campaign

Writer Neil Gaiman denied sexual misconduct allegations first brought forth against him over a year and a half ago in a statement released Monday.

Gaiman, the bestselling fantasy author behind “The Sandman” comic books, and novels and shows “American Gods” and “Good Omens,” called the allegations, which emerged in the summer of 2024, a “smear campaign” that are “simply and completely untrue.”

“These allegations, especially the really salacious ones, have been spread and amplified by people who seemed a lot more interested in outrage and getting clicks on headlines rather than whether things had actually happened or not,” Gaiman wrote.

Five women first accused the 65-year-old British author of sexual misconduct in the summer of 2024, appearing in the Tortoise Media podcast “Master: The Allegations Against Neil Gaiman.” The women claimed Gaiman had them call him “master” during their alleged sexual encounters.

Eight women then accused the author of assault, abuse and coercion in an article published by New York magazine just over a year ago.

Scarlett Pavlovich, Gaiman’s former nanny, filed a lawsuit against the author and his estranged wife Amanda Palmer, almost exactly a year ago, accusing the couple of human trafficking. She alleged that she was brutally and repeatedly raped and sexually assaulted by Gaiman while working for the couple without pay.

“Gaiman repeatedly physically and emotionally abused Scarlett, raping her vaginally and anally, humiliating her, forcing her into sexual conduct in front of Gaiman’s child, and forcing her to touch and lick feces and urine,” the complaint states. Gaiman called Pavlovich “slave” and ordered her to call him “master,” the complaint states.

The abuse took place while Pavlovich was providing babysitting services for the couple in New Zealand in 2022, according to the suit.

All other allegations against the author stemmed from the 1990s to 2022, when he was living in the United States, Britain and New Zealand.

The author has sold more than 50 million copies of his books worldwide, and many have received film and television adaptations over the years. His work drew a large female readership, typically uncommon for comic-book writers. The allegations clashed with the self-proclaimed feminist writer’s public persona.

Gaiman has spent the last year out of the spotlight, after publishing company Dark Horse Comics cut ties with him shortly after the New York magazine article was published. Gaiman was also dropped from various film and TV adaptations of his work, including the final season of Amazon’s “Good Omens” and the streamer’s new “Anansi Boys” TV series.

He was also left out of press for the final season of Netflix’s “The Sandman” last year and Disney halted development of “The Graveyard Book” months after the initial allegations.

The author last publicly addressed the allegations a day after the New York magazine article was released, and wrote he had stayed quiet “both out of respect for the people who were sharing their stories and out of a desire not to draw even more attention to a lot of misinformation.”

At the time, Gaiman wrote that he “could have and should have done so much better,” admitting that he “was obviously careless with people’s hearts and feelings, and that’s something that I really, deeply regret. It was selfish of me. I was caught up in my own story and I ignored other people’s.”

Gaiman’s most recent statement comes just days after an unidentified Substack user who goes by TechnoPathology posted the latest in a series of articles over the last year defending the fantasy author.

Gaiman claimed he hasn’t been in contact with the anonymous poster but would “like to thank them personally for actually looking at the evidence and reporting what they found, which is not what anyone else had done.”

He said “the actual evidence was dismissed or ignored” by most reporting, including “mountains” of “emails, text messages and video evidence that flatly contradict” the claims.

The author also announced in the statement that he’s been working on a book throughout the “strange, turbulent and occasionally nightmarish year and a half.” The project is his longest since the 450-plus-page “American Gods,” he said.

“It’s a rough time for the world,” Gaiman wrote. “I look at what’s happening on the home front and internationally, and I worry; and I am still convinced there are more good people out there than the other kind.”

In a state that’s home to nearly 40 million people and the fourth largest economy in the world, the race for California governor has been lost in the shadow of President Trump’s combustible return to office and, thus far, the absence of a candidate charismatic enough to break out of the pack.

For the first time in recent history, there is no clear front-runner with less than five months before the June primary election.

