Only a few months ago, former Irvine Vice Mayor Tammy Kim had aspirations of returning to the City Council she previously served on for four years.
Now her immediate goal is to fight off charges that could put her in prison for several years.
The Orange County district attorney’s office announced Thursday afternoon that Kim was charged with 10 felonies tied to allegedly lying about her residency during her City Council tenure and while campaigning for mayor last fall.
Kim was formally charged with three felony counts of perjury by declaration, three felony counts of filing a false document, and one felony count each of a public official aiding the illegal casting of votes, of filing false nominations papers, of knowing of the registration of someone not entitled to vote and of voter registration fraud. She was also charged with a misdemeanor of making a false statement.
She could spend up to 11 years and two months in state prison and county jail if convicted on all counts.
She is scheduled to be arraigned Friday morning.
Kim briefly responded to a call from The Times, saying she was advised not to share too much per her attorney, Caroline Hahn.
“We’re entering a not guilty plea,” Kim said.
Hahn added that she and her client “planned to launch a vigorous defense” but did not answer further questions.
Kim is accused of using two fraudulent addresses while running for mayor in the November 2024 election and then in a City Council special election in early 2025, according to the criminal complaint. She owned a condo in the city’s 3rd District, where she had lived since 2015, according to a separate lawsuit filed against Kim to get her thrown off the City Council ballot.
Kim won election to the Irvine City Council in November 2020, receiving nearly 44,000 votes a 14-person, top-three-candidate race.
At that time, city elections in Irvine used an at-large voting system, meaning candidates could live anywhere in the city.
The city moved to district elections in the fall 2024, requiring council members to live in the districts they represent. Only voters from those districts could vote for those candidates.
Kim served until November 2024 when she ran for and ultimately lost a mayoral campaign to Councilmember Larry Agran by a margin of nearly 5,000 votes.
The district attorney’s office believes Kim improperly used an address to run for mayor, no longer claiming to live in the 3rd District condo she had owned for a decade.
To run for mayor, Kim changed her California driver’s license and her voter registration to a home in the 5th District, where she never lived, according to the criminal complaint.
The home belonged to a family Kim met through a Korean teaching class, the complaint alleges. Kim did not inform the family that she was using their address, according to the complaint.
She has been charged with certifying that address as her own under the penalty of perjury.
Kim eventually finished her campaign and voted in November’s mayoral race based out of the 5th Diistrict home.
Shortly after her defeat, Kim declared her candidacy in December to fill the now- vacant 5th District seat, which Agran left after winning the mayoral election.
Kim eventually found a room in another 5th District home on Jan. 10 and changed her California driver’s registration that same day, according to the complaint. She then filed new nomination paperwork with the new 5th District address, according to the complaint.
Later that month, former mayoral candidate Ron Scolesdang sued Kim, claiming that she was fraudulently using an incorrect address. Scolesdang had hired a private investigator to monitor Kim, according to that lawsuit.
Kim eventually dropped out of the race on Feb. 7, the same day a Superior Court judge removed her name from the ballot.
Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again
By Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson Penguin Press: 352 pages, $32 If you buy books linked on our site, The Times may earn a commission from Bookshop.org, whose fees support independent bookstores.
Eleven minutes into the June 27 presidential debate, CNN anchor Dana Bash slipped a note to her colleague Jake Tapper after President Biden gave a rambling, incoherent answer.
Negative reaction to Biden’s alarmingly disastrous performance led him to abandon his campaign three weeks later and Vice President Kamala Harris to take his place on the 2024 Democratic ticket. The election against President Trump was less than four months away.
Biden’s mental and physical decline had long been the subject of speculation at that point. The unraveling of the then-81-year-old incumbent president in front of an audience of 51 million TV viewers made his diminished capacity undeniable.
“It was just the painful realization that the White House had been lying to everyone, including likely, in many ways, to themselves,” Tapper said in a recent Zoom conversation from his home in Washington, D.C. “As bad as it was on TV, it was worse in person.”
CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash at the first 2024 presidential debate in Atlanta on June 27.
(Austin Steele / CNN)
The debate meltdown and its aftermath prompted Tapper to join forces with Thompson for an investigative deep dive into Biden’s deteriorating condition and how family and staff protected him from scrutiny until it was no longer possible to hide.
“Original Sin” is rife with examples of Biden forgetting the names of friends and associates he’s known for years, most notably actor George Clooney at a Hollywood fundraiser. At the same event, former President Obama led a dazed-looking Biden offstage.
Tapper and Thompson give a detailed account of Biden’s October 2023 interview with special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated whether the former president was in illegal possession of classified material.
Biden frequently wandered off topic during his testimony and failed to recall dates of key moments of his life, such as the year his son Beau died. Hur declined to prosecute Biden, calling him a “well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory” in his report. Hur was hammered by Democratic critics who called him cruel and ageist.
There were private discussions among aides about Biden using a wheelchair if he were elected to a second term. The staff went through machinations to minimize the appearance of Biden’s physical challenges, even enlisting director Steven Spielberg to coach Biden for his 2024 State of the Union address.
Tapper and Thompson tie the stories together in a way that reads like a horror movie script — you know what’s coming and there’s nothing you can do about it.
“We were just lied to over and over again,” Tapper said.
Their book has already generated a national debate about whether the White House deceived the public about the president’s condition and how Biden’s late exit from the race undermined the Democratic Party’s chances of stopping a second term for President Trump.
The immediate response of right-wing commentators to the book’s revelations has been “we told you so,” along with accusations that the mainstream media was complicit in a White House cover-up of the president’s health issues.
Tapper anticipated the reaction. He said 99% of what is reported in the book was discovered after the election.
“If I learned about any of these stories in 2022, 2023 or 2024, I would have reported them in a second,” he said. “But I don’t have subpoena power.”
Tapper believes conservatives were proven correct in their harsh and at times tactless assessments of Biden’s condition, which clearly worsened in 2023 after his son Hunter faced the possibility of a prison sentence when a plea deal on tax and gun charges fell apart.
“They were right and that should be acknowledged,” Tapper said. “At the same time, saying that the president’s brain has turned to applesauce is not journalism. It’s punditry.”
