Thank you, Ben Bolch. In your newsletter, an open letter to UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk, you have asked all the right questions. On the surface, the proposed move to SoFi Stadium might make some sense. But in the real world, it sure doesn’t. I was at the game vs. Washington, and the sentiment was pretty strong against a move. Also, the word was that possibly 80% of season-ticket holders will not renew if they play in SoFi Stadium. Even though I have had season tickets for more than 40 years, if they do move, I will be part of that 80%. I wonder if that figure has been factored in?
Bruce Fischer Huntington Beach
The Rose Bowl is the most storied stadium in college football. Nestled just below the San Gabriel Mountains, it is probably the most beautiful as well. It has hosted five Super Bowls (XI, XIV, XVII, XXI, XXVII), men’s and women’s World Cup finals, the Olympics and its annual namesake bowl game — “the Granddaddy of Them All.” There literally isn’t a bad seat in it. Why would UCLA even consider leaving it, especially for the glorified erector set known as SoFi Stadium?
Pressure over antisemitism allegations against the Berkeley school system intensified Monday with the launch of what members of Congress called a “nationwide investigation of antisemitism in K-12 schools.”
The first three districts to fall under scrutiny of the House Committee on Education and Workforce are the Berkeley Unified School District, Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia and the School District of Philadelphia.
“The Committee is deeply concerned” that Berkeley Unified is “failing to uphold its obligations” to “end any harassment, eliminate any hostile environment and its effects and prevent any harassment from recurring.”
In a letter sent Monday to Berkeley Unified, the committee cited “numerous press and whistleblower reports” alleging that since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack against Israel, “Jewish and Israeli students have allegedly been regularly bullied and harassed.”
Letters to the three school districts were signed by Committee Chair Tim Walberg (R-Mich). The letter to Berkeley Unified also was signed by Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education Subcommittee Chair Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin).
In addition to recounting allegations, the letters seek information, including:
A chart of all complaints made against students, faculty or staff related to potential antisemitic incidents.
All documents relating to walkouts, demonstrations, toolkits, workshops, curricula, course materials, speakers and more referring to Jews, Judaism, Israel, Palestine, Zionism or antisemitism.
All documents related to contracts or agreements that refer to Jews, Judaism, Israel, Palestine, Zionism or antisemitism.
In a statement the district characterized the allegations as past incidents that had been dealt with.
“Today’s letter from the U.S. House Committee on Education concerns allegations raised almost 18 months ago,” the statement said. “The information sought in the current letter from the Committee concerns those old allegations. The District will, of course, respond appropriately to the Committee’s letter. Our commitment to the safety and well-being of all students in BUSD is unwavering.”
In May 2024, Supt. Enikia Ford Morthel testified in Congress about allegations of antisemitism.
At the time, Ford Morthel said her district had received formal complaints of antisemitism stemming from nine incidents and stressed that district leaders responded quickly to the accusations and launched investigations.
“Our babies sometimes say hurtful things,” she said. “We are mindful that all kids make mistakes. We know that our staff are not immune to missteps either, and we don’t ignore them when they occur,” Ford Morthel said. “However, antisemitism is not pervasive in Berkeley Unified School District.”
It’s difficult to determine from the letter the extent to which the allegations take in new incidents.
One of the most stark allegations is that officials permitted a rally in which some students shouted, “Kill the Jews.” Published reports indicate that such an incident was alleged to have occurred Oct. 18, 2023, more than two years ago.
This week’s letter does not contain dates of incidents, while alluding to an alleged inadequate district response.
In February of 2024, the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and the Anti-Defamation League filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education alleging that Berkeley public schools ignored reports of bullying and harassment of Jewish students on the basis of their ethnicity, shared ancestry and national origin. District leaders, it alleged, “knowingly allowed” classrooms and schoolyards to become a “viciously hostile” environment.
That investigation was opened under the Biden administration and it remains active under the Trump administration, which has made alleged antisemitism a highlighted target of the federal enforcement — accompanied by the threat of fines and withdrawal of federal funding.
Berkeley Unified also faces an active U.S. Education Department probe alleging “severe and pervasive anti-Palestinian racism” affecting Palestinian, Arab and Muslim students. This complaint was filed in 2024 by the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of the Council on American–Islamic Relations and American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.
The allegations included that Arab and Muslim students “were taunted as ‘terrorists’ after teachers in class taught lessons referencing ‘terrorism.’”
A Philadelphia school district spokesperson said Monday that it was district policy not to comment on an active investigation.
Officials in Virginia pledged cooperation with the congressional inquiry.
In a statement, Fairfax County school officials noted the request for “information about potential antisemitic incidents occurring … since 2022.” The school system “intends to fully cooperate with Congressman Walberg’s inquiry” and “continues to partner with all families to provide a safe, supportive, and inclusive school environment for all students and staff members.”
Your predecessor, Gene Block, never granted me that courtesy, and look where UCLA athletics are now.
A football team adrift, an athletic director less popular than student fees locked up on a long-term contract and more questions facing your athletic department than the 466 yards the Bruins gave up to Washington on Saturday in what might have been their last game at the Rose Bowl.
Sign up for UCLA Unlocked
A weekly newsletter offering big game takeaways, recruiting buzz and everything you need to know about UCLA sports.
(As a side note, if you’re contemplating not keeping your word with regards to the Rose Bowl lease, do you have to fulfill the terms of Martin Jarmond’s contract?)
I’ve heard from so many people who care so much about UCLA sports, and I’m wondering if you’re listening to any of them. They’re saddened and angered and want some answers — and deservedly so given the lack of transparency around here.
So let me start with some questions in the event your many public relations advisors and crisis management experts tell you to go the Gene Blockade route and remain mum or offer another statement that doesn’t say much of anything.
How did that Jarmond contract extension come about? It was signed by Block in the spring of 2024 and curiously announced the following November — in the wake of a three-game winning streak by the football team that took considerable heat off Jarmond for his questionable hiring of coach DeShaun Foster.
Why was there a rush to grant an athletic department boss with a shaky track record an extension before you took over and how do you feel about it? And what was the role of interim chancellor Darnell Hunt, if any, in pushing this thing through? Unless you make a bold move to part ways with Jarmond or he leaves for another job, you’re stuck with him through 2029.
Moving on from Jarmond would come with its own cost thanks to the absurd terms of his contract. (A yearly $300,000 retention bonus for an athletic director nobody else wanted? Really?) Unless you can find a way to terminate him for cause or negotiate a settlement, you’ll have to pay every dollar he’s owed through the end of his contract even if you bid him farewell. I can’t imagine you’re happy about that, but maybe there’s something I’m missing.
