arent

Like with cigarettes, la migra should come with a warning label: Proximity to ICE could be hazardous for your health.

From Los Angeles to Chicago, Portlandand New York, the evidence is ample enough that wherever Trump sends in the immigration agency, people get hurt. And not just protesters and immigrants.

That includes 13 police officers tear-gassed in Chicago earlier this month. And, now, a U.S. marshal.

Which brings us to what happened in South L.A. on Tuesday.

Federal agents boxed in the Toyota Camry of local TikToker Carlitos Ricardo Parias — better known to his hundreds of thousands of followers as Richard LA. As Parias allegedly tried to rev his way out of the trap, an ICE agent opened fire. One bullet hit the 44-year-old Mexican immigrant — and another ricocheted into the hand of a deputy U.S. marshal.

Neither suffered life-threatening injuries, but it’s easy to imagine that things could have easily turned out worse. Such is the chaos that Trump has caused by unleashing shock troops into U.S. cities.

Rather than take responsibility and apologize for an incident that could’ve easily been lethal, Team Trump went into their default spin mode of blaming everyone but themselves.

Homeland Security assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that the shooting was “the consequences of conduct and rhetoric by sanctuary politicians and activists who urge illegal aliens to resist arrest.”

Acting U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli chimed in on social media soon after: “I urge California public officials to moderate their rhetoric toward federal law enforcement. Encouraging resistance to federal agents can lead to deadly consequences.” Hours later, he called Times reporter James Queally “an absolute joke, not a journalist” because my colleague noted it’s standard practice by most American law enforcement agencies to not shoot at moving vehicles. One reason is that it increases the chance of so-called friendly fire.

Federal authorities accuse Parias of ramming his car into agents’ vehicles after they boxed him in. He is being charged with assault on a federal officer.

Time, and hopefully, evidence, will show what happened — and very important, what led to what happened.

The Trump administration keeps claiming that the public anger against its immigration actions is making the job more dangerous for la migra and their sister agencies. McLaughlin and her boss, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, keep saying there’s been a 1,000% increase in assaults on immigration agents this year like an incantation. Instead of offering concrete figures, they use the supposed stat as a shield against allegations ICE tactics are going too far and as a weapon to excuse the very brutality ICE claims it doesn’t practice.

Well, even if what they say is true, there’s only one side that’s making the job more dangerous for la migra and others during raids:

La migra.

It turns out that if you send in phalanxes of largely masked federal agents to bully and intimidate people in American cities, Americans tend not to take kindly to it.

Who knew?

Gregory Bovino, center, of U.S. Border Patrol, marches with federal agents to the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building in Los Angeles on Aug. 14.

(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

We’re about to enter the sixth month of Trump’s plan to rid the country of undocumented immigrants. Sycophants are bragging that he’s doing the job, but they’re not caring to look at the mess left in its wake that’s becoming more and more perilous for everyone involved. They insist that those who are executing and planning raids are professionals, but professionals don’t make constant pendejos out of themselves.

Professionals don’t bring squadrons to chase after tamale ladies or day laborers, or stage flashy raids of apartments and parks that accomplish little else than footage for propaganda videos. They don’t go into neighborhoods with intimidation on their mind and ready to rough up anyone who gets in their way.

A ProPublica investigation showed that ICE has detained at least 170 U.S. citizens this year, many whom offered proof that they were in this country legally as la migra cuffed them and hauled them off to detention centers.

Professionals don’t lie like there’s a bonus attached to it — but that’s what Trump’s deportation Leviathan keeps doing. In September, McLaughlin put out a news release arguing that the shooting death of 38-year-old Silverio Villegas González in Chicago by an ICE agent was justified because he was dragged a “significant distance” and suffered serious injuries. Yet body cam footage of local police who showed up to the scene captured the two ICE agents involved in the incident describing their injuries as “nothing major.”

Closer to home, a federal jury in Los Angeles last month acquitted an activist of striking a Border Patrol agent after federal public defender Cuauhtémoc Ortega screened footage that contradicted the government’s case and poked holes in the testimony of Border Patrol staff and supervisors. Last week, ICE agents detained Oxnard activist Leonardo Martinez after a collision between their Jeep and his truck. McLaughlin initially blamed the incident on an “agitator group … engaged in recording and verbal harassment,” but footage first published by L.A. Taco showed that la migra trailed Martinez and then crashed into him twice — not the other way around.

Professionals don’t host social media accounts that regularly spew memes that paint the picture of an American homeland where white makes right and everyone else must be eliminated, like the Department of Homeland Security does. A recent post featured medieval knights wearing chain mail and helmets and wielding longswords as they encircle the slogan “The Enemies are at the Gates” above ICE’s job listing website.

The Trump administration has normalized racism and has turned cruelty into a virtue — then its mouthpieces gasp in mock horror when people resist its officially sanctioned jackbootery.

This evil buffoonery comes straight from a president who reacted to the millions of Americans who protested this weekend at No Kings rallies by posting on social media an AI-generated video of him wearing a crown and dropping feces on his critics from a jet fighter. And yet McLaughlin, Noem and other Trump bobbleheads have the gall to question why politicians decry la migra while regular people follow and film them during raids when not shouting obscenities and taunts at them?

As I’ve written before, there’s never a nice way to conduct an immigration raid but there’s always a better way. Or at least a way that’s not dripping with malevolence.

Meanwhile, ICE is currently on a hiring spree thanks to Trump’s Bloated Beastly Bill and and has cut its training program from six months to 48 days, according to The Atlantic. It’s a desperate and potentially reckless recruitment drive.

And if you think rapidly piling more people into a clown car is going to produce less clown-like behavior by ICE on the streets of American cities, boy do I have news for you.

The scary thing about retirement is that it’s hard to know exactly how much money you’ll need to cover your costs until that period of life begins. Sure, you can estimate a budget based on certain assumptions, like where you’ll live and how you’ll spend your days. But nailing down an exact budget is pretty difficult.

Meanwhile, one of the most tricky retirement expenses to estimate is none other than healthcare. That’s because the cost there will hinge on factors like:

• How long you live
• What health issues you end up experiencing
• What Medicare plan you choose

Image source: Getty Images.

Still, it’s important to have a basic handle on what healthcare might cost you down the line. And recent data reveals that a good chunk of Americans are clueless in that regard.

Do you know what you might spend on healthcare in retirement?

In a recent report, Fidelity found that the typical 65-year-old today can expect to spend $172,500 on healthcare costs during retirement. But it also found that 20% of Americans have never thought about what healthcare might cost them down the line.

There are two reasons it’s important to plan for healthcare costs in retirement. First, it’s one expense that’s non-negotiable.

You can downsize your home if the costs of maintaining it are too high. And you can move to a state that’s cheaper if it helps you stretch your income and Social Security benefits. But you can’t not pay for healthcare. If you need a certain medication to function, you may not have a choice about taking it.

Secondly, healthcare has, for many years, outpaced broad inflation. When Fidelity first started estimating healthcare costs for retirement back in 2002, it found that the typical senior would spend $80,000 throughout their senior years. In the past two decades and change, that projection has more than doubled. And chances are, it’ll continue to climb.

Have a plan for tackling healthcare expenses

There are steps you can take to make healthcare in retirement more affordable, like going to your scheduled physicals and screening appointments to get ahead of potential issues and choosing the right Medicare plan. But there may be only so much you can do to keep your costs down.

That’s why it’s so important to save well for healthcare specifically. And while you could always boost your IRA or 401(k) plan contributions, you may want to allocate funds in a separate account specifically for healthcare.

In that regard, a health savings account, or HSA, is a great option to look at. The nice thing about HSAs is that they’re triple tax-advantaged, which means:

• Contributions go in tax-free
• Investment gains are tax-free
• Withdrawals are tax-free when used to cover qualifying healthcare expenses

Plus, HSAs are extremely flexible. You can withdraw your money at any time, and your money will never expire.

Also, if you end up in the enviable position of having lower healthcare costs in retirement than expected, your HSA won’t go to waste. When you’re under age 65, HSA withdrawals for non-medical expenses incur a steep penalty. But that penalty is waived once you turn 65, at which point an HSA can function like a traditional IRA or 401(k) plan.

Between Medicare premiums, deductibles, copays, and other expenses, you may find that healthcare in retirement costs more than expected. Read up on healthcare costs so you’re not caught off guard once your career comes to an end. Better yet, make sure you’re saving for your future healthcare needs so you never have to be in a position where you have to skimp on care because of the price tag attached to it.

Would the Dodgers have paid $4 million for Shohei Ohtani’s production on Friday night?

“Maybe I would have,” team owner Mark Walter said with a laugh.

Four million dollars is how much Ohtani has received from the Dodgers.

Not for the game. Not for the week. Not for the year.

For this year and last year.

Ohtani could be the greatest player in baseball history. Is he also the greatest free-agent acquisition of all-time?

“You bet,” Walter said.

Even before Ohtani blasted three homers and struck out 10 batters over six scoreless innings in a historic performance to secure his team’s place in the World Series, the Dodgers were a target of complaints over the perception they were buying championships. Their payroll this season is more than $416 million, according to Spotrac.