“This is the most wide-open governor’s race we’ve seen in California in more than a quarter of a century,” said Dan Schnur, a political communications professor who teaches at USC, Pepperdine and UC Berkeley. “We’ve never seen a multicandidate field with so little clarity and such an absence of anything even resembling a front-runner.

“There’s no precedent in the modern political era for a campaign that’s this crowded,” Schnur said.

Opinion polls bear this out, with more voters saying they are undecided or coalescing behind any of the dozen prominent candidates who have announced bids.

Former Rep. Katie Porter (D-Irvine) led the field with the support of 21% of respondents in a survey of likely voters by the Public Policy Institute of California released in December. Former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, also a Democrat, and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton, a Republican, won the support of 14% of poll respondents. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, also a member of the GOP, won the backing of 10%, while everyone else in the field was in the single digits, though some Democratic candidates who recently entered the race were not included.

Recent gubernatorial campaigns have been dominated by larger-than-life personalities — global superstar Arnold Schwarzenegger, eBay billionaire Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown, the scion of a storied California political family.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who vaulted into the national spotlight after championing same-sex marriage while he was mayor of San Francisco, has become a national force in Democratic politics and is pondering a 2028 presidential run. Newsom won handily in the 2018 and 2022 races for California governor, and easily defeated a recall attempt during the COVID-19 pandemic. He is barred from running again due to term limits.

Porter cheekily alluded to California’s political power dynamic at a labor forum earlier this month.

“Look, we’ve had celebrity governors. We’ve had governors who are kids of other governors, and we’ve had governors who look hot with slicked back hair and barn jackets. You know what?” Porter said at an SEIU forum in January. “We haven’t had a governor in a skirt. I think it’s just about … time.”

Gubernatorial contests in the state routinely attract national attention. But the 2026 contest has not.

Despite California being at the center of many policies emanating from the Trump administration, notably the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants, this year’s gubernatorial race has been overshadowed. Deadly wildfires, immigration raids, and an esoteric yet expensive battle about redrawing congressional districts are among the topics that dominated headlines in the state last year.

Additionally, the race was frozen as former Vice President Kamala Harris, Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso weighed entering the contest. All opted against running for governor, leaving the field in flux. San José Mayor Matt Mahan’s entry into the race on Thursday — relatively late to mount a gubernatorial campaign — exemplifies the unsettled nature of the race.

“We’ve made a lot of progress in San José, but getting to the next level requires bold leadership in Sacramento that’s going to take on the status quo,” Mahan said in an interview before he announced his campaign. ”I have not heard anyone in the current field explain how they’re going to help us in San José and other cities across the state end unsheltered homelessness, implement Prop. 36 [a 2024 ballot measure that increased penalties for certain drug and theft crimes], get people into treatment, bring down the cost of housing, the cost of energy.”

A critical question is who donors decide to back in a state that is home to the most expensive media markets in the nation. Candidates have to file fundraising reports on Feb. 2, data that will indicate who is viable.

“I know from first-hand experience that there comes a day when a candidacy is no longer sustainable because of a lack of resources,” said Garry South, a veteran Democratic strategist who has worked on national and state campaigns.

“You have to pay the bills to keep the lights on, let alone having enough cash to communicate with our more than 23 million registered voters,” he added. “They don’t have much time to do it. The primary is just months away.”

The state Democratic and Republican conventions are quickly approaching. A Republican may be able to win the GOP endorsement, but it’s unlikely a Democrat will be able to secure their party’s nod because of the large number of candidates in the race.

Political observers expect some Democratic candidates who have meager financial resources and little name identification among the electorate to be pressured to drop out of the race by party leaders so that the party can consolidate support behind a viable candidate.

But others buck the orthodoxy, arguing that the candidates need to show they have a message that resonates with Californians.

“There’s a lack of excitement,” Democratic strategist Hilda Delgado said. “Right now is really about the core issues that will unify Californians and that’s why it’s important to choose a leader that is going to … give people hope. Because there’s a lot of, I don’t want to say depression, but hopelessness.”

