panel

Tens of thousands of readers of all ages, from toddlers clutching picture books to longtime fans carrying armfuls of paperbacks, fanned out across the USC campus Saturday for the opening day of the 31st Los Angeles Times Festival of Books, packing panels and lining up to see favorite authors and celebrity guests.

It was too early to know how many people attended the first day of the event, billed as the country’s largest literary festival, though organizers said they expect between 150,000 and 155,000 attendees over the weekend. By late morning, the campus was already bustling, with strong turnout expected for appearances by author T.C. Boyle and actors Sarah Jessica Parker and David Duchovny, among others.

Founded in 1996 and spread across eight outdoor stages and 12 indoor venues, the festival has become a fixture on Los Angeles’ cultural calendar, bringing together more than 550 storytellers for panels, author interviews, book signings, performances and screenings spanning a wide range of genres, from children’s story times to cooking demonstrations.

This year’s lineup features a broad mix of writers, performers and public figures, including comedian Larry David, musician Lionel Richie, multihyphenate businesswoman (and Beyoncé’s mother) Tina Knowles, author and social critic Roxane Gay and scholar Reza Aslan.

Under sunny skies, actor and reality TV personality Lisa Rinna brought humor and a bit of bite to a 10:30 a.m. conversation on the festival’s main stage. The “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” alum released her second memoir, “You Better Believe I’m Gonna Talk About It,” in February, chronicling her time on the show and her recent turn on Season 4 of Peacock’s reality competition series “The Traitors.”

Reflecting on her approach to “Traitors,” Rinna said she wanted to strip away the conflict-driven persona she had cultivated on “Real Housewives” and present a more unfiltered version of herself. “I was like, ‘Self, listen. You’re gonna go in there and just be you. No housewife s—, none of that reactionary stuff.’ ”

In conversation with Times senior television writer Yvonne Villarreal, Rinna also spoke candidly about the loss of her mother, Lois Rinna, in 2021 and how her grief manifested in a feeling of rage while she was filming Season 12 of “Real Housewives.”

“It really took me by surprise,” she said. “And you have to give space for it because you can’t make it go away. … They always say time heals, but time makes everything just a little less intense.”

At a noon panel titled “Fire Escape: Wildfires and the Changing Geography of Southern California,” moderated by Times climate and energy reporter Blanca Begert, author and former wildland firefighter Jordan Thomas said the scale and frequency of California wildfires have shifted dramatically in recent decades.

“The vast majority of the largest wildfires in California’s recorded history have happened just in the past 20 years,” said Thomas, author of last year’s National Book Award finalist “When It All Burns: Fighting Fire in a Transformed World.” “While I was a hotshot, there were three of those fires burning simultaneously, including a million-acre fire — more than used to burn across the entire American West over the course of a decade.”

In the early afternoon, former Georgia Rep. Stacey Abrams spoke with moderator Leigh Haber about artificial intelligence and voter suppression in front of an enthusiastic, packed crowd at USC’s Bovard Auditorium.

Abrams’ latest Avery Keene novel, “Coded Justice,” came out last year and explores the role of artificial intelligence in the healthcare industry. AI has already become enmeshed in everyday life, she said, asking audience members to raise their hands if they had used TSA PreCheck or a streaming service.

“AI is a tool … but it is created by someone, it is programmed by someone, it is controlled by someone,” she said. “Regulation is not about slowing down progress. It is about asking questions and saying that in the absence of answers, we’re going to put on reasonable restraints that we can revisit.”

Abrams also revealed that her next book, the fourth in her Avery Keene thriller series, will focus on prediction markets.

“I write Avery Keene novels to tell stories about social justice, but I put it in a form that’s accessible to people who don’t think that they are social justice people,” Abrams said. “I want to meet people where they are, not where I want them to be.”

She also encouraged audience members to push back against voter suppression and defend democracy by volunteering at polling places — even in reliably blue districts — warning that she believes masked paramilitary groups will be allowed to patrol voting locations and target people of color in the upcoming midterm elections.

The festival kicked off Friday evening with the 46th Los Angeles Times Book Prizes ceremony at Bovard Auditorium, emceed by Times columnist LZ Granderson, recognizing both emerging voices and established writers.

Winners were announced in 13 categories for works published last year. Find a full list of winners here.

