Politics

WASHINGTON — President Trump is showing little urgency to broker a compromise that would end the government shutdown, even as Democrats insist no breakthrough is possible without his direct involvement.

Three weeks in, Congress is at a standstill. The House hasn’t been in session for a month, and senators left Washington on Thursday frustrated by the lack of progress. Republican leaders are refusing to negotiate until a short-term funding bill to reopen the government is passed, while Democrats say they won’t agree without guarantees on extending health insurance subsidies.

For now, Trump appears content to stay on the sidelines.

He spent the week celebrating an Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal he led, hosted a remembrance event for conservative activist Charlie Kirk and refocused attention on the Russia-Ukraine war. Meanwhile, his administration has been managing the shutdown in unconventional ways, continuing to pay the troops while laying off other federal employees.

Asked Thursday whether he was willing to deploy his dealmaking background on the shutdown, Trump seemed uninterested.

“Well, look, I mean, all we want to do is just extend. We don’t want anything, we just want to extend, live with the deal they had,” he said in an exchange with reporters in the Oval Office. Later Thursday, he criticized Democratic health care demands as “crazy,” adding, “We’re just not going to do it.”

Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told Fox News that Democrats must first vote to reopen the government, “then we can have serious conversations about health care.”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune echoed that approach before leaving for the weekend, saying Trump is “ready to weigh in and sit down with the Democrats or whomever, once the government opens up.”

Thune said he’d also be willing to talk, but only after the shutdown ends.

“I am willing to sit down with Democrats,” Thune posted on social media Friday.

“But there’s one condition: End the Schumer Shutdown. I will not negotiate under hostage conditions, nor will I pay a ransom,” he added.

Frustration is beginning to surface among rank-and-file Republicans, with bipartisan conversations breaking out on the Senate floor as members look for ways to move things forward. Still, even those Republicans admit little happens in Congress without Trump’s direction.

Leaving the Capitol on Thursday, GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, “We’re not making much headway this week.” For things to progress, Murkowski acknowledged Trump may need to get more involved: “I think he’s an important part of it.”

“I think there are some folks in his administration that are kind of liking the fact that Congress really has no role right now,” she added. “I don’t like that. I don’t like that at all.”

Trump has not been slowed by the shutdown

While Congress has been paralyzed by the shutdown, Trump has moved rapidly to enact his vision of the federal government.

He has called budget chief Russ Vought the “grim reaper,” and Vought has taken the opportunity to withhold billions of dollars for infrastructure projects and lay off thousands of federal workers, signaling that workforce reductions could become even more drastic.

At the same time, the administration has acted unilaterally to fund Trump’s priorities, including paying the military this week, easing pressure on what could have been one of the main deadlines to end the shutdown.

Some of these moves, particularly the layoffs and funding shifts, have been criticized as illegal and are facing court challenges. A federal judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked the administration from firing workers during the shutdown, ruling that the cuts appeared politically motivated and were carried out without sufficient justification.

And with Congress focused on the funding fight, lawmakers have had little time to debate other issues.

In the House, Johnson has said the House won’t return until Democrats approve the funding bill and has refused to swear in Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva. Democrats say the move is to prevent her from becoming the 218th signature on a discharge petition aimed at forcing a vote on releasing documents related to the sex trafficking investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.

So far, the shutdown has shown little impact on public opinion.

An AP-NORC poll released Thursday found that 3 in 10 U.S. adults have a “somewhat” or “very” favorable view of the Democratic Party, similar to an AP-NORC poll from September. Four in 10 have a “somewhat” or “very” favorable view of the Republican Party, largely unchanged from last month.

Democrats want Trump at the table. Republicans would rather he stay out

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries have said Republicans have shown little seriousness in negotiating an end to the shutdown.

“Leader Thune has not come to me with any proposal at this point,” Schumer said Thursday.

Frustrated with congressional leaders, Democrats are increasingly looking to Trump.

At a CNN town hall Wednesday night featuring Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, both repeatedly called for the president’s involvement when asked why negotiations had stalled.

“President Trump is not talking. That is the problem,” Sanders said.

Ocasio-Cortez added that Trump should more regularly “be having congressional leaders in the White House.”

Democrats’ focus on Trump reflects both his leadership style — which allows little to happen in Congress without his approval — and the reality that any funding bill needs the president’s signature to become law.

This time, however, Republican leaders who control the House and Senate are resisting any push for Trump to intervene.

“You can’t negotiate when somebody’s got a hostage,” said South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds, who added that Trump getting involved would allow Democrats to try the same tactic in future legislative fights.

Trump has largely followed that guidance. After previously saying he would be open to negotiating with Democrats on health insurance subsidies, he walked it back after Republican leaders suggested he misspoke.

And that’s unlikely to change for now. Trump has no plans to personally intervene to broker a deal with Democrats, according to a senior White House official granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. The official added that the only stopgap funding bill that Democrats can expect is the one already on the table.

“The President is happy to have a conversation about health care policy, but he will not do so while the Democrats are holding the American people hostage,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said Thursday.

A product of the Congress Trump has molded

In his second term, Trump has taken a top-down approach, leaving little in Congress to move without his approval.

“What’s obvious to me is that Mike Johnson and John Thune don’t do much without Donald Trump telling them what to do,” said Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona.

His hold is particularly strong in the GOP-led House, where Speaker Mike Johnson effectivelyowes his job to Trump, and relies on his influence to power through difficult legislative fights.

When Republicans have withheld votes on Trump’s priorities in Congress, he’s called them on the phone or summoned them to his office to directly sway them. When that doesn’t work, he has vowed to unseat them in the next election. It’s led many Democrats to believe the only path to an agreement runs through the White House and not through the speaker’s office.

Democrats also want assurances from the White House that they won’t backtrack on an agreement. The White House earlier this year cut out the legislative branch entirely with a $4.9 billion cut to foreign aid in August through a legally dubious process known as a “pocket rescission.” And before he even took office late last year, Trump and ally Elon Musk blew up a bipartisan funding agreement that both parties had negotiated.

“I think we need to see ink on paper. I think we need to see legislation. I think we need to see votes,” said Ocasio-Cortez. “I don’t accept pinky promises. That’s not the business that I’m in.”

Both parties also see little reason to fold under public pressure, believing they are winning the messaging battle.

“Everybody thinks they’re winning,” Murkowski said. “Nobody is winning when everybody’s losing. And that’s what’s happening right now. The American public is losing.”

Cappelletti and Kim write for the Associated Press. AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Oct. 17 (UPI) — The federal shutdown will last at least a few more days as the Senate expects to hold no votes until Monday. Meanwhile, lawmakers are questioning the legality of how the Trump administration plans to pay the military.

