessness. An exploding budget deficit. Vast income inequality.

Plus, a lot of social policies that many Californians consider beneficent and broad-minded that, to put it mildly, others around the country consider much less so. Don’t get me wrong. I love California with all my heart and soul. But we have a lot of deep-seated problems and cultural idiosyncrasies that Newsom’s rivals — Democrat and Republican — would be only too happy to hang around his neck.

So let’s not get too caught up in the moment. The fundamentals of the 2028 presidential race haven’t changed based on a single — albeit well-received — speech. It’s still hard to see Democrats turning the party’s fate over to yet another nominee spawned in the liberal stew of San Francisco politics and campaigning with kooky California as a home address.

Stranger things have happened.

True.

That said, 2028 is a zillion political light years and countless news cycles away. First come the midterm elections in November 2026, giving voters their chance to weigh in on Trump and his actions. The verdict will go a long way toward shaping the dynamic in 2028.

Well at least Newsom has brought his A-game to social media. His trolling of Trump is something to behold!

Whatever.

You’re not impressed?

I think it’s best to leave the snark to professionals.

I do, however, have some sympathy for the governor. It’s not easy dealing with someone as spiteful and amoral as the nation’s ax-grinder-in-chief.

Consider, for instance, the disaster relief money that fire-devastated Southern California is counting on. Helping the region in its time of desperate need shouldn’t be remotely political, or part of some red-vs.-blue-state feud. Historically, that sort of federal aid has never been.

But this is Trump we’re dealing with.

To his credit, Newsom tried making nice in the days and weeks following the January firestorm. He ignored the president’s provocations and held what was later described an an amicable session with Trump in the Oval Office. Their working relationship seemed to be a good one.

But few things last with the transactional Trump, save for his pettiness and self-absorption. Asked last week if his “recent dust-ups” with Newsom would impact the granting of wildfire relief, Trump said, “Yeah, maybe.”

He called Newsom incompetent, trotted out more gobbledygook about raking forests and then soliloquized on the nature of personal relationships. “When you don’t like somebody, don’t respect somebody, it’s harder for that person to get money if you’re on top,” Trump said.

Yeesh.

Responding in a posting on X, Newsom correctly noted, “Sucking up to the President should not be a requirement for him to do the right thing for the American people.”

Hard to argue with that.

Yet here we are.

The nation’s second-most populous city is occupied by National Guard and Marine troops. Thousands of people — displaced by disaster, their past lives gone up in smoke — are hostage to the whims of a peevish president who always puts his feelings first and cares nothing for the greater good.

The midterm election can’t come soon enough.

VATICAN CITY — Throughout President Biden’s life, his religion has been a refuge. He fingers a rosary during moments of stress and often attends Mass at the church in Delaware where his son Beau is buried.

But as Biden and Pope Francis prepared for a tete-a-tete Friday at the Vatican — the president’s first stop while traveling in Europe for two international summits — both the flocks they lead, the American people and the Roman Catholic Church, are beset by divisions and contradictions that at times seem irreconcilable.

“They preside over fractured communities,” said Massimo Faggioli, a theology professor at Villanova University who wrote a book about Biden and Catholicism. “They face situations with many similarities.”

The two leaders met for 90 minutes early Friday afternoon, according to the White House, which was longer than expected. Later in the day, Biden said they prayed together for peace and that Francis blessed his rosary.

The president said the conversation focused on the “moral responsibility” of dealing with climate change — the topic of an upcoming summit in Glasgow, Scotland. The president added that they did not discuss abortion. Biden supports abortion rights, a contradiction of Catholic doctrine that is common among Democrats.

“We just talked about the fact that he was happy I was a good Catholic,” Biden said, adding that Francis told him he should continue to receive Communion.

It was a significant statement from the pope on an issue that has stirred political and spiritual controversy over the relationship between politicians who support abortion rights and the church.

Conservative Catholic bishops in the United States are arguing that political leaders who support abortion rights should not receive Communion — the ritual where a priest consecrates bread and wine and then shares it with believers — and the issue is slated for debate during an upcoming episcopal meeting in Baltimore. Because the proposal gained steam after Biden’s election, it’s been viewed as a rebuke of the president.

The controversy reflects an internal debate over whether the Catholic Church should broaden its appeal or adhere more strictly to its core tenets. George Weigel, a distinguished senior fellow at the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center, said some people “claim to be Catholic and yet want to turn Catholicism into a version of liberal Protestantism.”