Although there is plenty of footage showing Biden’s memory lapses and senior moments, Tapper noted there were few deeply reported stories on the extent of the president’s condition. Biden was surrounded by family members and longtime loyalists who were effective at deflecting and dismissing the inquiries as partisan attacks.
Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy was persistent in raising the issue of Biden’s health in the White House briefing room and former Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was persistent in shutting him down, suggesting he was spreading disinformation.
“They weren’t only lying to journalists, they were lying to everybody,” Tapper said. “People would do reporting and all the great Democratic sources that you could rely on for candor would say, ‘No, we’re told that he’s fine.’ And I think that they all either believed it or had no other facts.”
Along with Thompson’s work for Axios, the most detailed report on Biden’s frailty and memory lapses came in June 2024 from Wall Street Journal reporters Siobhan Hughes and Annie Linskey. The highly respected Washington journalists were roundly criticized by progressive commentators for depending on unnamed sources in the report, titled “Behind Closed Doors, Biden Shows Signs of Slipping.” CNN’s own Reliable Sources newsletter dismissed the piece, saying, “The Wall Street Journal owes its readers — and the public — better.”
Tapper said Hughes and Linskey “should be heralded as heroes” and agreed that the Washington press corps failed to aggressively pursue the Biden health story. But it didn’t help that loyalty to Biden kept potential whistleblowers in line.
“I do primarily think that the people who were lying, or the people who knew the truth but were fearful, are the ones that could’ve prevented this disaster much more so than those of us in the news media,” Tapper said. “We’re only as good as our sources.”
Tapper and Thompson rely largely on unnamed sources in “Original Sin.” Among the 200 people they talked to are Democratic Party insiders and four cabinet secretaries. While many Democrats are still reluctant to go on the record about what they knew about Biden and when they knew it, the floodgate of anecdotes opened after the election.
“I have never experienced the ability to get behind the scenes in so many different rooms as for these recountings as I was for this book,” Tapper said. “I felt like people needed to get this off their chest. It was almost like they were unburdening themselves.”
Many of the sources expressed regret that they did not speak up sooner. Tapper said he and his co-author maintained a high bar for what they used.
“If there was stuff that we were not 100% sure about, we didn’t put it in the book,” he said. “There are stories, really good ones, that had one source and we said, ‘It’s not good enough.’”
In its only response to the book thus far, the Biden camp has asserted that the former president’s condition did not impair his ability to execute his duties in the White House.
“We continue to await anything that shows where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or where national security was threatened or where he was unable to do his job. In fact, the evidence points to the opposite — he was a very effective president.”
Tapper and Thompson say in the book that they found no instances where Biden was unable to discharge his duties as president. They write that even most of his critics interviewed for the book “attest to his ability to make sound decisions, if on his own schedule.”
Tapper believes that the effort of family and his longtime staff members to hide Biden’s condition deprived the Democratic Party of the chance to determine if its chances were better with another candidate, who would have benefited from more time to mount a campaign against Trump.
“President Biden knows what he was going through,” Tapper said. “Jill Biden knows what he’s going through. They hid this. It’s still amazing to me that they were actually arguing that he could do this job for four more years.
“I’m proud of the book that Alex and I wrote,” Tapper added. “I’m proud of the reporting. But I’d rather that this hadn’t happened.”
Asked if the Biden’s actions amounted to a medical Watergate, Tapper said it did “in the fact that there was a horrible cover-up of something that wasn’t technically a crime, but you could argue morally it was.”
National Party and Liberal Party part ways after more than 60-year alliance following election defeat.
Australia’s National Party has split from its conservative coalition partner of more than 60 years, the Liberal Party, citing policy differences over renewable energy and following a resounding loss in the national elections this month.
“It’s time to have a break,” the National leader, David Littleproud, told reporters on Tuesday.
The split shows the pressure on Australia’s conservative parties after Anthony Albanese’s centre-left Labor Party won a historic second term in the May 3 election, powered by a voter backlash against United States President Donald Trump’s policies.
Under the longstanding partnership in state and federal politics, the Liberal and National coalition had shared power in governments, with the Nationals broadly representing the interests of rural communities and the Liberals contesting city seats.
“We will not be re-entering a coalition agreement with the Liberal Party after this election,” Littleproud said, citing policy differences.
Liberal Party leader Sussan Ley, who was installed in the role last week, had pledged to revisit all policies in the wake of the election loss. She said on Tuesday she was disappointed with the Nationals’ decision, which came after they had sought specific commitments.
“As the largest nongovernment political party, the Liberals will form the official opposition,” she added.
The Liberals were reduced to 28 out of 150 seats in the House of Representatives, their worst result, as Labor increased its tally to 94 from 77, registering its largest-ever majority in an election. The National Party retained its 15 seats.
The Liberal Party lost key city seats to independents supporting gender equality and action on climate change.
Ley, a former outback pilot with three finance degrees, was elected as the party’s first female leader after opposition leader Peter Dutton lost his seat in the election.
“She is a leader that needs to rebuild the Liberal Party; they are going on a journey of rediscovery, and this will provide them the opportunity to do that,” said Littleproud.
The Nationals remain committed to “having the door open” for more coalition talks before the next election, but would uphold the interests of rural Australians, he said.
The Nationals had failed to gain a commitment from Ley that her party would continue a policy taken to the election supporting the introduction of nuclear power, and also wanted a crackdown on the market power of Australia’s large supermarkets, and better telecommunications in the Outback.
Australia has the world’s largest uranium reserves but bans nuclear energy.
Littleproud said nuclear power was needed because Australia’s move away from coal to “renewables only” under the Labor government was not reliable.
Wind farm turbines “are tearing up our landscape, they are tearing up your food security”, he said.
Michael Guerin, chief executive of AgForce, representing farmers in Queensland state, said the urban-rural divide was worsening.
“Perhaps we’re seeing that in the political forum,” he said, adding the Liberals and Nationals both needed to rebuild.
Labor Party treasurer Jim Chalmers said the split in the opposition was a “nuclear meltdown”, and the Liberals would have a presence “barely bigger” than the cross-bench of 12 independents and minor parties when Parliament sits.