Senate Republican leader John Thune of South Dakota sent senators home for the weekend, so the government will stay closed. The Senate will return at 3 p.m. Monday.

Three Democrats have voted for the Republican bills to reopen the government, but five more are needed to reach the 60 votes needed to pass the stopgap funding bill.

Meanwhile, some Republican senators are questioning the legality of President Donald Trump‘s move to shift Defense Department funds to pay for military paychecks during the shutdown.

They say they’re glad the service members are getting paid, but aren’t sure where the funds are coming from and whether the money shift is legal.

Normally, the White House would need to ask Congress to reappropriate federal funding, then the Appropriations Committee must approve it before moving funds around.

Senators interviewed by The Hill say they aren’t aware of any requests. Trump ordered Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to use “all available funds” to ensure troops got their paychecks.

“That’s a concern of not just appropriators, it seems broader than that,” an unnamed Republican senator told The Hill.

The lawmaker said Republican colleagues have asked the administration for more information about exactly which funds are getting shifted and what legal authority the White House is using to justify its action.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she wants more information from the White House.

“We’ve been given two different explanations. One, is that it’s unobligated balances. One, is that it’s taken from certain research and technology programs. But we don’t have the specifics. We have asked for the specifics,” Collins said.

Alaska’s Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski said: “I get that they say for the military pay for this pay period it comes out of … research and development technology [fund] but where? Is that taking it from projects that we have already identified? Maybe something’s really important to me. Where’s it coming from? We haven’t seen that,” she said.

On Wednesday, Trump signed a memo expanding his administration’s authority to repurpose unspent funds to pay service members during the shutdown.

Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., said Trump’s reallocation of funds was, “probably not legal.” On Face the Nation on Sunday, he said the “White House’s understanding of United States law” was “pretty tentative to say the best.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom this week signed a suite of privacy protection bills for transgender patients amid continuing threats by the Trump administration.

But there was one glaring omission that LGBTQ+ advocates and political strategists say is part of an increasingly complex dance the Democrat faces as he curates a more centrist profile for a potential presidential bid.

Newsom vetoed a bill that would have required insurers to cover, and pharmacists to dispense, 12 months of hormone therapy at one time to transgender patients and others. The proposal was a top priority for trans rights leaders, who said it was crucial to preserve care as clinics close or limit gender-affirming services under White House pressure.

Political experts say Newsom’s veto highlights how charged trans care has become for Democrats nationally and, in particular, for Newsom, who as San Francisco mayor engaged in civil disobedience by allowing gay couples to marry at City Hall. The veto, along with his lukewarm response to anti-trans rhetoric, they argue, is part of an alarming pattern that could damage his credibility with key voters in his base.

“Even if there were no political motivations whatsoever under Newsom’s decision, there are certainly political ramifications of which he is very aware,” said Dan Schnur, a former GOP political strategist who is now a politics lecturer at the University of California-Berkeley. “He is smart enough to know that this is an issue that’s going to anger his base, but in return, may make him more acceptable to large numbers of swing voters.”

Earlier this year on Newsom’s podcast, the governor told the late conservative activist Charlie Kirk that trans athletes competing in women’s sports was “deeply unfair,” triggering a backlash among his party’s base and LGBTQ+ leaders. And he has described trans issues as a “major problem for the Democratic Party,” saying Donald Trump’s trans-focused campaign ads were “devastating” for his party in 2024.

Still, in a conversation with YouTube streamer ConnorEatsPants this month, Newsom defended himself “as a guy who’s literally put my political life on the line for the community for decades, has been a champion and a leader.”

“He doesn’t want to face the criticism as someone who, I’m sure, is trying to line himself up for the presidency, when the current anti-trans rhetoric is so loud,” said Ariela Cuellar, a spokesperson for the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network.

Caroline Menjivar, the state senator who introduced the measure, described her bill as “the most tangible and effective” measure this year to help trans people at a time when they are being singled out for what she described as “targeted discrimination.”

In a legislature in which Democrats hold supermajorities in both houses, lawmakers sent the bill to Newsom on a party-line vote. Earlier this year, Washington became the first to enact a state law extending hormone therapy coverage to a 12-month supply.

In a veto message on the California bill, Newsom cited its potential to drive up health care costs, impacts that an independent analysis found would be negligible.

“At a time when individuals are facing double-digit rate increases in their health care premiums across the nation, we must take great care to not enact policies that further drive up the cost of health care, no matter how well-intended,” Newsom wrote.

Under the Trump administration, federal agencies have been directed to limit access to gender-affirming care for children, which Trump has referred to as “chemical and surgical mutilation,” and demanded documents from or threatened investigations of institutions that provide it.

In recent months, Stanford Medicine, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, and Kaiser Permanente have reduced or eliminated gender-affirming care for patients under 19, a sign of the chilling effect Trump’s executive orders have had on health care, even in one of the nation’s most progressive states.

California already mandates wide coverage of gender-affirming health care, including hormone therapy, but pharmacists can currently dispense only a 90-day supply. Menjivar’s bill would have allowed 12-month supplies, modeled after a 2016 law that allowed women to receive an annual supply of birth control.

Luke Healy, who told legislators at an April hearing that he was “a 24-year-old detransitioner” and no longer believed he was a woman, criticized the attempt to increase coverage of services he thought were “irreversibly harmful” to him.

“I believe that bills like this are forcing doctors to turn healthy bodies into perpetual medical problems in the name of an ideology,” Healy testified.

The California Association of Health Plans opposed the bill over provisions that would limit the use of certain practices such as prior authorization and step therapy, which require insurer approval before care is provided and force patients and doctors to try other therapies first.

“These safeguards are essential for applying evidence-based prescribing standards and responsibly managing costs — ensuring patients receive appropriate care while keeping premiums in check,” said spokesperson Mary Ellen Grant.

An analysis by the California Health Benefits Review Program, which independently reviews bills relating to health insurance, concluded that annual premium increases resulting from the bill’s implementation would be negligible and that “no long-term impacts on utilization or cost” were expected.

Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for LGBTQ Rights, said Newsom’s economic argument was “not plausible.” Although he said he considers Newsom a strong ally of the transgender community, Minter noted he was “deeply disappointed” to see the governor’s veto.

“I understand he’s trying to respond to this political moment, and I wish he would respond to it by modeling language and policies that can genuinely bring people along.”

Newsom’s press office declined to comment further.

Following the podcast interview with Kirk, Cuellar said, advocacy groups backing SB 418 grew concerned about a potential veto and made a point to highlight voices of other patients who would benefit, including menopausal women and cancer patients. It was a starkly different strategy than what they might have done before Trump took office.

“Had we run this bill in 2022-2023, the messaging would have been totally different,” said another proponent who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

“We could have been very loud and proud. In 2023, we might have gotten a signing ceremony.”

