Biden

At home and abroad, Trump challenges anyone to stop him

Five years after the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol by President Trump’s supporters, the White House released a website this week attempting to revise history.

Reasserting Trump’s false claim that he had won the 2020 presidential election, the administration doubled down on his decision to issue blanket pardons for the rioters, blamed Capitol Police for escalating tensions that day, and denounced Trump’s vice president at the time, Mike Pence, for “refusing to act” in defiance of the Constitution to stop congressional certification of Trump’s loss.

It was a display of political audacity that has become the hallmark of Trump’s second act — challenging anyone to stop him from asserting raw executive authority, both at home and increasingly abroad.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

Whether on foreign or domestic policy, lawmakers have struggled to respond to an administration that moves with unfettered restraint and exceptional speed. The U.S. Supreme Court has only facilitated Trump’s expansion of unitary executive power. And governments abroad accustomed to Trump’s lack of predictability now face a president whose entire philosophy toward foreign interventionism appears to have turned on a dime.

“There are political checks. They are checks, though, that have been degraded,” said William Howell, dean of the School of Government and Policy at Johns Hopkins University and author of “Trajectory of Power: The Rise of the Strongman Presidency.”

“They are checks that are looked upon not just with frustration, but an outward animosity by the president,” Howell added. “It’s a feature of his populist politics for him to say, ‘anything that stands in my way is illegitimate.’”

Unitary rule

Trump’s extraordinary use of executive authority has no comparison in recent times. The president has issued more than 220 executive actions in his first year back in office — more than the 220 orders he issued throughout his entire first term, and dwarfing the 276 actions that President Obama issued over eight years in office.

Directing the Justice Department to prosecute his political enemies, and deploying his pardon power to shield his friends and allies, Trump risks fueling the very sort of politicized system of justice he campaigned against as a presidential candidate.

And his administration has shown derision for Congress, controlled by the president’s own party, approving historically few bills and neglecting those that have passed, such as the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Trump has attempted to unilaterally rename the Defense Department and the Kennedy Center, despite straightforward laws requiring acts of Congress to do so, and has impounded funds appropriated by Congress for child care and family assistance allocated to Democratic states.

“The nature of presidential power is that it is given as much as taken,” said Andrew Rudalevige, a professor of government at Bowdoin College and author of “The New Imperial Presidency.” “You can’t have an imperial presidency without an invisible Congress. And certainly, the current Congress is setting new records for intentional invisibility.”

After Trump bulldozed the East Wing of the White House, a reporter asked his press secretary what was stopping him from knocking down the entire building. Karoline Leavitt demurred. “That’s a legal opinion that’s been held for many years,” she said, suggesting he could, in fact, demolish the rest of it.

“The institutional constraints on the unilateral presidency are weak,” said Dino Christenson, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis and co-author of “The Myth of the Imperial Presidency.” “The conservative majority of the [Supreme] Court has also recently chosen to back executive power.

“Arguably,” he added, “international constraints are even weaker, at least for powerful nations like the U.S.”

‘Governed by force’

Trump’s order over the weekend to depose Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, seizing him and his wife from their bedroom in a stunning military raid, was the type of rare exercise in American power that has defined past presidencies. But Trump said he was just getting started.

Beaming from the operational success in Caracas, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he was considering military action against no fewer than five countries, allies and foes alike. His homeland security advisor, Stephen Miller, said that no one would even try to stop Trump from militarily taking over Greenland, an autonomous region of Denmark, a NATO ally and European Union member state.

“We live in a world,” Miller told CNN, “that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power.”

At the State Department, veteran U.S. diplomats waited anxiously for guidance from the administration on how it would justify the operation based on international law on the global stage. It never came. “At least with Iraq, Libya, Syria, there was an effort to seek legal cover,” one diplomat said, granted anonymity to speak candidly. “This is just grab-and-go.”

After the president vowed to run Venezuela going forward as a vassal state, Trump’s energy secretary said the United States would exert control over its oil production “indefinitely.”

And the Trump administration ordered the seizure of two foreign tankers on Wednesday in international waters that have violated its unilateral oil embargo against Caracas, risking precedent governing the laws of the seas that have for decades ensured international commercial flows.

It was a surprising turn for a president who had campaigned on a promise to focus on domestic policy, under a slogan of “America first.”

“So many of the claims that he was making — both in terms of his power and his politics — was about an inward turn, about standing up for America and attending to core problems that it had failed to face, whereas all these foreign entanglements were distractions to be avoided,” Howell said. “So it is striking that he has assumed this new posture of outward imperialism — land grabs, oil tankers, removing heads of state — all at once.”

Several Republican lawmakers expressed skepticism over Trump’s new posture, warning the president against entrenching the U.S. military in foreign conflicts. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, warned that U.S. military action against Denmark in Greenland “would not be appropriate” after the White House issued an explicit threat of force.

Scholars of the imperial presidency often say that public opinion — not the legislature or the courts — remains the strongest check on executive authority. Trump is ineligible for a third term in office, and has signaled in recent weeks that he recognizes that constitutional limit as unambiguous.

“I don’t think Trump is immune from the laws of political gravity,” Rudalevige said. “Despite his bluster, he is a lame duck. He has never had a Gallup approval rating above 50%, and that rating is in the 30s. His policy actions are even less popular.”

But he also said he believes the public supports him in his brash use of power, telling lawmakers there could be a “constitutional movement” to keep him in office.

“MAGA loves it,” Trump said in an interview with NBC News this week, defending his foreign policy approach. “MAGA loves what I’m doing. MAGA loves everything I do.”

