politics

New budget includes a $7.6m military spending increase and aims to cut the deficit to 5 percent by the end of 2026.

France has passed a budget for 2026 after two no-confidence motions failed, allowing the legislation to pass and potentially heralding a period of relative stability for Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu’s weak minority government.

The budget, adopted on Monday after four months of political deadlock over government spending, includes measures to bring France’s deficit down and boost military spending.

“France finally has a budget,” Lecornu said in a post on X. “A budget that makes clear choices and addresses essential priorities. A budget that contains public spending and does not raise taxes for households and businesses.”

Motions tabled by France Unbowed, the Greens and other left-wing groups drew 260 of the 289 votes needed to oust the government. The far-right motion secured only 135 votes.

Budget negotiations have consumed the French political class for nearly two years, after President Emmanuel Macron’s 2024 snap election delivered a ⁠hung parliament just as a massive hole in public finances made belt-tightening more urgent.

The budget talks have cost two prime ​ministers their jobs, unsettled debt markets and alarmed France’s European partners.

However, Lecornu – whose chaotic two-stage nomination in October ‍drew derision around the world – managed to secure the support of Socialist lawmakers through costly but targeted concessions.

Reducing the deficit

France is under pressure from the European Union to rein in its debt-to-GDP ratio – the bloc’s third-highest after Greece and Italy – which is close to twice the EU’s 60-percent ceiling.

The bill aims to cut France’s deficit to five percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2026 from 5.4 percent in 2025, after the government eased back from an earlier target of 4.7 percent.

The budget includes higher taxes on some businesses, expected to bring in about 7.3 billion euros ($8.6bn) in 2026, though the Socialists failed to secure backing for a proposed wealth tax on the superrich.

It also boosts military spending by 6.5 billion euros ($7.7m), a move the premier last week described as the “heart” of the budget.

The Socialists did, however, win several sought-after measures, including a one-euro meal for students and an increase in a top-up payment for low-income workers.

SPRINGFIELD, Ohio — In a church crowded to overcapacity, two-dozen faith leaders and their audience of hundreds sang and prayed together in unity Monday as a sign of support for Haitian migrants, some of whom fear their protected status in the United States may be ended this week.

Religious leaders representing congregations from across the United States attended the event at Springfield’s St. John Missionary Baptist Church, demanding an extension of the Temporary Protection Status that allowed thousands of Haitian migrants to legally arrive in Springfield in recent years fleeing unrest and gang violence in their homeland. The TPS designation for Haiti is set to expire Tuesday, and those gathered were hoping that a federal judge might intervene and issue a pause.

“We believe in the legal system of this country of ours, we still believe. We believe that through the legal ways, the judge hopefully will rule in favor of current TPS holders today that will allow them to stay while we continue to fight,” Guerline Jozef, executive director of the Haitian Bridge Alliance, told the packed church.

“We have been called for such a time as this to protect those who have nowhere else to go. They cannot go back to Haiti,” she said.

So many people turned up for the church event that a fire marshal had to ask 150 to leave because the building had exceeded its 700-person capacity.

Hundreds joined a choir clapping and singing: “You got to put one foot in front of the other and lead with love.”

They also observed a moment of silence for people who died in federal immigration detention and for Alex Pretti and Renee Good, who were shot and killed by federal officers in Minneapolis. Some of the speakers evoked biblical passages while appealing for empathic treatment of migrants.

Federal immigration crackdown and TPS

The Department of Homeland Security announced last June that it would terminate TPS for about 500,000 Haitians in the U.S., including some who had lived in the country for more than a decade. DHS said conditions in the island nation improved enough to allow their safe return.

“It was never intended to be a de facto asylum program, yet that’s how previous administrations have used it for decades. The Trump administration is restoring integrity to our immigration system to keep our homeland and its people safe,” DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement, noting there were no new enforcement operations to announce.

A federal judge in Washington is expected to rule any day on a request to pause the TPS termination for Haitians while a lawsuit challenging it proceeds.

TPS allows people in the U.S. to stay and work legally if their homelands are deemed unsafe. Immigrants from 17 countries, including Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan and Lebanon, had the protective status before President Trump’s second term started.

The uncertainty over TPS has deepened worries for an already embattled Haitian community in Springfield.

Trump denigrated the community while campaigning in 2024 for a second term, falsely accusing its members of eating their neighbors’ cats and dogs as he  pitched voters  on his plans for an immigration crackdown. The false claims exacerbated fears about division and anti-immigrant sentiment in the mostly white, working class city of about 59,000 people.

In the weeks after his comments, schools, government buildings and the homes of elected officials received  bomb threats.

Since then Springfield’s Haitians have lived in constant fear that has only been exacerbated by the federal immigration crackdowns in Minneapolis and other cities, said Viles Dorsainvil, leader of Springfield’s Haitian Community Help and Support Center.

“As we are getting close to the end of the TPS, it has intensified the fear, the anxiety, the panic,” Dorsainvil said.

Sunday church service

Some of Springfield’s estimated 15,000 Haitians also sought comfort and divine intervention in their churches Sunday.

At the First Haitian Evangelical Church of Springfield, its pastor estimated that half of the congregants who regularly attend Sunday service stayed home.

“They don’t know the future; they are very scared,” Rev. Reginald Silencieux said.

Flanked by the flags of Haiti and the United States, he advised his congregation to stay home as much as possible in case of immigration raids. He also offered a prayer for Trump and the Haitian community and reminded congregants to keep their faith in God.

“The president is our president. He can make decisions. But he is limited,” he said. “God is unlimited.”

After the service Jerome Bazard, a member of the church, said ending TPS for Haitians would wreak havoc on his community.

“They can’t go to Haiti because it’s not safe. Without the TPS, they can’t work. And if they can’t work, they can‘t eat, they can’t pay bills. You’re killing the people,” he said.

Many children in the Springfield Haitian community are U.S. citizens who have parents in the country illegally. If they are detained, Dorsainvil said, some parents signed caregiver affidavits that designate a legal guardian in hopes of keeping their kids out of foster care.

“They’re not sending their kids to school,” he said.

Volunteers from nearby towns and from out of state have been calling the Haitian community center offering to deliver food for those afraid to leave home, Dorsainvil said. Others have been stockpiling groceries in case immigration officers flood the community.

Some, he said, have been receiving desperate calls from family members abroad asking them to leave. “They keep telling them that Springfield is not a safe place now for them to stay.”

Henao writes for the Associated Press. AP reporter Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.

BOGOTA, Colombia — President Trump is scheduled to host one of his most vocal regional critics, Colombian President Gustavo Petro, at the White House in a high-stakes meeting analysts suggest could redefine the immediate future of bilateral relations.

Petro has called Trump an “accomplice to genocide” in the Gaza Strip, while the U.S. president called him a “drug lord,” an exchange of insults that escalated with U.S. sanctions against Petro, threats of reciprocal tariffs, the withdrawal of financial aid to Colombia and even the suggestion of a military attack.

Tensions eased in early January when Trump accepted a call from Petro, saying it was a “great honor to speak with the president of Colombia,” who called him to “explain the drug situation and other disagreements.”

The two leaders are expected to meet Tuesday to address strategies for curbing drug trafficking and boosting bilateral trade, while potentially discussing joint operations against Colombian rebel groups fueled by the cocaine trade.

“There’s a lot of space here for mutual cooperation and shared success,” said Elizabeth Dickinson, a Colombia expert at the International Crisis Group.

Combating drug trafficking

Decades of security cooperation once made Colombia the primary U.S. ally in the region, but that relationship has recently faced unprecedented strain.

The two countries have opposing views on how to address the problem of illicit drugs. While the U.S. remains anchored in aggressive eradication and supply-side control, Petro advocates for interdiction, demand reduction and providing economic alternatives for small-scale coca farmers.

In 2025, the U.S. signaled its dissatisfaction with Petro’s anti-drug policy by adding Colombia to a list of nations failing to cooperate in the drug war for the first time in three decades.

Since then, Petro has focused on highlighting the record seizures and claiming that his government has managed to halt the growth of coca leaf crops. However, Colombia’s coca crop has reached historic highs, as the government shifts away from eradication. According to United Nations research, potential cocaine production has surged by at least 65% during the Petro administration, to more than 3,000 tons per year.

The Venezuela factor

The sudden detente between Petro and Trump followed a period of extreme volatility.

Tensions peaked after the Jan. 3 U.S. raid in Caracas that captured then-President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Petro denounced the operation as an act of “aggression” and a “kidnapping,” blasting the U.S. for what he called an “abhorrent” violation of Latin American sovereignty and a “spectacle of death” comparable to Nazi Germany’s 1937 carpet bombing of Guernica, Spain.

Despite recently calling for Maduro’s return to face Venezuelan justice, Petro’s tone softened significantly during a subsequent hourlong call with Trump, paving the way for their upcoming summit.

Gimena Sánchez-Garzoli, director for the Andes region at the Washington Office on Latin America, a think tank, believes that Trump accepted Petro’s call partly to quell questions about the operation in Venezuela and the growing concern over warnings issued to countries like Colombia.

She also said she considers it likely that both presidents will agree on actions against drug trafficking and a joint fight against the National Liberation Army guerrilla group, which is most active on the border with Venezuela.

‘A quiet, effective cooperation’

Signaling a thaw in relations just days before the White House summit, the Colombian Foreign Ministry announced on Thursday that repatriation flights for deportees from the U.S. have officially resumed.

Images released by the ministry showed citizens arriving at El Dorado airport — a stark contrast to the diplomatic crisis a year ago. At that time, Petro triggered a near trade war by refusing U.S. military deportation flights over “dignity” concerns, only relenting after Trump threatened 50% tariffs and visa cancellations.

“A good outcome [of the meeting] would be that the relationship is cordial, pragmatic, and that the two countries can get back to what they have been doing for years, which is a quiet, effective cooperation on shared security threats,” Dickinson said.

“The less noise there is around the relationship the better.”

Suárez and Rueda write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Republican chair of a House Committee rejected an offer Monday from former President Clinton to conduct a transcribed interview for a House investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, pushing the threat to hold both Clintons in contempt of Congress closer toward a vote.

The impasse comes as the full House is headed toward potential votes this week on criminal contempt of Congress charges against the Clintons. If passed, the charges threaten Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with substantial fines and even incarceration if they are convicted.

Rep. James Comer, the chair of the House Oversight Committee, said on social media that he would insist on both Clintons sitting for a sworn deposition before the committee in order to fulfill the panel’s subpoenas. A letter from the committee to attorneys for the Clintons indicates that they had offered for Bill Clinton to conduct a transcribed interview on “matters related to the investigations and prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein” and for Hillary Clinton to submit a sworn declaration.

“The Clintons do not get to dictate the terms of lawful subpoenas,” Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said.

The Republican-controlled Oversight panel had advanced criminal contempt of Congress charges last month. Nine of the committee’s 21 Democrats joined Republicans in support of the charges against Bill Clinton as they argued for full transparency in the Epstein investigation. Three Democrats also supported the charges against Hillary Clinton.

Bill Clinton’s relationship with Epstein has re-emerged as a focal point for Republicans amid the push for a reckoning over Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 in a New York jail cell as he faced sex trafficking charges.

Clinton, like a bevy of other high-powered men, had a well-documented relationship with Epstein in the late 1990s and early 2000s. He has not been accused of wrongdoing in his interactions with the late financier.

After Bill and Hillary Clinton were both subpoenaed in August by the House Oversight Committee, their attorney had tried to argue against the validity of the subpoena. However, as Comer threatened to begin contempt of Congress proceedings, they started negotiating toward a compromise.

Still, the Clintons remained highly critical of Comer’s decision, saying that he was bringing politics into the investigation while failing to hold the Trump administration accountable for delays in producing the Department of Justice’s case files on Epstein.