SACRAMENTO — Two of the top Democratic candidates in the race for California governor are taking heat for their past votes to fund and support federal immigration enforcement as the backlash against the Trump administration’s actions in Minnesota intensifies after the shooting death of Alex Pretti.

Fellow Democratic candidates are criticizing Rep. Eric Swalwell and former Rep. Katie Porter for voting — in Swalwell’s case, as recently as June — to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and support its agents’ work.

Swalwell (D-Dublin) last year voted in favor of a Republican-sponsored resolution condemning an attack that injured at least eight people demonstrating in support of Israeli hostages, one of whom later died, in Boulder, Colo., and expressing “gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland.”

He was one of 75 Democrats, including nine from California, to cross the aisle and vote in favor of the resolution.

“The fact that Eric Swalwell stood with MAGA Republicans in Washington to thank ICE while in California masked ICE agents terrorized our communities — despite Swalwell’s notorious and chronic record of absenteeism from Congress, is shamefully hypocritical,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a rival Democrat running for governor, said in a statement.

Swalwell’s campaign dismissed the attack as a “political ploy” by “a desperate campaign” polling in single-digits.

“What Eric voted for was a resolution to condemn a horrific antisemitic attack in Boulder, CO that killed Karen Diamond, an 82-year old grandmother,” a campaign spokesman said in a statement. “The truth is no one has been more critical of ICE than Eric Swalwell.”

The exchange comes as Villaraigosa, Swalwell and other Democrats running to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is serving his final year in office, struggle to differentiate themselves in a tight race that lacks a clear front-runner.

In a poll released in December by the Public Policy Institute of California, Porter led the field with support from 21% of likely California voters. She was slightly ahead of former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and conservative commentator Steve Hilton but had far from a commanding lead.

With the June 2 primary election fast approaching, the sparring among the candidates — especially in the crowded field of Democrats — is expected to intensify, with those leading in the polls fielding the brunt of the attacks.

The Trump administration’s immigration tactics face mounting political scrutiny after federal agents fatally shot Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse from Minneapolis, during a protest over the weekend.

Pretti was the second U.S. citizen in Minneapolis to be killed by immigration officers in recent weeks. Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother, was shot in the head by an ICE officer Jan. 7. Federal officials have alleged it was an act of self-defense when Good drove her vehicle toward an officer — an assertion under dispute.

In recent days, Swalwell said that if elected, he would revoke the driver licenses of ICE agents who mask their faces, block them from state employment and aggressively prosecute agents for crimes such as kidnapping, assault and murder.

Tony Thurmond, another Democrat currently serving as California’s top education official, in an online political ad criticized Swalwell’s vote as well as several by Porter for bills to fund ICE and Trump’s border wall during the president’s first term.

Porter and Swalwell joined majorities of Democratic House members to support various spending packages in Congress, which included billions for a border wall and in at least one case, avoided a government shutdown.

“When others have stayed quiet, Katie has boldly spoken out against ICE’s lawlessness and demanded accountability,” said Porter campaign spokesman Peter Opitz.

Thurmond’s video touted his own background as a child of immigrants and support for a new law that attempts to keep federal immigration agents out of schools, hospitals and other spaces.

Tom Steyer, a billionaire Democrat also running for governor, said Tuesday that he supports abolishing ICE “as it exists today” and replacing it with a “lawful, accountable immigration system rooted in due process and public safety.”

Republicans blame Democrats and protesters

The two most formidable Republicans running for governor have generally supported Trump’s immigration strategy but have not commented directly on Pretti’s killing over the weekend.

Hilton, a former Fox News host, wrote in an email that “every sane person is horrified by the scenes of chaos and lawlessness in Minneapolis, and most of all that people are getting killed.”

But he linked violence to sanctuary policies in Democratic-run states and cities, including California, which prohibit local law enforcement from coordinating or assisting with federal immigration enforcement.