During the on-field celebration that followed the 5-1 victory over the Milwaukee Brewers in Game 4 of the National League Championship Series, manager Dave Roberts told the Dodger Stadium crowd, “I’ll tell you, before this season started, they said the Dodgers are ruining baseball. Let’s get four more wins and really ruin baseball!”

What detractors ignore is how the Dodgers aren’t the only team that spent big dollars this year to chase a title. As Ohtani’s contract demonstrates, it’s how they spend that separates them from the sport’s other wealthy franchises.

The New York Mets spent more than $340 million, the New York Yankees $319 million and the Philadelphia Phillies $308 million. None of them are still playing.

The Dodgers are still playing, and one of the reasons is because of how opportunistic they are.

When the Boston Red Sox were looking for a place to dump Mookie Betts before he became a free agent, the Dodgers traded for him and signed him to an extension. When the Atlanta Braves refused to extend a six-year offer to Freddie Freeman, the Dodgers stepped in and did.

Something else that helps: Players want to play for them.

Consider the case of the San Francisco Giants, who can’t talk star players into taking their money.

The Giants pursued Bryce Harper, who turned them down. They pursued Aaron Judge, who turned them down. They pursued Ohtani, who turned them down. They pursued Yoshinobu Yamamoto, who turned them down.

Notice a pattern?

Unable to recruit an impact hitter in free agency, the Giants turned their attention to the trade market and acquired a distressed asset in malcontent Rafael Devers. They still missed the postseason.

The Dodgers don’t have any such problems attracting talent. Classified as an international amateur because he was under the age of 25, Roki Sasaki was eligible to sign only a minor-league contract this winter. While the signing bonuses that could be offered varied from team to team, the differences were relatively small. Sasaki was urged by his agent to minimize financial considerations when picking a team.

Sasaki chose the Dodgers.

Players such as Blake Snell, Will Smith and Max Muncy signed what could be below-market deals to come to or stay with the Dodgers.

There is also the Ohtani factor.

Ohtani didn’t want the team that signed him to be financially hamstrung, which is why he insisted that it defer the majority of his 10-year, $700-million contract. The Dodgers are paying Ohtani just $2 million annually, with the remainder owed after he retires.

Without Ohtani agreeing to delayed payments, who knows if the Dodgers would have signed the other pitchers who comprise their dominant rotation, Yamamoto, Snell and Tyler Glasnow.

None of this is to say the Dodgers haven’t made any mistakes, the $102 million they committed to Trevor Bauer a decision they would certainly like to take back.

But the point is they spend.

“We put money into the team, as you know,” Walter said. “We’re trying to win.”

Nothing is stopping any other team from making the financial commitments necessary to compete with the Dodgers. Franchises don’t have to make annual profits to be lucrative, as their values have skyrocketed. Teams that were purchased for hundreds of millions of dollars are now worth billions.

Example: Arte Moreno bought the Angels in 2003 for $183.5 million. Forbes values them today at $2.75 billion. If or when Moreno sells the team, he will receive a huge return on his investment.

The calls for a salary cap are nothing more than justifications by cheap owners for their refusal to invest in the civic institutions under their control.

The Dodgers aren’t ruining baseball. They might not do everything right, but as far as their spending is concerned, they’re doing right by their fans.

Gov. Gavin Newsom answering the Republican redistricting power-grab in Texas with a plan of his own is a powerful example of how Golden State Democrats are standing up to President Trump and firing up their base. But while the partisan fireworks draw attention, California Democrats are also quietly offering a different kind of model for the national party that may prove more meaningful in the long run. They’re not just resisting Trump; they’re actually governing.

Forget what you think you know about California and its lefty Democrats. They’re inching to the center, meeting voters where they are, and it’s improving people’s lives.

Just look at San Francisco, long seen as a dysfunctional emblem of failed progressive governance.

The city’s new mayor, Daniel Lurie, a nonprofit leader and philanthropist, has shaken off left-wing taboos and focused on delivering results. Instead of defunding the police, he’s hiring more officers and cracking down on shoplifting and drug crimes. Instead of demonizing the business community, he’s partnering with them. He’s also reforming zoning laws to make it easier to build more housing, which should ease the city’s affordability crunch and the homelessness crisis. Lurie has been in office less than a year, but already crime is plummeting and his approval rate has reached 73%.

National Democrats can find a lesson here: Voters care about results, not just empathy and ideology.

In Sacramento, Newsom and legislative Democrats are taking a similar tack, with a stubborn focus on affordability and the courage to stare down opposition, even in their own coalition. For example, the Legislature recently reformed the California Environmental Quality Act, a well-intentioned 50-year-old law that had been twisted to obstruct construction projects, clean energy development and public transportation. This angered some powerful environmental activists, but it will ultimately help bring down costs for housing and energy.

CEQA reform is emblematic of California’s new, more balanced approach on some thorny issues, like energy and climate. The state recently announced that two-thirds of its power now comes from clean energy sources — a major achievement. At the same time, Newsom and the Legislature agreed to a package of bills that will increase oil drilling while extending the state’s cap-and-trade program. Together, the package can reduce energy costs for Californians and strengthen our state’s chances of reaching carbon neutrality by 2045. Some environmental justice advocates and climate purists oppose the deal, but it’s an example of how to make progress in the long term while addressing affordability in the short term.

Immigration is another example: Newsom and other leading California Democrats continue to stand up to the Trump administration’s inhumane immigration policies, including suing to stop the deployment of troops to Los Angeles. But they also recently passed a budget that pulls back on costly plans to provide health insurance to all low-income undocumented immigrants.

This reflects the new California model: principled resistance and pragmatic governance. The results speak for themselves. The Golden State recently surpassed Japan to become the fourth-largest economy in the world.

Democratic leaders are making these moves because they are listening to voters who consistently say that the high cost of living is their top concern.

In 2024, these concerns contributed to a surprising number of Californians abandoning Democrats, even with Kamala Harris, the state’s former U.S. senator and attorney general, on the ticket. Trump flipped 10 counties and boosted his support in 45. Since 2016, 72% of California counties have gotten redder, including many with heavy Latino populations.

Democrats are paying attention and are wisely changing course. Being responsive to voter concerns doesn’t have to mean sacrificing core values, but it does require new approaches when the old ways aren’t working.

Karen Skelton (whose father is a political columnist for the Los Angeles Times) is a political strategist, having worked in the White House under Presidents Clinton and Biden and at the United States Departments of Energy, Transportation and Justice.

Well, it is starting to appear that we are on the way to another in a series of mediocre football seasons at my alma mater UCLA.

I am now officially in the “I don’t care about UCLA Football anymore” camp. I graduated from UCLA in 1975 and while every once in a while UCLA will have a somewhat successful season, the best they seem to be able to do is be invited to a second-tier bowl game. The College Football Playoff? Forget about it.

Coach DeShaun Foster is very clearly in way over his head. I predict he will be gone after this season.

Bruce Dunklin
Thousand Oaks

It has to be painfully obvious that the DeShaun Foster experiment at head coach is a dismal failure. The loss to UNLV was not just embarrassing but shameful. It was once said that Foster was Karl Dorrell 2.0, but that is unfair. Dorrell had a 10-win season and beat USC. Coach “We’re Close” Foster is in way over his head. His team is undisciplined and unprepared. This clueless performance will lead to a completely empty Rose Bowl and eventual desertion of NIL sponsors. What is the athletic department going to do when we lose to New Mexico and go 0-12 for the year?

Thomas Auyong
Diamond Bar

DeShaun Foster has to be the worst head coach in UCLA history. If a team is a reflection of their coach, then this is the worst UCLA team every. Does the team have a weight program? They are getting pushed around out there and it’s only going to get uglier. We are going to lose 100-0 to Ohio State.

Ed Villanueva
Chino Hills

UCLA fell for the third consecutive game to open the season, with their drubbing at the hands of New Mexico. Maybe it’s time for AD Martin Jarmond to consider dropping the football program to a lower division, or just dropping football completely (the latter might help balance the athletic budget). Either way, coach DeShaun Foster and the Bruins are in for a long season.

Chris Sorce
Fountain Valley

My 98-year-old father and I are 25-year UCLA football season-ticket holders. We love our Bruin football, but let’s face facts. When our AD, Martin Jarmond, hired coach DeShaun Foster, he looked at us with a straight face and told us that they had interviewed upward of 40 candidates for the head coaching position and that Foster was the best of the group. A man with no offensive, defensive or head-coaching experience.

It sadly is now painfully obvious that Jarmond and Foster should be replaced with more experienced and qualified candidates.

Christopher Armen
Woodland Hills

Let’s be honest, certificates of deposit (CDs) don’t exactly scream excitement. But they’re way better than earning 0.01% on your savings while inflation eats away at your money.

Right now, top CDs are paying over 4.00% APY — and with the Fed likely to cut interest rates a couple times before year end, that kind of guaranteed return is worth paying attention to.