Oakland-born novelist Amy Tan, whose work often explores identity and the Chinese American immigrant experience, received the Robert Kirsch Award for lifetime achievement, and the literary nonprofit We Need Diverse Books received the Innovator’s Award for its work promoting diversity in publishing.

Accepting her award, Tan, author of the 1989 bestseller “The Joy Luck Club,” said that as a birthright citizen, she had never questioned her place in the country until recent debates over citizenship and belonging led her to reconsider whether she is, in fact, a “political writer.”

“My birthright and that of millions of others is now being argued before the Supreme Court, and no matter what the outcome is, it’s been a kick in the gut to know that those in the highest echelons of government and those who support them believe that we don’t belong.”

Tan said that as an author, “I imagine the lives of the people I write about,” and that act of compassion “reflects our politics and our beliefs. And so yes, I am a political writer.”

Addressing the attendees, Times Executive Editor Terry Tang pointed to the breadth of the weekend’s programming as an opportunity for connection and discovery. “If you take in just a fraction of these events, it will expand your mind,” she said. “This weekend gives all of us a chance to celebrate a sense of unity, purpose and support.”

The festival runs through Sunday. More information, including a schedule of events, can be found on the festival’s website.

The proposed 76-metre arch would tower over other iconic landmarks in Washington, DC, and has attracted scrutiny.

United States President Donald Trump’s goal of erecting a colossal arch in Washington, DC, has taken another step forward, with a key agency approving his proposed design for the monument.

The US Commission of Fine Arts, whose members were appointed by Trump, gave its go-ahead to the president’s design for a lofty 76-metre-high (250-foot) arch.

If given final approval, the arch would be built on Memorial Circle, between the Arlington National Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial. It would tower above other landmarks in the national capital.

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle hailed the commission’s approval as a “step in accomplishing President Trump’s promise to the American people from the campaign trail — to Make America Safe and Beautiful Again”.

But the arch has faced criticism, including for potentially obscuring views of the national cemetery, a resting place for war veterans.

Public Citizen Litigation Group is representing some Vietnam War veterans in a lawsuit against the proposed construction, which they argue needs congressional approval.

Even the vice chair of the Commission of Fine Arts, James McCrery II, suggested that Trump’s proposed “Triumphal Arch” ditch the winged statue and eagles on its top. He also opposed the lions at its base, pointing out that African animals are “not a beast natural to the North American continent”.

The enormous arch is another effort by the US president to leave his mark on the physical landscape of Washington, DC.

In January, he told reporters he wants the arch to be the “biggest one of all”. The commission still needs to vote on final approval for the proposal after reviewing updated designs.

Current plans show the arch would be significantly larger than the Lincoln Memorial, which is 99 feet (30 metres) tall, and about twice as tall as the famous Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which the design resembles.

The phrases “One Nation Under God” and “Liberty and Justice for All” would be written in gold lettering atop either side of the monument.

About three out of every four people who delivered public comments about the project expressed opposition, many of them citing its enormous size.

But the arch is one of several Trump projects that have received public pushback.

Trump has sought to paint the granite of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building white, and his allies plan to close the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, a national theatre complex, for two years of renovations, after adding Trump’s name to the exterior.

One of the most permanent changes so far has been the abrupt demolition of the White House’s East Wing, in order to make room for an enormous ballroom, long one of Trump’s priorities.

But that project is likewise entangled in legal battles, with critics arguing that congressional approval is required.

On Wednesday, Judge Richard Leon clarified that construction on underground structures at the ballroom site could continue, as part of an exemption he previously allowed for national security concerns.

But he maintained his short-term injunction against construction on the ballroom itself, batting down Trump’s position that the whole project should proceed.

“Defendants argue that the entire ballroom construction project, from tip to tail, falls within the safety-and-security exception and therefore may proceed unabated,” Leon wrote in Thursday’s ruling.

“That is neither a reasonable nor a correct reading of my Order!”

The president responded on social media by calling Leon an “out of control Trump hating” judge. Leon was appointed in 2002 under Republican President George W Bush.

WASHINGTON — The Food and Drug Administration will hold a meeting in the summer to consider easing restrictions on more than a half-dozen peptide injections, a group of unapproved therapies that have become popular among wellness influencers, fitness gurus and celebrities.

The meeting announcement Wednesday follows repeated pledges by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to loosen regulations on peptides, which are often pitched as a quick way to build muscle, heal injuries or appear younger. There’s little research behind those claims and most peptides have not been reviewed for safety by the FDA.