Let’s move on to your vagrant football team. Who’s driving the proposed move to SoFi Stadium and what do the numbers look like? There’s been lots of chatter about chief financial officer Steven Agostini trying to clean up the financial mess you both inherited within the athletic department. I’m assuming there have been extensive calculations about a Rose Bowl payout and how much more money you’d make playing at SoFi Stadium.
But how much of that is SoFi spin and aren’t you worried that a judge could make you pay so much in damages that the whole thing would be a net negative? Yes, you’d presumably get suite revenue at SoFi Stadium, but would anyone want to buy one given what we’ve seen from this football team over the last decade? Shouldn’t you just go back to the Rose Bowl, football helmet in hand, and ask for a lease renegotiation that satisfies both sides?
Are you sure a big enough chunk of the fan base is on board with a move to Inglewood to justify such a jarring and abrupt abandonment of the school’s longtime home? If you indeed left the Rose Bowl, how would you compensate donors who contributed major gifts to the stadium for capital improvements on the premise that the Bruins would be a tenant through the 2043 season? And why would any business entity ever feel comfortable signing a long-term lease with the school again?
Speaking of contracts, you’re going to be signing another one soon for the next football coach. Since the school has paid out so much money on so many bad deals over the years, here’s a free piece of advice: Do everything — and I mean everything — within your power to hire Bob Chesney.
The guy is a winner. He won big at Salve Regina and Assumption, and I’m wondering if you even knew those were football teams before this very moment. He went on to do the same at Holy Cross and now James Madison, the new cradle of coaches, lest you haven’t seen what’s happening over at Indiana under Curt Cignetti. Chesney has a proven system for success, not to mention the personality to win over recruits, donors and a fan base sadder than Bob Toledo’s final season.
Some of the Plan B options might work out, of course, but can you really take that risk? Chesney has won everywhere he’s been and there’s no reason to think he wouldn’t do the same in resuscitating UCLA football after bringing a decent chunk of his James Madison roster with him.
So if Jimmy Sexton, the superagent reportedly representing Chesney, does his thing and leverages you into a few more million dollars than expected to finalize a deal with his client, pay the man. Chesney will be more than worth it. This hire must go right not only for the football team but also the health of an athletic department that’s facing possibly the most pivotal moment in its history.
But don’t worry, I’m here for you and we can talk more about this soon. Right?
Best,
Ben
And another thing . . .
Any presumption that UCLA attendance will soar at SoFi Stadium might need further consideration.
Just look at what happened when the then-No. 15 men’s basketball team played Arizona at the nearby Intuit Dome earlier this month. Even with a crowd bolstered by a large contingent of Wildcats fans, attendance was a mere 7,554 — less than half of the arena’s 18,000-seat capacity. There were probably fewer than 5,000 UCLA fans in the building for a showdown between nationally ranked rivals.
Here’s wondering how many donors and season ticket holders would really prefer Inglewood for football games and how the actual time it takes to drive southbound on the 405 from Westwood on a Friday night, Saturday afternoon or Saturday night compares to the alternative commute to Pasadena.
It has been a rough season for UCLA quarterback Nico Iamaleava.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Losing by 34 points in what might have been UCLA’s last game ever at the Rose Bowl generated the sort of grades you want to hide from your parents.
Quarterbacks: B-. Nico Iamaleava has nothing left to gain this season and should protect his health by sitting out the cross-town rivalry game. Meanwhile, Luke Duncan’s work as a backup continues to impress, putting him in line for a possible John Barnes breakthrough against USC.
Running backs: D. Jaivian Thomas didn’t play and those who did probably wish they didn’t considering UCLA rushed for a total of 57 yards.
Wide receivers/tight ends: C-. Mikey Matthews caught a touchdown pass, but all anyone is going to remember is Titus Mokiao-Atimalala’s drop that could have changed the trajectory of the game.
Offensive line: C-. Watching Garrett DiGiorgio walk off the field one last time after another tough day on the job was heartbreaking.
Defensive line: C-. Giving up 212 yards rushing means that there wasn’t enough resistance at the line of scrimmage, but the late sack by freshman Cole Cogshell was encouraging.
Linebackers: B-. Jalen Woods continued to emerge as a playmaker with two tackles for loss.
Defensive backs: B. Held up pretty well considering Rodrick Pleasant was out with an injury. Cole Martin’s interception was among the highlights on an otherwise bleak night.
Special teams: D. Cash Peterman certainly generated some viral social media content with his over-the-shoulder flip gone awry on the fake field goal leading to a Washington touchdown.
Coaching: C-. The initial infusion of energy from this staff seems to have gone missing in recent weeks.
Olympic sport the week: Men’s water polo
Chase Dodd
(Elijah Carr / UCLA)
With the exception of the men’s and women’s basketball teams winning every game as expected, it was a frustrating week for UCLA sports.
The men’s and women’s soccer teams saw their seasons end in the NCAA tournament. The women’s volleyball team lost to Washington in straight sets. The football team got stomped by Washington.
The final indignity came Sunday.
UCLA’s top-ranked men’s water polo team fell behind big early and couldn’t catch up during a 14-11 loss to second-ranked USC in the championship of the Mountain Pacific Sports Federation tournament at Stanford’s Avery Aquatic Center.
After trailing 10-4 late in the second quarter, the Bruins closed to within 11-8 late in the third quarter but could come no closer. Ryder Dodd finished with three goals and one assist for UCLA (24-2), which has suffered both of its defeats this season against the Trojans.
UCLA will open play in the NCAA tournament Dec. 5 at Stanford’s Avery Aquatic Center.
Opinion time
In a rivalry oddity, the home team has not won since 2019 when UCLA has faced USC in football. Will that trend continue Saturday when the teams meet at the Coliseum?
We asked, “Which possible football coaching candidate excites you most?”
After 701 votes, the results:
James Madison’s Bob Chesney, 76.8% Washington’s Jedd Fisch, 11.3% San Diego State’s Sean Lewis, 4.8% Tulane’s Jon Sumrall, 4.6% South Florida’s Alex Golesh, 2.5%
Do you have a comment or something you’d like to see in a future UCLA newsletter? Email me at [email protected], and follow me on X @latbbolch. To order an autographed copy of my book, “100 Things UCLA Fans Should Know & Do Before They Die,” send me an email. To get this newsletter in your inbox, click here.
I have to give it to Bill Plaschke when he’s right. UCLA moving to SoFi Stadium is about as smart as a typical UCLA coaching hire.
This month I was able to attend the Steelers-Chargers game at SoFi on a Sunday, followed the next Saturday by the USC-Iowa game at the Coliseum. Everything about those two places is different and only one of them feels like the college experience.
SoFi crams tailgaters in like sardines. There is no room to enjoy the experience.
The fresh air and scenery at the Rose Bowl are the best maybe in the country. People don’t show up at the Rose Bowl for a very simple reason: The program stinks. Not the venue. This proves the old adage, “the fish stinks from the head down.” Thousands of fans sat in the rain last weekend for a Trojans game because the product on the field was worth it. Simple.