“The only places we’ve seen this kind of chaos are ‘sanctuary’ cities and states, where Democrat politicians are whipping people up into a frenzy of anti-law enforcement hate, and directly putting their constituents in harm’s way by telling them — from behind the safety of their own security details — to disrupt the enforcement of federal law,” Hilton said.

The conservative pundit said the “worst offender” is Newsom, whom Hilton accused of using “disgustingly inflammatory language designed to rile up his base in pursuit of his presidential ambitions.”

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s campaign did not respond to questions about events in Minnesota. Bianco has repeatedly criticized California’s sanctuary state policy but affirmed last year that his department would not assist with federal immigration raids.

On Sunday, Bianco posted on X that “Celebrities and talking heads think they understand what it’s like to put on a uniform and make life or death decisions,” an apparent reference to the encounter that resulted in Pretti’s death.

SAN FRANCISCO — Katie Porter’s still standing, which is saying something.

The last time a significant number of people tuned into California‘s low-frequency race for governor was in October, when Porter’s political obituary was being written in bold type.

Immediately after a snappish and off-putting TV interview, Porter showed up in a years-old video profanely reaming a staff member for — the humanity! — straying into the video frame during her meeting with a Biden Cabinet member.

Not a good look for a candidate already facing questions about her temperament and emotional regulation. (Hang on, gentle reader, we’ll get to that whole gendered double-standard thing in a moment.)

The former Orange County congresswoman had played to the worst stereotypes and that was that. Her campaign was supposedly kaput.

But, lo, these several months later, Porter remains positioned exactly where she’d been before, as one of the handful of top contenders in a race that remains stubbornly formless and utterly wide open.

Did she ever think of exiting the contest, as some urged, and others plainly hoped to see? (The surfacing of that surly 2021 video, with the timing and intentionality of a one-two punch, was clearly not a coincidence.)

No, she said, not for a moment.

“Anyone who thinks that you can just push over Katie Porter has never tried to do it,” she said.

Porter apologized and expressed remorse for her tetchy behavior. She promised to do better.

“You definitely learn from your mistakes,” the Democrat said this week over a cup of chai in San Francisco’s Financial District. “I really have and I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how do I show Californians who I am and that I really care about people who work for me. I need to earn back their trust and that’s what campaigns are literally about.”

She makes no excuse for acting churlish and wouldn’t bite when asked about that double standard — though she did allow as how Democratic leader John Burton, who died not long before people got busy digging Porter’s grave, was celebrated for his gruff manner and lavish detonation of f-bombs.

“It was a reminder,” she said, pivoting to the governor’s race, “that there have been other politicians who come on hot, come on strong and fight for what’s right and righteous and California has embraced them.”

Voters, she said, “want someone who will not back down.”

Porter warmed to the subject.

“If you are never gonna hurt anyone’s feelings, you are never gonna take [JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive] Jamie Dimon to task for not thinking about how his workers can’t afford to make ends meet. If you want everyone to love you, you are never gonna say to a big pharma CEO, ‘You didn’t make this cancer drug anymore. You just got richer, right?’ That is a feistiness that I’m proud of.”

At the same, Porter suggested, she wants to show there’s more to her persona than the whiteboard-wielding avenger that turned her into a viral sensation. The inquisitorial stance was, she said, her role as a congressional overseer charged with holding people accountable. Being governor is different. More collaborative. Less confrontational.

Her campaign approach has been to “call everyone, go everywhere” — even places Porter may not be welcomed — to listen and learn, build relationships and show “my ability to craft a compromise, my ability to learn and to change my mind.”

“All of that is really hard to convey,” she said, “in those whiteboard moments.”

The rap on this year’s pack of gubernatorial hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, as though the lack of A-list sizzle and failure to throw off sparks is some kind of mortal sin.

Porter doesn’t buy that.

“When we say boring, I think what we’re really saying is ‘I’m not 100% sure how all this is going to work out.’ People are waiting for some thing to happen, some coronation of our next governor. We’re not gonna have that.”