Kennedy has discussed using peptides for his own injuries. And some major supporters of his Make America Healthy Again movement are big proponents of them, including Gary Brecka, a self-described “longevity expert” who sells various peptide formulas through his website.

The FDA said in a federal notice Wednesday that it will ask a panel of outside advisors to review seven peptides at a meeting in July, specifically whether they should be added to a list of substances that can be safely produced by pharmacies. In the meantime, the agency said it would soon remove the chemicals from a restrictive list reserved for unapproved, high-risk drugs. The peptides under discussion include some of the most popular among influencers, such as BPC-157, which is marketed to heal injuries and reduce inflammation.

“The Wild West is about to become wilder,” said Dr. Peter Lurie, a former FDA official who now leads the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In an interview, Lurie said allowing peptides on the market without clinical testing poses a “profound threat” to FDA’s decades-old system for vetting drugs.

“I don’t see why one would take the path of a proper drug approval if there is now this less rigorous, alternative path to market,” he said.

Under President Biden, the FDA added nearly 20 peptides to the federal list of substances that should not be produced by compounding pharmacies — businesses that mix medications that aren’t available from drugmakers.

At the time, the FDA’s panel of pharmacy advisors voted overwhelmingly that the peptides did not meet the criteria for substances that can be safely compounded. And FDA regulators agreed, saying later that the substances “present significant safety risks,” because most have not been extensively tested in humans.

Many of the FDA advisors and internal staff who oversaw those decisions no longer work for the agency. The FDA’s pharmacy panel currently has a number of vacancies, which Kennedy could fill before the July meeting.

Kennedy previewed Wednesday’s move in an interview with podcast host Joe Rogan. Both men have repeatedly spoken about peptides and claimed to have benefited from their use.

RFK Jr. claims personal benefit from peptides

“I’m a big fan of peptides,” Kennedy told Rogan. “I’ve used them myself and with really good effect on a couple of injuries.”

Given Kennedy’s statements, Lurie said it was doubtful the drugs would receive real scrutiny from FDA.

“Everybody knows the outcome that the secretary wants,” Lurie said. “I don’t believe for one moment that what’s going on here is an honest investigation of whether these products should be compounded.”

Scott Brunner of the Alliance for Pharmacy Compounding said the coming meeting will be the start of a “protracted process.” Even if the panel votes to make the peptides available, and the FDA agrees, the agency will still have to draft and publish rules on the change, he noted.

Peptides are essentially the building blocks of more complex proteins. Inside the human body, peptides trigger hormones needed for growth, metabolism and healing.

In recent years peptides have become widely known through the blockbuster success of GLP-1 medications, which the FDA has approved for treating obesity and diabetes. Other FDA-approved peptides include insulin for diabetics and hormone-based drugs for several medical conditions.

But many of the peptides promoted online have never been approved, making them technically illegal to market as drugs. Several peptides, such as BPC-157 and TB-500, are banned by international sports authorities as doping substances.

But that has not stopped them from gaining a foothold in the burgeoning marketplace for wellness hacks and alternative remedies.

“I think this is a disaster in the works,” said Dr. Eric Topol of Scripps Research Translational Institute, who has studied the issue. “These peptides have no data to support their safety and efficacy.”

Meanwhile, some dietary supplement makers have begun mixing peptides into capsules, protein powders and gummies. At a recent FDA meeting, the industry argued for expanding the federal definition of supplements to permit the use of newer ingredients such as peptides in their products.

Safety risks were cited previously

When the FDA added a number of injectable peptides to its list of restricted substances in 2023, it cited safety risks including cancer and liver, kidney and heart problems.

That triggered pushback from wellness entrepreneurs, compounding pharmacies and their allies in Washington.

Last year several members of Congress, including Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, sent letters to Kennedy asking him to lift limits on peptide production.

Some in the compounding industry argue that FDA restrictions have given rise to an illicit market of imported chemicals from China and other countries, which are not subject to U.S. drug standards.

Kennedy has echoed those concerns.

“With the gray market you have no idea if you’re getting a good product,” Kennedy told Rogan. “And a lot of this stuff that we’ve looked at is just very, very substandard.”

Perrone writes for the Associated Press.

A Los Angeles City Council panel is pushing to ban electric bikes from most city recreational trails, saying the machines pose a threat to hikers and equestrians.