Advocates for trans rights were so wary of the current political climate that some also felt the need to steer clear of promoting a separate bill that would have expanded coverage of hormone therapy and other treatments for menopause and perimenopause. That bill, authored by Assembly member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, who has spoken movingly about her struggles with health care for perimenopause, was also vetoed.

In the meantime, said Jovan Wolf, a trans man and military veteran, patients like him will be left to suffer. Wolf, who had taken testosterone for more than 15 years, tried to restart hormone therapy in March, following a two-year hiatus in which he contemplated having children.

Doctors at the Department of Veterans Affairs told him it was too late. Days earlier, the Trump administration had announced it would phase out hormone therapy and other treatments for gender dysphoria.

“Having estrogen pumping through my body, it’s just not a good feeling for me, physically, mentally. And when I’m on testosterone, I feel balanced,” said Wolf, who eventually received care elsewhere. “It should be my decision and my decision only.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

GREENBELT, Md. — John Bolton arrived at a federal courthouse Friday to surrender to authorities and make his first court appearance on charges accusing the former Trump administration national security adviser of storing top secret records at home and sharing with relatives diary-like notes that contained classified information.

The 18-count federal indictment Thursday also suggests classified information was exposed when operatives believed to be linked to the Iranian government hacked Bolton’s email account and gained access to sensitive material he had shared. A Bolton representative told the FBI in 2021 that his emails had been hacked, prosecutors say, but did not reveal that Bolton had shared classified information through the account or that the hackers had possession of government secrets.

The closely watched case centers on a longtime fixture in Republican foreign policy circles who became known for his hawkish views on American power and who served for more than a year in Trump’s first administration before being fired in 2019. He later published a book highly critical of Trump.

The third case against a Trump adversary in the past month will unfold against the backdrop of concerns that the Justice Department is pursuing the Republican president’s political enemies while at the same time sparing his allies from scrutiny.

“Now, I have become the latest target in weaponizing the Justice Department to charge those he deems to be his enemies with charges that were declined before or distort the facts,” Bolton said in a statement.

Even so, the indictment is significantly more detailed in its allegations than earlier cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Unlike in those cases filed by a hastily appointed U.S. attorney, Bolton’s indictment was signed by career national security prosecutors. While the Bolton investigation burst into public view in August when the FBI searched his home in Maryland and his office in Washington, the inquiry was well underway by the time Trump had taken office in January.

Sharing of classified secrets

The indictment filed in federal court in Greenbelt, Maryland, alleges that between 2018 and this past August, Bolton shared with two relatives more than 1,000 pages of information about his day-to-day activities in government.

The material included “diary-like” entries with information classified as high as top secret that he had learned from meetings with other U.S. government officials, from intelligence briefings or talks with foreign leaders, according to the indictment. After sending one document, Bolton wrote in a message to his relatives, “None of which we talk about!!!” In response, one of his relatives wrote, “Shhhhh,” prosecutors said.

The indictment says that among the material shared was information about foreign adversaries that in some cases revealed details about sources and methods used by the government to collect intelligence.

The two family members were not identified in court papers, but a person familiar with the case, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic details, identified them as Bolton’s wife and daughter.

The indictment also suggests Bolton was aware of the impropriety of sharing classified information with people not authorized to receive it, citing an April news media interview in which he chastised Trump administration officials for using Signal to discuss sensitive military details. Though the anecdote is meant by prosecutors to show Bolton understood proper protocol for government secrets, Bolton’s legal team may also point to it to argue a double standard in enforcement because the Justice Department is not known to have opened any investigation into the Signal episode.

Bolton’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement that the “underlying facts in this case were investigated and resolved years ago.”

He said the charges stem from portions of Bolton’s personal diaries over his 45-year career in government and included unclassified information that was shared only with his immediate family and was known to the FBI as far back as 2021.

“Like many public officials throughout history,” Lowell said, “Bolton kept diaries — that is not a crime.” He said Bolton “did not unlawfully share or store any information.”

Controversy over a book

Bolton suggested the criminal case was an outgrowth of an unsuccessful Justice Department effort after he left government to block the publication of his 2020 book “The Room Where It Happened,” which portrayed Trump as grossly misinformed about foreign policy.

The Trump administration asserted that Bolton’s manuscript contained classified information that could harm national security if exposed. Bolton’s lawyers have said he moved forward with the book after a White House National Security Council official, with whom Bolton had worked for months, said the manuscript no longer had classified information.

In 2018, Bolton was appointed to serve as Trump’s third national security adviser. His brief tenure was characterized by disputes with the president over North Korea, Iran and Ukraine. Those rifts ultimately led to Bolton’s departure.

Bolton subsequently criticized Trump’s approach to foreign policy and government in his book, including by alleging that Trump directly tied providing military aid to Ukraine to that country’s willingness to conduct investigations into Joe Biden, who was soon to be Trump’s Democratic 2020 election rival, and members of Biden’s family.

Trump responded by slamming Bolton as a “washed-up guy” and a “crazy” warmonger who would have led the country into “World War Six.”

Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press. Durkin Richer reported from Washington.

Oct. 17 (UPI) — A federal appeals court panel rejected the Trump administration’s request to overturn a lower court order blocking deployment of National Guard troops in Illinois.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday said U.S. President Donald Trump‘s plan to deploy National Guard troops to Illinois “likely” violated the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment, which outlines specific state power.

“The facts do not justify the president’s actions,” the 18-page ruling read, adding that “political opposition is not rebellion.”

Roughly 200 federalized National Guardsmen currently sit in Illinois via Texas and more than a dozen from California. Trump federalized an additional 300 troops over the objection of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, both Democrats.

Trump has repeatedly described Chicago and other Democratic-governed cities as a “war zone.” Pritzker has said there’s no evidence for Trump’s claims and led the state’s legal actions against the White House with other local and state officials.

During an appearance on Politico’s The Conversation podcast — to be aired Sunday — Pritzker said that Trump has “got the biggest platform in the country, the presidency, and he just says things.” He attacked Trump’s “lies” on crime.

“It’s propaganda, again, not true, but he’ll say it over and over and over again, hoping that people will believe him,” the governor said.

On Thursday, the court panel added the administration was unlikely to prove a rebellion against the U.S. government or that Trump as president could not enforce the law using regular federal forces.

The judges wrote in the decision they saw “insufficient evidence of a rebellion or danger of rebellion in Illinois.”

“The spirited, sustained, and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest of the federal government’s immigration policies and actions, without more, does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government’s authority,” it continued.

An hearing is scheduled for Wednesday to determined if the temporary restraining order should be extended, which remains in effect until Thursday.

“To Illinoisans: Stay safe, record what you see and post it, and continue to peacefully protest. Make sure that your community members know their rights in times of crisis,” the two-term Pritzker said Thursday night on Bluesky.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has said handing over the Ukrainian diver is not in the country’s best interests.