Nicusor Dan (C), Bucharest mayor and independent presidential candidate supported by the Force of the Right (FD), delivers his speech after the first exit poll results are announced in Cismigiu Park, Bucharest, Romania, on May 18, 2025.. Photo by Bogdan Cristel/EPA-EFE
May 19 (UPI) — The Pro-European Union centrist mayor of Bucharest, Nicusor Dan, has claimed victory in Romania’s presidential run-off election over far-right nationalist candidate George Simion, who has conceded defeat.
According to official results, Dan, an independent, won 54.22% of the vote compared to Simion, of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, who secured 45.78% of the vote.
“It was an unprecedented mobilization, and that is why the victory belongs to each and every one of you,” Dan said in a statement on X.
“To every Romanian who went out to vote, made their voice heard and thus fought for what they believe in, for the country they want and wish to live in. Starting tomorrow, we begin the reconstruction of Romania — a united, HONEST Romania, based on respect for the law and for all people.”
Simion vowed, also on X, to “continue our fight for freedom and our great values along with other patriots, sovereignists and conservatives all over the world.”
“We may have lost a battle, but we will certainly not lose the war.”
According to Romania’s Permanent Electoral Authority, nearly 55.6% of all registered voters cast ballots in the contest.
Dan’s victory on Sunday comes after Simion was declared the winner of the first round early this month, with nearly 41% of the vote. The run-off election was necessitated as he fell short of the 50% majority needed to win outright.
“For Ukraine — as a neighbor and friend — it is important to have Romania as a reliable partner,” Zelensky said. “And we are confident we will. By working together, we can strengthen both our countries and our Europe.”
The election comes after a run-off between the pro-Russian nationalist, Calin Georgescu, and centrist Elena Lasconi was canceled in November, just days before ballots were to be cast, over Russia attempting to influence the outcome in Georgescu’s favor.
Online on Sunday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania warned of a vile disinformation campaign on Telegram, specifically concerning NATO forces in the country in connection with the election.
“Any attempt to associate the activity of the allied forces on the national territory with the political electoral context in Romania constitutes a form of distortion of the truth,” it said on Facebook, calling the posts “fake news.”
Portugal’s ruling centre-right Democratic Alliance (AD) is poised to win the most votes in an early parliamentary election, but is short of a full majority, exit polls have shown, paving the way for more political instability in the country.
Sunday’s election, the third in as many years, was called just one year into the minority government’s term after Prime Minister Luis Montenegro failed to win a parliamentary vote of confidence in March when the opposition questioned his integrity over the dealings of his family’s consultancy firm.
Montenegro has denied any wrongdoing, and most opinion polls showed that voters have dismissed the opposition’s criticism.
The election, also dominated by issues such as housing and immigration, follows a decade of fragile governments. And the only one of those governments to have a parliamentary majority collapsed halfway through its term last year.
Exit polls published by the three main television channels – SIC, RTP and TVI – put Montenegro’s AD as receiving between 29 percent and 35.1 percent of the vote, garnering the biggest share but again no parliamentary majority, similar to what happened in the previous election in March 2024.
Supporters react to the first electoral result projections at Portugal’s Social Democratic Party (PSD) and Democratic Alliance (AD) leader Luis Montenegro’s electoral night headquarters, in Lisbon, Portugal [Violeta Santos Moura/Reuters]
Outside the polling station where Montenegro voted in the northern city of Espinho, Irene Medeiros, 77, told Reuters the “best candidate must win”, but that she feared more uncertainty ahead.
According to the exit polls, Montenegro’s main rival, the centre-left Socialist Party (PS), garnered between 19.4 percent and 26 percent of the vote, nearly tied with the far-right Chega party’s 19.5 percent to 25.5 percent share, which is higher than the 18 percent it won in 2024. Montenegro has refused to make any deals with Chega.
With that tally, the DA could get between 85 and 96 seats, short of the 116 needed for a majority in Portugal’s 230-seat parliament. It could form a minority government or forge partnerships with smaller parties to obtain a majority.
Most official results are expected by midnight (23:00 GMT).
For the last half century, two parties have dominated politics in Portugal, with the Social Democrats, who head the DA, and the PS alternating in power.
Public frustration with their record in government has fuelled the search and for growth of new alternatives in recent years.
“This campaign was very, very weak, had ridiculous moments, like clownish. Very little was spoken about Portugal within the European Union – it’s like we are not part of it,” teacher Isabel Monteiro, 63, told the Associated Press news agency in Lisbon, adding that she felt “disenchantment” with all parties.
Political scientist Antonio Costa Pinto said the new parliament would likely be similar to the last, and it was impossible to predict how long the government would last, as it depended on factors ranging from the international situation to the AD’s ability to reach deals with other parties.
“The only doubt is whether the AD will form a new minority government … or whether it will form a post-electoral coalition with IL, even if this coalition does not guarantee an absolute majority,”, referring to the pro-business Liberal Initiative (IL) party, according to Reuters.
Shortly after casting his own ballot, Montenegro told reporters he was confident stability could be achieved.
“There is a search for a stable solution, but that will now depend on [people’s] choices,” he said.
A second consecutive minority government in Portugal would dash hopes for an end to the worst spell of political instability in decades for the European Union country of 10.6 million people.
For the past 50 years, two parties have dominated politics, with the Social Democrats, who head the DA, and the Socialist Party alternating in power.
George Simion rejected the exit poll soon after it was released, claiming he was ahead in the vote.
Centrist Bucharest Mayor Nicusor Dan, who has pledged to clamp down on corruption and is staunchly pro-EU and NATO, is on course to win presidential elections in Romania.
Exit polls showed Dan ahead with 54.9 percent. His rival, hard-right nationalist George Simion, was on 45.1 percent.
Simion rejected the exit poll soon after it was released, claiming on Sunday his count estimates have him at 400,000 votes more than Dan.
Dan had campaigned on a pledge to fight rampant corruption and to keep Romania firmly within the European mainstream.
The rerun was held months after the cancellation of the previous election plunged Romania into its worst political crisis in decades.
Turnout was significantly higher in Sunday’s runoff and is expected to play a decisive role in the outcome.
Official results are expected to come in later on Sunday.
Simion appeared alongside Georgescu at a Bucharest polling station on Sunday and told reporters that he voted against the “humiliations to which our sisters and brothers have been subjected”.