“MAGA is me,” he added. “MAGA loves everything I do, and I love everything I do, too.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Palisades fire report was sent to mayor’s office for ‘refinements,’ Fire Commission president says
The deep dive: Michael Reagan’s death reverberates among Californians of both parties
The L.A. Times Special: One year since my childhood home burned

More to come,
Michael Wilner

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

Source link

Fifth anniversary of the Jan. 6 attack brings fresh division to the Capitol

Five years ago outside the White House, outgoing President Trump told a crowd of supporters to head to the Capitol — “and I’ll be there with you” — in protest as Congress was affirming the 2020 election victory for Democrat Joe Biden.

A short time later, the world watched as the seat of U.S. power descended into chaos, and democracy hung in the balance.

On the fifth anniversary of Jan. 6, 2021, there is no official event to memorialize what happened that day, when the mob made its way down Pennsylvania Avenue, battled police at the Capitol barricades and stormed inside, as lawmakers fled. The political parties refuse to agree to a shared history of the events, which were broadcast around the globe. And the official plaque honoring the police who defended the Capitol has never been hung.

Instead, the day displayed the divisions that still define Washington, and the country, and the White House itself issued a glossy new report with its revised history of what happened

Trump, during a lengthy morning speech to House Republicans convening away from the Capitol at the rebranded Kennedy Center now carrying his own name, shifted blame for Jan. 6 onto the rioters themselves.

The president said he had intended only for his supporters to go “peacefully and patriotically” to confront Congress as it certified Biden’s win. He blamed the media for focusing on other parts of his speech that day.

At the same time, Democrats held their own morning meeting at the Capitol, reconvening members of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack for a panel discussion. Recalling the history of the day is important, they said, in order to prevent what Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., warned was the GOP’s “Orwellian project of forgetting.”

And the former leader of the militant Proud Boys, Enrique Tarrio, summoned people for a midday march and they began retracing the rioters’ steps from the White House to the Capitol, this time to honor Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt and others who died in the Jan. 6 siege and its aftermath. About 100 people gathered, including Babbitt’s mother.

Tarrio is among those putting pressure on the Trump administration to seek retribution against those who prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters, and the White House in its new report highlighted the work the president has done to free those charged and turned the blame on Democrats for certifying Biden’s election victory.

“They should be fired and prosecuted,” Tarrio told the rally crowd Tuesday.

He was sentenced to 22 years in prison for seditious conspiracy for orchestrating the Jan. 6 attack, and he is among more than 1,500 defendants who saw their charges dropped when Trump issued a sweeping pardon on his return to the White House last year.

Echoes of 5 years ago

This milestone anniversary carried echoes of the differences that erupted that day.

But it unfolds while attention is focused elsewhere, particularly after the U.S. military’s stunning capture of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and Trump’s plans to take over the country and prop up its vast oil industry, a striking new era of American expansionism.

“These people in the administration, they want to lecture the world about democracy when they’re undermining the rule of law at home, as we all will be powerfully reminded,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said on the eve of the anniversary.

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, responding to requests for comment about the delay in hanging the plaque honoring the police at the Capitol, as required by law, said in a statement that the statute “is not implementable,” and proposed alternatives “also do not comply with the statute.”

Democrats revive an old committee, Republicans lead a new one

At the morning hearing at the Capitol, lawmakers heard from a number of witnesses and others — including former U.S. Capitol Police officer Winston Pingeon, who said he thought he was going to die that day and if it hadn’t been for Jan. 6, he would still be on the force, as well as a Pamela Hemphill, a rioter who refused Trump’s pardon, and silenced the room as she blamed the president for the violence and apologized to the officer, stifling tears.

“I can’t allow them not be recognized, to be lied about,” Hemphill said about law enforcement.

“Until I can see that plaque up there,” she won’t be done, Hemphill said.

Pingeon implored the country not to forget what happened, and said, “I believe the vast majority of Americans have so much more in common than what separates us.”

Among those testifying were former Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who along with former Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming were the two Republicans on the panel that investigated Trump’s efforts to overturn Biden’s win. Cheney, who lost her own reelection bid to a Trump-backed challenger, did not appear. Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi urged the country to turn away from the culture of violent threats on lawmakers and the police.

Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, who has been tapped by Johnson to lead a new committee to probe other theories about what happened on Jan. 6, rejected Tuesday’s session as a “partisan exercise” designed to hurt Trump and his allies.

Many Republicans reject the narrative that Trump sparked the Jan. 6 attack, and Johnson, before he became the House speaker, had led challenges to the 2020 election. He was among some 130 GOP lawmakers voting that day to reject the presidential results from some states.

Instead, they have focused on security lapses at the Capitol — including the time it took for the National Guard to arrive and the failure of the police canine units to discover the pipe bombs found that day outside Republican and Democratic party headquarters. The FBI arrested a Virginia man suspected of placing the pipe bombs, and he told investigators last month he believed someone needed to speak up for those who believed the 2020 election was stolen, authorities say.

“The Capitol Complex is no more secure today than it was on January 6,” Loudermilk said in a social media post. “My Select Subcommittee remains committed to transparency and accountability and ensuring the security failures that occurred on January 6 and the partisan investigation that followed never happens again.”

The aftermath of Jan. 6

Five people died in the Capitol siege and its aftermath, including Babbitt, who was shot and killed by police while trying to climb through the window of a door near the House chamber, and Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died later after battling the mob. Several law enforcement personnel died later, some by suicide.

The Justice Department indicted Trump on four counts in a conspiracy to defraud voters with his claims of a rigged election in the run-up to the Jan. 6 attack.

Former Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith told lawmakers last month that the riot at the Capitol “does not happen” without Trump. He ended up abandoning the case once Trump was reelected president, adhering to department guidelines against prosecuting a sitting president.