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

MINNEAPOLIS — U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi on Monday announced two more arrests following a protest at a Minnesota church against the immigration crackdown, bringing the number of people arrested to nine.

The nine were named in a grand jury indictment unsealed Friday. Independent journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort were among four people arrested Friday. Three others were arrested earlier in the week, including prominent local activist Nekima Levy Armstrong.

A grand jury in Minnesota indicted all nine on federal civil rights charges of conspiracy and interfering with the 1st Amendment rights of worshippers during the Jan. 18 protest at the Cities Church in St. Paul. A pastor at the church is also a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official. The protest generated strong objections from the Trump administration.

In a social media post Monday, Bondi named the latest two arrestees as Ian Davis Austin and Jerome Deangelo Richardson. She gave no details of their arrests.

Lemon, who was fired from CNN in 2023 following a bumpy run as a morning host, has said he had no affiliation to the group that disrupted Sunday service by entering the church. He has described himself as an independent journalist chronicling protesters.

The indictment alleges that Richardson traveled to the church with Lemon while he was streaming and that Richardson told Lemon they needed to catch up to the others. It also alleges that Austin stood in the aisles of the church and loudly berated a pastor with questions about Christian nationalism.

Online jail records show Austin was arrested Friday. It wasn’t immediately clear when Richardson was taken into custody.

Austin’s attorney, Sarah Gad, did not immediately return a call seeking comment. Court records don’t list an attorney for Richardson who could comment on his behalf.

The Justice Department began its investigation after the group interrupted services by chanting, “ICE out” and “Justice for Renee Good,” referring to the 37-year-old mother of three who was fatally shot by an ICE officer in Minneapolis.

Cities Church belongs to the Southern Baptist Convention and lists one of its pastors as David Easterwood, who leads ICE’s St. Paul field office.

Karnowski writes for the Associated Press.

All about the numbers

The Petro administration has also continued to target criminal networks that traffic in cocaine through arrests and the seizure of shipments.

In November, Petro announced the Colombian government had made its largest drug bust in a decade, with law enforcement nabbing nearly 14 tonnes of cocaine.

Gloria Miranda was appointed by Petro in 2024 to lead Colombia’s Directorate for the Substitution of Illicit Crops, the agency overseeing the voluntary eradication efforts.

She believes that the Petro administration’s efforts have been mischaracterised as ineffective.

“There’s been a narrative that Colombia isn’t doing anything in the fight against drug trafficking,” she told Al Jazeera.

“But we’ve seized 276,000 kilogrammes [608,500 pounds] of cocaine, destroyed 18,000 laboratories, arrested 164,000 people, and are replacing more than 30,000 hectares [about 74,100 acres] of illicit crops.”

But critics — including Trump — argue Petro’s measures have yet to translate into results. Coca cultivation and cocaine production remain stubbornly at record levels.

According to the latest United Nations figures, coca cultivation rose in Colombia by about 10 percent in 2023. Potential cocaine output also jumped 53 percent to about 2,600 tonnes.

Petro has questioned the accuracy of those numbers, though. Last week, ahead of Petro’s meeting with Trump, his government announced it would no longer use the United Nations figures, arguing that they rely on an “obscure statistical method”.

Michael Weintraub, the director of the Center for the Study of Security and Drugs (CESED) at the University of the Andes, told Al Jazeera that some of Petro’s pushback is political.

But he added that there is a genuine basis for questioning the UN’s methodology.

“The ‘potential cocaine production’ measure has a lot of baked-in assumptions that make it very difficult to trust,” Weintraub said.

It predicts coca production from selected plots, but yields vary by region and season. The UN itself has admitted there are limitations in its method.

Despite these concerns, coca cultivation in Colombia has trended upward for decades.

Analysts note one overriding factor: demand. Consumption in North America and Europe remains strong, and new markets have emerged in Asia, Africa and South America.

“Coca can only grow in limited places due to climate, soil and elevation,” Weintraub said. “So Colombia is likely to remain a major producer for the foreseeable future.”

New Delhi, India – The latest release of documents related to the US Justice Department investigation into the crimes of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has set off political infernos around the globe for featuring the names of world leaders.

The tranche of files, which includes more than three million pages of documents, was released on Friday. This is the largest release since US President Donald Trump’s administration passed a law last year to force the release of the documents.

Epstein was convicted in 2008 of sex offences but avoided federal charges – which could have seen him face life in prison – by doing a deal with prosecutors. Instead, he received an 18-month prison sentence, which allowed him to go on “work release” to his office for 12 hours a day, six days a week. He was released on probation after 13 months.

In 2019, he was arrested again on charges including the sex trafficking of minors. But he died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 before his trial could commence.

With this latest disclosure of documents and emails linked to the cases against him, yet more has been revealed about the disgraced financier’s sexual abuse of young girls and his interactions with wealthy and powerful figures from the United Kingdom, Australia, Norway, Slovakia and India.

Simply being named in Epstein documents or emails does not mean a person is guilty of criminal wrongdoing, and, so far, no charges have been brought against individuals named in connection with the sex offender.

However, the new documents show communications between high-profile figures in the US, including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and business tycoons such as Bill Gates and Elon Musk.

Here is what we know about some of the powerful men (and one woman) from other countries who have featured in these documents.

Narendra Modi, Indian prime minister

Documents released on Friday reveal conversations between Anil Ambani, the billionaire chairman of Reliance Group who is close to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Epstein. All the conversations took place in the years following Epstein’s first conviction for sex offences in 2008.

The two emailed each other about a range of issues, from sizing up incoming US ambassadors to India to setting up meetings for Modi with top US officials.

Ambani is the elder brother of India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani, who is also close to PM Modi.

On March 16, 2017, two months after Trump was sworn in for his first term as president of the US, Ambani sent an iMessage to Epstein, saying “Leadership” was asking for his help to connect with senior figures in Trump’s circle, including Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon.

Ambani also asked for advice from Epstein about a possible visit by Modi to meet Trump “in may (sic)”, before setting up a call in the messages.

In another iMessage exchange two weeks later, on March 29, Epstein wrote to Ambani: “Discussions re israel strategy dominating modi dates (sic).” Two days later, Ambani informed Epstein that Modi would visit Israel in July and asked the disgraced financier: “who do u know fir track 2”.

On June 26, Modi met Trump in Washington on his first visit since Trump became president.

Then, on July 6, 2017, Modi became the first-ever Indian prime minister to visit Israel. He snubbed the Palestinian Authority, prompting condemnation from Palestinian officials.

That year, New Delhi became the largest buyer of Israeli weapons, amounting to $715m worth of purchases. The defence partnership between the two countries has since continued despite Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

This marked a sharp change from India’s history of advocating for the Palestinian cause. It only opened up formal diplomatic ties with Israel in 1992. Before that, Indian citizens had been barred by India from travelling to Israel since the country’s creation in 1948.

After Modi’s visit on July 6, Epstein emailed an unidentified individual he referred to as “Jabor Y”, saying: “The Indian Prime minister modi took advice. and danced and sang in israel for the benefit of the US president. they had met a few weeks ago.. IT WORKED. !”

Ambani Reliance Defence Ltd also entered a joint venture with an Israeli state defence group last year in a deal valued at $10bn over a decade.

Shortly after Modi’s visit to Israel, Larry Summers, former Harvard University president and former secretary of the US Treasury, asked Epstein if he still thought Trump was a better president than rival candidate Hillary Clinton would have been. Epstein responded affirmatively, stating, “yes, defintley India israel. for example great and all his doing (sic).”

In another conversation revealed in the latest document drop, Epstein offered to arrange a meeting between Modi and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon just hours after Modi had won a thumping majority in the Indian national election in 2019.

In an iMessage to Bannon on May 19, 2019, Epstein wrote, “modi sending someone to see me on thurs,” referring to Ambani.

That Thursday, May 23, Epstein met Ambani in New York and his calendar for that day shows no other meeting scheduled.

After the meeting with Ambani, Epstein wrote to Bannon: “really interesting modi meeting. He won [the 2019 parliamentary elections] with HUGE mandate. His guy said that no one in wash speaks to him however his main enemy is CHINA!   And their proxy in the region pakistan. They will host the g20 in 22.. Totally buys into your vision.”

Epstein then messaged Ambani: “I think mr modi might enjoy meeting steve bannon, you all share the china problem.” And Ambani wrote back: “sure.”

Epstein then wrote back to Bannon: “modi on board.”

It is not immediately clear if Ambani was authorised to approve such decisions on behalf of the Indian government. There is no public record either of a meeting between Bannon and Indian officials that summer.

Hardeep Singh Puri, Indian politician

Another major Indian name featured in the Epstein files is Hardeep Singh Puri, who retired from the Indian Foreign Service to join Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014.

In the documents are email exchanges between Puri and Epstein that began in June 2014, with the sex offender writing to Puri about Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, and arranging a visit by Hoffman to India.

Following an exchange of emails, Puri wrote a detailed pitch for investment opportunities in India to Epstein and Hoffman, laying out economic plans in India under the newly elected Modi government, and urging Hoffman to visit. Documents also show Puri met Epstein at his Manhattan townhouse on at least three occasions: February 4, 2015; January 6, 2016; and May 19, 2017.

Puri told Indian media on Sunday that his visits and interactions with Epstein were strictly business-related.

In December 2014, Puri wrote to Epstein again by email. “Please let me know when you are back from your exotic island,” he wrote, asking to set up a meeting in which Puri could give Epstein some books to “excite an interest in India”.

How has the Indian government responded?

India has dismissed the references to Modi in the Epstein files.

“Beyond the fact of the prime minister’s official visit to Israel in July 2017, the rest of the allusions in the email are little more than trashy ruminations by a convicted criminal, which deserve to be dismissed with the utmost contempt,” External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on Saturday.

However, the opposition, led by the Congress Party, has demanded answers about the latest disclosures – particularly those relating to Israel relations.

The Congress Party’s general secretary in charge of organisation, KC Venugopal, wrote in a post on X: “The reports of the new batch of Epstein Files are a huge wake-up call about the kind of monsters who have access to PM Modi, and how susceptible he is to foreign manipulation. The Congress demands that the Prime Minister personally come clean on these disturbing disclosures that raise serious questions.”

Kevin Rudd, former Australian prime minister

Australian diplomat Kevin Rudd, who served as the country’s prime minister from 2007 to 2010 and again in 2013, has also been named in the Epstein files.

Rudd’s name appeared on Epstein’s daily meeting schedule for June 8, 2014, at 4:30pm. On that day, Epstein flew to New York from his private island, Little Saint James in the US Virgin Islands, for several meetings, including with Rudd.

Rudd, who is currently serving as Australia’s ambassador to the US, claims he did not visit Epstein and denies any friendship with him.

But the newly released files show that two days before the scheduled appointment, Epstein emailed his assistant, Lesley Groff, on June 6, 2014 to ask for non-vegetarian food to be made available at the upcoming Sunday lunch “as now kevin rudd is also coming”. Rudd was not in government at the time.

Just seconds later, Epstein follows up in another email to Groff: “Kevin Rudd might also stop by former prime minister austrailia [sic].”

Peter Mandelson, UK politician

The name of Peter Mandelson, a former UK cabinet minister and life peer, had appeared in tranches of Epstein files previously made public. But he resigned from his membership of the UK’s ruling Labour Party on Sunday after yet more links to Epstein surfaced in the latest dump.

Mandelson was sacked as the UK’s ambassador to the US last year over his connections to Epstein.

The latest documents reveal that Epstein made $75,000 in payments to Mandelson in three separate transactions in 2003 and 2004.

In his resignation letter to Labour’s general secretary, Mandelson wrote: “I have been further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and I feel regretful and sorry about this.”