Inflation costs more than you think

Let’s say you’ve got $10,000 sitting in a checking account earning basically nothing. If inflation is running at 2.7%, then you’re losing about $270 in purchasing power this year.

You don’t see it leave your account. But slowly, silently, your money buys less and less.

That’s why keeping cash in low-interest accounts is riskier than it seems. You’re not just missing out on returns — you’re falling behind.

The upside of CDs: Fixed returns

CDs are like the tortoise in the old fable — slow, steady, and totally underestimated.

But their superpower is certainty. You lock in a fixed interest rate, and you know exactly how much you’ll earn and when. And that predictability matters, especially in today’s economy.

Right now, top-paying CDs offer over 4.00% APY, and some lock-in periods are as short as three months. You won’t get rich overnight. But the right CD can help you keep pace with inflation — and even come out ahead.

For example, a $10,000 deposit into a 12-month CD earning 4.00% APY will grow to $10,400 in a year. Even if inflation stays around 2.7%, you’re still netting a positive return — something most checking and savings accounts can’t offer right now.

When a CD beats a high-yield savings account

High-yield savings accounts (HYSAs) are great for flexibility. You can add or withdraw money whenever you want, and the best online banks still offer APYs in the 4.00% range.

But the trade-off is that HYSA rates can drop at any time.

CDs, on the other hand, lock in your rate for a set term. So even if interest rates fall, you’ll keep earning that guaranteed return until your CD matures.

So how do you choose between the two?

• An HYSA is best if you need access to your cash anytime, like for emergency funds or upcoming expenses
• CDs are best for money you know you won’t need for a few months or longer. You can lock in today’s great APYs and continue earning no matter what happens to interest rates.

Sometimes a hybrid strategy works best. Splitting your savings between both an HYSA and CDs can give you the best of both worlds. You’ll stay flexible and earn more.

Don’t wait for rates to drop

According to the CME FedWatch Tool, interest rate traders are pricing in a 100% probability that the Federal Reserve will cut rates at its next meeting.

If that happens, banks will almost certainly start lowering APYs on savings accounts and CDs shortly after (some have already started pulling back in anticipation of a rate cut).

That means the clock is ticking.

If you’re thinking about opening a CD, doing it now could help you lock in a high rate before the market shifts. Even a short-term CD opened today could earn hundreds more than the same account opened just a few weeks from now.

Compare all the top CD rates and lock in a 4.00%+ APY while they last.

What makes someone suspicious enough to be grabbed by masked federal authorities?

Is it a Mexican family eating dinner at a table near a taco truck?

Afghan women in hijabs working at a Middle Eastern market?

South Asian girls in colorful lehengas, speaking Hindi at an Indian wedding?

According to Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing a concurrence in the Supreme Court’s emergency ruling allowing roving immigration raids in Los Angeles, any of these could be fair game, using law and “common sense.”

Brown people, speaking brown languages, hanging out with other brown people, and doing brown people things like working low-wage jobs now meets the legal standard of “reasonable suspicion” required for immigration stops.

Living while brown has become the new driving while Black.

Of course, this particular high court ruling — and our general angst — has centered on Latino immigrants. That’s fair, and understandable. In California, about half of our immigrants are from Mexico, and thousands more from other Latin and South American countries.

But increasingly, especially for newer immigrants, more folks are coming from Africa and Asian countries such as China and India — some of which, you may recall, Donald Trump called “shithole countries” way back in 2018, while questioning why America doesn’t take more immigrants from white places such as Norway.

It’s a dangerous mistake to think Trump’s immigration purge is just about Latinos. He’s made that clear himself. We have reached the point in our burgeoning white nationalism when our high court has deemed brown synonymous with illegal, regardless of what country that pigment originated in. False distinctions about who is being targeted create divisions at a time when solidarity is our greatest power.

“It’s really about racial subordination, and this is really about promoting white supremacy in this nation,” George Galvis, executive director of Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, told me. He’s part Native American and part Latino, and 100% against policies like this one that target people by skin color.

Mexico, India, China, Iran. People from these places may not always see what they have in common, but let me help you out.

Racists see two colors: white and not white. Although this particular case was filed on behalf of Latino defendants, there is nothing in it that limits its scope to Latinos.

“It’s not targeting, you know, Eastern Europeans. It’s not targeting people who are Caucasian,” said Amr Shabaik, legal director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in L.A., a nonprofit civil rights organization advocating for American Muslims. “This is going to be on Black and brown communities, and that’s who’s going to feel the brunt.”

For Black Americans, this argument is as old as dirt. Our criminal justice system, our society, has a long and documented history of viewing Black Americans with suspicion — considering it “common sense” to think they’re up to something nefarious for actions like getting behind the wheel of a car. But, for the most part, our courts have frowned upon such obvious racism — though not always.

That anti-Black discrimination can be seen today in Trump’s deployment of the National Guard into urban centers in what Trump has described as a “war” on crime, a callback to the war on drugs of the 1990s that targeted Black Americans with devastating consequences.

This ruling on immigration enforcement goes hand-in-hand with that military deployment, two prongs in a strategy to wear away our outrage and shock at the dismantling of civil rights.

As Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out in her dissent, the 4th Amendment is supposed to protect us all from “arbitrary interference” by law enforcement.

“After today,” she wrote, “that may no longer be true for those who happen to look a certain way, speak a certain way, and appear to work a certain type of legitimate job that pays very little.”

That makes this ruling “unconscionably irreconcilable” with the Constitution, she wrote.

ICE has detained about 67,000 people across the country since last October, according to government data. Of those, almost 18,000 are from Mexico. Detentions of people from Guatemala and Honduras add almost 14,000 Latinos to that number. Places including Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela add thousands more. Certainly, by any measure, Latinos are bearing the brunt of immigration enforcement.

Other parts of the brown world are not immune, however. More than 2,800 people from India have been detained, as have more than 1,400 Chinese people. Thousands of people from across Africa, including more than 800 Egyptians, have been locked up, too.

So we are not just talking about Latino people at car washes or Home Depots. We are talking about Artesia’s Little India; Mid-City’s Little Ethiopia; the Sri Lankan community in West Covina.

We are talking about Sacramento’s Stockton Boulevard, where Vietnamese men congregate in the cafes every afternoon.

We are talking about the farms, schools and towns of the Central Valley and the Central Coast, where Latino and Asian immigrants grow our food.

We are talking about cities such as Fremont in the Bay Area, where 50% of the population is Asian, from places including India, China and the Philippines.

We are talking about California, where immigrants make up 27% of the state’s population, more than double the national average. And yes, many of them lack documents, or live in families of mixed status.

A recent UC Merced study found that there are about 2.2 million undocumented immigrants in California. Of those, about two-thirds have been here more than a decade, and half have been here for more than 20 years.

“This isn’t about enforcing immigration laws — it’s about targeting Latinos and anyone who doesn’t look or sound like Stephen Miller’s idea of an American, including U.S. citizens and children, to deliberately harm California’s families and small businesses,” Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on social media. “Trump’s private police force now has a green light to come after your family — and every person is now a target.”

Remember a few short months ago when our dear leader swore they were only going after criminals? How quickly did that morph into criminals being anyone who had crossed the border illegally?

And now, it has openly become anyone who is brown — and we are not even shocked. We are happily debating what the rules of these broad sweeps will be, having given up entirely on the fact that broad sweeps are horrific.

Do you think it will stop with immigration, or even crime? What about LGBTQ+ people? Or protesters? Who becomes the next threat?

Immigration sweeps are not a Latino problem, a Latino fear. We have opened the door to target people who “common sense” tells us are un-American.

The only way to close that door is with our collective strength, undivided by the kind of “common sense” discrimination that men like Kavanaugh embrace.

It was like Orel Hershiser could hear what Dodger fans were screaming at their TV.

Because, as slumping closer Tanner Scott came trotting into a nightmare ninth inning in Baltimore on Saturday night, the club’s color analyst on SportsNet LA immediately tried to offer a rationalization for his entrance.

“You might be asking, why Tanner Scott tonight?” Hershiser said, moments after the SNLA broadcast showed a clip of the left-hander getting walked off the night before, and moments before he’d get walked off again on a bases-loaded single to end Saturday’s disastrous loss to the Orioles.

Well, Hershiser continued, “If the Dodgers are going to go deep into October, and go back-to-back as world champions, the people Dave Roberts is bringing in have to get it right.”

An unsatisfying answer, perhaps. But one that reflects the precarious reality of the Dodgers’ bullpen situation — with the team feeling little choice but to rely on the high-profile relievers this year’s team was built around.

Granted, Saturday’s collapse epitomized just how difficult that faith has been to maintain.

It starts with Scott, the $72-million offseason signing who was supposed to cement the back end of the unit — not require an explanation from team broadcasters upon entering games in key situations.

It’s been compounded by inconsistencies elsewhere, from similarly scuffling offseason signing Kirby Yates; to Blake Treinen and the unreliable form he has shown since returning from an elbow injury, including a meltdown earlier in Saturday’s ninth inning that forced Scott into an unforgiving situation.