Trump, who never made it to the Capitol that day as he hunkered down at the White House, was impeached by the House on the sole charge of having incited the insurrection. The Senate acquitted him after top GOP senators said they believed the matter was best left to the courts.

Ahead of the 2024 election, the Supreme Court ruled ex-presidents have broad immunity from prosecution.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Will Weissert, Joey Cappelletti and Gary Fields contributed to this report.

Source link

Column: In the new year, same budget headache for California

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

Congratulations, you survived 2025. What will the new year bring? Joy and prosperity for all, hopefully, but it’s hard to say.

Few in California could have predicted some of the most life-changing events of 2025 — the deadly Los Angeles area wildfires, the Trump administration’s militant, often inhumane immigration crackdown and an obscure congressional redistricting fight that could alter the balance of power in Washington.

With that in mind, California can expect one of 2026’s most consequential stories to be the turmoil in Sacramento over the entrenched state budget deficit — which will be compounded by the massive federal healthcare cuts by the Trump administration.

The good news is that, after a rain-soaked Christmas holiday, California enters the new year with reservoirs brimming, even if its coffers are not. It also just got easier to delete Facebook, X and other social media accounts that consume too much of our lives. And let’s not forget that the Los Angeles Dodgers reign as World Series champions!

Happy New Year! This is Phil Willon, the California Politics editor for the Los Angeles Times, filling in for columnist George Skelton. Along with the state budget crisis, 2026 will bring a wide-open race for governor — and the person the candidates hope to replace, Gov. Gavin Newsom, is flirting with a run for president in 2028 and has just a year left in his final term to deliver on all his promises. So buckle up and visit latimes.com early and often.

An $18-billion problem

The California Legislature returns to work Monday for the 2026 session, and a major financial headache awaits.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the state will have an $18 billion budget shortfall in the upcoming fiscal year – $5 billion higher than what the Newsom administration predicted in June.

As Times reporter Katie King reported earlier, state revenue has been improving, but a shortfall is still expected. That’s because mandatory spending requirements under Proposition 98, which sets minimum annual funding for public schools, and Proposition 2, which specifies reserve deposits and debt payments, almost entirely offset any gains, according to the legislative analysis.

And it gets worse. The LAO said that, starting in 2027-28, California’s structural deficits are expected to grow to about $35 billion annually “due to spending growth continuing to outstrip revenue growth.”

The solution? Cut spending and/or increase revenue, the LAO report says.

But cut what, and raise money how? That’s up to Newsom and the Legislature to decide, and their difficult task will begin later this week when the governor releases his proposed budget.

Poking the billionaire

One controversial idea — outside of the legislative process — already is being kicked around.

A November ballot measure proposed by a labor organization, the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, would impose a one-time 5% wealth tax on billionaires that could raise $100 billion for healthcare programs. Opponents say it will drive wealthy, taxpaying, job-creating, economy-driving Californians out of the state.

The measure has yet to qualify for the November ballot but will receive ample attention regardless.

Supporters say the revenue is needed to backfill the massive federal funding cuts to healthcare that President Trump signed this summer under what’s known as the “Big Beautiful Bill,” according to a report by The Times’ Seema Mehta and Caroline Petrow-Cohen.

The California Budget & Policy Center estimates that as many as 3.4 million Californians could lose Medi-Cal coverage, more rural hospitals could close and other healthcare services would be slashed unless a new funding source is found.

Federal cuts to healthcare

If California does not backfill those federal cuts by raising taxes, or other creative means, costs for the state will still increase, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. That seems counterintuitive, since millions of Californians may lose coverage. But under the “Big Beautiful Bill,” cuts to federal cost sharing and a drop in health provider tax revenue will far outpace any potential cost savings for the state.

Newsom’s possible White House run will ensure that California’s budget shortfall and liberal policies it spends money on will whip up the nation’s caustic partisan divide. Near the top of the list will be California’s decision to extend state-sponsored healthcare coverage to low-income, undocumented immigrants. The expansion has cost the state billions and drawn sharp criticism from Republicans and, last year, Newsom and the Democratic-led Legislature reduced the expansion of state-sponsored healthcare to those immigrants due to the high cost.

On top of that, the monthly premiums for federally subsidized plans available on the Covered California exchange — often referred to as Obamacare — will soar by 97% on average for 2026. That’s due to decisions by the Republican-led Congress and Trump not to extend federal subsidies for that coverage. State officials estimate that roughly 400,000 Californians will drop their coverage under the program because of the higher cost. And California counties are ill prepared to step into the breach, as KFF Health News recently reported.

Needless to say, the healthcare situation will be extremely volatile in 2026, which will make the state’s upcoming high-stakes budget process even more unpredictable.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Billionaire tax proposal sparks soul-searching for Californians
CA vs. Trump: Trump pulls back National Guard from L.A. and other cities, Newsom claims win
The L.A. Times Special: California rolls out sweeping new laws for 2026, from cellphone limits in schools to a ban on cat declawing


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

Source link

Contributor: Democrats could avoid a lot of trouble with a little ego management

As we head into 2026 and Democrats try to figure out how to regain power, their New Year’s resolution should be simple: Manage egos better.

In recent years, they seem to have forgotten the time-tested necessity of placating people. In other words, doing the same basic drudgery the rest of us rely on to get through this chaotic world.

This effort cannot merely be directed toward voters, as important as they are. It must also include elite stakeholders, some of whom might (rightly) be considered kooks, weirdos and otherwise high-maintenance eccentrics.

Lest you think Dems should simply shrug off these folks and say “good riddance,” consider this: Both Trump terms might have been avoided if Democrats had been more willing to nurture the nuts in years gone by.