“We voted against abuses and against poverty,” he said. “I voted for our future to be decided only by Romanians, for Romanians and Romania. So help us God!”
OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahoma high school students studying U.S. history learn about the Industrial Revolution, women’s suffrage and America’s expanding role in international affairs.
Beginning next school year, they will also learn about false conspiracy theories surrounding the 2020 presidential election.
Oklahoma’s new social studies standards for K-12 public school students, already infused with references to the Bible and nationalist themes, were revised at the direction of state schools Supt. Ryan Walters. The Republican official has spent much of his first term in office lauding President Trump, feuding with teachers unions and local school superintendents, and trying to end what he describes as “wokeness” in public schools.
“The left has been pushing left-wing indoctrination in the classroom,” Walters said. “We’re moving it back to actually understanding history … and I’m unapologetic about that.”
The previous standard for studying the 2020 election merely said, “Examine issues related to the election of 2020 and its outcome.” The new version is more expansive: “Identify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information, including the sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities in key battleground states, the security risks of mail-in balloting, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters, and the unprecedented contradiction of ‘bellwether county’ trends.”
The new standard raised red flags even among Walters’ fellow Republicans, including the governor and legislative leaders. They were concerned that several last-minute changes, including the language about the 2020 election and a provision stating the source of the COVID-19 virus was a Chinese lab — a theory never proven — were added just hours before the state school board voted on them.
A group of parents and educators has filed a lawsuit asking a judge to reject the standards, arguing that they were not reviewed properly and that they “represent a distorted view of social studies that intentionally favors an outdated and blatantly biased perspective.”
Grassroots pressure on lawmakers
While many Oklahoma teachers have expressed outrage at the change in the standards, others say they leave room for an effective teacher to instruct students about the results of the 2020 election without misinforming them.
Aaron Baker, who has taught U.S. government in high schools in Oklahoma City for more than a decade, said he’s most concerned about teachers in rural, conservative parts of the state who might feel encouraged to impose their own beliefs on students.
“If someone is welcoming the influence of these far-right organizations in our standards and is interested in inserting more of Christianity into our practices as teachers, then they’ve become emboldened,” Baker said. “For me, that is the major concern.”
Leaders in the Republican-led Oklahoma Legislature introduced a resolution to reject the standards, but there wasn’t enough GOP support to pass it.
Part of that hesitation probably stemmed from a flurry of last-minute opposition organized by pro-Trump conservative groups such as Moms for Liberty, which has a large presence in Oklahoma and threatened to back primary opponents against lawmakers who reject the standards.
“In the last few election cycles, grassroots conservative organizations have flipped seats across Oklahoma by holding weak Republicans accountable,” the group wrote in a letter signed by several other conservative groups and GOP activists. “If you choose to side with the liberal media and make backroom deals with Democrats to block conservative reform, you will be next.”
Claims that changes ‘encourage critical thinking’
After a group of parents, educators and other Oklahoma school officials worked to develop the new social studies standards, Walters assembled an executive committee consisting mostly of out-of-state pundits from conservative think tanks to revise them. He said he wanted to focus more on American “exceptionalism” and incorporate the Bible as an instructional resource.
Among those Walters appointed to the review committee are Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation and a key figure on its Project 2025 project, a blueprint for a conservative administration largely reflected in Trump policies; and Dennis Prager, a radio talk show host who founded Prager U, a conservative nonprofit that offers “pro-American” educational materials for children that critics decry as lacking in objectivity and accuracy.
In a statement to the Associated Press, Walters defended teaching students about “unprecedented and historically significant” elements of the 2020 presidential election.
“The standards do not instruct students on what to believe; rather, they encourage critical thinking by inviting students to examine real events, review publicly available information, and come to their own conclusions,” he said.
Recounts, reviews and audits in the battleground states where Trump contested his election loss all confirmed Democrat Joe Biden’s victory, and Trump lost dozens of court cases challenging the results.
Critics say Walters’ new standard is filled with misleading phrasing that seeks to steer the discussion in a particular direction.
Democrats characterized it as another political ploy by Walters, widely viewed as a potential candidate for governor in 2026, at the expense of schoolchildren.
“It’s harmful posturing and political theater that our kids do not need to be subjected to,” said state Sen. Mark Mann, a Democrat from Oklahoma City who previously served on the school board for one of the state’s largest districts.
Concerns about politicizing school standards
National experts on education standards also expressed alarm, noting that Oklahoma has historically ranked highly among the states for its standards.
Brendan Gillis, the director of teaching and learning at the American Historical Assn. who oversaw a research project that analyzed standards in all 50 states, said Oklahoma’s social studies standards had been “quite good” until the latest version.
In addition to concerns about election misinformation, Gillis said, “there was also a lot of biblical content that was sort of shoehorned in throughout the existing standards.”
He said a lot of the references to Christianity and the Bible misinterpreted the history of the country’s founding and lacked historical nuance.
David Griffith, a research director at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative-leaning education think tank, said he was not aware of any other states that have tried to promote election misinformation in their curriculum standards.
He called the new standards an “unfortunate” departure from Oklahoma’s traditionally strong social studies standards.
“It is just inappropriate to promote conspiracy theories about the election in standards,” he said.
Murphy writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Christina A. Cassidy in Atlanta contributed to this report.
Foreign policy under Prime Minister Donald Tusk, LGBTQ rights and abortion have been major issues on the campaign trail.
Voters in Poland are casting their ballots to elect the next president in what is expected to be a close contest between the liberal mayor of Warsaw and a conservative historian.
Polls opened at 7am (05:00 GMT) in Sunday’s election, and the results of exit polls are expected to be released after the polls close at 9pm (19:00 GMT). The final official results of the contest, in which 13 candidates are running, are expected on Monday.
The frontrunners are Rafal Trzaskowski, the pro-European mayor of the Polish capital, and Karol Nawrocki, a historian backed by the nationalist Law and Justice party, which lost power 18 months ago.
Neither is expected to reach the required 50 percent threshold for victory, making a run-off on June 1 likely.
The election is being closely watched for whether voters endorse the pro-European path set by Prime Minister Donald Tusk or favour a return to the nationalist vision of Law and Justice, which ran the country from 2015 to 2023.
Tusk was elected prime minister in December 2023 after defeating Law and Justice, which had engaged in repeated disputes with the European Union.