Jeff Heister Chatsworth
Who can blame UCLA for wanting to play at SoFi Stadium, the ultra-modern sports palace, not to mention great recruiting tool, a mere 15 minutes from campus? As Bill Plaschke waxes nostalgic, the rest of us slog down the 10 Freeway from Westwood, through downtown, up into the far northeast corner of L.A., to the antiquated monument that is the Rose Bowl.
Afterward, those of us sitting on the east side of the stadium, staring into the setting sun until the fourth quarter, stumble with burned-out retinas to the muddy golf course that they call a parking lot, to wait in our stack-parked cars, until everyone else is out, so we can leave, an hours-long ordeal just to get home. My only question is, what genius at UCLA signed a long-term contract to play at a place that was obsolete long before the ink dried?
Art Peck View Park
UCLA will pay attorneys millions of dollars endeavoring to extricate the university from the ironclad Rose Bowl lease it pledged to honor. Beyond those fees, they’ll pay tens of millions more to Pasadena in order to get out of the deal.
If UCLA takes those same many millions, invests in a top-tier coach, enhances its football programs and facilities, and fills their NIL coffer, that should lead to a winning, sustainable program that brings more fans to the games. Rose Bowl revenue goes up.
Pasadena may get a one-time windfall, but over time without an anchor tenant, revenue will shrink and the stadium’s luster will fade.
Where are the sensible, honorable folks who possess the smarts and the backbone to craft a fair deal?
David Griffin Westwood
UCLA likely leaving the historic Rose Bowl, home of a million team memories and successes, for the sterile confines of SoFi Stadium is abhorrent to any longtime Bruin fan. Terry Donahue, you have our sincerest apologies.
As California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta ponders a run for governor, he faces scrutiny for his ties to people central to a federal corruption investigation in Oakland and payments to private attorneys.
Bonta has not been accused of impropriety, but the questions come at an inopportune time for Democrat, who says he is reassessing a gubernatorial bid after repeatedly dismissing a run earlier this year.
Bonta said the decisions by former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla not to seek the office altered the contours of the race.
“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta said in an interview with The Times on Friday. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”
Bonta said he has received significant encouragement to join the crowded gubernatorial field and that he expects to make a decision “definitely sooner rather than later.” Political advisors to the 54-year-old Alameda politician have been reaching out to powerful Democrats across the state to gauge his possible support.
Historically, serving as California attorney general has been a launching pad to higher office or a top post in Washington. Harris, elected to two terms as the state attorney general, was later elected to the U.S. Senate and then as vice president. Jerry Brown served in the post before voters elected him for a second go-around as governor in 2010. Earl Warren later became the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
Bonta, the first Filipino American to serve as the state’s top law enforcement official, was appointed in March 2021 by Gov. Gavin Newsom after Xavier Becerra resigned to become U.S. Health and Human Services secretary. Bonta easily won election as attorney general in 2022.
Bonta was a deputy city attorney in San Francisco and vice mayor for the city of Alameda before being elected to the state Assembly in 2012. During his tenure representing the Alameda area, Bonta developed a reputation as a progressive willing to push policies to strengthen tenants’ rights and to reform the criminal justice system.
In his role as the state’s top law enforcement official, Bonta has aggressively fought President Trump’s policies and actions, filing 46 lawsuits against the administration.
Bonta also faced controversy this past week in what Bonta’s advisers say they suspect is an attempt to damage him as he considers a potential run.
“Political hacks understand it’s actually a badge of respect, almost an endorsement. Clearly others fear him,” said veteran Democratic strategist Dan Newman, a Bonta adviser.
On Monday, KCRA reported that Bonta had spent nearly $500,000 in campaign funds last year on personal lawyers to represent him in dealings with federal investigators working on a public corruption probe in Oakland.
On Thursday, the website East Bay Insider reported that as that probe was heating up in spring 2024, Bonta had received a letter from an Oakland businessman warning him that he might soon be subject to blackmail.
The letter writer, Mario Juarez, warned Bonta that another businessman, Andy Duong, possessed “a recording of you in a compromising situation.”
Duong was later indicted, along with his father David Duong and former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, on federal bribery charges. All have pleaded not guilty. An attorney for David Duong this week said that Juarez, who is widely believed to be an informant in the case against the Duongs and Thao, was not credible. Juarez could not be reached for comment.
Bonta said his legal expenditures came about after he began speaking with the U.S. Attorney’s office, who approached him because prosecutors thought he could be a victim of blackmail or extortion. Bonta said the outreach came after he already had turned over the letter he had received from Juarez to law enforcement.
Bonta said he hired lawyers to help him review information in his possession that could be helpful to federal investigators.
“I wanted to get them all the information that they wanted, that they needed, give it to him as fast as as I could, to assist, to help,” Bonta said. “Maybe I had a puzzle piece or two that could assist them in their investigation.”
He said he may have made “an audible gasp” when he saw the legal bill, but that it was necessary to quickly turn over all documents and communications that could be relevant to the federal investigation.
“The billing rate is high or not insignificant at private law firms,” Bonta said. “We were moving quickly to be as responsive as possible, to be as helpful as possible, to assist as as much as possible, and that meant multiple attorneys working a lot of hours.”
Bonta said the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission also has alerted him that it received a complaint against him. Bonta and his advisers believe is about the use of campaign funds to pay the legal expenses and suspect it was filed by the campaign of a current gubernatorial candidate.
“We’re not worried,” Bonta said. “That’s politics.”
Asked whether these news stories could create obstacles to a potential gubernatorial campaign, Bonta pushed back against any assertion that he may have “baggage.” He said he was assisting federal prosecutors with their investigation with the hopes of holding people accountable.
“That’s what I would expect anyone to do, certainly someone who is committed as I am to public safety.,” he said. “That’s my job, to assist, to support, to provide information, to help.”
“I know a few people working on the production, so I wrote to Dominic,” said Radcliffe, who appeared on the morning show to promote his return to Broadway in “Every Brilliant Thing.” “I sent him a letter and he sent me a very sweet note back.”
The new “Harry Potter” series is currently filming in the U.K. McLaughlin stars as the eponymous orphan who learns about his magical heritage after he receives his acceptance letter to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Arabella Stanton and Alastair Stout will portray Harry’s best friends Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley, respectively.
Radcliffe said he hopes the young actors are “having a great time” and that seeing their pictures made him “just want to hug them.”
“I don’t want to be a specter in the life of these children at all,” Radcliffe said. “I just wanted to write to him and say, ‘I hope you have the best time and an even better time than I did. I had a great time, but I hope you have an even better one.’”