He said he had “no recollection” of the payments, however.

The latest documents also show that Mandelson discussed with Epstein by email a campaign against Rudd’s proposed mining tax, which would have taxed “super profits” reaped by mining companies at 40 percent, while Rudd was still prime minister.

Mette-Marit, Norway’s crown princess

The latest disclosures from the US Justice Department have embroiled Norway’s crown princess, Mette-Marit, in the Epstein scandal, as they reveal her years of extensive contact with the sex offender.

Mette-Marit, who is married to Crown Prince Haakon, the heir apparent to the Norwegian throne, appears nearly 1,000 times in the Epstein files, with scores of emails sent between the two.

In the emails, Mette-Marit told Epstein, “you tickle my brain”, and called him “soft hearted” and “such a sweetheart”. In another, she thanked Epstein for flowers he had sent when she was feeling unwell, signing off with “Love, Mm”.

In 2012, Mette-Marit told Epstein he was “very charming” and asked if it was “inappropriate for a mother to suggest two naked women carrying a surfboard for my 15 yr old sons wallpaper?”

The revelations come at a tricky time for Norway’s royal family, with Mette-Marit’s son, Marius Borg Hoiby – who was born before her marriage to Crown Prince Haakon – set to go on trial for rape later this week. Hoiby has been accused of 38 crimes, including the rapes of four women as well as assault and drug offences.

Miroslav Lajcak, Slovakian national security adviser

The new tranche of Espstein files has also prompted the resignation of Slovakia’s national security adviser, Miroslav Lajcak.

Photos and emails released with the documents reveal that he met with Epstein several years after the sex offender was released from jail and exchanged text messages about women in 2018 during his second spell as foreign minister.

On Sunday, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico accepted Lajcak’s resignation, and wrote on Facebook that the government was losing “an incredible source of experience and knowledge in foreign policy”, adding that the former minister had “categorically denied and rejected” the allegations made against him.

SACRAMENTO — The year opened with President Trump declaring that “the fraud investigation of California has begun,” a move that quickly set off a barrage of allegations from his administration and Republican allies questioning the integrity of state programs and the leadership of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

The accusations, amplified across social media and conservative outlets, have pushed California and its Democratic leadership to the center of a broader national political fight over waste, fraud and abuse.

Newsom has dismissed the claims as politically driven, arguing that the administration is singling out Democratic-led states while ignoring similar problems elsewhere. The governor also responded by highlighting fraud cases in Republican-led states and by criticizing Trump’s own record and business dealings.

Against that backdrop, it has become increasingly difficult to separate substantiated fraud from fabricated or recycled claims, to distinguish old findings from newly raised allegations and to determine who can credibly claim credit for uncovering wrongdoing — all amid a toxic and deeply polarized political climate.

Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at USC and UC Berkeley, said allegations of malfeasance in California is a particularly ripe target for Republicans because Democrats have controlled the state Legislature and governor’s office for years.

Democrats hold a supermajority in both the Assembly and the Senate, meaning they hold at least two-thirds of seats in both houses, and not a single Republican has been elected to statewide office in California since 2006, when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner were reelected.

“There is no shared responsibility here for Republicans,” Schnur said. “If you had a state in which Republicans were actually competitive, they would bear some responsibility for these problems.”

Audits and prosecutions show that California has experienced its share of fraud, particularly in complex programs involving emergency aid, healthcare and unemployment insurance. The state paid out billions of dollars in fraudulent unemployment claims during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the California State Auditor has issued repeated warnings about state agencies that are “at high risk for waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement.”

Along with recycling a barrage of years-old allegations of financial malfeasance in California and other Democratic states, the Trump administration elevated claims of child-care fraud in Minnesota last month, prompting Gov. Tim Walz to drop his reelection plans to focus on the growing political crisis in his state.

Fraud allegations are increasingly being deployed as a political weapon against Newsom, a leading Trump critic and a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender. Politicians have always railed against government waste, fraud and abuse, but now those issues are being “weaponized into a partisan issue,” Schnur said.

For the public, it can be hard to discern the truth. Here is a look at three of the central fraud allegations — and what the evidence shows.

Child-care funding

President Trump used his social media platform, Truth Social, to accuse California of widespread fraud last month, drawing a link between his administration’s investigation into child-care spending in Minnesota and programs in the Golden State, and announcing a major federal “fraud investigation” into the state’s actions.

“California, under Governor Gavin Newscum, is more corrupt than Minnesota, if that’s possible???” wrote Trump, using a disparaging nickname for the governor.

The Trump administration then moved to freeze $10 billion in federal funding for child care in five Democrat-led states — California, New York, Colorado, Illinois and Minnesota — over “serious concerns about widespread fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars.”

In a trio of Jan. 6 letters addressed to Newsom, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it was concerned there had been “potential for extensive and systemic fraud” in child care and other social services programs that rely on federal funding, and had “reason to believe” that the state was “illicitly providing illegal aliens” with benefits.

The letters did not detail evidence to support the claims. The governor’s office dismissed the accusation as “deranged.”

A federal judge subsequently blocked the Trump administration temporarily from freezing those funds. In that ruling, U.S. District Judge Vernon Broderick said he didn’t understand why the government was making it harder for states to access child-care money before any wrongdoing had been discovered.

“It just seems like the cart before the horse,” he said.

Hospice funding

Days after Trump’s social media post about alleged corruption under Newsom’s watch, Dr. Mehmet Oz, administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Bill Essayli, the top federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, held a joint news conference on public benefits fraud, but offered few details about the scope of their investigation.

The officials accused “foreign actors” of draining billions from public healthcare programs in California, referencing bogus hospice providers first exposed by The Times in 2020 and later investigated by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta.

Essayli placed the blame for bad actors squarely on Newsom, calling him “the fraud king.”

Weeks later, Oz released a video of himself walking in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Van Nuys as he questioned why dozens of alleged hospices were operating along four blocks. He blamed the “Russian Armenian Mafia” and made his remarks while pointing to an Armenian bakery, prompting accusations of racism from the Armenian community.

Newsom’s office last week hit back by highlighting state efforts to fight fraud, while pointing to a 2025 Axios story on the Trump administration’s decision to pause a federal program to crack down on bad hospice operators.

Bonta’s office said it has filed criminal charges against 109 individuals over hospice fraud-related offenses and launched dozens of civil investigations.

Newsom, speaking at a Bloomberg event Thursday in San Francisco, said the allegations have been recycled and misrepresented. Later that day, he filed a civil rights complaint against “baseless and racist allegations against Armenian Americans in California” made by Oz.

“Hospice, we’ve been after that for years and years before Oz was even on the scene,” Newsom said. “In 2021, we did a moratorium on new hospice programs, 280 we shuttered.”

The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services said earlier this year that — in addition to California — Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Ohio and Georgia are being monitored following allegations of fraud and waste.

EDD fraud

The state’s Employment Development Department, known as EDD, reported in 2021 that approximately $20 billion was lost due to fraud, largely in the federal Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program.

While unemployment fraud was rampant across country during the pandemic as governments rushed to provide support, California’s problems stood out.

The state itself admitted in 2021 that it failed to take precautions that had been implemented in other states, including using software to identify suspicious applications and cross-checking benefit claims against personal data on state prison inmates.

Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin) said department mismanagement and fraud often overlap and cited EDD as a prime example.

“When there is a lack of internal controls, a lack of diligence of how funds are used, that makes it easier for those who want to take advantage of the system to profit,” Kiley said.

EDD’s own tracker said the state has recovered more than $6 billion in stolen funds and opened more than 2,300 unemployment fraud investigations since the pandemic began, leading to nearly 1,000 arrests and more than 670 convictions.

The department said it has expanded fraud enforcement through partnerships with law enforcement, new identity-verification technology and a dedicated fraud task force.

But, reports of mismanagement at EDD have continued. A recent audit also found EDD wasted $4.6 million by paying monthly service fees for more than 6,200 cellphones that went unused for at least four consecutive months between November 2020 and April 2025 — including some devices that were inactive for more than four years.

At the same time, “EDD continues to have high rates of improper [unemployed insured] payments, including fraudulent payments, and it needs to improve the customer service it provides to UI claimants,” another report found.

What’s next?

Newsom said there is a reason the Trump administration is not pointing to fraud in Republican-led states.

“This is about polarization, politicalization, weaponization,” Newsom said Thursday.

Asked what the Trump administration will discover in probing California for fraud, Newsom said investigators will find a state “taking that issue very, very seriously.”

“We absolutely are here to be a partner, to go after waste, fraud and abuse,” Newsom said.

State audits show vulnerabilities persist. The California State Auditor has repeatedly flagged Medi-Cal eligibility discrepancies that have exposed the state to billions of dollars in questionable payments, while also warning that weaknesses in information security across state agencies remain a high-risk issue.

Curtailing waste could be particularly important during the upcoming year as California and its state-funded programs head into a period of volatile fiscal uncertainty, driven largely by events in Washington and on Wall Street. Newsom’s own optimistic budget proposal projects a $3-billion state deficit for the next fiscal year despite no major new spending initiatives.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office warned in November that California faces a nearly $18-billion budget shortfall.

It will also be a key issue in upcoming elections. A group of Republicans running for statewide offices, including California gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, pegged that the state’s annual estimate of fraud, waste and abuse across state programs at $250 billion, an estimate that includes unverified public tips submitted to a campaign-run website.

The group cited the estimate as justification for creating their own “California Department of Government Efficiency,” or CAL DOGE, a nod to a similarly named federal initiative promoted by Elon Musk that generated headlines but has not produced documented savings or formal audit findings. CAL DOGE is not currently a state department, despite its name.

Who deserves credit when fraud is prosecuted has also become a point of contention. After a man was arrested last month for fleecing L.A.’s homeless services program for $23 million, critics of Newsom were quick to blame the governor. Newsom responded by saying the case was uncovered by local investigators working with law enforcement, which he added is “exactly the kind of accountability and oversight the state has pushed for.” (The Los Angeles district attorney’s office ran a parallel, independent investigation.)

Essayli responded on social media by saying no one made an arrest until Trump and Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi “appointed me to investigate and charge fraud offenses in California.”

Kiley, the California Republican congressman, said despite the partisan fighting over fraud, the issue should rally both parties.

The “easiest” way to solve the state’s budget problems and improve government services for taxpayers is to “minimize and eventually eliminate fraud,” said Kiley.

SACRAMENTO — We relearned something from the killings of two law-abiding citizens by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis: There’s a limit to how many government lies the public will tolerate.

When government officials arrogantly persist in blatantly lying, the public just might turn angrily against the prevaricators.

Or maybe they’re not lying technically. They simply might not care whether they’re telling the truth, or what it is. Their only intent is to spew a tale that fits a political agenda. Regardless, the citizenry can stomach only so much.

Another thing we relearned is that when a government keeps acting against the public’s wishes, the public tends to rise up and smack its leader, altering the leader’s direction.

That’s the sign of a functional democracy when enough people get riled up and elbow their way into leading the government themselves.

In the process, they’re very likely to prod various other governments — state and local — into acting on their behalf.

We’ve been seeing this play out in the aftermath of the Minneapolis killings.

But, in fact, the public rebellion has been building during a yearlong nightmare of unjustified, inhumane, un-American violence by federal immigration agents. Their targets have been people with brown skin suspected of living in the country illegally. Never mind that many not only are documented, they’re U.S. citizens.

Such has been the slipshod and authoritarian way President Trump’s promised mass deportation program has been carried out.

Polls have consistently shown that voters strongly support the president’s goals of protecting the border and also deporting the “worst of the worst” undocumented criminals. But people have increasingly objected to his roughhouse methods, including masked federal agents slapping around and pepper-spraying legal protesters.