The Polish president has limited executive powers but is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, steers foreign policy and can veto legislation.
Security fears loom large
The campaign has largely revolved around foreign policy at a time of heightened security concerns in Poland, a key NATO and EU member bordering war-torn Ukraine, and fears that the United States’s commitment to European security could be wavering in the President Donald Trump era.
Trzaskowski, deputy leader of Tusk’s centre-right Civic Platform, has pledged to cement Poland’s role as a major player at the heart of Europe in contrast with Law and Justice, which was frequently at odds with Brussels over rule-of-law concerns.
“I would definitely strengthen relations with our partners … within NATO and the EU,” Trzaskowski told state broadcaster TVP Info on Friday.
Social issues have also been a major theme on the campaign trail with Nawrocki framing himself as a guardian of conservative values and Trzaskowski drawing support from liberal voters for his pledges to back abortion and LGBTQ rights.
Malgorzata Mikoszewska, a 41-year-old tourism agency employee, told the AFP news agency that she was a fan of Trzaskowski’s liberal stance on social issues.
“Above all, I hope for the liberalisation of the law on abortion and sexual minorities,” she said.
Apartment scandal
Nawrocki’s campaign received a boost when he met with Trump in the Oval Office of the White House this month.
But it then took a hit over allegations that he bought an apartment in Gdansk from an elderly man in return for a promise to provide lifelong care for the man, which was not delivered. Nawrocki denied the allegations.
Polish authorities have reported attempts at foreign interference during the campaign, including denial-of-service attacks targeting the websites of parties in Tusk’s ruling coalition and allegations by a state research institute that political advertisements on Facebook were funded from overseas.
“With Nawrocki as president, the government would be paralysed, and that could eventually lead to the fall of the ruling coalition,” political scientist Anna Materska-Sosnowska told AFP.
His victory could see “the return of the populists with renewed force” at the next general election, she said.
The new president will replace Andrzej Duda, who has served two terms and is ineligible to stand again.
Poland will hold the first round of voting in its presidential election on Sunday.
This is a hotly contested race between two main candidates – one from Civic Platform, the lead party in the ruling Civic Coalition, and the other an independent backed by the main opposition party, Law and Justice (PiS).
While much of the power rests with the prime minister and parliament in Poland, the president is able to veto legislation and has influence over military and foreign policy decisions. The current president, Andrzej Duda, who is from PiS, has used his veto to block reforms to the justice system that the government has been trying to enact for some time.
Furthermore, reports of foreign election interference have recently spooked voters who are primarily concerned with issues such as the Russia-Ukraine war, immigration, abortion rights and the economy.
Here is all we know about the upcoming vote:
How does voting work?
Polish citizens aged 18 or older can vote. There are about 29 million eligible voters. On Sunday, they will select a single candidate from a list of registered presidential candidates. If a candidate wins at least 50 percent of the vote, they win the election. If all candidates fall short of the 50 percent threshold, the country will vote in a second round for the two top contenders from the first round on June 1. The winner of that contest will become president. The election is expected to go to a second round.
Presidents may serve a maximum of two five-year terms in Poland. The current president reaches the end of his second term on August 6.
What time do polls open and close in Poland?
On May 18, polls will open at 7am (05:00 GMT) and close at 9pm (19:00 GMT).
What’s at stake?
In 2023, current Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s Civic Coalition ascended to power, ending eight years of rule by the PiS party’s government.
While Tusk promised to reverse unpopular judicial reforms enacted by PiS, President Andrzej Duda, a former nationalist ally of the party, has hampered Tusk’s efforts by using his presidential power to veto legislation.
What are the key issues?
Key issues dominating this election include the Russia-Ukraine war.
When the war first broke out in February 2022, Poland threw its full support behind Ukraine, welcoming more than one million Ukrainian refugees who crossed the border without documents.
On May 10, Tusk, alongside other European leaders, visited Kyiv and gave Russian President Vladimir Putin an ultimatum to enact an unconditional 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine.
However, relations between Poland and Ukraine have grown tense. Earlier this year, Polish farmers led protests, arguing the market had been flooded with cheap agricultural products from Ukraine.
There are also emerging reports of Ukrainian refugees facing discrimination in Poland, as well as resentment about welfare provided to them.
There have been growing fears of a spillover of Russian aggression to Poland due to its proximity to Ukraine. On May 12, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Warsaw said an investigation had revealed that Moscow’s intelligence agencies had orchestrated a massive fire at a shopping centre in Warsaw in May 2024.
Several candidates for the presidential election have proposed raising the defence budget to 5 percent of GDP.
Poles also have economic concerns about taxes, housing costs and the state of public transport.
Abortion is a key issue in Poland. Poland has some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe. Women are only allowed to have abortions in cases of rape or incest or if their life or health are at risk.
In August 2024, Tusk acknowledged that he did not have enough backing from parliament to deliver on one of his key campaign promises and change the abortion law.
Opinion is also split on whether LGBTQ rights should be restricted or expanded in the country.
The country is also divided over how involved it should be with the European Union (EU), with the PiS taking the stance that the country would be better off forming an alliance with the United States than the EU.
Who is running?
A total of 13 candidates are vying for the presidency. The top four candidates are:
Rafal Trzaskowski
Trzaskowski, 53, has been the liberal mayor of Warsaw since 2018 and is an ally of Tusk, affiliated with the PM’s political alliance, Civic Coalition. He is also a senior member of the Civic Platform party (PO), which heads the Civic Coalition. Trzaskowski was narrowly defeated by Duda in the 2020 presidential election.
During his time as mayor, he was lauded for investing in Warsaw’s infrastructure and culture. He proposes to increase defence spending to 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and to develop Poland’s arms and technology industry.
Trzaskowski has liberal views. He is pro-Europe and one of his campaign promises includes strengthening Poland’s position in the EU. Another one of his pledges is to relax abortion laws, however, he has been quiet on this issue during the run-up to the presidential election. He has also been supportive of the LGBTQ community and has attended pride parades. This could alienate some more conservative voters who live outside urban centres.
For this reason, right-wing voters may vote against him in the second round of voting. Trzaskowski could also lose support from centrist and progressive voters, who are frustrated by Tusk’s inability to bring reform to abortion laws.