Gavin Newsom, she noted, was a high-profile former San Francisco mayor who spent eight years as lieutenant governor before winning the state’s top job. His predecessor was the dynastic Jerry Brown.

None of those running this time have that political pedigree, or the Sacramento backgrounds of Newsom or Brown, which, Porter suggested, is not a bad thing.

“I actually think this race has the potential to be really, really exciting for California,” she said. “… I think everyone in this race comes in with a little bit of a fresh energy, and I think that’s really good and healthy.”

Crowding into the conversation was, inevitably, Donald Trump, the sun around which today’s entire political universe turns.

Of course, Porter said, as governor she would stand up to the president. His administration’s actions in Minneapolis have been awful. His stalling on disaster relief for California is grotesque.

But, she said, Trump didn’t cause last year’s firestorm. He didn’t make housing in California obscenely expensive for the last many decades.

“When my children say ‘I don’t know if I want to go to college in California because we don’t have enough dorm housing,’ Trump has done plenty of horrible attacks on higher ed,” Porter said. “But that’s a homegrown problem that we need to tackle.”

Indeed, she’s “very leery of anyone who does not acknowledge that we had problems and policy challenges long before Donald Trump ever raised his orange head on the political horizon.”

Although California needs “someone who’s going to [buffer] us against Trump,” Porter said, “you can’t make that an excuse for why you are not tackling these policy changes that need to be.”

She hadn’t finished her tea, but it was time to go. Porter gathered her things.

She’d just spoken at an Urban League forum in San Francisco and was heading across the Bay Bridge to address union workers in Oakland.

The June 2 primary is some ways off. But Porter remains in the fight.

Jan. 26 (UPI) — With one week to go before presidential elections scheduled for Sunday, Feb. 1, Costa Rica closed its campaign season amid a polarized political climate and with the ruling party leading most opinion polls.

In recent weeks, multiple surveys have shown Laura Fernández Delgado, candidate of the ruling Partido Pueblo Soberano, holding first place with support levels close to 40%. That figure would be enough for the former cabinet minister to secure a first-round victory.

However, polls also point to high voter indecision, estimated at around 45%, in a context marked by political fragmentation and an unusually large field of candidates, local newspaper El Observador reported.

A recent survey by the Centro de Investigación y Estudios Políticos (CIEP) of the Universidad de Costa Rica places Fernández at 30% support, still well ahead of the remaining 19 candidates competing for the presidency.

Second place is held by Álvaro Ramos of the Partido Liberación Nacional, who polls below 8%. Most other candidates register less than 2.3% support.

Fernández, 39, has campaigned on a continuity platform, seeking to capitalize on the popularity of President Rodrigo Chaves, who is expected to leave office with approval ratings near 60%. His support has been driven in part by a confrontational style and rhetoric against traditional politics and established elites.

Chaves, who is constitutionally barred from seeking re-election, has governed amid persistent political tension and frequent institutional clashes. His administration has been characterized by sharp rhetoric, public disputes with other branches of government and a governing style that emphasizes direct communication and political confrontation.

The elections follow a dispute with the Tribunal Supremo Electoral, which in October 2025 asked the Legislative Assembly to lift the president’s immunity to investigate alleged violations of electoral rules, including his participation in campaign activities.

Public security has emerged as one of the dominant themes throughout the campaign, reflecting growing concern among voters over rising violent crime and the expanding influence of organized crime in several regions of the country, according to daily La Nación.

During debates organized by media outlets and universities, candidates broadly agreed that addressing insecurity requires more than law enforcement alone. Proposals have emphasized criminal intelligence, increased police presence, improved coordination among state institutions and the recovery of territories affected by organized crime.

According to CIEP, two out of three Costa Ricans believe the country’s security situation is worse than a year ago. Long viewed as one of Central America’s safest nations, Costa Rica is facing an unprecedented security crisis.