It’s not clear whether the two Minnesota citizens victimized by quick-draw federal agents were protesting. You can’t believe the Trump administration.

And that’s the danger in habitually lying: People can become so cynical that most disregard whatever they’re told by their so-called leaders. And that cripples what’s necessary for an ongoing healthy democracy: a cooperative relationship based on trust between citizens and those they’ve chosen to govern.

Some things we do know about the slain Minnesota citizens.

Alex Pretti, 37, was an intensive care nurse in a VA hospital. He was shooting video with his cellphone of agents and protesters when he was pepper-sprayed and wrestled to the ground by several agents as his legally carried handgun was removed. Then he was shot in the back several times.

He was not a “domestic terrorist” and “assassin” who wanted to “massacre law enforcement,” as Trump sycophants immediately lied on TV before backing off, after most of America saw videos of the killing and the president got nervous.

Renee Good, 37, was a mother and poet who appeared merely to be trying to drive through protest chaos when an agent shot her three times through the windshield. She did not try to run down the agent, as the administration claimed.

Good was not “obviously a professional agitator” who “violently, willfully and viciously ran over the ICE officer,” as Trump wrote on social media.

Public outrage at the lying and the brutish immigration enforcement has pressured elected officials into action all around the country.

Sure, you can call it political grandstanding and, of course, much of it is. But good politics and sound democracy involve listening to the public and acting on its desires.

In Sacramento, the state Senate held an emotional two-hour debate over a bill aimed at permitting people to sue federal law enforcement when their constitutional rights are violated. Rights such as the ability to peacefully protest and to be protected against excessive force. Lawsuits already are allowed against state and local officers. But federal agents are practically untouchable.

Senate Bill 747 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) passed on a 30-10 party-line vote — Democrats for and Republicans against. The measure moved to the Assembly.

The vote was yet another sorry sign of today’s unhealthy political polarization. Not one Republican could break out of the Trump web and vote to hold illegally operating federal agents accountable in civil courts. But neither could one Democrat detect enough fault in the bill to vote against it.

Some law enforcement groups oppose the legislation because they fear it would spur additional suing against local cops. Look for an amendment in the Assembly.

The heated Senate debate reflected Democratic lawmakers’ frustration with Trump — and many of their constituents’ fears.

“The level of anxiety and anger is higher than I’ve ever seen in my 13 years in the Legislature,” Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) told me.

“People are coming into our offices fearful for relatives or friends who are hiding out, afraid to go to doctors’ appointments and their kids are staying away from schools.”

During the debate, several senators mentioned two young protesters who were each permanently blinded in one eye by rubber bullets shot by Homeland Security officers in Santa Ana. Lawmakers also railed against “kidnappings” off the street of people simply because of their skin colors, accents and dress.

“California is not going to let these thugs get away with it,” Wiener vowed.

“There’s a lot of hyperbole on this floor,” Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) asserted. He called for repeal of California’s “sanctuary” laws that greatly restrict cooperation by state and local officers with federal immigration agents.

Easing those laws is probably a good idea. But more important, we’ve got to restrain undisciplined federal agents from shooting unarmed people in the back.

Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who revealed that she has been packing a firearm for 30 years, said that Pretti should never have brought his gun to a protest even if it was legal — which it isn’t in California.

And she’s right. But he never brandished the weapon and shouldn’t have paid with his life.

Neither should Pretti have been immediately attacked as a bad guy by lying federal officials. They’re now paying a political price.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Planned Parenthood, reproductive healthcare could receive $90 million in new state funding
The TK: Healthcare experts warn “people will die” unless state steps up amid federal cuts
The L.A. Times Special: Meet the un-Gavin. Kentucky’s governor sees a different way to the White House

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

Pakistan’s decision to boycott their T20 World Cup game against India has been termed a political move, with cricketers and politicians in both countries and around the world urging the International Cricket Council (ICC) to resolve the dispute.

The Pakistani government on Sunday issued a statement saying its men’s cricket team will participate in the global tournament but will not take the field in the match against archrivals India on February 15.

In a swift response, the ICC was critical of Pakistan’s move of “selective participation” and asked the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to consider the “significant and long-term implications” of its decision.

A decades-old political rift between the two nuclear-armed countries is blamed for their frosty sporting ties.

Pakistan was carved out of India in 1947, resulting in a bloody division of the subcontinent by the colonial British. Over the past 78 years, the nations have fought four wars, exchanged countless skirmishes and remained at odds primarily over the disputed Kashmir region that both claim in entirety but administer parts of.

The South Asian archrivals returned from the brink of an all-out war in May, when both countries clashed at their shared border before an internationally-brokered ceasefire.

An official of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has supported the ICC’s statement asking Pakistan to reconsider the move.

“The ICC has issued a big statement, they have spoken about sportsmanship,” BCCI’s Vice President Rajeev Shukla told the ANI news agency in India.

“We completely agree with the ICC. BCCI won’t make any comments on it until we speak with the ICC.”

However, former cricketers and politicians have called upon the ICC to act as a mediator between both countries’ cricket boards.

“Cricket can open doors when politics closes them,” former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi wrote on X.

He urged the ICC to “lead and prove through decisions, not statements, that it is impartial, independent and fair to every member.”

‘Sport has been politicised’

Prominent Indian politician Shashi Tharoor was critical of the politicisation of cricket, and slammed the BCCI’s decision to expel Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the Indian Premier League in January.

“It is pretty disgraceful that sport has been politicised in this way on both sides,” he told reporters in New Delhi.

“I don’t think that Mustafizur should have been denied his contract to play in Kolkata. It was most unfortunate. [An] intrusion of politics. I think the Bangladeshi reaction was an overreaction, but it is also a reflection of the same, and Pakistan is trying to show its solidarity with Bangladesh. ”

Tharoor, who is a member of India’s main opposition party, said the situation was “spiralling out of control”.

“Sports, especially a sport like cricket which means so much to all the people, should be a means of bringing us together at least on the playing field, rather than allowing this to go on like this,” he said.

The 69-year-old, who is also an author of several books on history and politics, called on the ICC to help mend the ties.

“This is now a wake-up call for all concerned to contact each other on an emergency basis. The ICC could be the platform for it. Just say, ‘Let’s call off this nonsense’. You can’t go on like this forever.”

Pakistan’s decision, which came six days before the start of the World Cup, has cast a shadow on the marquee fixture of the group stage.

India and Pakistan were scheduled to play in Colombo on February 15 in a game that attracts millions of viewers from across the world and is seen as a major revenue-generating fixture for the tournament’s organisers and sponsors.

Outspoken former Pakistan captain Rashid Latif said Pakistan could face sanctions from the ICC, but such a move would be hypocritical as teams have boycotted games at previous World Cups.

“Where was ICC when Australia and West Indies forfeited their matches in 1996; England refusing to travel to Harare and New Zealand to Nairobi in 2003,” he said on X.

Latif, who played 37 Tests and 166 one-day internationals (ODIs), feared that Pakistan may be sanctioned by the ICC.

“They [Pakistan] don’t seem to care about it,” he said.

‘Would Pakistan refuse to play the final?’

Should Pakistan keep their word and boycott the group game, they will forfeit two points, which could have an impact on their standings in Group A.

Pakistan and India could meet again in the tournament, in the final on March 8, but with the multiple stages of progress between the group game and the final, it is unclear how that match would pan out.

Former England captain Kevin Pietersen questioned whether Pakistan would boycott the tournament decider as well.

“Would Pakistan refuse to play the World Cup final?” he asked.

Cricketers from across the border condemned Pakistan’s boycott of the game.

“This isn’t about guts at all, this is about foolishness,” Madan Lal, a former Test cricketer and coach, told Indian media.

“Because Pakistan wants to show India down, that’s why they’re taking all these decisions. That’s the reason their growth isn’t happening, either. If you keep looking at others, what will you do for your own growth?”

Indian cricket writer and commentator Harsha Bhogle said the boycott could deal a financial blow to Pakistan cricket.

“If there is an inevitable reduction in the ICC’s revenue caused by Pakistan’s forfeit and future uncertainty, the least affected countries, given other strong sources of revenue, will be India, Australia and England,” he said in a social media post.

“The most affected will be those completely reliant on revenues from the ICC; not just the smaller and associate nations but also the West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and…… Pakistan!”

Pakistan will open their T20 World Cup campaign on the opening day, February 7, against the Netherlands in Colombo.

The 2009 champions will play all their games, including any Super 8 fixtures and knockouts, in Sri Lanka.

This follows an ICC-brokered agreement between the PCB and the BCCI in December 2024 that allows both teams to play their games at a neutral venue when the neighbour hosts an ICC event.

Pakistan’s remaining Group A fixtures are against the United States on February 10 and against Namibia on February 18.

MINNEAPOLIS — For weeks, administrators at this charter high school have arrived an hour before class, grabbed neon vests and walkie-talkies, and headed out into the cold to watch for ICE agents and escort students in.

Lately, fewer than half of the 800 sudents show up.

“Operation Metro Surge,” the immigration crackdown in Minnesota that led to nationwide protests after federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens, has had students, parents and teachers on edge regardless of their immigration status.

Signs of a fearful new normal are all over the school. Green craft paper covers the bottom of many first-floor windows so outsiders can’t peer in. A notice taped outside one door says unauthorized entry is prohibited: “This includes all federal law enforcement personnel and activities unless authorized by lawful written direction from appropriate school officials or a valid court order.”

Students at a Minneapolis high school classroom with many empty seats on Jan. 29, 2026.

Staff coordinate throughout the day with a neighborhood watch group to determine whether ICE agents are nearby. When they are, classroom doors are locked and hallways emptied until staff announce “all clear.”

Similar tactics have been utilized by schools in other cities hit by immigration raids across the country. The Los Angeles Unified School District established a donation fund for affected families and created security perimeters around schools last summer.

But it appears nowhere have students felt the repercussions of local raids more than in Minneapolis.

Many schools have seen attendance plummet by double-digit percentages. At least three other, smaller charter schools in Minneapolis have completely shut down in-person learning.

At this high school, which administrators asked The Times not to identify for fear of retaliation by the Trump administration, 84% of students are Latino and 12% are Black. Staff and students are being identified by first or middle names.

A balloon sits in a hallway at the high school.

Doors and windows are covered at the school so outsiders can’t see in.

Three students have been detained — and later released — in recent weeks. Two others were followed into the school parking lot and questioned about their immigration status. Several have parents who were deported or who self-deported. Latino staff said they have also been stopped and questioned about their legal status.

“Our families feel hunted,” said Noelle, the school district’s executive director.

Students returned from winter break on Jan. 6, the same day 2,000 additional immigration agents were dispatched to Minneapolis to carry out what Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Todd Lyons called the agency’s “largest immigration operation ever.” The next day, an ICE officer fatally shot Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother of three.

“I describe that day as if you’re on an airplane and it’s really bad turbulence, and you have to keep your cool because, if you don’t, you lose the entire building,” said Emmanuel, an assistant principal. “It felt like we went through war.”

Attendance dropped by the hundreds as parents grew too afraid to let their children leave home. School leaders decided to offer online learning and scrambled to find enough laptops and mobile hotspots for the many students who didn’t have devices or internet. Some teachers sent packets of schoolwork to students by mail.

A teacher at the Minneapolis high school that administrators asked The Times not to identify for fear of retaliation by the Trump administration. Teachers and students there also asked not to be identified.

Noelle said in-person attendance, which had dropped below 400 students, increased by around 100 in the third week of January. Then federal agents shot and killed 37-year-old intensive care nurse Alex Pretti, and attendance plummeted again.

Rochelle Van Dijk, vice president of Great MN Schools, a nonprofit supporting schools that serve a majority of students of color, said many schools have redirected tens of thousands of dollars away from other critical needs toward online learning, food distribution and safety planning. For students still attending in person, recess has frequently been canceled, and field trips and after-school activities paused.