Radcliffe starred in all eight films of the first film series, starting with “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” (2001) through “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2” (2011). His golden Gryffindor trio included Emma Watson as the muggle-born bookworm Hermione and Rupert Grint as the loyal but sometimes insensitive Ron.
Written and executive produced by Francesca Gardiner, the new “Harry Potter” HBO series has been billed as “a faithful adaptation” of the popular seven-book series by author J.K. Rowling, who serves as an executive producer. Multiple episodes will be directed by executive producer Mark Mylod.
The cast of the new show includes returning “Harry Potter” actor Warwick Davis, who will be reprising his role as Professor Filius Flitwick. Joining him on the Hogwarts staff are John Lithgow (Albus Dumbledore); Nick Frost (Rubeus Hagrid); Paapa Essiedu (Severus Snape); Janet McTeer (Minerva McGonagall); Sirine Saba (Pomona Sprout); Richard Durden (Cuthbert Binns); Bríd Brennan (Poppy Pomfrey); Luke Thallon (Quirinus Quirrell); and Paul Whitehouse (Argus Filch).
SACRAMENTO — Current and former members of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration were among the dozens of Sacramento insiders who received FBI letters in recent days notifying them that their phone calls, texts or other electronic communications had been intercepted as part of the federal corruption case tied to Dana Williamson and two other longtime Democratic operatives.
The notifications are routine in wiretap investigations once surveillance ends, but the letters set off a wave of panic across California’s political power structure. The letters are signed by Sacramento Field Office Special Agent in Charge Siddhartha Patel and began arriving in mailboxes from Sacramento to Washington, D.C., last week, according to copies of the communications shared with The Times.
The legal notifications, under the terms of the 1968 Federal Wiretap Act, are sent out routinely to people whose private communications have been captured on federal wiretaps.
A Newsom spokesperson said the governor’s office is aware that a limited number of the letters were sent to current and former members of the administration. The spokesperson said that the letters were expected given federal law requires parties to be notified. Newsom’s office said the governor did not receive a letter.
Newsom’s office said the governor is not involved in the case against Williamson. None of the charging documents released in the cases against the three aides mention Newsom.
Copies of the letters, which were provided to The Times by individuals who asked to remain anonymous, indicate the period of time the communications were intercepted ranged from May 2024 to the end of July of 2024.
“This letter does not necessarily mean you were the target of the investigation or that any criminal action will be taken against you,” Patel wrote in the letter. “Rather, the purpose of this letter is to notify you that some of your communications may have been intercepted during the course of the investigation.”
Williamson, known as one of California’s toughest political insiders who previously worked as chief of staff to Newsom, was arrested last week on federal charges that allege she siphoned $225,000 out of 2026 gubernatorial hopeful Xavier Becerra’s dormant state campaign account. She also was accused of spending $1 million on luxury handbags and high-flying travel and illegally declaring them as business expenses on her tax returns.
According to the 23-count indictment, Williamson conspired with Becerra’s former chief deputy in the California attorney general’s office and ex-chief of staff Sean McCluskie, along with lobbyist Greg Campbell to bill Becerra’s dormant campaign account for bogus consulting services.
Williamson has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The highly publicized indictment against Williamson was sprinkled with references to her phone calls and text messages, indicating that federal investigators were likely relying on wiretapping. But the letters informing a wide swath of political insiders, from lobbyists to other operatives, is causing widespread anxiety across the Capitol.
The exact number of letters sent by the FBI is unknown, but political insiders say they’ve heard dozens of people have received one.
“It sends a chill up your spine, and everybody is worried,” said Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio, who said he did not receive a letter. “They can’t remember what they said to whom, about what. It could be anything. I think most people think this could be the tip of the iceberg. They are very concerned about where all these roads might lead.”
Former Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe revealed he had written the note to 11-year-old Dominic McLaughlin who is taking over the iconic role from the British actor
Rory Gannon Showbiz Journalist
09:29, 19 Nov 2025
Daniel Radcliffe starred as Harry Potter for a decade and is now passing the baton to his successor(Image: WARNER BROS)
Daniel Radcliffe has admitted he sent a letter to the next Harry Potter, as filming for the new HBO series gets underway. He revealed that he even received a small note back from the actor, as the baton was passed from one star to the next.
Filming for the TV adaptation of the legendary book series has already started, with a host of famous faces taking on the roles of the iconic Harry Potter franchise. But with three fresh-faced stars about to walk into their biggest project yet, Daniel offered his counterpart some words of advice to get him through.
The show is not set to hit our screens until 2027, but production officially got underway back in July. Daniel reflected on how his own filming stint for the series went, and how history is repeating on set for the new cast.
As reported in People, Daniel, 36, told Good Morning America on Tuesday (November 18) that he had written a note to give to 11-year-old star Dominic McLaughlin, who is set to take over as the title character. He explained it was not a mandatory thing, but felt it was necessary as the first shoots began for the show.
“I wouldn’t say that anyone who is going to play Harry has to [reach out],” Radcliffe explained. “I know a few people who are working on the production so I wrote to Dominic and I sent him a letter and he sent me a very sweet note back.”
Daniel was the face of Harry Potter for decades, growing up in front of audiences in the film adaptation of the book series by JK Rowling. When asked why he wanted to send the kids the letter, he admitted that he did “not want to be a spectre in the light” of their own portrayals of the characters.
He added: “I just wanted to write to him to say, ‘I hope you have the best time, and an even better time than I did — I had a great time, but I hope you have an even better time.’ And I do, I just see these pictures of him and the other kids and I just want to hug them.”
Radcliffe revealed he was astounded when he saw the pictures of the up-and-coming actors who will play the trio of Harry, Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger, admitting he thought they looked “so young”. However, he realised he faced similar concerns when he took on the role back in 2001, when he was aged just 12.
HBO has said that each book in the series will be adapted into its own separate season, and will gradually be released over the coming years. A slew of famous faces have also joined the cast to breathe life into iconic characters such as Dumbledore and Professor Snape.
On top of this, some actors who appeared in the original adaptation will reprise their roles for the HBO show. Warwick Davis has confirmed he will return to the franchise, once again taking on Filius Flitwick in a touching nod to the films.
In a statement announcing the commission of the series, HBO has said it is aiming to be as “authentic to the original books” as possible, whilst bringing new viewers into the world of Harry Potter. Radcliffe added that he would not be making a ceremonial cameo in the series.
Revealing all in an interview with E! in May 2024, Daniel said he was now “very excited to watch as an audience member”. When asked if he thought it was a good idea not to have the original trio back, he said: “I don’t know if it would work to have us do anything in it.”
Serious financial woes have plagued the Palm Springs Art Museum for at least six years, according to internal documents obtained by The Times. Recent developments have opened a Pandora’s box.
On Jan. 15, the accounting firm conducting the annual audit of the museum’s 2024 books attached to its report a “letter of material weakness,” a standard accounting practice for alerting a client to the reasonable possibility that its internal financial statements are significantly out of whack.