“What the bishops are discussing is whether Catholic political leaders who are not in full communion with the church because they act in ways that contradict settled Catholic teaching should have the integrity not to present themselves for Holy Communion,” he said.

The Vatican, however, has been wary of a debate that mixes politics and one of the church’s holiest rituals. Francis said last month that he has “never refused the Eucharist to anyone.” Since becoming pope eight years ago, he has sought to distance himself from divisive topics such as same-sex marriage while focusing on more ecumenical issues.

John K. White, professor of politics at the Catholic University of America in Washington, said the pope’s meeting with Biden “sends a message to the American bishops that denying Communion is not something that he approves of.”

The news media were not allowed into the meeting or to catch a glimpse of Biden and Francis together. The Vatican released video of part of an encounter that appeared affectionate, even chummy. At one point, Biden handed the pope a commemorative coin.

“The tradition is, and I’m only kidding about this, the next time I see you and you don’t have it, you have to buy the drinks,” said Biden, who joked that he’s probably the only Irishman that Francis has ever met who doesn’t drink.

The president bid farewell to the pope with a phrase that has become something of a trademark for him — “God love you.”

Biden and Francis have met several times before, starting with a brief encounter when Biden, then vice president, attended Francis’ papal inauguration in 2013.

Then-presidential candidate Joe Biden leaves a church in Wilmington, Del., last year after attending a confirmation Mass for his granddaughter.

(Patrick Semansky / Associated Press)

Two years later, Biden welcomed Francis to the U.S. and brought his family to a private meeting with him shortly after Beau died.

“I wish every grieving parent, brother or sister, mother or father would have had the benefit of his words, his prayers, his presence,” Biden said the following year during a visit to the Vatican, where he met Francis again.

Biden is only the second Catholic president after John F. Kennedy, who was elected in 1960. At that time, the church was still viewed with suspicion by some Americans, and Kennedy assured voters that he believed in the separation of church and state — another way of saying that he would follow the Constitution, not the pope, while in office.

Now, Catholics are represented in the highest levels of American public life. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, is Catholic, as is one of her predecessors, John Boehner, a Republican from Ohio. The majority of Supreme Court justices are Catholic.

Biden keeps a photo of him with Francis in the Oval Office among an assortment of family photos.

The president attends Mass once a week, even when traveling. He made a point of visiting a church during a 2001 trip to China while he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

“I’m going to be there on a Sunday — can I go to church somewhere?” Biden said, according to Frank Januzzi, one of the future president’s staff members at the time.

Although there were large Catholic churches in Beijing where Biden could have attended Mass, he ultimately visited what Januzzi described as a “tiny, hole-in-the-wall” parish in a village outside the Chinese capital. Biden took Communion from an elderly priest there.

“This was an opportunity to make a statement about the importance of freedom of religion and demonstrate his own faith as well,” said Januzzi, who now leads the Mansfield Foundation, an organization dedicated to fostering U.S.-Asia relations.

White, the university professor, recalled attending Mass at a church in Bethesda, Md., in 2015 when Biden and his wife slipped in. It was unexpected, because it was not Biden’s usual parish, but Beau was hospitalized nearby with brain cancer and was near death.

Even from a distance, White said, “You could tell they were in distress.” They received Communion and exchanged the sign of peace — when parishioners shake hands and exchange greetings — and left.

“It wasn’t like he was there to shake a lot of hands,” said White, who later worked on Catholic outreach for Biden’s 2020 campaign. “It wasn’t about that at all.”

Beau’s death was just one of the tragedies that have shaped Biden’s life. In 1972, his first wife and daughter were killed in a car accident shortly after he was first elected to the Senate.

“When people have tragedy, sometimes their faith goes away, or is forged in steel,” White said. “All the tragedies that have beset Biden have reinforced his faith and who he is.”

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a 2026 candidate for California governor, criticized former Vice President Kamala Harris and former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra on Tuesday as complicit in covering up former President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline in office.

Villaraigosa said those actions, in part, lead to President Trump winning the November election. Becerra, who previously served as California Attorney General, is also in the running for governor and Harris is considering jumping into the race. All three are Democrats.

“At the highest levels of our government, those in power were intentionally complicit or told outright lies in a systematic cover up to keep Joe Biden’s mental decline from the public,” Villaraigosa said in a statement. “Now, we have come to learn this cover up includes two prominent California politicians who served as California Attorney General – one who is running for Governor and another who is thinking about running for Governor. Voters deserve to know the truth, what did Kamala Harris and Xavier Becerra know, when did they know it, and most importantly, why didn’t either of them speak out?”