A Polish court has blocked the extradition of a Ukrainian diver wanted by Germany in connection with the 2022 Nord Stream gas pipeline explosions, a handover that Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said earlier this month was not in his country’s best interests.

The Warsaw District Court rejected the extradition of the man, only identified as Volodymyr Z, on Friday and ordered his immediate release.

The government had previously said that the decision about whether Volodymyr Z should be transferred to Germany was one for the courts alone.

Tusk has said the problem was not that the undersea pipelines, which run from Russia to Germany, were blown up in September 2022, but that they were built at all.

The explosions ruptured the Nord Stream 1 pipeline, which was inaugurated in 2011 and carried Russian natural gas to Germany under the Baltic Sea until Russia cut off supplies in August 2022.

They also damaged the parallel Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which never entered service because Germany suspended its certification process shortly before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

The explosions largely severed Russian gas supplies to Europe, marking a major escalation in the Ukraine conflict and squeezing energy supplies.

Germany’s top prosecutors’ office says Volodymyr Z was one of a group suspected of renting a sailing yacht and planting explosives on the pipelines near the Danish island of Bornholm.

He faces allegations of conspiring to commit an explosives attack and of “anti-constitutional sabotage”.

His Polish lawyer rejects the accusations and says Volodymyr Z has done nothing wrong. He has also questioned whether a case concerning the destruction of Russian property by a Ukrainian at a time when the countries are at war is a criminal matter.

Volodymyr Z’s wife has told Polish media her husband is innocent and that they were together in Poland at the time the pipelines were blown up.

He is one of two Ukrainians whose extradition German judicial authorities have been trying to secure in the case.

A man suspected of being one of the attack’s coordinators was arrested in Italy in August. This week, Italy’s top court annulled a lower court’s decision to order his extradition and called for another panel of judges to reassess the case, his lawyer said.

It’s almost a year into Trump 2.0 and MAGA has gone full “snowflake.”

You know the word, the one that for the past decade the right has wielded against liberals as the ultimate epithet — you know, because libs are supposedly feelings-obsessed, physically weak, morally delicate and whiny as all get out.

Well, if you’re MAGA in 2025, you should probably embrace the term like Trump hugging an American flag with a Cheshire Cat grin.

Because if you think, among other things, that Portland is “War ravaged” like Trump claims it is and the U.S. of A. has to send in the military, you truly are a snowflake.

It sure wasn’t the left that called for the firing of people who criticized one of their heroes in the wake of their tragic death. Or that revoked visas over it. Or cheered when a late-night talk show host was temporarily suspended after the FCC chairman threatened to punish his network, as Brendan Carr did to ABC when he told a podcaster Disney could mete out punishment to Jimmy Kimmel “the easy way or hard way.”

Which president complains any time someone doesn’t think they’re the greatest leader in human history? Threatens retribution against foes real and imagined every waking second? Whines like he’s a bottle of Chardonnay?

Trump even complained this week about a Time magazine cover photo that he proclaimed “may be the Worst of All Time.”

“They ‘disappeared’ my hair, and then had something floating on top of my head that looked like a floating crown, but an extremely small one. Really weird!” the king of MAGA-dom wrote on Truth Social.

Here’s guessing he’d have complained a little less if the “something” floating on the top of his head looked like a really, super-big crown.

President Trump speaks to reporters before boarding Air Force One prior to departure from Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on Sunday.

(Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images)

Watch out, Time magazine, Trump might send the Texas National Guard to your newsroom!

This is an administration that is forcing airports to run videos blaming the government shutdown on their opponents? What branch of the government just asked journalists to only publish preapproved information?

And always with the reacting to Democrat-led cities like Portland, Chicago and L.A. as if they’re Stalingrad during the siege.

Kristi Noem, Homeland Security secretary in August: “L.A. wouldn’t be standing today if President Trump hadn’t taken action then. That city would have burned down if left to the devices of the mayor and the governor of that state.”

Trump about Washington, D.C., over the summer as he issued an executive order to take over its police department in the wake of what he characterized as out-of-control crime: “It is a point of national disgrace that Washington, D.C., has a violent crime rate that is higher than some of the most dangerous places in the world.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to military brass he called in from across the world last month to declare the following: “No more beardos. The era of rampant and ridiculous shaving profiles is done.”

Welcome to our Snowflake Government. The way these people’s tough talk turns into waterworks at the slightest provocation, you’d think they were the ski slopes of Mt. Baldy come summertime.

Trump and his lackeys possess scary power and don’t hesitate to use it in the name of punishing enemies. But what betrays their inherent snowflake-ness is how much they cry about what they still don’t dominate and their continued use of brute force to try and subdue the slightest, well, slight.

The veritable pity party gnashes its teeth more and more as the months pass. Trump was so angry at the sight of people causing chaos over a relatively small area of downtown L.A. after mass raids swept Southern California in June — chaos that barely registered to what happens after a Dodgers World Series win — that he sent in the Marines.

His spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, keeps describing any nasty look or bad word thrown at migra agents as proof of them suffering a supposedly unprecedented level of assault despite never offering any concrete proof.

The Southland’s acting U.S. attorney, Bill Essayli, accused an LAPD spokesperson last week of leaking information to The Times after one of my colleagues asked him about … wait for it … an upcoming press conference.

No part of the government melts faster, however, than the agency with the apropos acronym of ICE.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement and their fellow travelers across Homeland Security are Trump’s own Praetorian Guard, tasked with carrying out his deportation deluge. They’ve relished their months in the national spotlight cast by the federal government simultaneously as an unstoppable force and an immovable object. La migra continues to crash into neighborhoods and communities like a masked avalanche of tear gas and handcuffs, justice be damned.

But have you seen how they’re flailing in Chicago?

Illinois State Police clash with demonstrators by the ICE facility in Broadview, Ill., as tensions rise over prolonged protests targeting federal ICE operations in Chicago on Oct. 10.

(Jacek Boczarski / Anadolu via Getty Images)

They’re firing pepper balls at the heads of Presbyterian priests outside detention facilities and tackling middle-aged reporters.

Border Patrol sector chief Gregory Bovino, who thinks he’s Napoleon with a crew cut and an Appalachian drawl, has accused protester Cole Sheridan of causing an unspecified groin injury even though the government couldn’t provide any video evidence during a preliminary court hearing earlier this month.

Agents have set off tear gas canisters without giving a heads-up to Chicago police. They’re detaining people without giving them a chance to prove their citizenship until hours later.

All this because — wah, wah! — Windy City residents haven’t welcomed la migra as liberators.

Bovino and his ICE buddies keep whimpering to Trump that they need the National Guard to back them up because they supposedly can’t do their job despite being the ones armed and masked up and backed by billions of dollars in new funds.