Organized crime, fueled largely by drug trafficking, has expanded its presence in neighborhoods in southern San Jose, as well as in the provinces of Limón and Puntarenas. In 2024, Costa Rica recorded a homicide rate of 16.6 per 100,000 inhabitants, ranking eighth highest in Latin America, surpassing Guatemala and approaching levels reported in Mexico.

WASHINGTON — Eleanor Holmes Norton, the 18-term delegate for the District of Columbia in Congress and a veteran of the Civil Rights Movement, has filed paperwork to end her campaign for reelection, likely closing out a decades-long career in public service.

Norton, 88, has been the sole representative of the residents of the nation’s capital in Congress since 1991, but she faced increasing questions about her effectiveness after the Trump administration began its sweeping intervention into the city last year.

Mayor Muriel Bowser congratulated Norton on her retirement.

“For 35 years, Congresswoman Norton has been our Warrior on the Hill,” Bowser wrote on social media. “Her work embodies the unwavering resolve of a city that refuses to yield in its fight for equal representation.”

Norton’s campaign filed a termination report with the Federal Election Commission on Sunday. Her office has not released an official statement about the delegate’s intentions.

The filing was first reported by NOTUS.

Her retirement opens up a likely competitive primary to succeed her in an overwhelmingly Democratic city. Several local lawmakers had already announced their intentions to run in the Democratic primary.

An institution in Washington politics for decades, Norton is the oldest member in the House. She was a personal friend to civil rights icons such as Medgar Evers and a contemporary of other activists turned congressional stalwarts, including Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) and the late Reps. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and John Lewis (D-Ga.).

But Norton has faced calls to step aside in recent months as residents and local lawmakers questioned her ability to effectively advocate for the city in Congress amid the Republican administration’s aggressive moves toward the city.

The White House federalized Washington’s police force, deployed National Guard troops from six states and the federal district across the capital’s streets and surged federal agents from the Department of Homeland Security into neighborhoods. The moves prompted outcry and protests from residents and a lawsuit from the district’s attorney general.

Norton’s retirement comes as a historically high number of lawmakers announce they will either seek another public office or retire from official duties altogether. More than 1 in 10 members of the House are not seeking reelection this year.

Norton’s staunch advocacy for her city

As the district’s delegate, Norton does not have a formal vote in the House. But she has found other ways to advocate for the city’s interests. Called the “Warrior on the Hill” by her supporters, Norton was a staunch advocate for D.C. statehood and for the labor rights of the federal workers who called Washington and its surrounding region home.

She also secured bipartisan wins for district residents. Norton was the driving force behind the passage of a law that provides up to $10,000 per year for students who attend public colleges outside the district. It also provides up to $2,500 per year for students who attend select private historically Black colleges and universities across the country and nonprofit colleges in the D.C. metropolitan area.

In the 1990s, Norton played a key role in ending the city’s financial crisis by brokering a deal to transfer billions of dollars in unfunded pension liabilities to the federal government in exchange for changes to the district’s budget. She twice played a leading role in House passage of a D.C. statehood bill.

Steeped in the civil rights movement

Norton was born and raised in Washington, and her life spans the arc of the district’s trials and triumphs. She was educated at Dunbar High School as part of the school’s last segregated class.

“Growing up black in Washington gave a special advantage. This whole community of blacks was very race conscious, very civil rights conscious,” she said in her 2003 biography, “Fire in My Soul.”

She attended Antioch College in Ohio and in 1963 split her time between Yale Law School and Mississippi, where she worked as an organizer during the Freedom Summer of the Civil Rights Movement.

One day that summer, Evers picked her up at the airport. He was assassinated that night.

Norton also helped organize and attended the 1963 March on Washington.

In an interview with the Associated Press in 2023, Norton said the march was still “the single most extraordinary experience of my lifetime.”

She went on to become the first woman to lead the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which helps enforce anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. She ran for office when her predecessor retired to run for Washington mayor.

Brown writes for the Associated Press.