The council’s Arts, Parks, Libraries, and Community Enrichment Committee voted 3 to 0 in favor of the measure, which now goes to the council’s Transportation Committee before potentially advancing to the full City Council, which would have to approve the ban before it takes effect.

“When you have something that’s motorized traversing that same space, especially if it’s somewhat of a rugged space, for folks that have sensitivities — knees, ankles — you don’t want to create an intimidating situation,” councilmember Adrin Nazarian said.

Although he voted to support the measure, Nazarian said he was open to making changes such as restricting some classes of e-bikes instead of a unilateral ban.

The ban, proposed by councilmember John Lee, would still allow e-bikes on designated bikeways in the city, including some of those along the L.A. River and city beaches.

Regular bikes are already banned from anything designated as a “trail,” according to a city ordinance, but a spokesperson for Lee said e-bikes were a gray area that his proposal aims to address.

Supporters of the measure include Lisa Baca of the Monteverde Ranch Equestrian Center in the northeast San Fernando Valley, who said horses are animals that can easily be spooked by facing moving e-bikes.

“They panic and it becomes very dangerous” for both riders, she said in an interview. At the same time, Baca noted that enforcing any ban on remote trails would be difficult.

Eli Akira Kaufman, director of the nonprofit advocacy group BikeLA, criticized the proposed ban as a “blunt instrument” and said the city should instead engage in a public education campaign aimed at getting people to share space safely.

Michael Schneider, chief executive of StreetsForAll, said the main problem on trails comes not from e-bikes but from people riding more powerful motorcycles and motorized trail bikes that aren’t street legal.

Federal regulations around e-bikes are lenient; they are considered nonmotorized vehicles like regular bikes and don’t require riders to have driver’s licenses or insurance. Local regulations, such as the one proposed by Lee, can vary widely by jurisdiction.

Under California law, e-bikes and e-motorcycles are separately classified by motor power, top speed and whether the bike has working pedals. Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes don’t require licenses or insurance, while Class 3 riders need to be at least 16.

Catherine Lerer, a partner at law firm McGee Lerer Ogrin who has worked on dozens of e-bike accident cases, said accidents are more dangerous because riders — sometimes children — are moving faster than they would on a regular pedal bike.

“Minors riding e-bikes do not appreciate how fast that these bikes go, and they don’t know the rules that apply to riding an e-bike,” Lerer said. “It’s just a recipe for disaster.”

April 12 (Asia Today) — An unusual situation is unfolding in South Korea as prosecutors, a special counsel team and the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials simultaneously move to reexamine major cases tied to allegations of “fabricated indictments,” intensifying political and legal tensions.

The cases under scrutiny include the alleged illegal transfer of funds to North Korea involving the Ssangbangwool Group and the Daejang-dong development corruption case, both of which are also the subject of a parliamentary probe led by the Democratic Party of Korea.

According to Asia Today reporting, a special counsel team led by Kwon Chang-young and the anti-corruption agency are investigating suspicions surrounding the North Korea fund transfer case. The case centers on allegations that the Ssangbangwool Group sent money to North Korea on behalf of Gyeonggi Province during projects pursued when President Lee Jae-myung was governor.

Lee Hwa-young, former vice governor for peace affairs, was sentenced to seven years and eight months in prison, a ruling finalized by the Supreme Court. Lee Jae-myung was also indicted, but his trial has been suspended following his election as president.

The ruling party has argued that prosecutors coerced testimony and pursued a “fabricated indictment,” calling for charges to be dropped.

The anti-corruption agency has opened an investigation into allegations that prosecutor Park Sang-yong, who led the case, coerced testimony and encouraged perjury. The case was assigned to a dedicated investigative unit last month.

Meanwhile, the special counsel team is examining whether the presidential office under the previous administration interfered in the early stages of the investigation. Authorities have imposed a travel ban on Park as part of the probe.

Separately, the prosecution has launched an internal inspection into prosecutors who handled both the North Korea fund transfer case and the Daejang-dong case, following a request relayed through the Ministry of Justice. The review, led by a human rights task force at the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office, covers multiple prosecutors involved in the investigations.

The overlapping probes have sparked debate over prosecutorial independence and the appropriateness of political involvement in ongoing or concluded cases.