That’s why the government is now pushing tech giants to crack down on how activists are organizing. In the past two weeks, Apple has taken down apps that tracked actions by ICE agents and a Chicago Facebook group that was a clearinghouse for migra sightings at the request of the Department of Justice.

On X, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi bragged that she “will continue engaging tech companies to eliminate platforms where radicals can incite imminent violence against federal law enforcement” despite offering no evidence whatsoever — because who needs facts in the face of Trump’s blizzard of lies?

Since the start of all this madness, I’ve seen the left offer a rejoinder to the snowflake charge: the slogan “ICE Melts,” usually accompanied by a drawing of the action at hand. It’s meant to inspire activists by reminding them that la migra is not nearly as mighty as the right makes them out to be.

That’s clever. But the danger of all these conservative snowflakes turning into a sopping mess the way they do over their perceived victimhood is that the resulting flood threatens to drown out a little thing we’d come to love over many, many, many years.

Democracy.

In the early days of President Trump’s second term, the U.S. appeared keen to cooperate with Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s authoritarian leader. Special envoy Ric Grenell met Maduro, working with him to coordinate deportation flights to Caracas, a prisoner exchange deal and an agreement allowing Chevron to drill Venezuelan oil.

Grenell told disappointed members of Venezuela’s opposition that Trump’s domestic goals took priority over efforts to promote democracy. “We’re not interested in regime change,” Grenell told the group, according to two sources familiar with the meeting.

But Marco Rubio, Trump’s secretary of State, had a different vision.

In a parallel call with María Corina Machado and Edmundo González Urrutia, two leaders of the opposition, Rubio affirmed U.S. support “for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela” and called González “the rightful president” of the beleaguered nation after Maduro rigged last year’s election in his favor.

Rubio, now also serving as national security advisor, has grown closer to Trump and crafted an aggressive new policy toward Maduro that has brought Venezuela and the United States to the brink of military confrontation.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio whispers to President Trump during a roundtable meeting at the White House on Oct. 8, 2025.

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

Grenell has been sidelined, two sources told The Times, as the U.S. conducts an unprecedented campaign of deadly strikes on suspected Venezuelan drug boats — and builds up military assets in the Caribbean. Trump said Wednesday that he has authorized the CIA to conduct covert action in the South American nation, and that strikes on land targets could be next.

“I think Venezuela is feeling the heat,” he said.

The pressure campaign marks a major victory for Rubio, the son of Cuban emigres and an unexpected power player in the administration who has managed to sway top leaders of the isolationist MAGA movement to his lifelong effort to topple Latin America’s leftist authoritarians.

“It’s very clear that Rubio has won,” said James B. Story, who served as ambassador to Venezuela under President Biden. “The administration is applying military pressure in the hope that somebody inside of the regime renders Maduro to justice, either by exiling him, sending him to the United States or sending him to his maker.”

In a recent public message to Trump, Maduro acknowledged that Rubio is now driving White House policy: “You have to be careful because Marco Rubio wants your hands stained with blood, with South American blood, Caribbean blood, Venezuelan blood,” Maduro said.

As a senator from Florida, Rubio represented exiles from three leftist autocracies — Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela — and for years he has made it his mission to weaken their governments. He says his family could not return to Cuba after Fidel Castro’s revolution seven decades ago. He has long maintained that eliminating Maduro would deal a fatal blow to Cuba, whose economy has been buoyed by billions of dollars in Venezuelan oil in the face of punishing U.S. sanctions.

In 2019, Rubio pushed Trump to back Juan Guaidó, a Venezuelan opposition leader who sought unsuccessfully to topple Maduro.

Rubio later encouraged Trump to publicly support Machado, who was barred from the ballot in Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election, and who last week was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her pro-democracy efforts. González, who ran in Machado’s place, won the election, according to vote tallies gathered by the opposition, yet Maduro declared victory.

Rubio was convinced that only military might would bring change to Venezuela, which has been plunged into crisis under Maduro’s rule, with a quarter of the population fleeing poverty, violence and political repression.

But there was a hitch. Trump has repeatedly vowed to not intervene in the politics of other nations, telling a Middle Eastern audience in May that the U.S. “would no longer be giving you lectures on how to live.”

Denouncing decades of U.S. foreign policy, Trump complained that “the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand.”

To counter that sentiment, Rubio painted Maduro in a new light that he hoped would spark interest from Trump, who has been fixated on combating immigration, illegal drugs and Latin American cartels since his first presidential campaign.

Venezuelan presidential candidate Edmundo González Urrutia, right, and opposition leader María Corina Machado greet supporters during a campaign rally in Valencia before the country’s presidential election in 2024.

(Ariana Cubillos / Associated Press)

Going after Maduro, Rubio argued, was not about promoting democracy or a change of governments. It was striking a drug kingpin fueling crime in American streets, an epidemic of American overdoses, and a flood of illegal migration to America’s borders.

Rubio tied Maduro to Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan street gang whose members the secretary of State says are “worse than Al Qaeda.”

“Venezuela is governed by a narco-trafficking organization that has empowered itself as a nation state,” he said during his Senate confirmation hearing.

Meanwhile, prominent members of Venezuela’s opposition pushed the same message. “Maduro is the head of a narco-terrorist structure,” Machado told Fox News last month.

Security analysts and U.S. intelligence officials suggest that the links between Maduro and Tren de Aragua are overblown.

A declassified memo by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found no evidence of widespread cooperation between Maduro’s government and the gang. It also said Tren de Aragua does not pose a threat to the U.S.

The gang does not traffic fentanyl, and the Drug Enforcement Administration estimates that just 8% of cocaine that reaches the U.S. passes through Venezuelan territory.

Still, Rubio’s strategy appears to have worked.

In July, Trump declared that Tren de Aragua was a terrorist group led by Maduro — and then ordered the Pentagon to use military force against cartels that the U.S. government had labeled terrorists.

Trump deployed thousands of U.S. troops and a small armada of ships and warplanes to the Caribbean and has ordered strikes on five boats off the coast of Venezuela, resulting in 24 deaths. The administration says the victims were “narco-terrorists” but has provided no evidence.

Elliott Abrams, a veteran diplomat who served as special envoy to Venezuela in Trump’s first term, said he believes the White House will carry out limited strikes in Venezuela.

“I think the next step is that they’re going to hit something in Venezuela — and I don’t mean boots on the ground. That’s not Trump,” Abrams said. “It’s a strike, and then it’s over. That’s very low risk to the United States.”

He continued: “Now, would it be nice if that kind of activity spurred a colonel to lead a coup? Yeah, it would be nice. But the administration is never going to say that.”

Even if Trump refrains from a ground invasion, there are major risks.