Less than three months after the audit letter, in early April, the museum’s director suddenly resigned, and trustee defections began. A cascade of at least eight resignations from the museum’s board of trustees — nearly one-third of its membership — has occurred since spring. One resignation came on the advice of the trustee’s attorney. With 19 trustees remaining, according to a listing on the museum’s website, the total number has fallen below the minimum of 20 required in the museum’s by-laws.
Palm Springs Art Museum board chair Craig Hartzman did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Accountants at Eide Bailly, citing a “deficiency in internal control” at the museum, highlighted six areas of concern, including problems with reporting of endowment spending, improper recording of the market value of donated and deaccessioned art, and faulty recording of admissions revenues.
Former museum director Adam Lerner had reportedly been negotiating a three-year contract renewal when he stepped down. Without elaborating on his unexpected decision to depart, he was cited in a museum press release as leaving for personal reasons. Lerner returned to Colorado, where he previously headed the Museum of Contemporary Art Denver.
Reached by text, Lerner declined a request for interview, referring questions to the museum.
Financial problems at PSAM are not new. According to six pages of notes obtained by The Times, compiled by a trustee who led a task force charged with examining museum finances, the ending statement on the 2019 endowment balance was $3 million higher than the beginning balance on the 2020 statement. Audits and tax returns posted on the museum website confirm the puzzling discrepancy.
The notes say it is “highly unlikely” the funds were stolen. Instead, they question internal museum accounting practices, which can create a misleading appearance of fiscal health. By the 2021 audit, the outside accounting firm that had been preparing them annually prior to Eide Bailly had quit.
“This is always a red flag,” wrote museum trustee Kevin Comer, an art collector who retired after 30 years as a managing director at Deutsche Bank in New York, and who is a former professor of accounting and fiduciary management techniques at the Ohio State University. A trustee for less than two years, Comer resigned Nov. 6.
Reached by telephone, Comer declined to discuss the accounting firm’s letter or the task force notes.
Palm Springs Art Museum
(Guillaume Goureau/Palm Springs Art Museum)
Since late July, a lengthy anonymous email has also been circulating from a self-described “whistleblower with a direct relationship” to the Palm Springs Art Museum. Fourteen itemized complaints, most concerning fiscal matters, are presented with sobriety, plus a slow burn of understandable anger. Whether or not the unidentified whistle blower has an ax to grind is unknown to me, but plainly the email is not a list of wild accusations hurled by an unreliable gadfly.
The coherent level of informed specificity certainly suggests authorship by a knowledgeable insider. Some stated grievances may have benign explanations, while others are troubling.
Comer pulled few punches in his own letter of resignation to fellow trustees, also obtained by The Times. The fiduciary expert, a former member of the board’s finance committee, said he was resigning on the advice of his attorney.
The board, Comer alleged, is sidestepping the fundamental fiduciary obligation to protect “the integrity of the museum, despite our best intentions.” The letter urges hiring both a law firm and a forensic accounting firm to review museum finances, partly to untangle apparently inappropriate methods in the past for the benefit of the current board, and partly to address potential liability.
An earlier task force suggestion to that effect was discussed by the board but went unheeded, he charges.
Especially concerning is a 2019 reclassification of some restricted funds. Task force notes suggest the $3-million discrepancy between 2019 and 2020 may have originated as a change in restricted funds to unrestricted status. Assets specifically donated for a particular function could then appear to be available for general operating purposes.
The museum consistently operated at a loss, the notes say, with some operating shortfalls covered by the 2019 reclassification. A deficit is not unusual for an art museum, but whether the reclassifications of some restricted funds were appropriate appears to be in doubt. Presumably, funds reclassified as unrestricted at the end of one year to make the financial filing look good may have had their restricted status restored at the start of the next year.
Restricted funds can include money raised through the deaccession and sale of art donated to a museum’s collection. Common museum ethical standards require income from deaccessioned art to be sequestered, used only for other art purchases, as well as for direct care of the collection. For accounting purposes, the monetary value of a nonprofit museum’s art collection is not considered a material asset to be carried on the books. Reclassification of sequestered art funds could support an appearance of general financial vigor.
During the lengthy 2020 pandemic closure, the cash-strapped museum made the controversial decision to deaccession and then sell a prized 1974 Helen Frankenthaler painting, which brought $4.7 million at auction. The 2024 audit puts total donor restricted funds for art purchases and collection maintenance at $7.8 million.
To pay the bills the museum has also been drawing down the endowment. According to the 2024 audit, the most recent financial statement currently available, the endowment is slightly more than $17 million — extremely small for a museum that last year had an operating budget of approximately $10.5 million.
“Endowment draws over the past decade totaled roughly $8 million, and contributions to the endowment totaled roughly $500,000,” the notes report. “Most years the museum operated at a loss, including for the last three years when the board believed we were profitable,” it states.
Such a disproportion between fundraising and expenditure, between money coming in and money going out, is frankly unsustainable for this — or any — art museum, especially when inflation is factored in.
The endowment is a nonprofit’s “seed corn,” eaten for short-term gain only at its long-term peril. Most disturbing: The notes suggest that while the five-person executive committee may have been aware of some of the situation’s more difficult details, the rest of the board appears not to have been fully informed of the museum’s financial position . “Bottom line,” Comer’s resignation letter astutely observes, “this is a leadership group that doesn’t know what it doesn’t know, and that is the most dangerous place in which an institution can be placed.”
The Palm Springs Art Museum has apparently wedged itself firmly between a rock and a hard place. Now, it is unclear how the museum can move forward without a full cohort of 20 trustees authorized to vote on making essential decisions — including accepting new members to the board.
KING Charles had a letter hand-delivered to the Osbourne family after heavy metal legend Ozzy’s death.
Widow Sharon revealed she was left touched after the “amazing” monarch wrote to them.
Sign up for the Showbiz newsletter
Thank you!
King Charles had letter hand-delivered to Osbourne family after Ozzy’s death, reveals SharonCredit: PAWidow Sharon revealed she was left touched after the ‘amazing’ monarch wrote to them.Credit: PA:Press Association
Speaking on The Osbournes podcast with her children, 73-year-old Sharon said: “If he did it for us, you know he does it for many, many, many people.
“Now here’s a man that does know what’s going on in the street with people. Not just politics, not just . . . here’s a man that cares about the environment, animals. He’s got a good heart.
“In the past — Ozzy’s birthday, when Ozzy was sick in hospital with the motorbike accident, he reached out.
“He’s a good, caring man with a good heart, and Ozzy’s, as me, we’re royalists and that’s it.
“And again, took the time out of his day to write us, have it hand-delivered to us, a note from the King for Ozzy’s passing with his condolences, that says so much.”