Injuries have also hampered the continuity of the bullpen time and again this season. Hard-throwing right-hander Michael Kopech has been limited to 10 appearances because of arm and knee troubles. Left-handed stalwart Alex Vesia has missed the last two weeks with an oblique strain (though he was set to be activated for this week’s homestand). The team’s only notable trade deadline reliever acquisition, Brock Stewart, made just four outings before going down with a shoulder injury. Evan Phillips is already out for the year with Tommy John surgery. It’s unclear if Brusdar Graterol will return from a shoulder procedure in time to pitch at all this year.

All of those names were supposed to make up the core of this year’s relief unit — the high-leverage pieces that the front office decided to invest in, and Roberts expected he’d be able to trust.

Instead, they’ve been the biggest culprits behind the bullpen’s 4.21 ERA on the season (which ranks 19th in the majors) and a spate of recent painful late-game losses that have kept the Dodgers mired in a two-month slump.

Moving forward, it has left Roberts and his club facing a difficult decision: Continue to trust that underperforming crop of supposed lockdown arms, or look for alternatives from less proven options elsewhere?

For now, the former appears to remain their preferred choice.

If the bullpen is to turn things around, they’ve decided, it will require their biggest names to simply start pitching better.

“These are the guys we signed off on, we believe in,” Roberts said Sunday. “Not to say that you’ve got to have blind faith forever. I understand that. But … I’m going to keep giving [opportunities] to them, until I don’t.”

Pitching coach Mark Prior echoed that same message, reiterating that “those are our guys, and we believe in them,” even as the team searches for late-season improvements.

“The results haven’t been there. It hasn’t been good,” Prior added. “[But we have to] move forward with the three weeks we have left in the season and get on a run. Things happen very fast in this game.”

Prior pointed to last season, when the Dodgers faced other — though much less alarming — bullpen questions leading up to the playoffs. At that time, they didn’t have a set closer in the ninth inning. Several key pieces were either hurt or scuffling in the second half.

Treinen, in particular, was one of the bigger uncertainties, after missing two weeks in August with a hip injury that also doubled as a reset amid a midseason slump. Once he returned, however, the right-hander transformed into the Dodgers’ most trusted late-game option. “Next thing you know, he’s the MVP of our team in the playoffs,” Prior said.

The stability he provided also helped the rest of the bullpen, which effectively carried the Dodgers to their World Series title, flourish around him.

“If they see a guy having some success, things just snowball,” Prior said, describing how successes (and failures) can often feel contagious among a bullpen at large.

That’s the kind of dynamic the Dodgers are trying to rediscover again this year.

It’s why Scott (despite his 4.56 ERA and 12 combined blown saves and losing decisions) keeps getting late-game opportunities. And why Treinen (4.26 ERA), Yates (4.71 ERA) and other disappointments in the Dodgers’ beleaguered relief corps have been given continued leash to work to get back to the best version of themselves.

On paper, those are the most veteran, most experienced, and most trustworthy options on this year’s team. They have, as Roberts has repeatedly reiterated of late, the kind of “track record” the club is still willing to bet on. If just a couple of them can figure things out and get on a dominant run, more unit-wide success might follow in their wake.

“When you’re talking about winning 11 games in October, getting there [requires] guys that you can trust in that hot box of moments,” Roberts said.

“[This] is who we have, it’s not like that’s changing,” Prior added. “So we just gotta keep getting there.”

That doesn’t mean the team will endure more struggles forever. The clock is ticking on the Dodgers’ expected leverage group to finally find a way to realize their potential.

On Sunday morning, for example, Roberts said Scott could be shifted out of his ninth-inning role as he tries to iron out command problems that have led him to consistently miss down the middle. Later that day, the manager entrusted a late-game lead to three rookies in Edgardo Henriquez (who escaped a jam but had shaky command), Justin Wrobleski (who struck out five over two scoreless innings in one of his best outings this year) and Jack Dreyer (a steady left-hander this season who now has three saves to go along with his sub-3.00 ERA) to close out a skid-snapping win against the Orioles.

Come the playoffs, there could be another wild card. Two-way star Shohei Ohtani will likely be needed in the starting rotation, but Roberts acknowledged there have been “thoughts about” whether he could factor into some kind of potential ninth-inning role as well.

“I can’t answer that question right now,” Roberts said. “But I think that we’re going to do whatever we feel is the best chance to give us a chance to win. And I know Shohei would be open to whatever. We certainly haven’t made that decision yet, though.”

But before they get there, much will depend on the actual relievers they expected to be able to count on this season. For as ugly as the performances have been to this point, the Dodgers haven’t yet abandoned all hope for a turnaround.

“I live in a world of, what’s the alternative?” Roberts said. “I just don’t feel that Edgardo Henriquez, for example” — who has 17 career major-league innings — “is now the savior.”

“It’s not a knock on Edgardo, because he’s throwing the heck out of the baseball,” Roberts added. “But you look at our ‘pen, there’s a confidence thing right now that [other guys have] got to get over.”

Over the final three weeks of the regular season, the Dodgers feel their best bet is banking on them to do just that.

“Look, it can turn really quick,” Prior said. “This game is so much about feeling confident … Getting, and being able to stack good outings or quality at-bats. When you’re able to start stacking those things, you feel good. And like anything, if you feel good, you feel better about your stuff. You have more confidence. You feel that you can get anybody out in any situation.”

The Dodgers’ top relievers, of course, appear to be a long way from that at the moment.

But “at the core of it,” Prior insisted, even after the frustrations of the bullpen’s continued failures, “we believe in who we have.”

Dodgers manager Dave Roberts wanted to set the record straight: Mookie Betts is his shortstop.

“Mookie,” Roberts said, “will not go to right field.”

Roberts repeated the phrase a couple of times, as if he was determined to quash any speculation about another late-season position change for Betts.

“Mookie,” Roberts said again, “will not go to right field.”

There it is, directly from the man who hands the lineup card to the umpire every night.

So ignore the noise and stop the chatter.

Mookie Betts is the Dodgers’ shortstop.

Betts is the Dodgers’ shortstop now, Betts will be the Dodgers’ shortstop next week, and Betts will be the Dodgers’ shortstop in the postseason.

The only times Roberts said he envisioned Betts returning to right field was late in games in which the Dodgers ran out of bench players. A situation like that came up a few weeks ago in a game against the Angels. Miguel Rojas, an infielder, was deployed as a pinch hitter in the top of the eighth inning and remained in the game at shortstop. Betts defended right field for an inning.

Roberts isn’t sticking with Betts at shortstop because of their close relationship. He’s sticking with Betts at shortstop because of how Betts has played the position.

Betts entered his team’s weekend series against the Arizona Diamondbacks leading all major league shortstops in defensive runs saved (15).

He was ninth in outs above average (four).

He was also fifth in fielding percentage (.985).

“When you’re talking about shortstop play, you’re looking for consistency, and I’ve just loved the consistency,” Roberts said. “He’s made every play he’s supposed to make, and then the last couple weeks, he’s made spectacular plays. He’s been a big part of preventing runs. “

Roberts is equally, if not more, encouraged by how Betts has looked.

“Right now, it’s all instinct instead of the technical part of it, how to do this or that,” Roberts said. “I think he’s free to just be a major league shortstop. I truly, to this day, have never seen a position change like Mookie has.”

Dodgers shortstop Mookie Betts throws to first base after forcing out Padres baserunner Freddy Fermin at second on Aug. 15.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

A six-time Gold Glove Award winner as a right fielder, Betts moved to shortstop late in spring training last year when it became evident the team didn’t have an everyday player at the position. The last time he spent significant time at shortstop was in high school.

By mid-June, Betts was about a league-average shortstop but further progress was derailed by a broken hand that landed him on the injured list. When Betts was activated a couple of months later, he returned as a right fielder. He remained there throughout the Dodgers’ World Series run.

However, Betts was determined to take another shot at playing shortstop. Unlike the previous year, he was able to train at this position over the offseason, working with Dodgers coaches and former All-Star shortstop Troy Tulowitzki. The preparation has made a noticeable difference.

Betts has improved to where he now feels comfortable dispensing advice on how to play the position, regularly offering pointers to rookie infielder Alex Freeland.

“It’s the smallest details,” Freeland said. “I give him so much credit because he makes the small things matter the most because a lot of those smaller details go overlooked by a lot of players where they’re like, ‘Oh, we don’t need to focus on that, something so minute, it’s not going to matter.’ But Mookie takes all the small details and makes them very important.”

Roberts expected this of Betts, whom he considers one of the team’s leaders alongside Freddie Freeman and Clayton Kershaw. He pointed to how Betts has carried himself in the worst offensive season of his career, his relentless work resulting in him batting .329 over the last three weeks.

“I love how Mookie is always accountable,” Roberts said. “There’s been times where he’s been really good and times he hasn’t but he’s never run from having the conversation or owning the fact that he’s underperforming. His work has never wavered. So for me, that’s something that when you’re talking about one of the leaders in your clubhouse, it really resonates with everyone, coaches included. I’m always going to bet on him.”