Karol Nawrocki
Nawrocki, 42, is a conservative historian standing as an independent candidate backed by the PiS party.
His academic work has been centred around anti-communist resistance. He currently administers the Institute of National Remembrance, where his removal of Soviet memorials has angered Russia. He administered the Museum of the Second World War in northern Poland from 2017 to 2021.
His campaign promises include lowering taxes and pulling Poland out of the EU’s Migration Pact and Green Deal. He also wishes to allocate 5 percent of GDP to defence. Nawrocki is critical of giving more rights to LGBTQ couples.
Nawrocki has had a fair share of controversies in the past. In 2018, he published a book about a notorious gangster under the pseudonym “Tadeusz Batyr”. In public comments, Nawrocki and Batyr praised each other, without revealing they were the same person.
Slawomir Mentzen
Mentzen, 38, is a far-right entrepreneur who leads the New Hope party, a member of the Confederation coalition. He has degrees in economics and physics; owns a brewery in Torun; runs a tax advisory firm; and is critical of government regulation, wishing for significant tax cuts.
Mentzen has used social media platforms to connect with younger voters.
He believes that Poland should not take sides in the Russia-Ukraine war. He wants to ensure the Polish constitution overrides EU laws and wishes to withdraw from the EU Green Deal. He opposes LGBTQ rights and opposes abortion, even in cases of rape.
Ahead of the 2019 election for the European Parliament, he said: “We don’t want Jews, homosexuals, abortion, taxes or the European Union.” Since then, he has tried to distance himself from this statement.
While Poland offers free higher education, Mentzen dropped in opinion polls after he advocated for tuition fees in state schools in late March.
Szymon Holownia
Holownia, 48, is a former journalist and television personality-turned-politician. He is the speaker, or marshal, of the lower house of parliament, the Sejm.
In 2020, he founded a centrist movement called Polska 2050, which burgeoned into a party and ended up joining Tusk’s coalition.
Holownia wishes to promote regional development alongside better access to affordable housing and improving the public transport system. He says he wants to reduce bureaucracy, support Polish businesses and develop Poland’s domestic arms production capabilities.
Other candidates
Three leftist candidates are also running the election including Deputy Senate Speaker Magdalena Biejat, 43, an advocate for women’s rights, minority rights, affordable housing and abortion access; Adrian Zandberg, 45, who has made similar promises to Biejat; and academic and lawmaker Joanna Senyszyn, a former member of the Polish United Workers’ Party.
Other candidates include far-right Grzegorz Braun, who was pilloried globally for using a fire extinguisher to put out Hanukkah candles in parliament in 2023, and journalist and YouTuber Krzysztof Stanowski, 42, who does not have a political programme and wants to show Poles behind the scenes of the campaign while raising money for charity.
What do the opinion polls say?
As of May 12, Trzaskowski was in the lead with the support of 31 percent of voters, according to Politico’s polling aggregate. Nawrocki was in second place with 25 percent, while Mentzen had 13 percent and Holownia had 7 percent.
When will we know the results?
As soon as polls close, Ipsos will release an exit poll based on surveys undertaken at 500 randomly selected polling stations. While this is not the official result, it is expected to be highly indicative of which way the vote is going. Partial results may start to emerge on Sunday night or Monday.
In Poland, voting always takes place on a Sunday. In 2020, the official results for the first round of voting were confirmed on Tuesday morning.
What is the election interference controversy about?
On Wednesday, Poland said it had uncovered a possible election interference attempt via advertisements on Facebook.
“The NASK Disinformation Analysis Center has identified political ads on the Facebook platform that may be financed from abroad. The materials were displayed in Poland,” according to a statement by NASK, which is Poland’s national research institute dealing with cybersecurity. “The advertising accounts involved in the campaign spent more on political materials in the last seven days than any election committee.”
The NASK statement did not specify which countries’ financial backers of the campaign were believed to be based in. Fears of Russian election interference are high in Europe after Romania declared a do-over of its November presidential election after reports emerged of alleged Russian election interference. The first round of the repeat election took place on May 4, with the second round due to happen on May 18. This was after far-right politician Calin Georgescu, who was polling in single digits during the campaign, surprisingly emerged victorious.
Grigory Melkonyants (R), co-chair of Russia’s leading independent election monitoring group Golos, stood inside a defendant’s cage as he attended Wednesday’s verdict hearing at Basmanny district court in Moscow, Russia. Melkonyants was arrested in August 2023 charged with alleged involvement in work of an “undesirable” non-governmental organization. The court sentenced Melkonyants to 5 years in prison. Photo Provided By Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA-EFE
May 14 (UPI) — A Russian court on Wednesday sentenced well-known election watchdog Grigory Melkonyants to five years in prison after it found him guilty of allegedly working for a so-called “undesirable” organization.
“Don’t worry, I’m not despairing,” Melkonyants was quoted telling supporters after the sentence was handed down by Moscow’s Basmanny District Court in a latest blow to free speech in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime.
“You shouldn’t despair either!” he reportedly stated.
Melkonyants, who has been in custody since his August 2023 arrest, co-founded Russia’s most respected and prominent election monitoring group which in 2013 was designated as a “foreign agent” by Russian authorities.
The charge stems from alleged ties to the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations, which was declared “undesirable” by the Russian state in 2021.
Melkonyants has denied the allegations.
Three years later, Golos — which means “vote” in Russian — was liquidated as a non-governmental organization but despite court orders, continued to publish reports on Russia’s local and national elections, which international experts contend were not free or fair.
“Grigory Melkonyants has committed no crime,” Marie Struthers, Amnesty International‘s director for Eastern Europe and Central Asia, said Wednesday in a statement in calling for his “unconditional” release.
Struthers says his only “offense” was “defending the right to free and fair elections,” and that Russian authorities “instigated this criminal case in order to silence one of the country’s most respected election observers.”
The election monitoring group was long-accused by Russian officials of multiple violations and for allegedly being tainted by money it received from the U.S.-based National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Agency for International Development.
“Golos gave rise to a massive election monitoring movement in Russia in 2011, then the protests began which gave Putin quite a scare,” according to Leonid Volkov, a close associate of late Russian political opposition leader Alexei Navalny.