Former Prosecutor General Lee Won-seok criticized the parliamentary inquiry, saying it risks undermining the rule of law and the judicial system. He argued the probe effectively shifts judicial functions to the legislature, potentially violating the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

He said the inquiry attempts to overturn court-established facts and legal conclusions in a short period by emphasizing claims from convicted defendants, adding that such actions could discourage prosecutors and judges from pursuing cases involving political power.

Hong Seung-wook, former chief prosecutor of the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office who led the investigation, also defended the probe, saying it was conducted thoroughly without political considerations and warned that targeting investigators could amount to retaliation.

Legal experts have raised concerns that revisiting cases already decided by the courts or still under trial could encroach on judicial authority and undermine the constitutional balance of powers.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260412010003476

April 11 (UPI) — A panel of judges said Saturday it will allow construction on the White House ballroom to continue for now.

The panel of three judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit told the lower court judge who halted the project to seek more information about the national security risk that President Donald Trump claims the pause in construction causes.

In an earlier filing, the Trump administration said that stopping construction “would imperil the President and national security, and indefinitely leave a large hole beside the executive residence.”

The planned construction includes bomb shelters, a hospital, medical area and other “top secret military installations, structures and equipment,” the administration said.

Construction of the 90,000-square-foot building began with the demolition of the East Wing of the White House in October. The new building was to cost $200 million, but the ballroom’s price tag has since doubled. Trump said it will be financed by private donors.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon for the District of Columbia halted the work on April 1.

“The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!” Leon said in his opinion.

The appeals court said work on the project can continue until at least April 17.

“It remains unclear whether and to what extent the development of certain aspects of the proposed ballroom is necessary to ensure the safety and security of those below-ground national security upgrades or otherwise to ensure the safety of the White House and its occupants while the appeal proceeds,” the judges in the majority wrote.

The judges, Patricia Ann Millett, Bradley Garcia and Neomi Rao, were not unanimous. Rao dissented, arguing that the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked standing to sue.

Trump has also said that the military was building a “massive complex” under the ballroom, but he hasn’t released any details.

The National Trust told the appeals court that Trump was confusing the above-ground ballroom with the below-ground bunker.

“As is obvious, the absence of a massive ballroom on White House grounds has not stopped this (or any other) President from residing at the White House or hosting events there,” the lawyers said in a filing. “Temporarily halting the ballroom project until it complies with the law will not irreparably harm defendants or the nation.”

Justice Department lawyers had asked the court to shelve Leon’s ruling.

“The upgrades to the East Wing are not cosmetic; instead, they involve the use of missile-resistant steel columns, beams, drone-proof roofing materials, and bullet-, ballistic- and blast-proof glass windows,” they said in a filing. “They also include the installation of bomb shelters, hospital and medical facilities, protective partitioning and top-secret military installations, air conditioning, heating, venting and more.”

On April 2, The National Capital Planning Commission voted Thursday to approve Trump’s plans for the White House ballroom. Though, that vote doesn’t override the court’s rulings.

ORLANDO, Fla. — Environmental groups on Tuesday asked a federal appellate court panel to drop its temporary halt of a lower court’s order instructing state officials to close an immigration detention center in the heart of the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz.”

The Everglades facility remains open, still holding detainees, because the appellate court in early September relied on arguments by Florida and the Trump administration that the state had not yet applied for federal reimbursement, and therefore wasn’t required to follow federal environmental law. State officials opened the detention center last summer to support President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Questions by the three appellate judges during oral arguments in a Miami courtroom focused on how much control the federal government had over the state-built facility and under what circumstances an environmental review was required to be in compliance with federal law. The judges did not indicate when they would rule.

Jesse Panuccio, an attorney for the Florida Department of Emergency Management, told the judges federal funding and federal control of the facility were the two criteria for determining if the federal environmental law would apply and the federal agencies had no control over the state-run detention center.

Florida was notified in late September that FEMA had approved $608 million in federal funding to support the center’s construction and operation.

“You need both,” Panuccio said. “Even with funding, I don’t think that would follow because they don’t have federal control.”

An attorney for the environmental groups said the law requiring a review applied to the facility because the Department of Homeland Security had authorized the funding and immigration was a responsibility of the federal government, not the state.

“What is different about this property is that immigration is constitutionally a federal function,” said Paul Schwiep,” an attorney representing the Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity. “The state has no role.”

The federal district judge in Miami in mid-August ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact according to federal law. That judge concluded that a reimbursement decision already had been made. The appellate court halted the order on an appeal.