So much so that Roberts has wagered the season on him.

Mookie Betts is his shortstop — now, next week and in the postseason.

Just how unsafe are American streets?

To hear President Trump tell it, killers lurk in every shadow not already filled by rapists and thieves.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom isn’t nearly as dire, pointing out that crime numbers are down.

But “numbers mean little to people,” Newsom lamented during a press gaggle in his office Thursday, where he ruthlessly trolled Trump with a flags-and-all setup that appeared to mock the president’s marathon Cabinet meeting earlier in the week.

Yes, folks, midterm elections are coming and crime is high — in our consciousness if not in reality. Although violent crime and some property crimes have declined in most California cities (and in many major cities across the country), the perils of city living remain stubbornly stuck in our collective psyches.

This angst has augured in another get-tough era of crime suppression, culminating with the fulfillment of Trump’s authoritarian fantasy of National Guard troops patrolling in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and potentially more cities to come.

Newsom is now offering up what many have framed as a counterpunch to Trump’s military intervention: A surge of California Highway Patrol officers in strategic locations across the state, basically Newsom-controlled cop boots on the ground to mirror Trump’s troops.

But looking at Newsom’s deployment of more CHP officers as no more than a reaction to Trump misses a larger debate on what really makes our communities safer. Understanding what makes cops different from soldiers — and Newsom’s move different from Trump’s — is ultimately understanding the difference between repression and public safety, force and finesse.

Newsom has been using the CHP to supplement local police departments for years. In 2023, when the Tenderloin area of San Francisco was plagued by open drug use, making it the favorite right-wing example of a failed Democratic-run city, Newsom sent this state force in to help clean it up (though that work continues). The next year, he sent it into Oakland and Bakersfield, both places where auto theft, retail crime and side shows were rampant.

Now, he’s expanding the CHP’s role in local policing to include Los Angeles, San Diego, the Inland Empire and some Central Valley cities including Fresno and Sacramento.

In each of those places, mobile teams of around a dozen officers, all of whom will volunteer for the job, will target specific crimes, criminals or problem areas. These officers won’t just be patrolling or responding to calls like the local force, but hitting targets identified by data or intelligence, or making their presence known in high-crime neighborhoods.

Here’s where Trump’s military approach has an overlap with Newsom’s — and where the two men might agree: It is true that a visible show of armed authority deters crime. Whether it’s the National Guard or the Highway Patrol, criminals, both petty and violent, tend to avoid them.

“We go in and saturate an area with high visibility and view patrol,” said Sean Duryee, commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, standing at Newsom’s side. “The people that have a problem with that are the criminal community.”

The approach seems to be working. I can throw the numbers at you — 400 firearms seized in San Bernardino, Bakersfield, Oakland; 4,000 stolen vehicles recovered in Oakland; more than 9,000 arrests statewide.

But numbers really don’t matter. It genuinely is how a community feels about its safety. Across California, many if not the majority of small and mid-sized law enforcement departments are understaffed. Even big departments such as Los Angeles struggle to hire and retain officers. There are simply not enough cops — or resources such as helicopters or K9 teams — to do the work in too many places, and citizens feel it.

Using these small strike teams of CHP officers fills the gap of both manpower and expertise. And by aiming that usage precisely at troubled spots, it can make underserved communities feel safer, and crime-ridden communities actually be safer.

Tinisch Hollins is the head of Californians for Safety and Justice, an advocacy group that works to end over-incarceration and promote public safety beyond just making arrests. She is “obviously not a huge proponent of sending law enforcement into communities like that,” she said.

But she lived in San Francisco when homicides topped 100 per year, and now lives in the Bay Area city of Vallejo, where the local police have been so understaffed and plagued by scandal that local leaders declared a state of emergency.

She has seen how the CHP has “made an impact” in the Bay Area.

“There are some very effective things happening,” Hollins said.

That buy-in from community, especially skeptical community, is a massive departure from the militarization of Trump, and also hints at the deeper difference between troops and cops.

California has been on the cutting-edge of law enforcement reform for years, though it is a conversation that has fallen from favor and headlines in the Trump era.

In the wake of the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, California outlawed controversial carotid restraints that can cut off breathing. The state put in place a method for decertifying officers found guilty of serious misconduct. It increased age and education standards for becoming a peace officer, increased transparency requirements and put more oversight on the use of military equipment by civilian forces, just to name a few reforms.

Most significantly, Newsom is championing a new vision of incarceration and rehabilitation modeled after successful efforts in Norway and other places that centers on the simple truth that arresting people does not end crime.

Most people who are convicted and incarcerated will return to our streets after a few years at most, and if the state does not change their outlook and opportunities, they will also likely return to crime — making us no safer than the day they were first put into cuffs.

But for a time, it seemed to some as if these reforms with their focus away from enforcement and toward alternatives to incarceration had gone too far. Images of marauding groups of retail thieves invading stores filled the news, and reasonably caused anxiety — leading to Californians passing the still-unfunded, tough-on-crime Proposition 36 that sought to create stiffer penalties for some drug and property crimes, along with mandated treatment for addiction, but which could also take money from rehabilitation programs.

As much as Trump, Newsom’s use of the CHP is the response to that pushback on reform, an acknowledgment that enforcement remains a key piece of the crime-stopping dilemma.

But Hollins points out that the rehabilitation aspect, the most innovative and arguably important aspect of California’s approach to crime, is getting lost in the current political climate.

“It’s not just arresting people that brings crime down,” she said. “The [penal] system isn’t going to deal with the drivers of the crime.”

This is where Newsom needs to do better, both on the ground and in his explanations. It may not be popular to talk about rehabilitation, and certainly Trump will seize on it as weak, but it is what works, and what makes the California method different from the MAGA view of crime.

For Trump, the be-all and end-all is the arrest, and the subsequent cruel glee of punishment. He has called for harsher and longer penalties for even minor crimes, and recently demanded the blanket use of the death penalty in all murder cases charged in Washington, D.C. His is the authoritarian view that fear and repression will make us safer.

“We lost grip with reality, the idea that the military can be out there in every street corner the United States of America,” Newsom said Thursday.

Or should be.

Soldiers on our streets just make even law-abiding citizens less free, and ultimately does little to fix the problems of poverty and opportunity that often start the cycles of crime.

This is the showdown happening right now on American streets, and ultimately the showdown between the Democratic view of crime prevention and Trump’s — soldiers or cops, the easy spectacle of compliance induced by the barrel of a gun or a complicated and imperfect system of community and law enforcement working together.

Execution, intensity, and pacing defined Tuesday’s matchup at Crypto.com Arena, where the Sparks faced the Phoenix Mercury in their third meeting of the season, with the Sparks losing for the third time to the Mercury, 92-84.

Before the game, Sparks coach Lynne Roberts emphasized the importance of focus on both ends of the floor.

“For us offensively, it’s going to come down to pace and being willing to execute,” Roberts said. “You have to execute with intensity and intention.”

While Sparks (17-19) did a good job forcing some turnovers and getting some steals, execution was a little rushed.

With 40.5 seconds left in the third quarter, things got chippy on the court when Rickea Jackson slipped and limped off, sidelined for the remainder of the quarter.

“I am proud of her for trying to go back in, but I could tell she was just laboring a little bit and we had a big stretch coming in and it’s not fair to keep her through,” Roberts said of Jackson playing through what appeared to be an ankle injury.

“She is tough, and I have a feeling she’ll be fine by the time Friday comes around,” Roberts said.

Sparks forward Dearica Hamby’s scoring run early in the second quarter helped the Sparks briefly take the lead. After hitting a jumper to tie the score at 24, Hamby drew a foul and hit one of two free throws to put Los Angeles ahead 25-24. She finished with 25 points and eight rebounds.

But the Sparks couldn’t hold the advantage for long. The Mercury (23-14) led 48-40 at halftime and maintained control throughout.

“We didn’t shoot great from three, I mean that’s where the difference in the game is they (Phoenix) went 11 for 25, we went seven for 24,” Roberts said. “I do feel like we typically shoot it better,”

Satou Sabally paced Phoenix with 19 points and three rebounds. Kahleah Copper added 18 points and three assists, while Alyssa Thomas had a triple-double with 12 points, 16 rebounds and 15 assists.

Tuesday’s matchup was a testament to how physical the WNBA is, especially with playoffs on the line.

“I’m sure it’s because the playoffs are coming, and we’re scrapping for our lives, and they’re playing hard. We’re all playing for something and the intensity is up, and these guys have pride in how they play,” Roberts said

Despite strong performances from Jackson (21 points) and Hamby, the Sparks couldn’t break through against Phoenix’s balance and depth.

The Sparks next play the Indiana Fever on Friday night at Crypto.com Arena.

SAN DIEGO — The home team was one strike from victory Friday night, when the Petco Park video board suddenly erupted in hues of pink and mint, flashing the preferred accompaniment to any game against the Dodgers: BEAT LA.

Then came the 102-mph fastball, then a swing and a miss, and the San Diego Padres had indeed beaten the Dodgers.