“If it’s a war, then what is the war’s aim? Is it to overthrow Maduro? Is it more than Maduro? Is it to get a democratically elected president and a democratic regime in power?” said John Yoo, a professor of law at UC Berkeley, who served as a top legal advisor to the George W. Bush administration. “The American people will want to know what’s the end state, what’s the goal of all of this.”

“Whenever you have two militaries bristling that close together, there could be real action,” said Christopher Sabatini, a senior fellow for Latin America at the think tank Chatham House. “Trump is trying to do this on the cheap. He’s hoping maybe he won’t have to commit. But it’s a slippery slope. This could draw the United States into a war.”

Sabatini and others added that even if the U.S. pressure drives out Maduro, what follows is far from certain.

Venezuela is dominated by a patchwork of guerrilla and paramilitary groups that have enriched themselves with gold smuggling, drug trafficking and other illicit activities. None have incentive to lay down arms.

And the country’s opposition is far from unified.

Machado, who dedicated her Nobel Prize to Trump in a clear effort to gain his support, says she is prepared to govern Venezuela. But there are others — both in exile and in Maduro’s administration — who would like to lead the country.

Machado supporter Juan Fernandez said anything would be better than maintaining the status quo.

“Some say we’re not prepared, that a transition would cause instability,” he said. “How can Maduro be the secure choice when 8 million Venezuelans have left, when there is no gasoline, political persecution and rampant inflation?”

Fernandez praised Rubio for pushing the Venezuela issue toward “an inflection point.”

What a difference, he said, to have a decision-maker in the White House with family roots in another country long oppressed by an authoritarian regime.

“He perfectly understands our situation,” Fernandez said. “And now he has one of the highest positions in the United States.”

Linthicum reported from Mexico City, Wilner from Dallas and Ceballos from Washington. Special correspondent Mery Mogollón in Caracas contributed to this report.

Thousands of mourners gathered at a stadium in Kenya for a state funeral for opposition leader and former prime minister, Raila Odinga. His flag-draped coffin was carried by uniformed officers ahead of the service, which was attended by President William Ruto.

Past visits by top leaders to Yasukuni, which honours convicted war criminals, have angered Japan’s neighbours.

The new leader of Japan’s governing party, Sanae Takaichi, has decided not to visit a controversial World War II shrine in Tokyo, as uncertainty remains over whether she will be appointed prime minister ahead of a visit by United States President Donald Trump before the end of the month.

Takaichi, 64, seen as an arch-conservative from the right of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), has previously visited the Yasukuni Shrine, including as a government minister.

However, Takaichi opted on Friday to send an offering, and reports said she was likely to refrain from visiting in order not to antagonise the country’s neighbours whom Imperial Japan had occupied and committed atrocities against in the first half of the 20th century.

Past visits by top leaders to Yasukuni, which honours convicted war criminals, have angered China and South Korea. The last visit by a Japanese premier was in 2013 by the late Shinzo Abe, Takaichi’s mentor.

Takaichi’s decision not to visit the shrine came as Japan’s former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama, best known for making a statement apologising for atrocities Japan committed in Asia over the course of World War II, died aged 101.

Murayama, in office from 1994 to 1996, issued the 1995 “Murayama statement” on the 50th anniversary of Japan’s unconditional surrender.

Murayama died on Friday at a hospital in his hometown, Oita, in southwestern Japan, according to a statement from Mizuho Fukushima, head of Japan’s Social Democratic Party (SDP).

Hiroyuki Takano, secretary-general of the SDP in Oita, told the AFP news agency he had been informed that Murayama died of old age.

Political wrangling

Takaichi became LDP leader on October 4, but her aim to become Japan’s first female prime minister was derailed after the LDP’s coalition partner of 26 years, the Komeito party, pulled the plug on their alliance last week.

The LDP is now in talks about forming a different alliance, boosting Takaichi’s chances of becoming premier in a parliamentary vote that local media reports said will likely happen on Tuesday.

The clock is ticking for Takaichi to become Japan’s fifth prime minister in as many years with Trump’s impending visit.

Details of Washington and Tokyo’s trade deal remain unresolved and Trump – who had warm relations with Abe in his first term – wants Japan to stop Russian energy imports and boost defence spending.

Komeito said that the LDP has failed to tighten rules on party funding following a damaging slush fund scandal involving dodgy payments of millions of dollars.

The LDP this week began talks on forming a new coalition with the Japan Innovation Party instead.

The two parties would be two seats short of a majority but the alliance would still likely ensure that Takaichi succeeds in becoming premier.

A spanner in the works could be if opposition parties agreed on a rival candidate but talks earlier this week appeared to make little headway.

More talks were due to take place on Friday.

State of emergency to be declared in capital as protests that led to last week’s ouster of former president intensify.

Peru’s new president, Jose Jeri, is refusing to resign amid Gen Z antigovernment protests, inflamed by the death of a popular rapper, as crime grips the nation.

The government said late on Thursday that a state of emergency would be declared in the capital, Lima, as the prosecutor’s office announced it was investigating the previous day’s killing of 32-year-old protester and hip-hop singer Eduardo Ruiz in a mass demonstration.

Peru’s police chief, General Oscar Arriola, said that Luis Magallanes, a member of the force, was believed to have fired the bullet and had subsequently been detained and dismissed from his job. Arriola added that Magallanes was being treated in hospital after being physically assaulted.

Ruiz was the first person to die in the protests, which began a month ago with calls for better pensions and wages for young people and later became a lightning rod for broader frustrations with crime and corruption, culminating in the ouster of former President Dina Boluarte last week.

On Wednesday, thousands massed around the country, with hundreds clashing with police outside Congress in Lima, as they called on recently appointed Jeri, the seventh president in less than a decade, to resign.

“My responsibility is to maintain the stability of the country; that is my responsibility and my commitment,” Jeri told the local media after visiting Peru’s parliament, where he said he would request powers to combat crime.

Jeri expressed regret over Ruiz’s death in a post on X, saying the death would be “objectively” investigated. He blamed violence on “delinquents who infiltrated a peaceful demonstration to sow chaos”.

“The full force of the law will be on them,” he wrote.

Reporting from Lima, Al Jazeera’s Mariana Sanchez said that Ruiz’s death had “added another layer to the ongoing political crisis” in the country and had “angered even more Peruvians who are frustrated with the corruption, with the insecurity in the country”.

“He was peacefully hanging out with his friends. Unfortunately, the bullet hit his chest. We want justice for him,” activist Milagros Samillan told Al Jazeera.

The prosecutor’s office wrote on X that it had ordered the removal of Ruíz’s body from a Lima hospital and the “collection of audiovisual and ballistic evidence in the area where the incident occurred, in the context of serious human rights violations”.