Let’s start with their treatment of America’s top crank: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

As journalist Michael Scherer, who profiled RFK Jr. for The Atlantic, told Alex Wagner of “Pod Save America”: Once Kennedy’s own 2024 presidential campaign started to flounder, he and his campaign manager began “to make sort of outreach to Democrats … to see if they can open a conversation with Biden to sort of trade something.”

Unfortunately, “the Democratic response [was] silence.” They wouldn’t meet with him, they wouldn’t talk to him.

Later, as Scherer recounts: “A friend of [Kennedy’s] connects him with Tucker Carlson who connects him with Donald Trump. And that night, just hours later, they’re talking, and Trump at that point wants to make a deal.”

The rest is history.

Now, I know what you’re thinking. “But Kennedy is a nut! Why should Democrats have humored him?”

How about this: Because Trump narrowly won the presidency in 2024 by forming a disparate coalition held together by duct tape, resentment and (possibly) a cursed amulet.

This motley crew included more prominent Dems than just RFK Jr. Remember when Biden basically ghosted Elon Musk for that big 2021 White House electric vehicle summit? Even Kamala Harris — who happily agreed with Biden on just about everything except her own polling numbers — called that a huge mistake.

Then again, Harris committed her own costly slight when she decided against going on Joe Rogan’s podcast.

For an entire decade now, Democrats have consistently alienated allies — with devastating results. I’m talking about the snubs that might have prevented Trump’s first presidential run entirely.

Not just the famous humiliation of Trump at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Here’s the more tragic prequel: Former “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd told the Bulwark’s Tim Miller that before Trump went full birther, he actually called the Obama White House offering “ideas on how to improve the state dinner.”

That’s right. Donald J. Trump — future leader of the free world — just wanted to talk about better parties. Shrimp trays. Tablecloths. Maybe a chocolate fountain.

Just as the world would have been better had the Washington Senators signed Fidel Castro to a huge baseball contract before he got too interested in politics, America might have been better if Obama had made Trump the White House state dinner czar.

But as Todd put it, “The last thing the Obama White House was going to do was placate a guy like Donald Trump.”

Understandable — until you consider that the alternative to humoring him was, you know … President Trump. Twice.

Look, I totally understand why a U.S. president might think he or she shouldn’t have to stoop to kissing some crank’s ring or placating some gilded, phony billionaire. But let’s be honest: It’s part of the job.

Instead of performing this sort of ego cultivation, Democrats — whether because of snobbery, elite gatekeeping, geriatric aloofness or a disciplined disdain for “time burglars” — have repeatedly alienated potential allies (or at least neutral parties). Then they act shocked when these same people drift into the MAGA solar system like space debris.

If Trump is truly an existential threat — and Democrats say this approximately 87 times a week — then maybe, just maybe, they should Return. A. Phone. Call.

Otherwise, Donald Trump will. Probably at 3 a.m., while eating a Big Mac.

So grovel if you must. Fake interest. Smile like you’re not dying inside. Do the basic humiliations the rest of us perform daily to get hired, get promoted or get a date.

It’s the least you can do. So make it your New Year’s resolution and honor it.

But if you think you’re too good to perform the basic glad-handing and ego-stroking, even for the nuttiest eccentrics, bad things will happen.

Trust me — I’ve seen this movie. And we’re only a year into his second term.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Source link

Column: Reagan biographer Lou Cannon always played it straight and true

You are reading our Politics newsletter

Sign up to get an inside guide to the movers, shakers and lawmakers who shape the Golden State.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

Lou Cannon was a good friend and a daunting competitor. And he was a national treasure.

The retired newspaper reporter and Ronald Reagan biographer died Dec. 19 at age 92 in hometown Santa Barbara from complications of a stroke.

I use the words “national treasure” hesitantly because they smack of trite hyperbole. But they truly fit.

That’s because it was Cannon who brought to light through several Reagan books innumerable broad details of the actor-turned-politician’s important and often controversial actions as America’s 40th president and California’s 33rd governor.

Bookshelves are crammed with Reagan tomes. But no author has been so thorough on a sweeping scale as Cannon. That’s because he put in the time and did the hard work of sifting through records and conducting hundreds of interviews, then painstakingly explaining it all in very readable nongovernmentese.

Cannon also covered Reagan up close as a reporter during the early years of his governorship and both his terms as president.

Reagan once asked Cannon why he was embarking on yet another book about him. “I’m going to do it until I get it right,” the writer replied, only half-jokingly, according to Cannon’s son, longtime journalist Carl Cannon.

In all, Lou Cannon authored five books on Reagan‘s tenures as governor and president.

That’s an invaluable contribution to historians and contemporary America’s sense of this oft-misunderstood and underestimated world leader.

But that’s not what mainly prompted me to write this column. I wanted to point out Cannon’s core strength. And that was his dedication to strict nonpartisanship in writing, whether it be straight news stories for the Washington Post, syndicated columns or his Reagan biographies.

I knew Cannon for 60 years, competed against him covering Reagan for at least 20 and we became friends very early based on professional respect. In none of my countless conversations with him did I ever learn whether he leaned right or left. He registered to vote as an “independent,” as do many of us political journalists.

Cannon was the type of journalist that millions of Americans — particularly conservative Republicans and MAGA loyalists — claim is rare today: An unbiased reporter who doesn’t slant stories toward one side or the other, especially left.

Actually, most straight news reporters follow that nonpartisan credo or they leave the business. Columnists? We’re supposed to be opinionated. But for some, their opinions are too often rooted more in predetermined bias than in objective facts. But that has always been true, even in the so-called “good ol’ days.”