For Dodgers fans who thought the National League West had been won last weekend at Dodger Stadium, this just in from San Diego: The NL West is tied.

These were words in this publication just five days ago: “The Dodgers now lead the National League West by two games, but it feels like 20.”

The Dodgers had just swept the Padres, their only competition for the division title. The Dodgers were 8-2 against the Padres this season. There was a blue wave of emotion. The thing that happened last is the thing you remember best.

“It’s natural,” Dodgers manager Dave Roberts said. “That’s the great thing about fandom. People get excited. That’s a great thing about sports.”

The feeling in the clubhouse last weekend?

“In here? We played a great series, but there’s still a lot of baseball left to play,” Roberts said. “It wasn’t going to be won or lost then, and it’s not going to be won or lost this weekend.”

The trouble is not with the emotion. The trouble is with the schedule.

The number of games left after this weekend: 31. The number of Dodgers-Padres games left after this weekend: 0.

This is baseball’s best rivalry, with a division title and potential first-round playoff bye on the line. The Dodgers and Padres should be facing each other to wrap up the season, with all that emotion bursting forth.

Instead, the Dodgers finish the regular season against another traditional rival, the (checks notes) Seattle Mariners.

There has been plenty of emotion among the Dodgers and Padres fan bases already this year, mostly in the form of angst.

The Dodgers won the winter, and Padres fans wondered why their team was not keeping up with the competition.

The Padres won the trade deadline, and Dodgers fans wondered why their team was not keeping up with the competition.

For the Dodgers, the cliche is about to be put to a real-life test: Getting a player off the injured list is just like getting a player in a trade.

Reliever Tanner Scott was activated Friday. Reliever Kirby Yates could be activated as soon as Saturday.

Infielder/outfielder Kiké Hernández could be activated next week, followed in some order by relievers Michael Kopech and Brock Stewart, infielder/outfielder Hyeseong Kim, infielder/outfielder Tommy Edman and third baseman Max Muncy.

On Friday, infielder Alex Freeland hit his first major league home run, but infielder Buddy Kennedy (.287 OPS) went hitless, and the Dodgers burned their backup catcher to bat for him. They trusted outfielder Justin Dean to pinch-run and play center field, but not to bat.

Alex Freeland celebrates after hitting a solo home run in the third inning of a 2-1 loss to the Padres on Friday.

(Sean M. Haffey / Getty Images)

“This is our club right now,” Roberts said. “We have guys coming back.”

On a hot August night, Petco Park was its usual lively self, with its usual sellout crowd, with Dodgers fans drowning out chants of “Let’s Go Padres” and Padres fans returning the favor at the sound of “Let’s Go Dodgers.”

Amid intensity fit for October, the Dodgers and Padres each let a strong starting pitcher — Blake Snell for L.A., Yu Darvish for San Diego — continue rather than reflexively remove him for the third time through the lineup.

How do you win in October, with pitchers like Snell and Darvish lined up?

Is it with the home run?

Only one major league team has more home runs than the Dodgers. The Dodgers scored their only run Friday on a home run.

Is it with small ball?

Only one major league team has fewer home runs than the Padres. The Padres scored both their runs in one inning Friday, with a rally that included three singles, a walk, a sacrifice bunt and a sacrifice fly.

The Padres dropped three sacrifice bunts Friday. They have 40 this season, the most in the majors. The Dodgers have eight, the fewest of any NL team.

Before the game, I spoke with Mason Miller, the former Athletics All-Star closer turned Padres eighth-inning setup man. To this point in his career, Miller said, the biggest game of his career has been closing the A’s final game in Oakland last September.

“I think I said it after that game: until I play in the playoffs, that will probably be my all-time baseball memory,” Miller said. “Now it doesn’t seem like I’ll have to wait that much longer to get that playoff taste.”

Not much longer at all. As of Friday morning, Baseball Prospectus put the Dodgers’ chance of making the playoffs at 99.8% and the Padres’ chance at 99.6%.

Maybe this weekend won’t mark the last Dodgers-Padres game this season. What we really want is the first NL Championship Series between the Dodgers and the Padres, with the winner advancing to the World Series: SoCal vs. the World.

A BRITISH grandad accused of trying to drown his daughter-in-law pleaded with cops that he is not in a relationship with her, The Sun can reveal.

Family sources claim Mark Gibbon, 62, has secretly been dating Jasmine Wyld – the mother of his grandchildren – for years.

6

6

6

He was arrested last week and charged with attempted murder after allegedly forcing her head underwater at a Florida resort pool during a row over his will.

But despite reports of a love affair, both Gibbon and Wyld, 33, denied to cops they were a couple.

Polk County Sheriff’s Office told The Sun the pair had been quizzed on the status of their relationship.

A detective asked Gibbon and mum-of-two Wyld “about their relationship to determine if the incident would be classified as domestic violence”.

They both denied being in a romantic relationship, however.

It comes after a family source told the Daily Mail how the pair had grown close after Gibbon split from his partner and Wyld split from his son Alex.

The insider claimed: “Mark and Jasmine have been seeing each other for a few years, but they’ve never admitted it.

“[The couple] do an awful lot together and they go away on holiday with the children a couple of times every year.”

Gibbon is divorced from his wife and lives alone at a £800,000 semi-detached home in Beaconsfield he purchased in 2023.

Wyld – a hairdresser – separated from Gibbon’s son Alex, 34, back in 2021.

They share two young children together.

Just two years after they separated, Alex, 34, was jailed for trying to run over his dad in a £80,000 Porsche Cayenne in Beaconsfield, Bucks.

As well as assaulting his father, Alex also pleaded guilty to harassing ex-wife Wyld.

Alex was sentenced at Aylesbury Crown Court to 25 months in jail, a 36-month disqualification from driving, a five-year restraining order, plus a surcharge.

The dad was released from jail around six months ago and went to move in with his mum, who had divorced Gibbon some years earlier.

Alex and his father also became embroiled in a public row in 2023 after Alex left his dad’s business for an unknown reason.

The family source confirmed that Alex and Gibbon no longer speak.

They added: “He feels an awful betrayal at how his dad has struck up a relationship with the mother of his two children.”

6

6

6

Gibbon – a lighting technician, who runs his own firm called MRG Lighting – is now being held in Polk County Jail and is due in court next week over the attempted murder charge levelled against him.

He and Wyld were on holiday at the Solterra Resort in Devenport, near Disney World, Florida with Wyld’s two children – Gibbon’s grandkids.

The reported couple started arguing over the “stipulations of his wilL” while by the pool, according to US police.

Gibbon then pushed Wyld’s head “under the water and held her down multiple times”, the arrest affidavit claims.

The mum told cops she “could not breathe and believed that she was going to drown”.

Police say Wyld was forced to “fight Mark in order to get away from him and from under the water but he kept pushing her back under”.

Her nine-year-old daughter then leapt to her mother’s defence but was pushed away by Gibbon, it is claimed.

Wyld is reported to have called out to two women in the distance and screamed at them to call 911.

Gibbon now faces one count of attempted murder and two counts of battery.

When questioned, Gibbon allegedly admitted to pushing Jasmine underwater, but insisted he hadn’t been trying to drown her.

The grandad is due in court on Monday.

When is AI not artificial intelligence? When it refers to ammonia inhalants, aka smelling salts.

When are these AIs in the news? When it was reported that the NFL banned their use, San Francisco 49ers star George Kittle protested, and the NFL walked back the ban a day later. The league’s players association clarified that players can still use AIs as long as teams don’t provide them.

Got it?

The NFLPA sent a memo to players on Wednesday saying that the ban only prohibits team employees from distributing AIs during games.

That must have pleased Kittle, who when under the impression that AIs were banned completely, grabbed a microphone on an NFL Network broadcast to say, “I honestly just came up here to air a grievance. Our team got a memo today that smelling salts and ammonia packets were made illegal in the NFL, and I’ve been distraught all day.”

The five-time All-Pro tight end said he used the substances for an energy boost before every offensive drive and joked that upon learning of the ban he “considered retirement.”

Except that it isn’t a ban. Kittle will just have to bring his own AI stash to ballgames.

“To clarify, this policy does not prohibit player use of these substances, but rather it restricts clubs from providing or supplying them in any form,” the NFLPA memo said. “The NFL has confirmed this to us.”

The use of AIs by NFL players has been under the radar despite apparently being a common practice. Their primary use is to prevent and treat fainting, with the Federal Aviation Administration requiring U.S. airlines to carry them in the event a pilot feels faint.

The ammonia gas irritates the nasal membranes, causing a reflex that increases breathing and heart rate. That can keep a person from fainting, and apparently can also help a person block and tackle.

In short, an AI — which has been described as smelling like cat urine — is a performance-enhancing substance.

The NFL, however, cited a warning from the FDA that AIs can mask symptoms of a concussion and have not been proven to be safe or effective simply to increase energy.

“In 2024, the FDA issued a warning to companies that produce commercially available ammonia inhalants (AIs), as well as to consumers about the purchase and use of AIs, regarding the lack of evidence supporting the safety or efficacy of AIs marketed for improving mental alertness or boosting energy,” the NFL memo to teams stated. “The FDA noted potential negative effects from AI use.