Newly appointed interior minister, Vicente Tiburcio, said that 89 police and 22 civilians had been injured during Wednesday’s protest and 11 people were detained.

Oct. 16 (UPI) — With less than three weeks before New Yorkers head to the polls to select the city’s 111th mayor, candidates Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani, Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa and independent Andrew Cuomo squared off for a heated debate Thursday night in Manhattan.

Though a trio of candidates stood before lecterns at WNBC’s 30 Rockefeller Center studios, the debate was mainly a fight between Mamdani, the New York City assemblyman leading in the polls, and Cuomo, the former governor of New York State, leaving Sliwa, founder of the nonprofit crime prevention Guardian Angels organization, trying to enter the fray.

Leadership

Cuomo, who left the New York governor’s mansion in August 2021 amid sexual harassment allegations, was quick to attack Mamdani, saying the New York assemblyman’s inexperience makes him unfit to oversee a 300,000-employee city workforce and a multi-billion-dollar budget.

“This is no job for on-the-job training,” he said. “And if you look at the failed mayors they’re ones that have no management experience. Don’t do it again.”

Mamdani, in rebuttal, attempted to frame Cuomo as an out-of-touch politician backed by wealthy donors, while pointing to his successes in the state’s assembly as proof of his own experience.

The former governor said Mamdani’s answer was proof of his lack of experience — and a lack of experience in leading New York could have deadly consequences.

“This is not a job for a first timer,” Cuomo said. “Any day you could have a hurricane, God forbid, a 9/11, a health pandemic. If you don’t know what you’re doing people will die.”

“If we have a health pandemic, then why would New Yorkers turn back to the governor who sent seniors to their deaths in nursing homes?” Mamdani replied, referring to a public scandal over how Cuomo’s administration handled COVID-19 in nursing homes and other elder-care facilities.

Sliwa, who has taken a tough-on-crime stance, attempted to interject into the conversation, at one point telling the moderators that he was being “marginalized.”

He then attempted to set himself apart from the two men who have held political seats, by emphasizing that he is not a politican, and referring to Cuomo as the “architect” and Mamdani the “apprentice.”

“Thank God I’m not a professional politician because they have helped create this crime crisis in the city that we face and I will resolve [it],” he said.

President Donald Trump

President Donald Trump’s presence and ongoing immigration crackdown have loomed large over the race and ahve put a greater spotlight on Mamdani, who was recently little known outside of the city, as the American leader has called him and his left-leaning policies out on social media.

Asked what he would say to Trump in their first phone call, Mamdani said he would tell the American leader that he is willing to work with him to help raise the living standards of New Yorkers, but if that he seeks to cut funds to the city “he’s going to have to get through me as the next mayor.”

Cuomo similarly offered that he’d like to work with Trump “but Number One, I will fight you every step of the way if you try to hurt New York.”

Sliwa criticized both candidates for trying to act “tough” when doing so would only end up hurting New Yorkers.

“They want to take on Donald Trump. Look, you can be tough, but you can’t be tough if its going to cost people desperately needed federal funds,” he said, stating he would sit down with the president and negotiate.

“But if you try to get tough with Trump, the only people who are going to suffer from that are the people of New York City.”

Israel-Hamas

With the first phase of the Israel-Hamas cease-fire deal underway, moderators called on Mamdani to clarify previous statements he has made about the Palestinian militant group specifically about whether it should disarm.

In response, Mamdani said he was “proud” to be among the first New York elected officials to call for a cease-fire, which he defined as meaning “all parties have to cease fire and put down their weapons.”

Sliwa then jumped in to chastise Cuomo and Mamdani for neither applauding Trump for securing the cease-fire deal.

Cuomo then rebutted that he did applaud Trump and his administration, using the topic to accuse Mamdani and his stance against Israel’s occupation of the West Bank as coded language meaning “Israel does not have a right to exist as a Jewish state.”

Mamdani then clapped back that “occupation” is an international legal term that “Mr. Cuomo has no regard for” as he has joined the legal defense team of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in their fight against arrest warrants at the International Criminal Court.

He was then pressed on his previous reluctance to condemn the use of the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which to some is a pro-Palestinian slogan of resistance against oppression and to others as encouragement of violence against Jews.

Sliwa also lashed out at Mamdani, stating “Jews don’t trust you’re going to be there for them when they are victims of anti-Semitic attacks.”

The second mayoral debate is scheduled for Oct. 22.

Early voting opens Oct. 25. The election is to be held Nov. 4.

WASHINGTON — In his final hours as president, Bill Clinton on Saturday granted pardons to 140 Americans, including Patricia Hearst, an heiress kidnapped in the 1970s; his half-brother, Roger, who was convicted on drug charges; and Susan McDougal, who spent 18 months in jail rather than testify about the Clintons’ role in the Whitewater scandal.

Former Housing Secretary Henry G. Cisneros, ex-CIA Director John M. Deutch and former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington also received last-minute pardons.

But Clinton chose not to pardon financier Michael Milken, who pleaded guilty in 1990 to six counts of securities fraud. Milken’s request for a pardon had been championed by influential business and political figures.

In the end, strong opposition from law enforcement and the investment community–including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. attorney in New York–convinced the president that Milken did not deserve a pardon, according to a former administration official who asked not to be identified.

“A lot of influential people on Wall Street weighed in against the pardon,” the official said. “The press obsession with Milken and whether he was going to get a pardon was out of proportion.”

Milken, who heard of the decision early Saturday at his Encino home, is optimistic that one day he will be pardoned, said his spokesman, Geoffrey Moore.

“This man is never bitter,” Moore said. “He’s been through a lot worse than this. I’m sure he would have preferred another decision, but he never looks back.”

Ari Swiller, a spokesman for Ron Burkle, the Los Angeles grocery magnate who spearheaded Milken’s pardon efforts, would not comment on whether a campaign for a Milken pardon will continue. Burkle, who heads the Yucaipa Management Co., is a close friend of Clinton and one of his early campaign contributors.

“We don’t want to judge the process,” Burkle said. “On the good side, this has provided the opportunity for more people to know of Mike’s philanthropic efforts.”

The White House had been expected to announce its final pardons Friday, but Clinton was preoccupied with a more pressing issue–a deal with Whitewater independent counsel Robert W. Ray in which he acknowledged making false statements about his affair with Monica S. Lewinsky. In return, Ray promised not to prosecute Clinton.

During his eight-year term, Clinton pardoned 395 people, about the same as President Reagan, and commuted the sentences of 61 prisoners. Former President Bush pardoned 74 people during his four-year term.

McDougal learned of her pardon while watching the inauguration on television with friends in Arkansas.

“I have carried this burden with me since I was convicted,” said McDougal, who has repeatedly proclaimed her innocence. “I never realized how heavy the burden was until today. Now all of that has gone away.”