The environmental lawsuit was one of three federal court challenges to the Everglades facility since it opened. In the others, a detainee said Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state had no authority to operate the center under federal law. The challenge ended after the immigrant detainee who filed the lawsuit agreed to be removed from the United States.

In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Fort Myers, Fla., ruled the Everglades facility must provide detainees there with better access to their attorneys, as well as confidential, unmonitored, unrecorded outgoing legal calls.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Democratic Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick of Florida committed numerous violations of House rules and ethics standards, the House Ethics Committee found Friday in a ruling that could add weight to Republicans’ potential push to expel her from Congress.

After meeting into early Friday morning following a seven-hour hearing, the ethics panel of four Democrats and four Republicans found that Cherfilus-McCormick had committed 25 ethics violations, including breaking campaign finance laws. The panel said it would recommend a punishment in the coming weeks.

The allegations center around Cherfilus-McCormick’s receipt of millions of dollars from her family’s healthcare business after Florida made an overpayment of roughly $5 million in disaster relief funds. Cherfilus-McCormick is accused of using that money to fund her 2022 congressional campaign through a network of businesses and family members.

The congresswoman, who is running for a fourth term representing a southeastern Florida district, has denied wrongdoing, and her attorney stridently criticized Thursday’s public hearing — the first open proceeding in nearly 15 years. But the ruling from the Ethics Committee could fuel a potential vote on her expulsion and divide a Democratic caucus that is trying to make a comeback to power in the November midterm elections.

Cherfilus-McCormick also faces federal charges for allegedly stealing the $5 million in COVID-19 disaster relief funds and using it for purchases like a 3-carat yellow diamond ring. Her brother, former chief of staff and accountant were also charged. She has pleaded not guilty to those charges, and her attorney indicated Thursday that the trial is expected to start in the coming months.

What did the ethics panel find her guilty of?

The congresswoman declined to testify during Thursday’s ethics hearing, citing her 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. Her attorney, William Barzee, sparred with some of the lawmakers on the ethics panel and argued that they should have allowed a thorough ethics trial, where he could present witnesses and evidence to counter the conclusions of House investigators.

Barzee accused the panel of giving further momentum to the effort to “throw a woman out of Congress who was duly elected by her constituents” based primarily on bank records.

Committee investigators laid out 27 violations of House ethics standards and rules in a 242-page report. The report accused Cherfilus-McCormick of winning a 2022 special election by portraying her campaign as self-financed when it was actually funded through the $5-million overpayment her family’s company received from Florida for coronavirus vaccination services.

Barzee had argued that “she was entitled to that money,” pointing to a document that broke down how her family would share the proceeds from the healthcare business. But lawmakers on the ethics panel were skeptical of that argument.

The panel found Cherfilus-McCormick guilty of all but two of the ethics violations proposed by investigators. Lawmakers declined to find her guilty of one allegation of receiving political help from an organization run by an advisor and her husband that received funding from the Haitian government. The panel also did not find her guilty of refusing to cooperate with the ethics investigation.

Will there be a push to expel Cherfilus-McCormick?

The full House Ethics Committee said it would meet after Congress returns from a two-week break in April and consider what punishment to recommend for a vote in the House.

Rep. Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, told reporters Thursday that once the committee makes a determination he “will move on the floor to expel.”

House Democratic leaders have declined to condemn Cherfilus-McCormick and said they wanted to see the ethics process play out. A couple of members of the Congressional Black Caucus, one of the most powerful groups of Democratic members, also showed up to the start of the ethics hearing Thursday in an apparent show of support for Cherfilus-McCormick.

But Democratic Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a moderate member from Washington state who often breaks with her caucus, posted on social media Friday morning that “since she was found guilty, she should resign or be removed.”

The last member to be expelled from Congress was Republican Rep. George Santos of New York in 2023. He argued at the time that the House would be “haunted” by the precedent of expelling a member before a criminal trial played out. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) voted against expulsion at the time, expressing the same concern.

It takes a two-thirds majority in the 435-member House to expel a member.

Groves and Kinnard write for the Associated Press. Kinnard reported from Columbia, S.C.

WASHINGTON — The Senate Government Affairs Committee voted Tuesday to curtail the privileges of former presidents.