Even if students return to school by mid-February, Van Dijk said, they will have missed 20% of their instructional days for the year.

“A senior who can’t meet with their college counselor right now just missed support needed for major January college application deadlines. Or a second-grader with a speech delay who is supposed to be in an active in-person intervention may lose a critical window of brain plasticity,” she said. “It is not dissimilar to what our nation’s children faced during COVID, but entirely avoidable.”

At the high school, administrators said they tried to create “a security bubble,” operating under protocols more typical of active shooter emergencies.

Gym class at the Minneapolis school, where many students are so afraid of ICE that they won’t go to the campus.

If agents were to enter the building without a judicial warrant, the school would go into a full lockdown, turning off lights, staying silent and moving out of sight. That hasn’t happened, though ICE last year rescinded a policy that had barred arrests at so-called sensitive locations, including schools.

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, said that blaming ICE for low school attendance is “creating a climate of fear and smearing law enforcement.”

“ICE does not target schools,” McLaughlin said. “If a dangerous or violent illegal criminal alien felon were to flee into a school, or a child sex offender is working as an employee, there may be a situation where an arrest is made to protect the safety of the student. But this has not happened.”

Alondra, a 16-year-old junior who was born in the U.S., was arrested after school Jan. 21 near a clinic where she had gone with a friend, also 16, to pick up medication for her grandmother.

She said that as she was about to turn into the parking lot, another car sped in front of her, forcing her to stop. Alondra saw four men in ski masks with guns get out. Scared, she put her car in reverse. Before she could move, she said, another vehicle pulled up and struck her car from behind.

Alondra shared videos with The Times that she recorded from the scene. She said agents cracked her passenger window in an attempt to get in.

“We’re with you!” a bystander can be heard telling her in the video as others blow emergency whistles.

She said she rolled her window down and an agent asked to see her ID. She gave him her license and U.S. passport.

“Is it necessary to have to talk to you or can I talk to an actual cop?” she asks in the video. “Can I talk to an actual cop from here?”

“We are law enforcement,” the agent replies. “What are they gonna do?”

In another video, an agent questions Alondra’s friend about the whereabouts of his parents. Another agent is heard saying Alondra had put her car in reverse.

“We’re underage,” she tells him. “We’re scared.”

A sign directs students to line up for their school bus route. Bus pickups are staggered, with one group of students escorted outside at a time. This way, the children can be taken back inside the school or onto the bus more easily if ICE arrives.

A Minneapolis Public Radio reporter at the scene said agents appeared to have rear-ended Alondra’s car. But Alondra said an agent claimed she had caused the accident.

“It’s just a simple accident, you know what I mean?” he says in the video. “We’re not gonna get on you for trying to hit us or something.”

“Can you let us go, please?” her friend, visibly shaken, asks the agent at his window.

Alondra and her friend were handcuffed and placed in a U.S. Customs and Border Protection vehicle as observers filmed the incident. At least two observers were arrested as agents deployed tear gas and pepper spray, according to an MPR report.

The agents took the students to the federal Whipple Building. Alondra said the agents separated the friends, looked through and photographed her belongings and had her change into blue canvas shoes before chaining her feet together and placing her in a holding cell alone.

“I asked at least five times if I could let my guardian know what was happening, because I was underage, but they never let me,” she said.

Finally, around 7 p.m., agents released Alondra — with no paperwork about the incident — and she called her aunt to pick her up. Her friend was released later.

Meanwhile, school administrators who saw the MPR video called Alondra’s family and her friend’s.

Alondra said officers didn’t know what had happened to her car and told her they would call her when she could pick it up. But no one has called, and school administrators who helped her make calls to Minneapolis impound lots haven’t been able to locate it either.

Though Alondra could attend classes online, she felt she had to return to campus.

“I feel like if I would have stayed home, it would have gone worse for me,” she said, her lip quivering. “I use school as a distraction.”

The backstage of the auditorium, dubbed the bodega, has been turned into a well-stocked pantry for families who are too afraid to leave their homes.

A volunteer organizes donated items for distribution to families at the Minneapolis high school.

A teacher makes a delivery to a family in Minneapolis.

Teachers and volunteers sort donations by category, including hygiene goods, breakfast cereals, bread and tortillas, fruit and vegetables, diapers and other baby items. Bags are labeled with each student’s name and address and filled with the items their family has requested. After school, teachers deliver the items to the students’ homes.

Noelle said some students, particularly those who are homeless, are now at risk of failing because they’re in “survival mode.” Their learning is stagnating, she said.

“A lot of these kids are — I mean, they want to be — college-bound,” Noelle said. “How do you compete [for admission] with the best applicants if you’re online right now and doing one touch-point a day with one teacher because that’s all the technology that you have?”

On Thursday afternoon, 20 of 44 students had shown up for an AP world history class where the whiteboard prompt asked, “Why might some people resort to violent resistance rather than peaceful protest?”

Upstairs, in an 11th-grade U.S. history class, attendance was even worse — four students, with 17 others following online. The topic was what the teacher called the nation’s “first immigration ban,” the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.

Students head to their bus at the high school.

Morgan, the teacher, asked the students to name a similarity between the Chinese exclusion era and current day.

“Immigrants getting thrown out,” one student offered.

“Once they leave, they can’t come back,” said another.

“The fact that this is our first ban on immigration also sets a precedent that this stuff can happen over and over and over again,” Morgan said.

Sophie, who teachers English language learners, led the effort to organize the online school option. She is from Chile and says she has struggled to put her own fear aside to be present for the students who rely on her. Driving to school scares her, too.

“It’s lawless,” she said. “It doesn’t matter that I have my passport in my purse. The minute I open my mouth, they’re going to know that I’m not from here.”

Sophie said she once had to call a student’s mother to say her husband had been taken by immigration agents after another school staffer found his car abandoned on a nearby street.

“Having to have that conversation wasn’t on my bingo card for that day, or any day,” she said. “Having to say that we have proof that your husband was taken and hearing that woman crying and couldn’t talk, and I’m like, what do I say now?”

Close to the 4:15 p.m. dismissal, administrators again donned their neon vests and logged on to the neighborhood Signal call for possible immigration activity.

Students walk to a bus Thursday. Dismissal used to be a free-for-all, with large numbers of students rushing outside as soon as the bell rang.

Dismissal used to be a free-for-all — once the final bell rang, students would rush outside to find their bus or ride or to begin the walk home.

Now pickups are staggered, with students escorted outside one bus at a time. Teachers grab numbered signs and tell students to line up according to their route. If ICE agents pull up, administrators said, they could rush a smaller group of students onto the bus or back inside.

In yet another example of how the immigration raids had crippled attendance, some buses were nearly empty. On one bus, just two students hopped on.

It all began after a viral video alleging fraud in Somali-run child-care centers in Minneapolis: strangers peering through windows, right-wing journalists showing up outside homes, influencers hurling false accusations.

In San Diego, child-care provider Samsam Khalif was shuttling kids to her home-based center when she was spooked by two men with a camera waiting in a car parked outside, prompting her to circle the block several times before unloading the children.

“I’m scared. I don’t know what their intention is,” said Khalif, who decided to install additional security cameras outside her home.

Somali-run child-care centers across the United States have become targets since the video caught the attention of the White House amid the administration’s immigration crackdown. Child-care providers worry about how they can maintain the safe learning environments they have worked to create for young children who may be spending their first days away from their parents.

In the Minneapolis area, child-care providers, many of them immigrants, say they’re being antagonized, exacerbating the stress they face from immigration enforcement activity that has engulfed the city.

One child-care provider said she watched someone emerge from a car that had been circling the building and defecate near the center’s entrance. The same day, a motorist driving by yelled that the center was a “fake day care.” She’s had to create new lockdown procedures, is budgeting for security and now keeps the blinds closed to shield children from unwanted visitors and from witnessing immigration enforcement actions.

“I can’t have peace of mind about whether the center will be safe today,” said the provider, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being targeted. “That’s a hard pill to swallow.”

Video’s claims disproved

The day after Christmas, right-wing influencer Nick Shirley posted a lengthy video with allegations that members of Minneapolis’ large Somali community were running fake child-care centers so they could collect federal child-care subsidies.

The U.S. occasionally has seen fraud cases related to child-care subsidies. But the Minneapolis video’s central claims — that business owners were billing the government for children they were not caring for — were disproved by inspectors. Nonetheless, the Trump administration attempted to freeze child-care funding for Minnesota and five other Democratic-led states until a court ordered the funding to be released.

President Trump has repeatedly targeted Somali immigrants with dehumanizing rhetoric, calling them “garbage” and “low IQ” and suggesting that Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Minnesota Democrat who was born in Somalia, should be deported: “Throw her the hell out!” In Minnesota, 87% of foreign-born Somalis are naturalized U.S. citizens.

Trump has zeroed in on a years-old case in which a sprawling network of fraudsters — many of them Somali Americans — bilked Minnesota of an estimated $300 million that was supposed to help feed children and families. His rhetoric intensified after Shirley’s video was posted.

Activists take it upon themselves to investigate

In Federal Way, Wash., and Columbus, Ohio, both home to large Somali communities, right-wing journalists and influencers began showing up unannounced at addresses for child-care operations they pulled from state websites.

In one video, a man arrives at a bungalow-style building in Columbus. He films through the glass front door, showing a foyer with cheerful posters that read “When we learn, we grow” and “Make today happy.”

“It does not look like a child-care center at all,” the man says.

Ohio dispatched an inspector to the address and found that it was, in fact, a legitimate child-care center. The center’s voicemail was hacked, so parents calling heard a slur-laden message calling Somalis “sand rats” and saying they “worship a false religion of baby-raping terrorists,” according to WOSU-FM.

In Washington state, child-care workers called police on the right-wing journalists who kept appearing outside their homes.

Journalists with the right-leaning Washington outlet Center Square filmed themselves pressing a woman for proof that she ran a child-care center for which she was collecting federal subsidies. She refused to answer questions.

“Are you aware of the Somali day-care fraud? We’re just trying to check out if this is a real day care,” one of the journalists said. “Where are the children?”

Local officials speak out

Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson posted a statement on X saying she would not tolerate anyone trying to “intimidate, harass or film Somali child care providers.” Then, Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, issued her own warning: “Asking questions/citizen journalism are NOT HATE CRIMES in America — they are protected speech, and if Seattle tries to chill that speech, @CivilRights will step in to protect it and set them straight!”

In Ohio, Republican Gov. Mike DeWine held a news conference to debunk a right-wing influencer’s fraud claims about a Columbus child-care center and assured people the state diligently monitored centers that receive public money. He said a child-care provider refusing to let in a stranger should not be read as a sign of fraud.

“It shouldn’t be a shock when someone sees something on social media, and someone is going, ‘I can’t get into this place, no one will let me in,’” DeWine said in a news conference in January. “Well, hell, no! No one should let them in.”

Even after DeWine refuted the claims, Republicans in the Statehouse introduced legislation to more closely monitor child-care centers, including one measure that would require those that take public money to provide live video feeds of their classrooms to state officials.

Advocates say fraud claims are a distraction

Child-care advocates say the fraud allegations are detracting from more pressing crises.

Child-care subsidy programs in many states have lengthy waiting lists, making it difficult for parents to return to work. The programs that subsidize child care for families that struggle to afford it are also facing funding threats, including from the Trump administration.

Ruth Friedman, who headed the Office of Child Care under President Biden, accused Trump and Republicans of manufacturing a crisis for political gain.

“They are using it to try to discredit the movement toward investing in child care,” said Friedman, who is now a senior fellow at the left-leaning think tank Century Foundation.

Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon said in a statement that the department “rejects the claim that concerns about child care program integrity are manufactured.” He urged people to report suspected fraud to the government.

Balingit and Kramon write for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO — Matt Mahan, the mayor of San José and latest entrant into the jam-packed race for California governor, has in recent years raised his profile outside his Silicon Valley-area city by doing something most other elected Democrats would never: publicly criticize Gov. Gavin Newsom.

With the primary election almost four months away, candidates have already been busy trying to convince Californians that they can lead the state through its biggest challenges, including what they might do differently than Newsom on homelessness, crime and the high cost of living.

Democratic hopefuls have so far done so subtly, without taking direct shots at Newsom.

Until Mahan entered the race.

The 43-year-old-mayor began carving a moderate path in 2024, when he broke with Newsom and other Democrats to back Proposition 36, which increased penalties for theft and crimes involving fentanyl. Despite opposition from Newsom and legislative leaders, voters overwhelmingly approved it.

Mahan has also given mixed reviews to the Newsom administration’s approach to homelessness; he has praised efforts to make it easier for cities to clear homeless encampments but criticized inconsistent funding from the state to help local governments build interim housing.

Although most Democrats running to replace Newsom have praised his fiery opposition to President Trump and the Republican-led Congress, including the governor’s outlandish online trolling of Trump and his allies, Mahan was not impressed.

“Instead of spending so much energy attacking his opponents, the governor and his team should be addressing the high cost of energy, helping hard-pressed families make ends meet and keeping them and their employers from fleeing our state,” Mahan wrote last summer in a piece for the San Francisco Standard.

Mahan told reporters last week that his disagreements with Newsom are “rooted in substance” and praised the governor for muscling through major reforms to the California Environmental Quality Act and behavioral health treatment.

“I see the job of the next governor” as “building on many of the initiatives [Newsom] has championed,” he said, adding he would use those new reforms to build more housing and treatment facilities for people struggling with addiction and mental illness.

Newsom has routinely won approval from the state’s Democratic base, as well as respect and deference from its elected leaders, and his notoriety as a top foe of Trump continues to rise. Because the perch of California governor provides Democrats with an effective cudgel against the Republican administration, attacking Newsom could easily backfire in this left-leaning state.

“It’s a very delicate balancing act” to campaign to replace a leader of one’s own party, said Democratic strategist Garry South, who has worked on four California gubernatorial campaigns.

“The traditional way to do it is to try to project that you will build on things that the incumbent has done: programs they started, successes they’ve had,” he said.

South, who ran Newsom’s first, short-lived, campaign for governor in 2009, took issue with Mahan’s criticisms of the governor.

“To stick it to the incumbent of your own party might be OK if that person is viewed as a failure. … The fact is, Newsom is not unpopular. This guy’s had four massive victories in California,” he said, listing Newsom’s two elections in 2018 and 2022, defeating a recall in 2021 and overwhelmingly passing Proposition 50 last year.

Like Mahan, billionaire venture-capitalist-turned-environmentalist Tom Steyer has cast himself as an outsider of California’s Democratic establishment. Though he has so far avoided disparaging anyone directly, Steyer dinged “Sacramento politicians [who] are afraid to change this system” when he launched his campaign in November.

Early on in his campaign, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa indicated he would backtrack on Newsom’s strict oil drilling limits and what he calls heavy-handed regulations, which the industry has blamed for the state’s high gas prices.

A Phillips 66 refinery shut down last fall and a Valero refinery in Northern California plans to idle by the end of April, raising concerns that prices in the state’s isolated fuels market could climb even higher.

Villaraigosa previously told The Times he is “not fighting for refineries” but “for the people who pay for gas in this state.”

The former mayor took a more aggressive approach in the California’s governor’s race in 2018, when Villaraigosa accused Newsom of selling “snake oil” with his support for single-payer healthcare in order to win over the nurses union and progressives. Villaraigosa, who ran on a moderate platform, finished in a distant third place in the primary, and Newsom went on to win two terms as governor.

Former Rep. Katie Porter has gone in a more progressive direction on oil. When asked in October to name a policy arena in which she would act differently than Newsom, Porter said she would not have signed recent legislation to allow 2,000 new oil wells in Kern County.

“Drilling new wells is locking us into 100-plus years of energy of the past,” she said. “I absolutely know that we need our refineries to stay open. … But I’m concerned about the environmental consequences, the environmental justice consequences, the shortened lifespan and pollution that we see in some of our fossil fuel-producing places.”

While Newsom and most other candidates for governor have raised concerns about a proposed statewide ballot measure to tax the assets of billionaires, primarily to raise billions of dollars in revenue to blunt the impact of federal healthcare cuts, Tony Thurmond, the state superintendent of public instruction, has embraced the idea.

Even before the potential ballot measure drove some billionaires into leaving the state, Thurmond said that if elected, he would introduce a tax “solely on megamillionaires and billionaires to hire more teachers, healthcare workers, firefighters, construction workers and social workers,” who would earn “decent middle-class wages” to bolster the state’s economy.

Thurmond has also repeatedly said he would pursue single-payer healthcare in California, a promise Newsom also campaigned on before his first term but did not fully deliver.

Betty Yee, a former state controller and budget director, has pitched herself as the most qualified candidate to fix California’s ongoing budget deficits, and took swipes at accounting tricks Newsom and other governors have used in the past.

Newsom and state lawmakers have faced criticism for using short-term tactics like deferred spending and internal borrowing to fill budget shortfalls while ignoring the larger issue: The state regularly spends more money than it brings in.

“No more gimmicks. We can’t kick the can down the road anymore,” Yee said during a recent interview with KTLA. She said she would implement “spending cuts — not like DOGE” and explore “corporations and upper-income earners” potentially paying more tax revenue.

Newsom, aware that he’s entering lame-duck status, has jokingly called himself “a milk carton with a sell-by date” and admitted “these questions about who’s next and all that are uncomfortable.”

Asked specifically about Mahan’s criticisms, Newsom on Thursday declined to fuel any supposed rivalry with the San José mayor.

“I don’t know enough about him,” the governor said. “I wish him good luck.”

Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report.

A central question in the congressional investigation of the firings of eight U.S. attorneys is whether Carol C. Lam in San Diego was dismissed, and Debra Wong Yang in Los Angeles eased out, to try to derail corruption probes of prominent California Republicans.

Whatever officials in Washington might have intended, Yang and Lam’s departures had no effect on the investigations, which continue unabated, sources close to the inquiries said this week. And several present and former federal prosecutors said it would be extremely difficult — though not impossible — to quash an investigation for political reasons.

“Most criminal prosecutors are an independent sort with a strong sense of pursuing truth and justice,” said William W. Carter, a Los Angeles federal prosecutor for 14 years before moving to the firm Musick, Peeler & Garrett in November. “They would be repulsed, and rebel, against any political order. There would be an uproar.”

Although the nation’s 93 U.S. attorneys are political appointees, their offices are staffed with career prosecutors who are tasked with pursuing justice without regard for any political agenda.

Those prosecutors — assistant U.S. attorneys — often come from top-flight law schools and see the job as a noble calling. Many of them could make much more money in private practice.

Calling a prosecutor off a case — particularly if the motive were transparently political — would cause an uproar, said Loyola Law School professor and former federal prosecutor Laurie L. Levenson. “You’d have to suspend reality to think you could get away with it,” she said.

The U.S. attorney’s office in San Diego is moving forward on the expanding investigation that netted Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Rancho Santa Fe), the sources said. And prosecutors in Los Angeles continue to examine Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) over various dealings with lobbyists and contractors during the time he was chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee.

Neither Lam nor Yang had direct involvement in the corruption investigations, the sources said. According to one source close to the Lewis inquiry, Yang never asked to be briefed by her prosecutors, nor did she give them any input. “It was just nothing … which was good.”

The sources close to the probes requested anonymity because a Justice Department policy bars public comment on ongoing investigations.

Yang emphatically denied that she was pushed out or that she or her successor was asked to stop a politically charged investigation.

“You have so many players involved, it’s ridiculous that you could make an investigation disappear, especially one that is high profile — because those are the ones all the assistants want to work on,” she said.

Levenson said there are subtle ways, however, to let a case “die a slow death.”

Supervisors could assign the prosecutors other matters to work on or divert resources away from the case. They could balk at issuing subpoenas or seeking approvals of various sorts from Washington. And when it comes time to seek an indictment, particularly if the case is not a slam-dunk, the U.S. attorney or even the Justice Department in Washington could waver and tell the prosecutors that they need to do more investigating.

Yet even this scenario is more likely to happen in a John Grisham novel than in real life, Levenson said.

Congressional investigators first focused on the possibility that Lam was fired because of the expanding Cunningham inquiry or the Lewis investigation. Although Lam’s office was not involved in the Lewis probe, those involved in the firings might not have known that because both cases involved the same prominent lobbyist, several prosecutors suggested.

Now some of the focus has shifted to Yang, with testimony indicating that the White House might have been looking to push her out.

In October 2006 — less than two months before the firings — Yang announced her resignation to take a job at the Los Angeles firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, which was defending Lewis and has strong Republican ties. Her new salary is reportedly about $1.5 million a year.

Yang said at the time that, as a recently divorced mother of three, she needed to enter the private sector to support her family.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, was questioned Thursday about Yang’s resignation, but insisted that she left of her own accord.

But in recent testimony to congressional investigators, D. Kyle Sampson, the Justice Department aide who coordinated the firings, said the White House had inquired in September about pushing Yang out to “create a vacancy.”

“I remember [White House Counsel] Harriet Miers asking me about Debra Yang … and what her plans were, whether she might be asked to resign,” Sampson told investigators last month, according to a senior congressional aide.

An opinion piece by a New York Times editorial editor, Adam Cohen, suggested that Gibson Dunn might have lured Yang away with the rich salary offer to get her off the Lewis investigation.

Gibson Dunn lawyers took offense at the suggestion.

“It’s absurd,” said Randy Mastro, co-chairman of the firm’s crisis management group with Yang.

It was well known that Yang was looking for something new, he added, and at least three top firms were actively recruiting her.

As for her being pushed out, he said Yang notified Miers in January 2006 that she planned to leave by the end of summer.

Mastro would not comment specifically on the Lewis investigation.

joe.mozingo@latimes.com

IN RECENT WEEKS, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislators have talked about giving California a well-deserved bigger say in the presidential campaign by moving up the state’s primary. However, if Democrats really want to put the party in the strongest possible position to succeed in presidential elections, let’s completely rethink the current primary system and replace it with a nominating process designed to pick the candidate best able to win.

In 2004, the primary season was frontloaded around a few early, relatively small and not especially diverse states in order to identify as quickly as possible the “most electable” candidate and to conserve money for the general election. Because these were small states that are historically won one voter and one constituency group at a time, candidates were rewarded for their retail campaign skills: one-on-one politics, constituency group building and a good biography. Unfortunately, these skills are about as relevant to a 21st century national presidential campaign as horseback riding is relevant to driving a car.

Modern presidential campaigns are tests of character; they’re a hunt for candidates who have broad appeal (as opposed to a biography attractive to only a limited range of voters). They’re about identifying candidates with the ability to articulate a message that speaks to all Americans, rather than those who rely on the typical 12-point plans constructed for one constituency group or another. Modern presidential races are about the ability to connect with voters over the TV in their living rooms — not about a candidate’s charm when he meets with them in person in their own living rooms. And they’re about the capacity to assemble and run a far-flung organization capable of raising well in excess of $100 million in just a few years.

With three reforms, the Democrats can put in place a nominating system that will produce the strongest and, yes, most electable candidate.

First, the Democratic primary schedule should open with a group of states that, when taken together, represents the mosaic that is America. Along with a Midwestern Iowa and a Northeastern New Hampshire, let’s have a state from the Southwest, South and West all voting on the same day.