President Joe Biden walks out to speak in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Nov. 26, 2024.

(Ben Curtis / Associated Press)

Attempts to reach representatives for Harris and Beccera were unsuccessful Tuesday afternoon.

Villaraigosa based his remarks on excerpts from “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” written by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson and publicly released Tuesday.

The book, largely relying on anonymous sources, argues that Biden’s confidants and inner circle kept his deteriorating state from the American people, resulting in the Republican victory in the 2024 presidential election.

“Kamala Harris and Xavier Becerra took an oath of office and were entrusted to protect the American people, but instead Kamala Harris repeatedly said there was nothing wrong with Biden and Becerra turned a blind eye,” Villaraigosa said.

In March 2024, I wrote a column about President Biden’s State of the Union speech with a confident headline that made perfect sense to me at the time: “Chill out, my fellow Americans. Your president isn’t cognitively impaired.”

Boy was I wrong. For months, critics and supporters had been raising pointed questions about the president’s physical health and intellectual acuity. Had he won the November election, after all, he would have been the oldest president in American history. (Since he lost, that honor goes to the current White House occupant.) But during his hourlong speech to Congress, Biden had sparred repeatedly with Republican hecklers. He was on his game. Democrats were relieved.

Having watched Trump raise spurious questions during the 2016 campaign about Hillary Clinton’s health —particularly after she was visibly ill at a 9/11 ceremony in Manhattan — I thought Republicans were harping on the issue of Biden’s age more as a tactic than anything else. It was a good distraction, considering that his opponent, then-former President Trump, was only a few years younger and given to rambling incoherence himself.

Republicans may have exaggerated Biden’s issues, but they were, as we soon learned, in the main, correct. By the time the president stood slack-jawed and confused on a debate stage with Trump only three months after his triumphant State of the Union address, it was clear that something was very, very wrong. The debate stage can be a cruel place, and with no prepared speech loaded onto a teleprompter, Biden was suddenly naked in the spotlight. It was not a pretty sight, and suddenly, he was no longer a tenable presidential candidate.

But why are we talking about this old news when we have a president flouting every ethical norm of his office, wantonly violating the Constitution and cozying up to murderous dictators such as Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi crown prince whom the CIA concluded had ordered the 2018 killing and dismemberment of Washington Post columnist and Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi?

Biden is back in the news thanks to “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” by longtime CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios White House correspondent Alex Thompson. The book, whose subtitle says it all, has been excerpted in the New Yorker and reviewed by other publications. Its publication date is Tuesday.

I tried to get my hands on a copy, but the publishing house blew me off.

In any case, so much of the book’s insider information has been made available that it is possible to make a convincing case, even from a distance, that Biden’s insistence on running for a second term, despite his promise to be a one-term “bridge,” and his belated decision to drop out, is how we got to where we are today: in the grip of a chaotic, despotic self-dealing president who is turning the Constitution on its head.

Heckuva job, Joe!

I was as surprised as anyone that Biden became the nominee in 2020. I recall watching him stump in Iowa, certain that he was too old for the job. Onstage, he was shouty, his voice rising and falling for no particular reason — “mistaking volume for passion,” as I wrote back then.

And yet, for all his faults, gaffes and frailties, I would still prefer an impaired Biden to the corrupt felon who currently occupies the Oval Office.

Those who have read “Original Sin” say that it does not contain any bombshells. What it offers is a detailed account of the systematic effort by family and advisors to conceal the truth from the American people, and calls out the cowardly Democratic leaders who knew Biden was not up to a second term but were afraid to cross him.

As the Washington Post put it in its review: “The book is a damning account of an elderly, egotistical president shielded from reality by a slavish coterie of loyalists and family members united by a shared, seemingly ironclad sense of denial and a determination to smear anyone who dared to question the president’s fitness for office as a threat to the republic covertly working on behalf of Trump.”

Co-author Thompson, as it happens, was one of the few mainstream political journalists to aggressively report on Biden’s worsening condition and the struggle — you might even call it gaslighting — to keep it from the public.

For that, the White House Correspondents’ Assn. awarded him its top honor in April. In his acceptance speech, Thompson was unflinching.

“President Biden’s decline and its cover-up by the people around him is a reminder that every White House, regardless of party, is capable of deception,” he said. “But being truth tellers also means telling the truth about ourselves. We, myself included, missed a lot of this story, and some people trust us less because of it. We bear some responsibility for faith in the media being at such lows. … We should have done better.”

I take his point. We are now living with the consequences of our failures.

@rabcarian.bsky.social and @rabcarian