Sharon also revealed that she had received a message from US President Donald Trump, adding: “He knows what’s going on in the streets . . . and I can’t say that for our Prime Minister.”
Sharon joined mourners along with kids Aimée, Kelly and Jack. They had a private funeral the following day.
Kelly, 41, said she had not seen “an outpouring like that since Princess Diana died”, adding: “It wasn’t just the heavy metal community. It was the entire world.”
Sharon also revealed that she had received a message from US President Donald TrumpCredit: Getty
Frank McCourt’s proposed gondola from Union Station to Dodger Stadium hit what appears to be its most significant roadblock yet on Wednesday, when the Los Angeles City Council voted to urge Metro to kill the project.
The resolution, approved by an 11-2 vote, is not in itself any kind of formal decision. It would not take effect unless Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass concurs, and Bass previously voted in favor of the project as a member of the Metro board.
But it makes clear that a City Council vote to approve the project, which is expected next year, could be an increasingly challenging hurdle for McCourt and his allies to overcome.
“This resolution tells Metro that the city of Los Angeles refuses to be bought by shiny renderings and empty promises,” councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, whose district includes Dodger Stadium, told her colleagues in Wednesday’s council meeting.
No councilmember spoke in support of the gondola.
The project requires approvals from the council, the state parks agency and Metro, which approved an environmental impact report for the project last year. A court demanded fixes to two defects in the report, and Metro is scheduled to vote next month on whether to approve the revised report.
The resolution approved Wednesday urges Metro to reject the revised report and “deny reapproval of the project.”
McCourt, the former Dodgers owner and still half-owner of the Dodger Stadium parking lots, first pitched the gondola in 2018 and later said fans would ride free. The projected construction cost is about $500 million; none of the promised private funding has been publicly identified.
“This project is an insult to our communities, and the process has been an insult to our collective intelligence,” Hernandez said.
Project opponents — and the resolution itself — cite among other issues that 160 trees from a beloved park would be permanently removed to make way for the gondola and that a UCLA study projected Dodger Stadium traffic would not even be decreased by 1%.
In a letter to councilmembers, the board of directors of Zero Emissions Transit — the nonprofit charged with funding and operating the gondola — urged the council to reject what it called “serious inaccuracies and misleading claims.”
The 160 trees would be temporarily removed and then restored, with 480 trees added as well, the letter said. The UCLA study retracted its conclusion, the letter also said, based on “biased data supplied by individuals affiliated with project opposition groups.”
Said ZET spokesman Nathan Click: “We continue to move forward with all the approval processes: Metro, city, state.”
US President Donald Trump called the corruption trial against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a ‘political, unjustified prosecution’ as he requested the country’s president pardon him. However, under Israeli law, such a request can only be made by the person accused of wrongdoing, a legal representative, or a family member.
LONDON — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer refused to say Wednesday whether he would urge President Trump to drop his threat to sue the BBC for a billion dollars over the broadcaster’s edit of a speech he made after losing the 2020 presidential election.
During his weekly questioning in the House of Commons, Starmer was asked by Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, whether he would intervene in the row between Trump and the British public broadcaster, and to rule out the idea that the British people would hand over money to the U.S. president.
Instead of responding directly, Starmer reiterated the government’s line since the BBC’s director-general, Tim Davie, announced his resignation on Sunday because of the scandal.
“I believe in a strong and independent BBC,” he said. “Some would rather BBC didn’t exist, I’m not one of them.”
However, he added that “where mistakes are made, they do need to get their house in order.”
In an interview that aired Tuesday on Fox News, Trump said he intended to go through with his threat to sue the BBC, a century-old institution under growing pressure in an era of polarized politics and changing media viewing habits.
“I guess I have to,” he said. “Because I think they defrauded the public and they’ve admitted it.”
The president’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, sent the threat to the BBC over the way a documentary edited his Jan. 6, 2021, speech before a mob of his followers stormed the U.S. Capitol. The letter demanded an apology to the president and a “full and fair” retraction of the documentary along with other “false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading or inflammatory statements” about Trump.
If the BBC does not comply with the demands by 5 p.m. EST Friday, then Trump will enforce his legal rights, the letter said.
The row centers on an edition of the BBC’s flagship current affairs series “Panorama,” titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” days before the 2024 U.S. presidential election.
The third-party production company that made the film spliced together three quotes from two sections of the 2021 speech, delivered almost an hour apart, into what appeared to be one quote in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.”
Among the parts cut out was a section where Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully.
BBC Chairman Samir Shah apologized Monday for the misleading edit that he said gave “the impression of a direct call for violent action.”
In addition to Davie’s resignation, the news chief Deborah Turness quit Sunday over accusations of bias and misleading editing.
LONDON — President Trump’s threat to bring a billion-dollar lawsuit against the BBC has cast a shadow over the British broadcaster’s future, but it could also be a bluff with little legal merit.
The president’s lawyer sent the threat to the BBC over the way a documentary edited his Jan. 6, 2021, speech before a mob of his followers stormed the U.S. Capitol.
Trump’s history of suing news media companies — sometimes winning multimillion-dollar settlements — is part of a long-running grievance against the industry he describes as “fake news” that has often focused a critical eye on his actions.
But Trump faces fundamental challenges to getting a case to court, never mind taking it to trial. He would also have to deal with the harsh glare of publicity around his provocative pep talk the day Congress was voting to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election that Trump falsely alleged was stolen from him.
“If he sues, he opens a Pandora’s box and inside is every damning quote he’s ever uttered about the ‘steal,’” said attorney Mark Stephens, an international media lawyer who practices in the U.S. and U.K.
The BBC documentary
The BBC’s “Panorama” series aired the hourlong documentary titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” days before the 2024 U.S. presidential election.
The third-party production company that made the film spliced together three quotes from two sections of the 2021 speech, delivered almost an hour apart, into what appeared to be one quote in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.” Among the parts cut out was a section where Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully.
BBC Chairman Samir Shah apologized Monday for the misleading edit that he said gave “the impression of a direct call for violent action.”
Director-General Tim Davie and news chief Deborah Turness quit Sunday over accusations of bias and misleading editing.
From letter to lawsuit
A lawsuit in England is unlikely because the one-year deadline to bring one expired two weeks ago, experts said. If successful in overcoming that barrier, libel awards in the High Court rarely exceed 100,000 pounds ($132,000), experts said.
Trump could still bring a defamation claim in several U.S. states, and his lawyer cited Florida law in a letter to the BBC.
Filing a lawsuit and demanding money is one thing, but prevailing in court is much different. To succeed, Trump would have to clear many hurdles to get a case before a jury.
Before any of that could happen, Trump faces a more fundamental challenge: The BBC program was not aired in the U.S., and the BBC’s streaming service is also not available there. Americans could not have thought less of him because of a program they could not watch, Stephens said.