A multi-state campaign taking place on one day and involving a diverse set of states will begin the process of identifying the candidate who can put together the winning qualities of a national campaign.

Second, the primary season needs to be spread over a longer time period — not just in theory but in practice as well, so candidates are truly tested. Beginning in early February and going until May, Democrats should schedule a series of 10 primaries, with each involving five geographically diverse states voting every two weeks. The diverse and multi-state nature of the races would make it far more likely that the campaign would be competitive for a longer period. (Under the current system, the 2008 primary could effectively be over after four early states vote in a span of a few weeks, as it was in 2004. The compressed time period and winner-take-all nature of the existing system means that whoever does well in these first states, especially the first two, is in all likelihood the presumptive nominee.)

This sort of diverse process over an extended time period worked in 1992 — the only time in the last 25 years that the Democrats nominated a candidate, Bill Clinton, who went on to be sworn in as president. That year, because Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin was running in the Iowa caucuses and because New Hampshire voters chose former Sen. Paul Tsongas of neighboring Massachusetts, neither Iowa nor New Hampshire played their historically determinative roles. In fact, the 1992 election was the first time in history that a candidate became president who did not win the New Hampshire primary. Instead, Democrats had to compete vigorously over the course of several months in such places as South Dakota, and then in Georgia (where Clinton got his first win), Maryland, Colorado, South Carolina, Arizona, Super Tuesday, and then on to Connecticut, New York and eventually California, where Clinton wrapped up the nomination in early June.

If Democrats had been using the 2004 primary system in 1992, their nominee could well have been Tsongas. The longer, diversified schedule, however, allowed Clinton to prove himself to voters, exposed the candidates’ relative strengths and weaknesses and allowed the Democrats to stay on the offensive and define the terms of the general election. Democrats ended up with a candidate who actually won a number of states in the South and all the states in the upper Midwest — and who had the message, the battle-hardened ability and the proven campaign operation needed to beat the Republicans.

The third reform, in order to encourage more voter participation and loosen the grip of the Washington establishment on the Democratic Party’s nomination process, is a three-part proposal: Eliminate the “super delegate” system. Super delegates are a significant pool of at-large, free-agent delegates representing the Democratic apparatus (including both party and elected officials) in the nominating process. In addition, the party should establish a system that more closely resembles the system that states such as Maine and Nebraska use in the general election, in which they divide nominating delegates by congressional districts, with votes for each district and additional points for whichever candidate wins the majority of the state’s total vote. Finally, as in New Hampshire, independents should be allowed to vote in Democratic primaries.

These changes would force candidates to compete for an ideologically broader range of voters throughout all regions of a state, including in urban, suburban, exurban and rural districts.

Even a cursory glance at a red-and-blue color-coded map that divides the country’s counties up shows that Democrats need to compete in more than just the major cities and coastal regions. Not only will this be of enormous help to producing a candidate who can compete nationally — it will help the party’s candidates lower down on the ballot, where Democrats face challenges in traditional swing communities.

The winning coalition for Democrats will in all likelihood not be the old Democratic coalition of labor, minorities, women and coastal progressives. As the 2006 midterms demonstrated, for the Democratic Party to regain a permanent majority status, our candidates must win by talking to all Americans.

Reporting from Washington — The FBI office that handles employee discipline has recommended firing the bureau’s former deputy director over allegations that he authorized the disclosure of sensitive information to a reporter and misled investigators when asked about it — though Justice Department officials are still reviewing the matter and have not come to a final decision, a person familiar with the case said.

The recommendation from the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility is likely to add fuel to the political fire surrounding former deputy director Andrew McCabe, who abruptly stepped down from his post earlier this year but technically remained an FBI employee.

McCabe was hoping to retire in days, when he becomes eligible for his full benefits. If he is fired, he could lose his retirement benefits. President Trump has long made McCabe a particular target of his ire, and the recommendation to fire the former No. 2 FBI official could give him new ammunition.

Through a representative, McCabe declined to comment. A Justice Department spokeswoman said in a statement: “The Department follows a prescribed process by which an employee may be terminated. That process includes recommendations from career employees, and no termination decision is final until the conclusion of that process. We have no personnel announcements at this time.”

An FBI spokeswoman declined to comment.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz has for some time been working on a report that blasts McCabe for allowing two high-ranking bureau officials to sit down with the Wall Street Journal as the news outlet prepared a story in 2016 on an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s family foundation, then misleading the inspector general’s team about his actions. A person familiar with the matter said Horowitz’s findings are what sparked the Office of Professional Responsibility’s recommendation, which was first reported by The New York Times. Horowitz’s report has not yet been released.

McCabe, 49, had long been expected to retire March 18, though he abruptly left his post earlier this year after his boss, FBI Director Christopher Wray, was told of what the inspector general had found.

The situation now seems fraught for all involved. If the Justice Department does not move on the recommendation, conservatives might view officials there as unfairly protecting McCabe. Trump — who already has a strained relationship with Justice Department leaders — might be particularly displeased.

But if the FBI fires McCabe with just days to go before his retirement, it could be viewed as bending to the will of a vindictive president. Trump has previously suggested McCabe was biased in favor of Clinton, pointing out that McCabe’s wife, who ran as a Democrat for a seat in the Virginia Legislature, received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from the political action committee of Terry McAuliffe, the former governor of Virginia and a noted Clinton ally. The president remarked in December that McCabe was “racing the clock to retire with full benefits.”

The inspector general has since last January been investigating the FBI and Justice Department’s handling of the politically charged probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of State, which is separate from the foundation inquiry. McCabe represents but a piece of that work.

Horowitz is also examining broad allegations of misconduct involving former FBI Director James Comey, including the public statement he made recommending that the Clinton email case be closed without charges and his decision 11 days before the election to reveal to Congress that the FBI had resumed its work. McCabe briefly took over as the FBI’s acting director after Trump fired Comey in May.

The story for which McCabe authorized FBI officials to discuss came just as the bureau announced it was resuming its look at Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of State, though it focused more on a different case involving her family’s foundation.

The story presented McCabe as a complicated figure — one who lower-level officials felt was stymieing their work, even though it detailed McCabe pushing back against Justice Department officials so the case could move forward.

The inspector general was interested in McCabe’s role in authorizing officials to talk about the matter, people familiar with the case said, because the story detailed ongoing criminal investigative work, which law enforcement officials are not normally allowed to discuss.

The Wall Street Journal story was written by Devlin Barrett, who is now a reporter at the Washington Post. Recently released text messages show that Barrett had talked with the FBI’s top spokesman, Michael Kortan, and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked for McCabe, two days before it was published.

Background briefings with reporters are common in Washington, particularly when reporters have information that officials feel compelled to respond to or add context. In this instance, though, it might have been viewed as inappropriate because the discussion was focused on an ongoing criminal investigation.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Sunday that he will move to close Washington’s Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts for two years starting in July for construction, his latest proposal to upend the storied venue since returning to the White House.

Trump’s announcement on social media follows a wave of cancellations by leading performers, musicians and groups since the president ousted the previous leadership and added his name to the building. Trump made no mention in his post of the recent cancellations.

His proposal, announced days after the premiere of “Melania,” a documentary about the first lady, was shown at the center, is subject to approval by the board of the Kennedy Center, which has been stocked with his handpicked allies. Trump chairs the center’s board of trustees.

“This important decision, based on input from many Highly Respected Experts, will take a tired, broken, and dilapidated Center, one that has been in bad condition, both financially and structurally for many years, and turn it into a World Class Bastion of Arts, Music, and Entertainment,” Trump wrote in his post.

Neither Trump nor Kennedy Center President Ric Grenell, a Trump ally, have provided evidence to back up their claims about the building being in disrepair, and in October, Trump had pledged the center would remain open during renovations. In Sunday’s announcement, he said the center will close July 4, when he said the construction would begin.

“Our goal has always been to not only save and permanently preserve the Center, but to make it the finest Arts Institution in the world,” Grenell said in a post, citing funds Congress approved for repairs.

“This will be a brief closure,” Grenell said. “It desperately needs this renovation and temporarily closing the Center just makes sense — it will enable us to better invest our resources, think bigger and make the historic renovations more comprehensive. It also means we will be finished faster.”

The sudden decision to close and reconstruct the Kennedy Center is certain to spark blowback as Trump revamps the popular venue. The building began as a national cultural center and Congress renamed it as a “living memorial” to President Kennedy — a champion of the arts during his administration — in 1964, in the aftermath of his assassination.

Opened in 1971, it serves as a public showcase year-round for the arts, including the National Symphony Orchestra.

Since Trump returned to the White House, the Kennedy Center is one of many Washington landmarks that he has sought to overhaul in his second term. He demolished the East Wing of the White House and launched a massive $400-million ballroom project, is actively pursuing building a triumphal arch on the other side the Arlington Bridge from the Lincoln Memorial, and has plans for Washington Dulles International Airport.

Leading performing arts groups have pulled out of appearances at the Kennedy Center, most recently composer Philip Glass, who announced his decision to withdraw his Symphony No. 15 “Lincoln” because he said the values of the center today are in “direct conflict” with the message of the piece.

Last month, the Washington National Opera announced that it will move performances away from the Kennedy Center in another high-profile departure after Trump’s takeover of the U.S. capital’s leading performing arts venue.

The head of artistic programming for the center abruptly left his post last week, less than two weeks after being named to the job.

A spokesperson for the Kennedy Center could not immediately be reached and did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

Late last year, as Trump announced his plan to rename the building — adding his name to the building’s main front ahead of that of Kennedy — he drew sharp opposition from members of Congress, and some Kennedy family members.

Kerry Kennedy, a niece of John F. Kennedy, said in a social post on X at the time that she will remove Trump’s name herself with a pickax when his term ends.

Another family member, Maria Shriver, said at the time that it is “beyond comprehension that this sitting president has sought to rename this great memorial dedicated to President Kennedy,” her uncle. “It is beyond wild that he would think adding his name in front of President Kennedy’s name is acceptable. It is not.”

Late Sunday evening, Shriver posted a new comment mimicking Trump’s own voice and style, and suggesting the closure of the venue was meant to deflect from the cancellations.

She said that “entertainers are canceling left and right” and the president has determined that “since the name change no one wants to perform there any longer.”

Trump has decided, she said, it’s best “to close this center down and rebuild a new center” that will bear his name. She asked, “Right?”

One lawmaker, Rep. Joyce Beatty, an Ohio Democrat and ex-officio trustee of the center’s board, sued in December, arguing that “only Congress has the authority to rename the Kennedy Center.”

Price and Mascaro write for the Associated Press. AP writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Peter Mandelson says he is stepping down to avoid causing further embarrassment to the governing party.

Peter Mandelson, the United Kingdom’s former ambassador to the United States, has resigned from Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour Party following further revelations of his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, UK media have reported.

Mandelson, who was removed as London’s top representative in Washington last year after the emergence of emails detailing his associations with Epstein, said he had resigned to avoid causing further embarrassment to the governing party, the reports said on Sunday.

“I have been further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and I feel regretful and sorry about this,” Mandelson said in a letter reported by the BBC and The Guardian.

Mandelson said he believed that reports over the weekend that he had received several payments from Epstein in the early 2000s were false, but that he needed to investigate them, the reports said.

“While doing this I do not wish to cause further embarrassment to the Labour Party and I am therefore stepping down from membership of the party,” Mandelson said, according to the reports.

More to follow…

PORTLAND, Ore. — The mayor of Portland, Ore., demanded U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement leave his city after federal agents launched tear gas at a crowd of demonstrators — including young children — outside an ICE facility during a weekend protest that he and others characterized as peaceful.