“AIs also have the potential to mask certain neurological signs and symptoms, including some potential signs of concussion. As a result, the NFL Head, Neck, and Spine Committee recommended prohibiting the use of AIs for any purpose during play in the NFL.”

Tampa Bay Buccaneers quarterback Baker Mayfield — who says he uses AIs — said the logic behind the NFL no longer supplying them is convoluted.

“I think the reasoning was that it masked concussion symptoms,” Mayfield said on “Up and Adams.” “But if you get knocked out, which is the whole purpose of smelling salts — to wake you up — you’re not allowed back in the game.

“I think it was a quick trigger to ban them, just to kind of CYA [cover your ass].”

Maybe NFL officials figure that by no longer supplying AIs and forcing players to bring their own batch to games, their liability in case of concussions or other medical complications is reduced.

“You just got to bring your own juice to the party, got to wake up ready to go,” Mayfield said.

There may well be a few sighs of relief from senior finance company and banking executives following the Supreme Court’s ruling, but it is unlikely you will hear the champagne corks popping.

The verdict does almost certainly reduce the potential compensation bill significantly.

Lenders no longer face the prospect of having to pay £30bn to £40bn to aggrieved car buyers. The likelihood of the government stepping in also appears to have receded dramatically.

Nevertheless, the industry is not off the hook. The Financial Conduct Authority may still open a redress scheme for cases where dealers had a financial incentive from lenders to ramp up interest rates on loans as much as possible.

The Supreme Court’s ruling also upheld one consumer claim, in which the commission payments were deemed unfair – and that could provide a template for others to follow. All of this means the compensation bill could still be in the billions.

The Supreme Court’s intervention has been eagerly awaited since October, when the Appeal Court issued a verdict in three test cases which could have triggered an avalanche of compensation claims.

In each case, people who had bought cars on finance claimed they were partially or wholly unaware that the deal had involved a commission payment being made by the lender to the car dealer. They claimed that in law the commissions amounted to bribes, or secret payments.

The Appeal Court judges agreed, essentially saying that commission payments made by a finance company to a dealer for arranging a car loan were illegal if the car buyer had not given his or her “informed consent”.

They also concluded that a car dealer had a “fiduciary duty” towards the car buyer when it came to arranging a car loan. In other words, the dealer should set his or her own interests aside, and act purely on the customer’s behalf.

This meant that millions of car buyers could potentially claim compensation – if they could show that the dealer had not specified what commission payments they were receiving for lining up a finance deal. It was not enough for the details to be buried in small print.

Lenders had feared that this would lead to an avalanche of claims against them – and that the same arguments could be used to challenge other kinds of consumer finance agreements as well, potentially increasing the compensation bill still further.

But the Supreme Court threw very cold water over those arguments. The President of the Court, Lord Reed, dismissed the idea that car dealers had a “single minded duty of loyalty” to their customers, and insisted they “plainly and properly” had personal interests in the finance agreements they were involved in.

The ruling clearly blocks off what could have been a very wide avenue for compensation claims.

However, the court did side with one of the claimants. In the case of Marcus Johnson, a factory worker, it decided that the finance agreement was “unfair” under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act.

This was because the size of the commission payment was very large, and because Mr Johnson had been misled about the relationship between the dealer and the lender. He was, they said, entitled to compensation.

Analysts say this could open the doors for other cases in which the commission payments are seen to be egregious.

There is also a key question the Supreme Court ruling does not answer. This is what should happen in cases involving so-called Discretionary Commission Agreements (DCAs). These were finance deals in which the car dealer could set the interest rate of a loan, within a set scale. The higher the rate, the more commission they would be paid – and the customer would be unaware of the fact.

The Financial Conduct Authority banned such deals in 2021. It is now considering whether to launch a redress scheme for consumers who were affected by them. If it goes ahead, millions of car buyers could still have a claim, though it is not clear how much compensation they would get.

According to Richard Barnwell, a financial services advisory partner at accountancy firm BDO, the bill could still be substantial.

“We believe there is still a potential for redress, for example, if discretionary commission arrangements are deemed to be an unfair relationship, redress could still be from to £5bn to £13bn or more,” he said.

Other analysts agree. According to Martin Lewis, who runs the MoneySavingExpert website, “the Supreme Court has certainly narrowed the number of people who will be able to reclaim car finance. I think you’re probably talking the lower end of £10bn, as opposed to £40bn.”

That £10bn would still be a significant figure. But the finance industry appears to have avoided the potential free-for-all rush to claim compensation the earlier verdict had threatened to spark off.

And while the Treasury says it will “work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers”, the BBC understands that the likelihood of the government intervening with retrospective legislation to protect financial firms has now diminished significantly.

The thing about bullies is they don’t have real friends.

They have lieutenants, followers and victims — sometimes all three rolled into one.

Most of us learn this by about third grade, when parents and hard knocks teach us how to figure out whom you can trust, and who will eat you for lunch.

Elon Musk, at age 54 with $400 billion in the bank, just learned it this week — when his feud with our bully-in-chief devolved into threats that the president will have the South African native deported.

Speaking about Musk losing government support for electric cars, Trump this week warned that Musk “could lose a lot more than that.”

“We might have had to put DOGE on Elon,” Trump said, referencing Musk’s cost-cutting effort called the Department of Government Efficiency. “DOGE is the monster that … might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn’t that be terrible?”

Yes, I know. Schadenfreude is real. It’s hard not to sit back with a bit of “told ya” satisfaction as we watch Musk — who has nearly single-handedly demolished everything from hurricane tracking to international aid for starving children — realize that Trump doesn’t love him.

But because Musk is the richest man in the world, who also now understands he has the power to buy votes if not elections, and Trump is grabbing power at every opportunity, there’s too much at stake to ignore the pitiful interpersonal dynamics of these two tantrumming titans.

What does it have to do with you and me, you ask? Well, there’s a potential fallout that is worrisome: The use of denaturalization against political enemies.

In case you’ve been blessedly ignorant of the Trump-Musk meltdown, let me recap.

Once upon a time, nine months ago, Musk and Trump were so tight, it literally had Musk jumping for joy. During a surprise appearance at a Butler, Pa., political rally (the same place where Trump was nearly assassinated), Musk leaped into the air, arms raised, belly exposed, with the pure delight of simply being included as a follower, albeit one who funneled $290 million into election coffers. Back then, Musk had no concern that it wasn’t his own dazzling presence that got him invited places.

By January, Musk had transitioned to lieutenant, making up DOGE, complete with cringey swag, like a lonely preteen dreaming up a secret club in his tree house. Only this club had the power to dismantle the federal government as we know it and create a level of social destruction whose effects won’t be fully understood for generations. Serious villain energy.

But then he got too full of himself, the No. 1 sin for a lieutenant. Somewhere along the line, Trump noticed (or perhaps someone whispered in the president’s ear) that Musk was just as powerful as he is — maybe more.

Cue the fallout, the big “see ya” from the White House (complete with a shoving match with another Trump lieutenant) and Musk’s sad realization that, like everyone else in a bully’s orbit, he was being used like a Kleenex and was never going to wind up anyplace but the trash.

So Musk took to his social media platform to start bashing on Trump and the “Big Beautiful Bill,” which passed in the Senate on Tuesday, clearing the way for our national debt to skyrocket while the poor and middle class suffer.

“If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day. Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE,” Musk threatened, conjuring up a new political party the same way he ginned up DOGE.

Musk even promised to bankroll more elections to back candidates to oust Trumpians who voted for the bill.

“And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” Musk wrote. Presumably before he leaves for Mars.

It was those direct — and plausible — threats to Trump’s power that caused the president to turn his eye of Sauron on Musk, flexing that he might consider deportation for this transgression of defiance. It might seem entertaining if Musk, who the Washington Post reported may have violated immigration rules, were booted from our borders, but it would set a chilling precedent that standing up to this president was punishable by a loss of citizenship.

Because the threat of deporting political enemies didn’t start with Musk, and surely would not end with him.

For days, Trumpians have suggested that New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, who was born in Uganda and became a U.S. citizen in 2018, should be deported as well, for the crime of backing policies that range in description from progressive to socialist to communist (pretty sure the ones labeling them communism don’t actually know what communism is).

On Tuesday, Trump weighed in on Mamdani.

“A lot of people are saying he’s here illegally,” Trump said, which of course, no one is except for Trump’s attack dogs. “We’re going to look at everything.”

Denaturalization for immigration fraud — basically lying or misrepresenting stuff on your official application — is nothing new. Obama did it, as did Trump in his first term, and it has a long history before that.

But combing the documents of political enemies looking for pretexts to call fraud is chilling.

“This culture of weaponizing the law to go after enemies, it’s something that is against our founding principles,” Ben Radd told me. He’s a professor of law and an expert in political science at UCLA.

“It is very much an abuse of executive power, but [Trump] gets away with it until there’s a legal challenge,” Radd said.