“So many years have passed, and he still seeks revenge,” he wrote on social media.
Melkonyants expressed worry for the group’s 3,000 election monitors during Russia’s 2011 elections as it came under fire while Putin, then prime minister, was ultimately re-elected to succeed then-President Dmitry Medvedev for another term.
Meanwhile, the Britain-headquartered Amnesty International considers him a “prisoner of conscience” who was prosecuted and imprisoned solely for peaceful activism.
“The international community cannot remain silent,” Amnesty’s Struthers added Wednesday.
“Neither on this appalling verdict nor on the outrageous assault on civic space that is taking place in Russia.”
May 14 (UPI) — Democrat John Ewing Jr. defeated incumbent Republican Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert to become Omaha’s first Black mayor.
Ewing, a former Omaha deputy police chief and current Douglas County, Neb., treasurer, defeated Stothert by an unofficial margin of 48,693 to 37,758, as reported by the Douglas County Election Commission. The commission will canvass and make the election official on May 29.
Ewing will also be the first Democrat to serve as Omaha mayor since 2013. Stothert had won three consecutive terms before this loss. Stothert had been the first woman elected city mayor.
Democrats also won four of the seven City Council seats.
The mayor’s office is nonpartisan, but the candidates’ parties came into play as an ad from Stothert stated that “Ewing stands with radicals who want to allow boys in girls’ sports.” KETV-TV reported that Ewing said in response that “Nobody’s ever brought that question up. So I believe it’s a made-up issue by Jean Stothert and the Republican Party.”
Ewing ran an ad that connected Stothert to President Donald Trump, to which she told KETV that “Donald Trump does not call me and ask for advice.”
Omaha and its suburbs make up Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, and it carries a presidential electoral vote, which can be won by a party different than who may carry the state-wide election and its four electoral votes.
The state generally leans Republican, but Democrats have won the 2nd Congressional District with some regularity, as Kamala Harris did in 2024, Joe Biden in 2020 and Barack Obama in 2008. On the other hand, Republican Donald Trump won in 2016 and GOP member Mitt Romney took the vote in 2012.
Rose had been exiled from the sport since 1989, after he was found by then-commissioner Bart Giamatti (yes, the father of actor Paul Giamatti) to have been betting on his team’s games while he was manager of the Cincinnati Reds. Rose died Sept. 30, 2024, at age 83.
Rose’s daughter, Fawn Rose, filed a petition for reinstatement Jan. 8 and met with current MLB commissioner Rob Manfred. In February, President Trump advocated for the lifetime ban to be lifted in a social media post, then met with Manfred in April to discuss the matter.
Jeffrey Lenkov, a Los Angeles lawyer who represented Rose at the time of his death and prepared the petition pro bono, told The Times the decision was the result of several years of working with Manfred and his executive team.
“The Rose family and I are extremely overjoyed at the wisdom, courage and compassion exhibited by the commissioner,” Lenkov said. “The reinstatement in and of itself is a historic moment because many people, including Pete at times, thought the ban would never be lifted.
“Getting into the Hall of Fame on his merits is an opportunity he wanted and should be able to receive now.”
Cincinnati Reds player-manager Pete Rose hits a line drive single to break Ty Cobb’s all-time hits record in 1985.
(Associated Press)
From his 24-year career that resulted in more MLB hits — 4,256 — than any other player in history to his lifetime ban, Rose’s saga was as complex and sad as it was triumphant. Pete Rose Night will take place Wednesday at Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati, and the decision to lift the ban undoubtedly will elevate the mood.
Here is a look at key elements of his rise, fall and potential inclusion in the Hall of Fame.
Will Rose immediately be inducted into the Hall of Fame?
No. Barring an unforeseen exception, a three-year waiting period will apply before Rose can be put on the ballot because the committee that could vote him in doesn’t convene until December 2027 to consider candidates for induction in the summer of 2028.
Rose remains ineligible to be voted in by the Baseball Writers Assn. of America because its ballot includes only candidates whose playing careers ended no more than 15 years prior to the election. Players are eligible to be voted into the Hall of Fame by the baseball writers five years after they retire. However in 1991, two years after Rose was banned from baseball and months before he was set to make the ballot, the Hall’s board of directors passed a rule prohibiting anybody on the ineligible list from being a candidate for induction.
Now that he is eligible, his case will be reviewed by the 16-member Classic Baseball Era Committee that evaluates players who made their greatest impact before 1980. Rose would qualify for consideration because his 24-year career began in 1963.
The committee voted in Dick Allen and Dave Parker this year. When it convenes again to vote for 2028 induction, Rose would need an aye from a 75% majority — 12 of the 16 members.
What did Rose do to deserve a lifetime ban?
Since before the 1919 Black Sox Scandal resulted in Shoeless Joe Jackson and other players being banned for life for taking money from gamblers and throwing games, Major League Baseball has had a rule against gambling to protect the integrity of the game. Rule 21(d) is posted in every clubhouse and states: “Any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform, shall be declared permanently ineligible.”
Rose bet on the Cincinnati Reds when he was the team’s player-manager in 1985 and ‘86, and the manager in ’87. An MLB investigation headed by lawyer John Dowd resulted in a 225-page report released in 1989 that named men that Rose allegedly placed bets with and cited evidence that Rose bet on Reds games.
Cincinnati Reds manager Pete Rose before a spring-training game March 22, 1989, after the Commissioner’s Office investigation into his gambling was released.
(John Swart / Associated Press)
After denying for nearly 15 years that he bet on baseball, Rose admitted it in his 2004 book, “My Prison Without Bars,” written with Rick Hill. Later, he would sign and sell baseballs with the inscription, “Sorry I bet on baseball.” The balls currently go for $200 to $400 apiece online.
Born and raised in Cincinnati, Rose began gambling as a youngster when his dad took him to a local racetrack. By the time he reached the big leagues, he bet on college and pro basketball and pro football in addition to the horses.
“On Feb. 5, 1986, I wrote three checks for eight grand each to cover my losses on the NFL playoffs,” Rose wrote. “The NFL turned into March Madness, which turned into the NBA playoffs, which always turned into the skids.