Witnesses said agents deployed tear gas, pepper balls and rubber bullets as thousands of marchers arrived at the South Waterfront facility on Saturday. Erin Hoover Barnett, a former OregonLive reporter who joined the protest, said she was about 100 yards from the building when “what looked like two guys with rocket launchers” started dousing the crowd with gas.

“To be among parents frantically trying to tend to little children in strollers, people using motorized carts trying to navigate as the rest of us staggered in retreat, unsure of how to get to safety, was terrifying,” Barnett wrote in an email to OregonLive.

Mayor Keith Wilson said the daytime demonstration was peaceful, “where the vast majority of those present violated no laws, made no threat and posed no danger” to federal agents.

“To those who continue to work for ICE: Resign. To those who control this facility: Leave,” Wilson wrote in a statement Saturday night. “Through your use of violence and the trampling of the Constitution, you have lost all legitimacy and replaced it with shame.”

The Portland Fire Bureau sent paramedics to treat people at the scene, police said. Police officers monitored the crowd but made no arrests Saturday.

The Portland protest was one of many demonstrations nationwide against the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in cities including Minneapolis, where in recent weeks federal agents killed two residents, Alex Pretti and Renee Good.

Federal agents in Eugene, Ore., deployed tear gas on Friday when protesters tried to get inside the federal building near downtown. City police declared a riot and ordered the crowd to disperse.

President Trump posted Saturday on social media that it was up to local law enforcement agencies to police protests in their cities. But he said he has instructed Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to have federal agents be vigilant in guarding U.S. government facilities.

“Please be aware that I have instructed ICE and/or Border Patrol to be very forceful in this protection of Federal Government Property. There will be no spitting in the faces of our Officers, there will be no punching or kicking the headlights of our cars, and there will be no rock or brick throwing at our vehicles, or at our Patriot Warriors,” Trump wrote. “If there is, those people will suffer an equal, or more, consequence.”

Wilson said Portland would be imposing a fee on detention facilities that use chemical agents.

The federal government “must, and will, be held accountable,” the mayor said. “To those who continue to make these sickening decisions, go home, look in a mirror, and ask yourselves why you have gassed children.”

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson said Sunday that it will be a few days before a government funding package comes up for a vote, all but ensuring the partial federal shutdown will drag into the week as Democrats and Republicans debate reining in the Trump administration’s divisive immigration enforcement operations.

Johnson signaled he is relying on help from President Trump to ensure passage. Trump struck a deal with Democratic senators to separate out funding for the Department of Homeland Security from a broader package after public outrage over two shooting deaths during protests in Minneapolis against the immigration crackdown there. The measure approved Friday by the Senate would fund Homeland Security for two weeks, setting up a deadline for Congress to debate and vote on new restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations.

“The president is leading this,” Johnson (R-La.) said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“It’s his play call to do it this way,” the speaker said, adding that the Republican president has “already conceded that he wants to turn down the volume” on federal immigration operations.

Johnson faces a daunting challenge ahead, trying to muscle the funding legislation through the House while Democrats are refusing to provide the votes for speedy passage. They are demanding restraints on ICE that go beyond $20 million for body cameras that already is in the bill. They want to require that federal immigration agents unmask and identify themselves and are pressing for an end to roving patrols, amid other changes.

Democrats dig in on ICE changes

“What is clear is that the Department of Homeland Security needs to be dramatically reformed,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

Jeffries said the administration needs to begin negotiations now, not over the next two weeks, on changes to immigration enforcement operations.

“Masks should come off,” he said. “Judicial warrants should absolutely be required consistent with the Constitution, in our view, before DHS agents or ICE agents are breaking into the homes of the American people or ripping people out of their cars.”

It’s all forcing Johnson to rely on his slim House GOP majority — which will narrow further after a Democrat was elected to a vacant House seat in a Texas special election Saturday — in a series of procedural votes, starting in committee Monday and pushing a potential House floor vote on the package until at least Tuesday, he said.

House Democrats planned a private caucus call Sunday evening to assess the next steps.

Partial government shutdown drags on

Meanwhile, a number of other federal agencies are snared in the funding standoff as the government went into a partial shutdown over the weekend.

Defense, health, transportation and housing are among those that were given shutdown guidance by the administration, though many operations are deemed essential and services are not necessarily interrupted. Workers could go without pay if the impasse drags on. Some could be furloughed.

This is the second time in a matter of months that federal operations have been disrupted as Congress digs in, using the annual funding process as leverage to extract policy changes. In the fall, Democrats sparked what became the longest federal shutdown in history, 43 days, as they protested the expiration of health insurance tax breaks.

That shutdown ended with a promise to vote on proposals to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. But the legislation did not advance and Democrats were unable to achieve their goal of keeping the subsidies in place. As a result, insurance premiums have soared in the new year for millions of people.

Trump wants quick end to shutdown

This time, the administration has signaled its interest in more quickly resolving the shutdown.

Johnson said he was in the Oval Office last week when Trump, along with border advisor Tom Homan, spoke with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York to work out the deal.

“I think we’re on the path to get agreement,” Johnson said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Body cameras for immigration agents, which are already provided for in the package, and an end to the roving patrols are areas of potential agreement, Johnson said.

But he said taking the masks off and putting names on agents’ uniforms could lead to problems for law enforcement officers as they are being targeted by the protesters and their personal information posted online.

“I don’t think the president would approve it — and he shouldn’t,” Johnson said on Fox.

Democrats, however, said the immigration operations are out of control, and it is an emergency situation that must end in Minneapolis and other cities.

Growing numbers of lawmakers are calling for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to be fired or impeached.

“What is happening in Minnesota right now is a dystopia,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who led efforts to hold the line for more changes.

“ICE is making this country less safe, not more safe today,” Murphy said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“Our focus over the next two weeks has to be reining in a lawless and immoral immigration agency.”

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

Los Angeles unions enjoy a decided “brand advantage” over corporations among city voters, and the labor movement should use that popularity to advance “union-led solutions” to key public policy issues in 2007, a memo written by top labor strategists says.

The two-page memo, which was obtained by The Times, argues for broader, more straightforward engagement on policy issues than many unions have undertaken in the past. Some labor leaders prefer to focus on their own contract issues, and even those who are active in politics often soft-pedal the “union” label.

The document demonstrates labor’s confidence as it heads into a new year of big battles over politics, contracts and organizing.

Labor is preparing to fight a referendum, which was qualified by the business community, to block an expansion of the city’s living wage ordinance. Civilian city employees, grocery store workers, security officers and teachers are seeking new union contracts, and hotel workers near the airport and truck drivers near the port are engaged in organizing drives.

The memo relies heavily on public opinion research conducted by a Democratic pollster, David Binder, including a survey of 800 city voters last fall. The document was written by three veteran strategists, John Hein, Bob Cherry and Don Attore, all of whom have retired from the political operation of the California Teachers Assn. The three work closely with Working Californians, a nonprofit research and advocacy group.

“There is a significant opportunity for organized labor in Los Angeles,” the memo says. “In particular, we’d highlight these factors: unions’ fundamentally positive image and ‘brand advantage’ over business corporations; the overlap between union priorities and the key concerns of voters across the electorate in L.A., and the opportunity to expand public understanding of the connection between local government and the full range of quality-of-life issues.”

Gary Toebben, president and chief executive of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, said that unions, to the extent that they engage in policy issues, “are copying the Chamber of Commerce…. For other groups to want to be involved in efforts to build a better community, I say we welcome them to the cause that we have been championing.”

Toebben and other leaders of Los Angeles’ business community are focusing on a referendum to block a new law, which is heavily backed by labor, to expand the city’s living wage ordinance to cover workers at airport-area hotels. The success of the referendum, which probably will appear on the ballot in May, is crucial to persuading businesses to come to Los Angeles, expand and create jobs, he said.

Asked at a news conference last week about whether the referendum was wise given labor’s growing strength in the city, Toebben said it would be wrong to “just let the bulldozer run over you.”

Binder’s poll found that unions have more public support in Los Angeles than in other areas of the state and country. Among city voters surveyed, 55% agreed that “without unions, there would be no middle-class left in America.”

Reflecting the labor movement’s influence in city politics, the memo argues for talking up local government’s ability to deal with issues such as the economy, healthcare and the environment, which generally are considered federal and state matters.

The memo calls “for a public education campaign focused on union-led solutions to the quality-of-life issues that Los Angeles voters regard as most important.” The memo suggests that such a campaign be conducted before 2008, when state and national election campaigns will probably consume union energy.

“Los Angeles, against its own history, is a labor town now,” said Cherry, one of the strategists, who was a key figure in the successful effort to defeat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s slate of ballot initiatives in 2005. “One of the things that comes through in the poll is that people really see the potential of unions to take up the cause of ordinary people on quality-of-life issues.”

Nelson Lichtenstein, a labor historian and UC Santa Barbara professor, said he had “a certain admiration” for unions involving themselves more in policy issues, though he wonders if the public may prove skeptical.

In the long term, “this is the way that unions will make a breakthrough — when people see that solutions to society-wide questions are part of a labor agenda,” he said.

Binder’s polling suggests that any attempts by business to challenge union priorities will not be easy. Seventy-three percent of those surveyed agreed with the statement: “Big corporations are taking advantage of people like you.” Sixty-one percent of the Angelenos surveyed believe that oil companies are manipulating oil prices, including reducing prices during election times to keep supportive politicians in office.

Maria Elena Durazo, the leader of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, was briefed on the polling. She said in an interview that in 2007, she wanted to continue to organize workers while looking for opportunities to take on “the greediness of the corporations, which is pretty clear and pretty blatant.”

“Strategically, we just don’t take on everything that’s out there,” she said. “We’ve tried to put our resources in places where they make a difference.”

Dan Schnur, a Republican political consultant who teaches at USC, said that a public education campaign might be particularly effective this year, when no state or federal elections are scheduled.

“The best time to reach the voters with any type of argument is when their guard is down,” Schnur said. “The closer you get to an election, the more difficult it is to get through to people, but having this discussion in an off-year makes it much easier to get your message through.”

*

joe.mathews@latimes.com

Feb. 1 (UPI) — The Rafah border crossing between Egypt and Gaza reopened on Sunday morning to limited traffic for the first time in more than two years.

Israeli officials announced that after a trial operation of the crossing it will officially reopen on Monday, first for people leaving Gaza for medical attention and then others will be permitted to leave and enter, a process that will include intense scrutiny of Palestinians who use the crossing, Al-Jazeera reported.

“The Rafah crossing has reopened for movement of people only,” the Israeli Coordinator for Government Activities in the Territories said in a post on X. “The movement of residents in both directions, entry and exit to and from Gaza, is expected to begin tomorrow.”

Israel seized the Rafah crossing in May 2024 after officials alleged that Hamas had been using it to move terrorist operatives and materials in the area.

The seizure also made it more difficult to move supplies and aid into Gaza during Isarel’s war against Hamas after the group’s Oct. 7, 2023, terror attacks in Israel.

Reopening the crossing was part of the cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas in October, but Israel had held off on reopening it until it all hostages taken by the terrorist group on Oct. 7 were returned — a process that was not completed until last week.

Israel has said the people leaving or entering Gaza would have to undergo intense screening about what they were doing and why, with 150 people permitted to leave and 50 permitted to enter, an Israeli security official told CNN.

Among those returning, Israeli officials said that Palestinians who left Gaza during the war will also be allowed to return home after they have undergone additional screening.

Although Israel had said that only people would be permitted to use the crossing, NBC News reported that trucks with humanitarian aid were photographed entering Gaza from Egypt’s side of the crossing.

Hospitals and ambulances on the Egyptian side of the crossing have been preparing to receive sick and injured Palestinians, who will be the first people given clearance to leave.