“The other ticklish problem for Trump’s lawyer was that Trump’s reputation was already pretty battered after Jan. 6,” he said. “Alleging ‘Panorama’ caused additional harm when your reputation is already in tatters … is a tough sell.”
Trump was impeached on a charge of inciting insurrection over the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by some of his supporters, though he was acquitted by the Senate.
The demands
Trump’s lawyer Alejandro Brito threatened the BBC with a defamation lawsuit for “no less than” $1 billion. The letter spelled out the figure and used all nine zeros in numeric form.
The letter demanded an apology to the president and a “full and fair” retraction of the documentary along with other “false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading or inflammatory statements” about Trump.
It also said the president should be “appropriately” compensated for “overwhelming financial and reputational harm.”
The letter cites Florida’s defamation statute that requires a letter be sent to news organizations five days before any lawsuit can be filed.
If the BBC does not comply with the demands by 5 p.m. EST Friday, then Trump will enforce his legal rights, the letter said.
“The BBC is on notice,” it said.
While many legal experts have dismissed the president’s claims against the media as having little chance of success, he has won some lucrative settlements against U.S. media companies.
In July, Paramount, which owns CBS, agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by Trump over a “ 60 Minutes” interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump alleged that the interview was edited to enhance how Harris, the Democratic nominee for president in 2024, sounded.
That settlement came as the Trump-appointed head of the Federal Communications Commission launched an investigation that threatened to complicate Paramount’s need for administration approval to merge with Skydance Media.
Last year, ABC News said it would pay $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit over anchor George Stephanopoulos ’ inaccurate on-air assertion that the president-elect had been found civilly liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll. A jury found that he was liable for sexually abusing her. Trump asked the Supreme Court on Monday to throw out that jury’s finding.
Litigation threat could leverage payout
London lawyer David Allen Green dismissed the litigation letter for failing to spell out any actual harm Trump suffered. But he said Trump’s willingness to use lawsuits as a form of deal making could leverage a payout because the edit was indefensible.
“Putting aside the theatrics of a bombastic letter with its senseless $1 billion claim, there is a power play here which Trump has done many times before,” Green said on the Law and Policy Blog. “The real mistake of the BBC (and the production company) was opening itself up to such a play of power.”
Stephens said if Trump were somehow to win billions from the BBC, it could crush the news organization that is mostly funded through a fee charged to all television owners in the U.K.
But he said that outcome was unlikely and the broadcaster should stand its ground. He recommended Trump take the public relations win and avoid the damage from revisiting the Jan. 6 events that would be dredged up at trial.
He said Trump was due an apology, which Shah offered, for the BBC not upholding high journalistic standards.
“The question is, ‘Did it cause harm in people’s minds?’” he said. “Because he was elected afterwards, it doesn’t appear it did.”
LONDON — The BBC reported Monday that President Trump sent a letter threatening legal action over the way a speech he made was edited in a documentary aired by the British broadcaster.
The BBC’s top executive and its head of news both quit Sunday over accusations of bias and misleading editing of a speech Trump delivered on Jan. 6, 2021, before a crowd of his supporters stormed the Capitol in Washington.
Asked about a letter from Trump threatening legal action over the incident, the BBC said in a statement on Monday that “we will review the letter and respond directly in due course.” It did not provide further details.
Earlier, Trump welcomed the resignations of BBC Director-General Tim Davie and news chief Deborah Turness, saying the way his speech was edited was an attempt to “step on the scales of a Presidential Election.”
The hourlong documentary — titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” — was broadcast as part of the BBC’s “Panorama” series days before the 2024 U.S. presidential election. It spliced together three quotes from two sections of the 2021 speech, delivered almost an hour apart, into what appeared to be one quote in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.” Among the parts cut out was a section where Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully.
In a resignation letter to staff, Davie said: “There have been some mistakes made and as director-general I have to take ultimate responsibility.”
Turness said the controversy was damaging the BBC, and she quit “because the buck stops with me.”
Turness defended the organization’s journalists against allegations of bias.
“Our journalists are hardworking people who strive for impartiality, and I will stand by their journalism,” she said Monday. “There is no institutional bias. Mistakes are made, but there’s no institutional bias.”
BBC chairman Samir Shah apologized Monday for the broadcaster’s “error of judgment,” saying the broadcaster “accept[s] that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action.”
Trump posted a link to a Daily Telegraph story about the speech-editing on his Truth Social network, thanking the newspaper “for exposing these Corrupt ‘Journalists.’ These are very dishonest people who tried to step on the scales of a Presidential Election.” He called that “a terrible thing for Democracy!”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reacted on X, posting a screen grab of an article headlined “Trump goes to war with ‘fake news’ BBC” beside another about Davie’s resignation, with the words “shot” and “chaser.”
Trump speech edited
Pressure on the broadcaster’s top executives has been growing since the right-leaning Daily Telegraph published parts of a dossier compiled by Michael Prescott, who had been hired to advise the BBC on standards and guidelines.
As well as the Trump edit, it criticized the BBC’s coverage of transgender issues and raised concerns of anti-Israel bias in the BBC’s Arabic service.
The “Panorama” episode showed an edited clip from the January 2021 speech in which Trump claimed the 2020 presidential election had been rigged. Trump is shown saying: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”
According to video and a transcript from Trump’s comments that day, he said: “I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
“Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.
“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Trump used the “fight like hell” phrase toward the end of the speech, but without referencing the Capitol.
“We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” Trump said.
In a letter to Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Committee, Shah said the purpose of editing Trump’s words had been “to convey the message of the speech” so that viewers could understand how it had been received by Trump’s supporters and what was happening on the ground.
He said the program had not attracted “significant audience feedback” when it first aired but had drawn more than 500 complaints since Prescott’s dossier was made public.
Shah acknowledged in a BBC interview that “it would have been better to have acted earlier. But we didn’t.”
A national institution
The 103-year-old BBC faces greater scrutiny than other broadcasters — and criticism from its commercial rivals — because of its status as a national institution funded through an annual license fee of 174.50 pounds ($230) paid by all households who watch live TV or any BBC content.
The broadcaster is bound by the terms of its charter to be impartial, and critics are quick to point out when they think it has failed. It’s frequently a political football, with conservatives seeing a leftist slant in its news output and some liberals accusing it of having a conservative bias.
It has also been criticized from all angles over its coverage of the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. In February, the BBC removed a documentary about Gaza from its streaming service after it emerged that the child narrator was the son of an official in the Hamas-led government.
Governments of both left and right have long been accused of meddling with the broadcaster, which is overseen by a board that includes both BBC nominees and government appointees.
Some defenders of the BBC allege that members of the board appointed under previous Conservative governments have been undermining the corporation from within.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s spokesman, Tom Wells, said the center-left Labor Party government supports “a strong, independent BBC” and doesn’t think the broadcaster is biased.