Cannon’s sole goal was to report the news accurately with analysis and, if possible, beat his competitors to the punch. He beat us plenty, I hate to admit.

I vividly remember one such beating:

At the 1980 Republican National Convention in Detroit, Cannon scooped everyone for a full news cycle on Reagan selecting former campaign rival George Bush as his vice presidential running mate. Still pounding in my ears are the loud whoops and cheers by Cannon’s colleagues as he walked into the Post working area — next to the Los Angeles Times quarters — after Reagan formally announced Bush’s selection. It was deflating.

News sources readily opened up to Cannon, who was intense but always wore a slight smile.

I asked former Reagan speechwriter and Republican strategist Ken Khachigian what Cannon’s secret was.

“You’d get a fair shot from him,” Khachigian says. “He’d always be straight. He just wanted to get information mostly and find out what was going on.

“He had a way of talking to people that made them comfortable and he’d get a lot out of them. He wasn’t aggressive. He had a soft personality, one of his benefits. He’d put people at ease, a big advantage.”

His son, Carl Cannon, says: “If he’d been in politics, he’d have been a Democrat. But he didn’t go into politics. He went into journalism. He wasn’t partisan. He was a reporter who wanted to know what happened and why.”

Cannon began covering the state Capitol in 1965 for the San Jose Mercury News and became friends with Jud Clark, a young legislative staffer. Clark ultimately co-founded the monthly California Journal and persuaded Cannon to write for it on the side. Cannon did that for many years and when it folded, followed up by writing columns for a successor publication, the Capitol Weekly.

Cannon just loved to report and write and juggled it all in — reporting full time for the Washington Post, authoring books and writing for friends’ small publications in Sacramento.

“He would always want something new. In interviews, he didn’t want the standard stock story,” Clark says.

“Lou was curious about everything,” says Rich Ehisen, his longtime editor at Capitol Weekly. “He liked understanding what was going on and breaking things down. He told the straight story unvarnished. Never shortchanged on facts.”

Cannon was a workaholic, but he also knew how to carve out time for fun.

One summer while we covered Reagan vacationing at his beloved Santa Barbara hilltop ranch, Cannon decided he wanted to drive down to Los Angeles to see a Dodgers’ night game. But it’s risky to abandon your post while bird-dogging the president. Anything could happen. And you’d need to explain to your bosses why you weren’t there but your competitors were.

Cannon’s solution was to also get good seats for the two reporters he considered his main competitors– Steve Weisman of the New York Times and me at the L.A. Times. We’d provide each other some cover if any news broke out around the president, which it didn’t. Cannon even managed to wrangle us free dinners in a large suite overlooking the playing field.

He’ll be missed as a friend and a journalist — but not as an unrelenting competitor.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: How the Trump administration sold out public lands in 2025
The Golden State rules: After a year of insults, raids, arrests and exile, a celebration of the California immigrant
The L.A. Times Special: America tried something new in 2025. It’s not going well

Until next week,
George Skelton


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

Source link

Column: A lump of coal for Trump, a governor focused on California and other Christmas wishes

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

Anita Chabria and David Lauter bring insights into legislation, politics and policy from California and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

I’ve got a wish list for Santa and it’s topped by this urgent request: a remodeled president with at least an ounce of humanity and humility.

Maybe a Ronald Reagan type. I’m not referring here to ideology or policies. Just common decency, someone who acts presidential.

I know, forget it. That’s beyond Santa’s reach. It would require a miracle. And that’s not likely to happen with President Trump, who seems increasingly to be auditioning for the devil’s disciple.

But you’d think as we approach our nation’s 250th birthday, America could be led by a president who at minimum doesn’t publicly trash the newly deceased.

Someone who follows the basic rules of good behavior and respect for others that our mothers taught us.

For Trump, the Golden Rule seems to be only about cheapening the historic Oval Office with tasteless gilded garnishments, turning it into an extension of his Mar-a-Lago resort. That’s what you’d expect from someone who would pave over the lovely Rose Garden.

But I’ve gotten off the point: the despicable way our unhinged president treats people he deems the enemy because they’ve criticized him, as we’ve got a right and often a duty to do in a democratic America.

What our president said about Rob Reiner after the actor-director-producer and his wife Michele were brutally stabbed to death in their Brentwood home, allegedly by their son Nick, should not have shocked us coming from Trump.

After all, this is a guy who once said that the late Sen. John McCain, a Navy pilot shot down over North Vietnam, tortured, maimed and held captive for five years, was “not a war hero … I like people that weren’t captured.”

He also once mocked a disabled New York Times reporter at a campaign rally, saying: “The poor guy, you ought to see this guy.” Then Trump jerked his arms around imitating someone with palsy.

He frequently attacks female reporters for their looks.

Recently, he called all Somali immigrants “garbage. … We don’t want them in our country.” As for Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, a onetime Somalian refugee, “she’s garbage. Her friends are garbage.”

But even with Trump’s sordid history of insults and insensitivity, what he disrespectfully said about Reiner was stunning. He implied that the Hollywood legend was killed by someone angered by Reiner’s criticism of Trump. Again, everything’s all about him, in this egotistical president’s mind.

Trump said the Reiners died “reportedly due to the anger he caused others through his massive, unyielding and incurable affliction with a mind crippling disease known as TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME.”

Then the next day, he doubled down, telling reporters that Reiner “was a deranged person. … I thought he was very bad for our country.”

Topping off the holiday season for Trump, he orchestrated the renaming of Washington’s classy John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after himself. From now on, it’s to be called the Trump Kennedy Center.

What’s next? The Washington National Cathedral?