While Musk and Mamdani have the power to fight Trump in a court of law, if it comes to it, other naturalized citizens may not.

There are about 25 million such citizens in the United States — people who immigrated in the “right” way, whatever that means, jumped through the hoops, said their pledge of fealty to this country and now are Americans. Or so they thought.

In reality, under Trump, they are mostly Americans, as long as they don’t make him mad. The threat of having citizenship stripped for opposing the administration is powerful enough to silence many, in a moment when many immigrants feel a personal duty and impetus to speak out to protect family and friends.

Aiming that threat at Musk may be the opportunistic anger of a bully, and even seem amusing.

But it’s an intimidation meant to show that no one is too powerful to be punished by this bully, and therefore, no one is safe.

Travel expert Dale Peterson has visited every capital city in Europe, but there are three cities in particular that left him feeling underwhelmed and he wouldn’t rush to get back to

With so many stunning European cities just a short flight or train ride from the UK, there’s never been a better time to explore the continent.

While popular destinations like Paris, Lisbon, and Barcelona continue to attract tourists, there are also plenty of underrated gems waiting to be discovered – especially when you can get there for as little as £20. As concerns about overtourism grow, with protests erupting in some of Europe’s major cities, you might want to reconsider your next destination.

If you’re looking to avoid the crowds and discover somewhere new, one seasoned traveller has shared his expert insights after visiting every European capital city.

Dale Peterson, a full-time travel writer, revealed in an article for Business Insider that three cities left him feeling “underwhelmed” after his visits. With some pre-trip research, you can avoid disappointment and discover hidden treasures instead.

Travelling during peak season can be overwhelming, so considering a trip during the shoulder season can lead to a more relaxing experience.

Despite the incredible range of cities Europe has to offer, from exploring the medieval old town of Prague, taking in the street art on the Berlin Wall, or visiting the ancient ruins of Rome, here are the cities Dale would choose to skip, reports the Express.

London

With its iconic landmarks and world-class museums, London attracts approximately 20 million international visitors annually, yet Dale believes the city is “overhyped and expensive”.

The travel writer asserts that there are “so many other worthwhile destinations in the UK”, particularly in the “UK’s picturesque countryside”, such as the Cotswolds or the Lake District.

However, another adventure traveller who runs the blog The Bucket List Mermaid has a vastly different opinion about London, claiming the city is “absolutely” worth the hype.

Amsterdam

Boasting more than 100km of picturesque canals, earning it the nickname “Venice of the North”, and with more bicycles than residents, Amsterdam also features on Dale’s list of cities he wouldn’t revisit.

Despite drawing an estimated 20 million tourists annually, the travel writer remains unconvinced.

“Unfortunately, though, I thought the centre of Amsterdam felt like an overpriced theme park full of souvenir shops and crowds,” he stated.

However, one traveller on Tripadvisor had a glowing review of Amsterdam, describing it as a “wonderful city” with “helpful citizens”.

They praised its compact size, making it easy to explore on foot, and its efficient public transportation system. They also highlighted the city’s great museums, interesting neighbourhoods, and numerous places to eat and drink.

Helsinki

Located in Finland, the happiest country in the world, Helsinki is an ideal destination for exploring Nordic sauna culture. Last year, it was named the world’s most sustainable travel destination by Condé Nast Traveller.

However, Dale found Helsinki to be lacking in excitement, saying: “There’s no denying Helsinki is a clean city. But in my opinion, it feels a little too sterile, lacking in liveliness and exciting things to do.”

On the other hand, Jessica, who runs the blog Bon Traveller, believes Helsinki is perfect for those looking to slow down and connect with nature.

She highlights the city’s incredible design scene, which makes a trip to Helsinki “an experience to remember”.

For so long, the biggest question surrounding Shohei Ohtani’s future as a pitcher was simple.

When, after a second career Tommy John surgery, would he finally get back on the mound? When, after a year and a half of exclusively hitting, would he be able to resume two-way duties?

This past week, that answer finally arrived.

Twice in seven days, Ohtani climbed the bump as the Dodgers’ starter, throwing one inning in each outing in his long-awaited return to pitching.

Both times, he left his teammates and coaches in astonished amazement, giving them their first up-close glimpse of his dual-role skillset.

“I’ve seen [him throw] bullpens and lives and simulated games, or whatever,” manager Dave Roberts said Sunday. “But to kind of watch it in real time, to go from the mound to the on-deck circle and then go to the batter’s box, it’s pretty remarkable. And he’s just handling it the right way. He’s just unflappable.”

What comes next, however, remains shrouded in some uncertainty.

Now that Ohtani is again pitching in live-game action, new questions are lingering about where his build-up will go from here.

“It’s going to be a gradual process,” Ohtani said through interpreter Will Ireton on Sunday. “I want to see improvements with the quality of the pitches that I’m throwing, and then also increasing the amount of pitches. So it’s going to be gradual.”

It was no surprise that, in Ohtani’s return to pitching on June 16, he was limited to only one inning. It was a trade-off he and the team made to get him back into a real game sooner, agreeing to give him a live start even if they knew it wouldn’t extend past one frame.

Entering Ohtani’s second start on Sunday afternoon, however, the thinking was that the right-hander could be ready to push into the second — that, to eventually get stretched out for full-length starts, he would begin building up his workload by adding another inning each time out.

The way Ohtani pitched Sunday certainly warranted a second frame.

After giving up two hits and one run over a 28-pitch outing against the San Diego Padres six days prior, he collected two strikeouts in a scoreless 18-pitch frame against the Washington Nationals, his only baserunner reaching on a dropped pop fly by shortstop Mookie Betts.

“Overall, I was able to relax much better compared to my last outing,” Ohtani said. “The way my body moves when I pitch, it’s something that I worked on with the pitching coaches and I felt a lot better this time.”

However, in the top of the second, Ohtani was once again replaced on the rubber. Despite his improved execution and efficiency, it turned out he and the team had made a predetermined decision not to push him for a second inning quite yet.

“That was the original plan,” Ohtani said of being removed after the first.

“Going into today’s game,” Roberts added, “we felt really comfortable with one.”

It hammered home the reality of what lies ahead for Ohtani; the cautious, methodical and, as Roberts also described it, “gradual” pace with which the team will handle his pitching workload for the time being.

“I think that it’s more of just trying to get the foundation, the building blocks as he’s [pitching and] taking at-bats,” Roberts said. “[We are] erring on the side of caution … There’s no sense in rushing it right now.”

As Ohtani returns to pitching, there are new factors the Dodgers will have to monitor in his all-around performance.

Already, the reigning MVP has cut down on his base-stealing while ramping up as a pitcher: After swiping 11 bags in his first 50 games, he hasn’t even attempted a steal since throwing his first live batting practice session on May 25.

His place in the leadoff spot could be altered on days he pitches as well, with Roberts leaving open the possibility of moving him down in the batting order to give him more time to transition from pitcher to hitter (at least in the first inning of home games, when he currently has to hustle from the mound to the plate after the top half of the frame).

Then, there is perhaps the biggest question: Whether the burden of pitching will affect Ohtani’s all-important production with the bat?

That dynamic came under scrutiny this week, after Ohtani went just two-for-19 in the five games following his first pitching start.

“I don’t think that’s a fatigue thing,” Roberts insisted Sunday morning. “But we’ll manage it. I can only take him at his word, and the swing speed and all the stuff we sort of track is still in line.”

Ohtani did snap that slump after his inning on the mound Sunday, finishing the day with a three-run triple in the seventh and two-run home run in the eighth.

“I do feel like I do have to work on some things,” Ohtani said. “But at the same time, I do feel like I can perform better, even better than I used to be able to perform at.”

All of this is to say, while Ohtani has mastered his two-way role before (twice winning American League MVP while doing it with the Angels), the Dodgers are taking nothing for granted about his pitching comeback right now.

Before they begin adding to his pitching workload, they want to make sure they’ve accounted for any unintended side effects.

“All these conversations we have with him, obviously,” Roberts said. “He’s understanding of where he’s at, where we’re at, and appreciating the fact that as time goes on, we’ll get to a certain point.”

Before Sunday’s game, Roberts didn’t even commit to fully stretching out Ohtani like a traditional starter by the second half of the season.

“That’s kind of TBD,” he said when asked when Ohtani might be fully built-up for normal-length starts. “I think we’re always gonna be cautious. So I don’t even know what that’s going to look like, to be ‘fully built-up.’ I don’t think anyone knows what that looks like. Because it’s not a normal starting pitcher. So to say six [innings] and 90 [pitches], I don’t even know if we’ll get to that point.”

Could that mean using Ohtani as only a glorified opener for the rest of this season? Or stretching him out only if a currently shorthanded rotation doesn’t eventually get healthy?

Time will have to tell on those questions, with neither the Dodgers nor Ohtani ready to commit to any answers until they see how he continues to respond to his return to two-way duties.

“As we build more of a foundation, there will be some latitude,” Roberts said. “I think that we’re still gathering [information]. But again, once we ramp up more, it might be a different conversation.”