The bill was approved by voice vote and sent to the full Senate. The measure would limit the round-the-clock Secret Service protection for former presidents to five years instead of life and cut protection for their spouses to two years. Protection for children of former presidents, now extended until they are 16, would be limited to two years after their parent leaves office.

The legislation would prohibit former presidents from using their taxpayer-funded offices and staff for any money-making or political endeavors such as preparing speeches and memoirs.

March 18 (UPI) — Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard defended U.S. military strikes on Iran during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing Wednesday, calling them a strategic success.

Senators challenged Gabbard to reconcile the words of President Donald Trump with the intelligence her department has received on Iran. When pressed, Gabbard yielded that Trump has the final say on what threats the United States faces.

When the United States performed strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June, Trump said Iran’s nuclear capabilities were “obliterated.” Earlier this month, he said Iran’s development of nuclear weapons posed an imminent nuclear threat to national security, justifying military action.

Gabbard affirmed Wednesday that Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was “obliterated” in the June strikes.

“It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat,” Gabbard said. “That is up to the president, based on a volume of information he receives.”

Gabbard was once a vocal opponent of engaging in a war with Iran, even selling shirts that read “No War With Iran” in 2019 while she campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Iran is one of the United States’ top adversaries, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s “Annual Threat Assessment” said. China, Russia and North Korea are also on that list.

In the 19 days since the war with Iran began, Gabbard said the Iranian regime “appears to be intact but largely degraded.”

“Even so, Iran and its proxies remain capable of and continue to attack U.S. and allied interests in the Middle East,” Gabbard said. “The IC assesses that if a hostile regime survives it will seek to begin a yearslong effort to rebuild its missiles and UAV forces.”

The L.A. Times Festival of Books is back for its 31st year.

The event will feature authors, poets, artists and podcasters across panels, book signings, cooking demonstrations and screenings. This year’s lineup includes comedian Larry David, actor and Booker Prize judge Sarah Jessica Parker, musician Lionel Richie, Beyoncé’s mother and multihyphenate Tina Knowles, bestselling author and social critic Roxane Gay and News & Documentary Emmy- and Peabody-nominated scholar Reza Aslan, among others.

Scheduled for April 18 and 19, the literary festival will feature more than 550 storytellers and nearly 100 panels across the University of Southern California’s campus.

Other notable personalities include: Pat Benatar, Blippi, Mark Harmon, David Duchovny, Susan Lucci, Jennie Garth, Hannah Brown, Anne Lamott, Chanel Miller, Lisa Rinna, Stephanie Garber, Jon Klassen, Mac Barnett, Meghan Quinn, Hayley Kiyoko, Megan McDonald, Elyse Myers, Eli Rallo, Raegan Revord and Molly Jong-Fast.

As part of the Ideas Exchange speaker series, Richie will sit down with Times Pop Music Critic Mikael Wood, to discuss “Truly,” Richie’s new memoir. The book explores the singer’s upbringing in Alabama and his rise to stardom, including performing with the Commodores.

On Saturday, Sarah Jessica Parker and Alexandra Oliva join the festival to discuss Oliva’s new SJP Lit novel “The Radiant Dark.” The following day, Larry David and Times News and Culture Critic Lorraine Ali will talk about Ali’s new book, “No Lessons Learned: The Making of Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

This year’s event will debut the Audiobook and Podcast Stage presented by Spotify, hosting talent like “Crimes of The Times” host and Times writer Christopher Goffard and “Remarkably Bright Creatures” bestselling author Shelby Van Pelt. The festival will also screen a preview of the Hulu show “Rivals,” which will be followed by a discussion between producer and writer Dominic Treadwell-Collins and actor Nafessa Williams.

At the Times Food Stage, Cassandra Peterson, known for her work as Elvira, will be demoing from her book “Elvira’s Cookbook From Hell.” Culinary influencer Cassie Yeung will also be stopping by to discuss recipes from her new Asian takeout cookbook “Bad B*tch in the Kitch.”

The festival will kick off April 17 with The Times hosting the 46th annual L.A. Times Book Prizes at Bovard Auditorium. The ceremony will honor Amy Tan with the Robert Kirsch Award for lifetime achievement, We Need Diverse Books with the Innovator’s Award and Adam Ross with the Christopher Isherwood Prize for Autobiographical Prose. The prizes recognize 61 works in 13 categories.

General admission to the festival is free. Friend of the Festival packages, which include panel reservations, parking and merchandise, are currently on sale.