OK, next on my Santa’s wish list is a governor who spends his last year in office trying to improve California rather than his presidential prospects. Actually, he could do the latter by doing the former: making this state a better place to live and proving his ability to sensibly govern.

Too many of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s projects fall flat, collapse or are a waste of energy and dollars.

One recently announced Newsom venture particularly is questionable. He seems to be using state resources and tax money to expand his overdone war with Trump rather than helping Californians with their everyday lives.

The governor unveiled a new state-run website that tracks what his office calls Trump’s “criminal cronies.” It catalogs major criminal convictions that were followed by Trump pardons — from Jan. 6 rioters to former politicians and business tycoons.

Yeah, well, so what? I suppose some people may be interested in that. But at taxpayers’ expense? Will the information lower gas prices? Make it easier to buy a home? Pay for childcare?

Here’s just one example of a Newsom program that failed miserably:

Early in his administration the governor announced with great fanfare that he was increasing fees on telephone service to pay for upgrading California’s 911 emergency communication system. The state spent $450 million, couldn’t make the new stuff work and abandoned the project, the Sacramento Bee reported after a lengthy investigation. Now they’re apparently going to start all over.

A little hands-on supervision by the governor next time could help.

Also on my wish list: A Legislature that doesn’t hibernate through the winter and wait until late spring before starting to push bills.

They’d need to change legislative rules. But Democrats with their supermajorities could do practically anything they wanted — even work earnestly during the cold months.

Either that or just stay home.

Included in the gift package: Legislation focused more on quality and less on quantity. This year, the Legislature passed 917 bills. My guess is that 100 meaty measures would have sufficed.

There’s one more item on my Santa list that all of America needs: A new casual greeting to replace “How ya doing?”

Nobody really wants to hear how most people are doing and they probably don’t want to candidly say anyway — not in an elevator, on the sidewalk or in a restaurant.

“Bad stomach flu,” I might honestly answer. You really want to hear that while chomping on a hamburger.

So, what do we replace it with?

Maybe simply: “Good morning.” Or “Go Dodgers.”

Or “Go Trump” — far away out of earshot.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Ronald Reagan biographer, legendary California journalist Lou Cannon dies
The TK: Newsom taps former CDC leaders critical of Trump-era health policies for new initiative
The L.A. Times Special: In a divided America, Rob Reiner was a tenacious liberal who connected with conservatives

Until next week,
George Skelton


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

Source link

The U.S. economy was stagnant in 2025 — with one exception

Today’s political consensus crosses all ages, demographics and party lines: Three out of four Americans think the economy is in a slump. It is not just in their heads. Economic growth this year has been practically stagnant, save for one exception, economists say.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

A national California economy

Hundreds of billions of dollars invested by California-based tech giants in artificial intelligence infrastructure accounted for 92% of the nation’s GDP growth this year, according to a Harvard analysis, supported by other independent economic studies.

It is a remarkable boon for a handful of companies that could lay the groundwork for future U.S. economic leadership. But, so far, little evidence exists that their ventures are expanding opportunities for everyday Americans.

“You have to watch out for AI investments — they may continue to carry the economy or they may slow down or crash, bringing the rest of the economy together with them,” said Daron Acemoglu, an economics professor at MIT. “We are not seeing much broad-based productivity improvements from AI or other innovations in the economy, because if we were, we would see productivity growth and investment picking up the rest of the economy as well.”

Even in California itself, where four of the top five AI companies are based, the AI boom has yet to translate into tangible pocketbook benefits. On the contrary, California shed 158,734 jobs through October, reflecting rising unemployment throughout the country, with layoffs rippling through the tech and entertainment sectors. Consumer confidence in the state has reached a five-year low. And AI fueled a wave of cuts, cited in 48,000 job losses nationwide this year.

“It is evident that the U.S. economy would have been almost stagnant, absent the capital expenditures by the AI industry,” said Servaas Storm, an economist at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, whose own analysis found that half of U.S. economic growth from the second quarter of 2024 through the second quarter of 2025 was due to spending on AI data centers.

The scale of investments by AI companies, coupled with lagging productivity gains expected from AI tools, is spawning widespread fears of a new bubble on Wall Street, where Big Tech has driven index gains throughout the year.

The top 10 stocks listed in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, most of which are in the tech sector, were responsible for 60% of the yearlong rally, far outperforming the rest of the market. And the few who benefited from dividends fueled much of the rest of this year’s economic growth, with the vast majority of U.S. consumption spending attributed to the richest 10% to 20% of American households.

“There were ripple effects into high-end travel, luxury spending, high-end real estate and other sectors of the economy driven by the financial elite,” said Peter Atwater, an economics professor at William & Mary and president of Financial Insyghts, a consulting firm. “It tells the average consumer that while things are good at the top, they haven’t benefited.”

Stan Veuger, a senior fellow in economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent visiting lecturer at Harvard, said that slowing growth and persistently high inflation were diminishing the effects of the AI boom.

“Obviously, that’s not a recipe for sustainable growth,” he said.

U.S. growth today is based on “the hope, optimism, belief or hype that the massive investments in AI will pay off — in terms of higher productivity, perhaps lower prices, more innovation,” Storm added. “It should tell everyday Americans that the economy is not in good shape and that the AI industry and government are betting the farm — and more — on a very risky and unproven strategy involving the scaling of AI.”

Trump’s AI bet

The Trump administration has fully embraced AI as a cornerstone of its economic policy, supporting more than $1 trillion in investments over the course of the year, including a $500-billion project to build out massive data centers with private partners.

Trump recently took executive action attempting to limit state regulations on AI designed to protect consumers. And House Republicans passed legislation this week that would significantly cut red tape for data center construction.