“But it is important that the BBC acts to maintain trust and corrects mistakes quickly when they occur,” he said.
I have been a diehard baseball fan for more than 60 years, and this year’s Dodger team is the toughest, gutsiest and most resilient team I have ever seen. Toronto is an absolutely fabulous baseball team, and would’ve beaten anybody else in all of baseball without much stress.
And as for Yoshinobu Yamamoto, that young man ought to be on Mt. Rushmore.
Let’s go for a three-peat in ‘26!
Drew Pomerance Tarzana
No doubt about it. The best team won the World Series. The Dodgers found ways to win without great hitting. Their pitching and defensive skills exceeded our expectations. Thank you everyone for another amazing baseball season.
Cheryl Creek Anaheim
How wonderful to see grown men acting like little boys during their victory celebration. While I am not a fan of the gyrations on the bases after a hit (even when way behind), the pure joy emanating from the players at the end was to be cherished. How sports enables us to forget our problems is what has made me a lifelong sports fan.
Mark Kaiserman Santa Monica
Who would imagine that Games 6 and 7 would both end on double plays while the losing team had men in scoring position? One different swing of the bat would have reversed the outcome of the games and series. How suddenly agonizing and euphoric. How uniquely baseball!
Mel Spitz Beverly Hills
The Toronto Blue Jay fans taunted Shohei Othani early in the series, “We don’t need you!” I guess they did!
Edward Jimenez Whittier
Consideration should be given to incorporating the Japanese flag into the design of the 2025 World Series ring.
Greg Thompson Chatsworth
It took until Games 6 and 7, but the 2025 World Series lineup needed to include Miguel Rojas.
Ken Feldman Tarzana
Dodgers manager Dave Roberts’ haters and naysayers can take a seat. Whether it was confidence in the starting rotation, masterful management of the bullpen, being unafraid to tinker with the lineup or making brilliant defensive replacements, every lever Roberts pulled in Games 6 and 7 ultimately resulted in another championship.
Ron Yukelson San Luis Obispo
As my fellow Monday morning baseball critics always say, “Dave Roberts is a genius. Mookie is great at short. Last year no starting pitchers. This year no bullpen.”
So many contributed big plays. Constant tension, excitement, tenacity and, ultimately, exhilaration. Thank you Dodgers for a playoffs and World Series for the ages. Encore!
Rafael Serna Hacienda Heights
While we bask in the euphoria of the Dodgers’ World Series win, let’s not overlook but sing the praises to the last man standing! Without the heroics of Will Klein, there might not have been a Game 6 or a Game 7.
Stan Shirai Torrance
The World Series finished on Dia de los Muertos, but our Dodgers lived to win again. Against all odds in Game 7, the Dodgers solidified a dynasty. What a game. What a series. What a team. So many clutch moments and players. This one will be enjoyed and cherished FOREVER.
Michael Lee Manous San Dimas
A phrase that will never be used in the same sentence with Yoshinobu Yamamoto: “load management.”
WASHINGTON — As the federal shutdown has dragged on to become the longest in American history, President Trump has shown little interest in talks to reopen the government. But Republican losses on election day could change that.
Trump told Republican senators at the White House on Wednesday that he believed the government shutdown “was a big factor” in the party’s poor showing against the Democrats in key races.
“We must get the government back open soon, and really immediately,” Trump said, adding that he would speak privately with the senators to discuss what he would like to do next.
The president’s remarks are a departure from what has largely been an apathetic response from him about reopening the government. With Congress at a stalemate for more than a month, Trump’s attention has mostly been elsewhere.
To date, Trump’s main attempt to reopen the federal government has been calling on Republican leaders to terminate the filibuster, a long-running Senate rule that requires 60 votes in the chamber to pass most legislation. Trump wants to scrap the rule — the so-called nuclear option — to allow Republicans in control of the chamber to push through legislation with a simple-majority vote.
“If you don’t terminate the filibuster, you’ll be in bad shape,” Trump told the GOP senators and warned that with the rule in place, the party would be viewed as “do-nothing Republicans” and get “killed” in next year’s midterm elections.
Trump’s push to end the shutdown comes as voters are increasingly disapproving of his economic agenda, according to recent polls. The trend was reinforced Tuesday as voters cast ballots with economic concerns as their main motivation, an AP poll showed. Despite those indicators, Trump told a crowd at the American Business Forum in Miami on Wednesday that he thinks “we have the greatest economy right now.”
While Trump has not acknowledged fault in his economic agenda, he has began to express concern that the ongoing shutdown may be hurting Republicans. Those concerns have led him to push Republicans to eliminate the filibusters, a move that has put members of his party in a tough spot.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota has resisted the pressure, calling the filibuster an “important tool” that keeps the party in control of the chamber in check.
The 60-vote threshold allowed Republicans to block a “whole host of terrible Democrat policies” when they were in the minority last year, Thune said in an interview Monday with Fox News Radio’s “Guy Benson Show.”
“I shudder to think how much worse it would’ve been without the legislative filibuster,” he said. “The truth is that if we were to do their dirty work for them, and that is essentially what we would be doing, we would own all the crap they are going to do if and when they get the chance to do it.”
Sen. John Curtis (R-Utah) said last week he is a “firm no on eliminating it.”
“The filibuster forces us to find common ground in the Senate. Power changes hands, but principles shouldn’t,” Curtis said in a social media post.
As the government shutdown stretched into its 36th day Wednesday, Trump continued to show no interest in negotiating with Democrats, who are refusing to vote on legislation to reopen the government that does not include a deal on healthcare.
Budget negotiations deadlocked as Democrats tried to force Republicans to extend federal healthcare tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year. If those credits expire, millions of Americans are expected to see the cost of their premiums spike.
With negotiations stalled, Trump said in an interview aired Sunday that he “won’t be extorted” by their demands to extend the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies.
On Wednesday, Democratic legislative leaders sent a letter to Trump demanding a bipartisan meeting to “end the GOP shutdown of the federal government and decisively address the Republican healthcare crisis.”
“Democrats stand ready to meet with you face to face, anytime and anyplace,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries wrote in a letter to Trump.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Democrats’ letter.
“The election results ought to send a much needed bolt of lightning to Donald Trump that he should meet with us to end this crisis,” Schumer told the Associated Press.
Trump’s remarks Wednesday signal that he is more interested in a partisan approach to ending the shutdown.
“It is time for Republicans to do what they have to do and that is to terminate the filibuster,” Trump told GOP senators. “It’s the only way you can do it.”
If Republicans don’t do it, Trump argued Senate Democrats will do so the next time they are in a majority.
Democrats have not signaled any intent to end the filibuster in the future, but Trump has claimed otherwise and argued that it is up to Republicans to “do it first.”