“I always lived by one hard and fast rule: You don’t bet on baseball. But for the first time in my life, I was no longer playing baseball, just managing. A part of me was still looking for ways to recapture the high I got from winning batting titles and World Series. If I couldn’t get the high from playing baseball, then I needed a substitute.
“I can’t honestly remember the first time I bet on baseball. But I remember the first time I spoke openly about it. I was sitting in my living room, watching the 1986 playoffs between the Mets and the Astros. I had a group of friends over for the game. Without even thinking of the consequences, I said, ‘Betting on the playoffs makes the games more exciting to watch.’ ”
Rose’s immense popularity in his hometown began to erode when the Dowd Report was made public on June 27, 1989.
“Forever and ever and ever, the people here have been solidly behind Pete,” Marty Brennaman, longtime broadcaster for the Reds, told The Times’ Bill Plaschke. “This is the most provincial city I’ve lived in. I can’t imagine a more provincial city.
“But now, there is a segment of the population where, if they haven’t completely gone the other way against Pete, there is at least an element of doubt in their minds. People are becoming divided.”
Longtime Cincinnati historian Dan Hurley insisted the public reaction was even harsher.
“I think the reaction finally is, ‘Hey, they got him,’ ” Hurley said of Rose. “And for us, that’s not very pleasant.”
Rose does have his supporters within baseball. Terry Francona, his former teammate who is in his first season as Reds manager, recently said, “If he’s not in the Hall of Fame, there isn’t one.”
Why the change of heart by MLB?
Pete Rose speaks at a news conference in Las Vegas after MLB commissioner Rob Manfred said he has no intention of altering Rose’s lifetime ban from baseball.
(Mark J. Terrill / Associated Press)
Rose first petitioned for reinstatement in 1997 when Bud Selig was commissioner. Selig didn’t meet with Rose until 2002 and did not rule on the issue before he retired in 2006. Manfred rejected a second petition by Rose in 2015, saying, “Mr. Rose has not presented credible evidence of a reconfigured life either by an honest acceptance by him of his wrongdoing, so clearly established by the Dowd Report, or by a rigorous, self-aware and sustained program of avoidance by him of the circumstances that led to his permanent eligibility in 1989.
“Absent such credible evidence, allowing him to work in the game presents an unacceptable risk of a future violation by him of Rule 21, and thus to the integrity of our sport. I, therefore, must reject Mr. Rose’s application for reinstatement.”
The fact that Rose died in September created an opportunity to revisit his status. If the permanently ineligible list exists to prevent a person who poses a threat to the integrity of the game from working in baseball, could that status change when the person is no longer living?
Roses adorn the statue of Pete Rose at Great American Ballpark in Cincinnati after the all-time hits leader died.
(Kareem Elgazzar / Associated Press)
That argument was made in the December petition by Rose’s family, and Manfred took it into consideration.
“The decision was very complex and it’s not easily said that it could have been done during his lifetime,” Lenkov said. “MLB had a lot of factors to work through. They had to be receptive to listening for a number of years on this issue, and they did.
“Pete in his lifetime felt he had done his time, paid the price. I believe he lived with a scarlet letter on him because of it. His punishment was substantial.”
The relationship between gambling and professional sports — including MLB — has evolved dramatically in recent years. Sports betting is legal in 40 states, and the American Gaming Assn. estimates that its total economic impact is $328 billion a year and revenue from it exceeded $115 billion in 2024.
Yet restrictions still apply, again to protect the integrity of the game. Can a baseball player, coach or umpire bet on March Madness brackets, the Super Bowl or participate in a fantasy football league? Yes. Can they bet on anything — baseball or otherwise — through illegal or offshore bookmakers? No.
What was President Trump’s role in the reinstatement?
Seemingly out of nowhere, the president injected himself into the conversation. Even before the family’s petition for reinstatement had become public, Trump posted a bombastic message on Truth Social on Feb. 28 that read:
“Major League Baseball didn’t have the courage or decency to put the late, great, Pete Rose, also known as ‘Charlie Hustle,’ into the Baseball Hall of fame. Now he is dead, will never experience the thrill of being selected, even though he was a FAR BETTER PLAYER than most of those who made it, and can only be named posthumously. WHAT A SHAME!
“Anyway, over the next few weeks I will be signing a complete PARDON of Pete Rose, who shouldn’t have been gambling on baseball, but only bet on HIS TEAM WINNING. He never betted against himself, or the other team. He had the most hits, by far, in baseball history, and won more games than anyone in sports history. Baseball, which is dying all over the place, should get off its fat, lazy ass, and elect Pete Rose, even though far too late, into the Baseball Hall of Fame!”
No evidence has surfaced of Rose betting on the Reds to lose. After confessing in his book that he bet on baseball, he emphasized that point.
“I bet on my own team to win,” Rose told NJ.com. “That’s what I did in a nutshell. I was wrong, but I didn’t taint the game. I bet on my team every night because that’s the confidence that I had in my players. And I was wrong.”
A pardon wasn’t necessary for Manfred to reinstate Rose, although in 1990 Rose served five months in prison after pleading guilty to tax evasion.
Trump met with Manfred at the White House on April 16, but neither man spoke publicly about what they discussed. MLB issued a statement that said, “President Trump is a longtime fan of baseball. As he has done in the past, Commissioner Manfred was pleased to visit the White House again to discuss issues pertaining to baseball with the president.”
What are Pete Rose’s Hall of Fame credentials?
Cincinnati Reds player-manager Pete Rose is congratulated by his teammates after he broke Ty Cobb’s hitting record in Cincinnati on Sept. 11, 1985.
(Associated Press)
Rose broke Ty Cobb’s career hits total of 4,189 in 1985 and finished with 4,256. That alone would be enough for entry into the Hall of Fame, but Rose also was named National League Rookie of the Year in 1963 and the NL Most Valuable Player in 1973. He won three batting titles and three World Series titles — two with the Reds in 1975 and ’76 and one with the Philadelphia Phillies in 1980.
Rose batted .303 with an on-base percentage of .375, earning the nickname Charlie Hustle because he sprinted to first base even on a walk. He led the NL in hits seven times, doubles five times, and in 1978 put together a 44-game hitting streak, second in baseball history to Joe DiMaggio’s 56-game streak.
Rose played in more games (3,562), had more plate appearances (15,890) and more at-bats (14,053) than any other player.