Administration officials say the United States has little choice but to invest aggressively in the technology, or else risk losing the race for AI superiority to China — a binary outcome that AI experts warn will result in irreversible, exponential growth for the winner.

But there is little expectation that their investments will bear fruit in the short term. Data centers under construction under the Stargate program, in partnership with OpenAI and Oracle, will begin coming online in 2026, with the largest centers expected to become operative in 2028.

“AI can only fulfill its promise if we build the compute to power it,” OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman said at the launch of the Stargate project. “That compute is the key to ensuring everyone can benefit from AI and to unlocking future breakthroughs.”

In the meantime, the Americans expected to benefit are those who can join in the investment boom — for as long as it lasts.

“2025 has been a very good year for people who already have significant wealth, a mediocre year for everyone else,” said Kenneth Rogoff, a prominent economist and professor at Harvard. “While the stock market has exploded, wage growth has been barely above inflation.”

“Whether the rest of the economy will catch fire from AI investment remains to be seen, but near term it is likely that AI will take away far more good jobs than it will create,” Rogoff added. “The Trump team is nevertheless optimistic that this will all go their way, but the team is largely built to carry out the president’s vision rather than to question it.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: After the fires: A glance back at The Times’ coverage of the Eaton and Palisades wildfires
The deep dive: ‘Both sides botched it.’ Bass, in unguarded moment, rips responses to Palisades, Eaton fires
The L.A. Times Special: Hiltzik: Republicans don’t have a healthcare plan, just a plan to kill Obamacare

More to come,
Michael Wilner

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

Source link

Trump touts successes, bashes Biden in address to nation

Dec. 17 (UPI) — In a relatively brief, campaign-style speech on Wednesday night, President Donald Trump touted what he described as successes achieved by his administration during his first year back in office, while bashing his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, and the Democrats.

Before Christmas trees and a Christmas laurel decorating the mantel of the Diplomatic Reception Room fireplace, the commander-in-chief said he has returned the United States from a place of destitution to a level of unparalleled success.

“Our country is back stronger than ever before. We’re poised for an economic boom the likes of which the world has never seen,” he said.

“We will celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. There could be no more fitting tribute to this epic milestone than to complete the comeback of America that began just one year ago.”

The speech comes amid economic concerns and fears of war in the United States, though Trump only touched on the former during the address. A day earlier, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported unemployment had risen to its highest level since September 2021 during the pandemic. An ongoing U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean continues, and on Tuesday, Trump ordered a naval blockade of Venezuela oil tankers.

In the 18-minute speech, Trump described the country he inherited as a “mess” marked by inflation, high prices, rampant illegal immigration, unaffordability, transgender women playing women’s sports, “transgender for everybody,” censorship and crime.

“This is what the Biden administration allowed to happen to our country, and it can never be allowed to happen again,” he said.

“Our country was laughed at all over the world, but they are not laughing anymore.”

In the last 11 months, Trump said he has ushered more positive change into Washington “than any administration in American history.”

“There’s never been anything like it. And I think most would agree,” he said.

Trump also trumpeted his border policies, claiming they have resulted in “zero” undocumented migrants allowed to enter the United States. — an apparent reference to Customs and Border Protection data showing that, beginning in May, no migrants apprehended at the border were released into the U.S. interior.

“Do you remember when Joe Biden said he needed Congress to help with legislation to close the border?” he said. “As it turned out, we didn’t need legislation, we just needed a new president.”

This is a developing story.

Source link

Hunter Biden disbarred in Connecticut after losing license in D.C.

Dec. 15 (UPI) — A judge in Connecticut on Monday ordered the disbarment of Hunter Biden after his convictions on federal gun and tax charges and then pardoned by his father, Joe Biden, as president.

In Waterbury, Judge Trial Referee Patrick Carroll III suspended him from practicing law in the state after finding he violated the rules of professional conduct for attorneys.

In April, Biden voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law in Washington, D.C.

The judge found he violated several ethical rules for lawyers, including engaging in conduct for “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. Carroll also cited the Washington disbarment in his decision.

During the virtual hearing, Biden, 55, didn’t contest the decision and didn’t speak. He appeared with his lawyer, Ross Garber.

Biden graduated from Yale Law School and passed the bar one year later in 1997. But Biden apparently hadn’t practiced law in recent years with no cases in state or civil court.

A reciprocal discipline was imposed in the District of Columbia, where Biden lives and consented to disbarment. There were two other grievances filed by private individuals after Biden’s federal convictions on tax and gun charges last year.

Paul Dorsey, a private attorney who filed a grievance, objected to the proposed resolution because Biden does not admit to the criminal acts.

“It was very frustrating, very odd, and frankly, I don’t think the court should accept the proposed disposition as it is written because it doesn’t comply with the Practice Book. He has to admit to it, and he’s not doing that,” Dorsey said.

The proposed disposition does not include the admission of a crime because of Biden’s pardon by his father on Dec. 1, Leanne M. Larson, first assistant chief disciplinary counsel, said.

In Delaware federal court, he was found guilty of purchasing a gun in 2018 while allegedly lying on a federal form about not illegally using or being addicted to drugs. He was scheduled to be sentenced before the pardon, facing up to 25 years in prison. As a first-time offender, he could have stayed out of prison.

Biden also faced charges in California for not paying at least $1.4 million in federal taxes. He agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor and felony charges hours before jury selection was scheduled to begin in September 2024.

After the pardon, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika closed the gun case, though she didn’t toss out the conviction.

The federal pardon covered the gun and tax offenses and any “offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014, through December 1, 2024.”

“Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter,” Biden said in a statement. “From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted.”

Biden said it was clear that his son was “treated differently” than other people who have faced similar circumstances, and that Hunter Biden was “singled out because he is my son.”

The younger Biden said in a statement that he has taken accountability and responsibility for his mistakes “during the darkest days of my addiction.”

“I will never take the clemency I have been given today for granted and will devote the life I have rebuilt to helping those who are still sick and suffering,” he said.

Source link

Column: California Democrats have momentum, Republicans have problems

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

Anita Chabria and David Lauter bring insights into legislation, politics and policy from California and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

It turns out Proposition 50 smacked California Republicans with a double blow heading into the 2026 congressional elections.

First, there was the reshaping of House districts aimed at flipping five Republican-held seats to Democrats.

Now, we learn that the proposition itself juiced up Democratic voter enthusiasm for the elections.

Voter enthusiasm normally results in a higher casting of ballots.

It’s all about the national battle for control of the U.S. House of Representatives — and Congress potentially exercising its constitutional duty to provide some checks and balance against the president. Democrats need a net pickup of only three seats in November’s elections to dethrone Republicans.

President Trump is desperate to keep his GOP toadies in power. So, he has coerced — bullied and threatened — some red-state governors and legislatures into rejiggering Democratic-held House seats to make them more Republican-friendly.

When Texas quickly obliged, Gov. Gavin Newsom retaliated with a California Democratic gerrymander aimed at neutralizing the Lone Star State’s partisan mid-decade redistricting.

California’s counterpunch became Proposition 50, which was approved by a whopping 64.4% of the state’s voters.

Not only did Proposition 50 redraw some GOP-held House seats to tinge them blue, it stirred up excitement about the 2026 elections among Democratic voters.

That’s the view of Mark Baldassare, polling director for the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California. And it makes sense. Umpteen millions of dollars were spent by Newsom and Proposition 50 backers advertising the evils of Trump and the need for Democrats to take over the House.

A PPIC poll released last week showed a significant “enthusiasm gap” between Democratic and Republican voters regarding the House contests.

“One of the outcomes of Proposition 50 is that it focused voters on the midterm elections and made them really excited about voting next year,” Baldassare says.

At least, Democrats are showing excitement. Republicans, not so much.

In the poll, likely voters were asked whether they were more enthusiastic than usual about voting in the congressional elections or less enthusiastic.

Overall, 56% were more enthusiastic and 41% less enthusiastic. But that’s not the real story.

The eye-opener is that among Democrats, an overwhelming 72% were more enthusiastic. And 60% of Republicans were less enthusiastic.

“For Democrats, that’s unusually high,” Baldassare says.

To put this in perspective, I looked back at responses to the same question asked in a PPIC poll exactly two years ago before the 2024 elections. At that time, Democrats were virtually evenly split over their enthusiasm or lack of it concerning the congressional races. In fact, Republicans expressed more enthusiasm.

Still, Democrats gained three congressional seats in California in 2024. So currently they outnumber Republicans in the state’s House delegation by a lopsided 43 to 9.

If Democrats could pick up three seats when their voters weren’t even lukewarm about the election, huge party gains seem likely in California next year. Democratic voters presumably will be buoyed by enthusiasm and the party’s candidates will be boosted by gerrymandering.

“Enthusiasm is contagious,” says Dan Schnur, a former Republican operative who teaches political communication at USC and UC Berkeley. “If the party’s concentric circle of committed activists is enthusiastic, that excitement tends to spread outward to other voters.”

Schnur adds: “Two years ago, Democrats were not motivated about Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. Now they’re definitely motivated about Donald Trump. And in order to win midterm elections, you need to have a motivated base.”

Democratic strategist David Townsend says that “enthusiasm is the whole ballgame. It’s the ultimate barometer of whether my message is working and the other side’s is not working.”

The veteran consultant recalls that Democrats “used to go door to door handing out potholders, potted plants, refrigerator magnets and doughnuts trying to motivate voters.

“But the best turnout motivator Democrats have ever had in California is Donald J. Trump.”

In the poll, 71% of voters disapproved of the way Trump is handling his job; just 29% approved. It was even worse for Congress, with 80% disapproving.

Among Democratic voters alone, disapproval of Trump was practically off the chart at 97%.

But 81% of Republicans approved of the president.

Among voters of all political persuasions who expressed higher than usual enthusiasm about the House elections, 77% said they‘d support the Democratic candidate. Also: 79% said Congress should be controlled by Democrats, 84% disapproved of how Congress is handling its job and 79% disapproved of Trump.

And those enthused about the congressional elections believe that, by far, the most important problem facing the nation is “political extremism [and] threats to democracy.” A Democratic shorthand for Trump.

The unseemly nationwide redistricting battle started by Trump is likely to continue well into the election year as some states wrestle with whether to oblige the power-hungry president and others debate retaliating against him.

Sane politicians on both sides should have negotiated a ceasefire immediately after combat erupted. But there wasn’t enough sanity to even begin talks.

Newsom was wise politically to wade into the brawl — wise for California Democrats and also for himself as a presidential hopeful trying to become a national hero to party activists.

“Eleven months before an election, nothing is guaranteed,” Schnur says. “But these poll numbers suggest that Democrats are going to start the year with a big motivational advantage.”

Trump is the Democrats’ proverbial Santa who keeps on giving.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Kristi Noem grilled over L.A. Purple Heart Army vet who self-deported
The TK: Newsom expresses unease about his new, candid autobiography: ‘It’s all out there’
The L.A. Times Special: A Times investigation finds fraud and theft are rife at California’s county fairs

Until next week,
George Skelton


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

Source link