Los Angeles attorney Mark Geragos, who defended McDougal, said her pardon was one of a handful that Clinton wanted to sleep on before making a final decision Saturday morning.

“Susan is a very polarizing figure, and [Clinton] didn’t want to give the perception that a deal was cut,” Geragos said. “This is the final vindication for her.”

As part of the pardon, McDougal also avoids repayment of about $300,000 in court-ordered restitution plus interest, Geragos said.

Kenneth W. Starr, the former independent counsel who charged McDougal with civil contempt, did not return phone calls Saturday.

The pardon for Hearst ends a saga that began in the 1970s, when the newspaper heiress was kidnapped by revolutionaries of the so-called Symbionese Liberation Army and then joined them as “Tania.” She served a prison term for bank robbery.

Former President Carter, who commuted Hearst’s prison sentence, and his wife, Rosalynn, were strong advocates of a pardon for her.

“The Carters weighed in, and the president took their advice seriously,” the former Clinton official said. “She’s reformed and deserves a chance to vote.”

But Sarah Jane Olson, a former SLA member who was captured in 1999 after being a fugitive for nearly 25 years, said Saturday that Hearst fabricated much of her account of the kidnapping.

“Just because Clinton pardoned Patty Hearst does not mean that her story is true,” said Olson, who is scheduled to face trial this spring for allegedly planting bombs under two police cars. “Money, access to power and friends in high places have once again–as with her earlier commutation–influenced presidential prerogative in favor of Patricia Hearst.” Hearst could not be reached for comment.

Symington, a Republican, was convicted in 1997 of bank and wire fraud stemming from his days as a Phoenix real estate developer. The conviction was later thrown out when an appeals court ruled that one of the jurors had been improperly dismissed.

Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles had been attempting to restore criminal charges against Symington.

“Obviously, that’s not going to happen now,” said Thom Mrozak, spokesman for the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles. He said prosecutors had no comment on the pardon.

Cisneros resigned in 1996 amid controversy over his statements to the FBI about paying “hush money” to a former mistress. Formerly head of Univision, he now is chairman of American CityVista, an affordable housing venture at Kaufman & Broad Home Corp..

Former CIA Director Deutch, who was accused of transferring classified information to his home computer, had been discussing a possible plea deal to settle his case.

Roger Clinton pleaded guilty in 1985 to conspiring to sell cocaine.

In addition to Milken, Clinton declined to grant pardons to Jonathan Jay Pollard, convicted of spying for Israel; Native American activist Leonard Peltier, convicted of killing two FBI agents in 1975; and Webster L. Hubbell, a former law partner of Hillary Rodham Clinton who was convicted in a Whitewater-related trial. He had not requested a pardon.

The ability to grant pardons is a uniquely presidential power designated by the Constitution.

The purpose of a pardon is to grant official forgiveness of a crime. It does not expunge a person’s criminal record, but it can have the effect, depending on the state in which the person lives, of restoring some of the civil rights that a criminal conviction takes away, such as the right to vote, to run for office and to carry a firearm.

Clinton also acted Saturday to commute the prison sentences of 36 Americans. Unlike a pardon, a commutation does not imply forgiveness of the underlying offense but merely shortens the punishment.

Among those granted clemency were Peter MacDonald Sr., former leader of the Navajo Nation, who was imprisoned for his role in a 1989 riot that resulted in two deaths; and former Chicago-area Democratic Rep. Mel Reynolds, sent to prison for having sex with an underage campaign worker and for bank fraud.

*

Rosenblatt reported from Washington and Vrana from Los Angeles. Times staff writers Edmund Sanders and Alissa J. Rubin in Washington and Ann O’Neill and Richard Winton in Los Angeles contributing to this story.

Hello and happy Thursday. It’s me, California columnist Anita Chabria, filling in for your usual host, Washington bureau chief Michael Wilner.

Andrea Grossman was a kid when her mother pulled her out of school to join the 1969 Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, a nationwide day of peaceful protest. They held hands while her mom walked in a knit suit and ladylike shoes, joining more than 2 million people nationwide.

Grossman, now one of the organizers of the Beverly Hills segment of the “No Kings” marches being held in more than 2,000 cities this weekend, remembers that opponents of that long-ago protest threw stinky rat poison on the lawns in Exposition Park so participants couldn’t sit on the grass. But protesters were not deterred.

“It made it all the more rebellious of us to be there,” Grossman told me. “It made us more insistent that we had to be there.”

Today, that rat poison is being metaphorically hurled by MAGA leaders such as House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), in the form of noxious allegations that the No Kings marches are “Hate America” rallies staged for a “rabid base” of criminal agitators.

“It’s all the pro-Hamas wing and the antifa people, they’re all coming out,” Johnson said on Fox News.

Of course, that is dumb and false. It would be all too easy to write off comments such as Johnson’s as partisan jibber-jabber, but his insidious words are the kind of poison that seeps into the soil and shouldn’t be ignored.

Participants in the Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam demonstrate in 1969 at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco.

(Clay Geerdes / Getty Images)

The ‘enemy within’

Johnson isn’t the only Republican working overtime to smear everyday folks such as Grossman. Talk about organized campaigns — Trumpites are all going after No Kings with the same script.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) said: “These guys are playing to the most radical, small, and violent base in the country. You’ll see them on Saturday on the Mall. They just do not love this country.”

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has parroted similar messaging, and Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), diving into old, antisemitic conspiracies, described the events as “a Soros paid-for protest,” adding that the National Guard would probably need to be activated.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi added her two cents, apparently confusing printed signs, the kind that say, a union or organizations such as Planned Parenthood or the ACLU, might have made up, with evidence of diabolical terrorist networks.

“You’re seeing people out there with thousands of signs that all match,” Bondi told Fox News. “They are organized and someone is funding it. We are going to get to the funding of antifa, we’re going to get to the root of antifa and we are going to find and charge all of those people who are causing this chaos.”

Note to Bondi: Matching signs are not a conspiracy. Just ask Kinko’s.

But in her defense, it was a mere two weeks ago when President Trump addressed the leaders of the U.S. military at Quantico, Va. There, he warned that the use of military troops on American protesters was about to become reality, if he has any say in it.

“This is going to be a big thing for the people in this room, because it’s the enemy from within, and we have to handle it before it gets out of control,” Trump said.

That came on the heels of his executive order declaring antifa — a general descriptor for anyone who opposes fascism — as a terrorist organization.

So to recap: The president declares “antifa” a terrorist organization, warns military brass that they must be ready to defeat internal enemies, then MAGA Republicans begin to falsely claim No Kings rallies are full of “antifa.”

Andrea Grossman, second from left, with other activists in 2024 discussing efforts to protect a Beverly Hills abortion clinic.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Bad journalism

Grossman calls the idea that she is anti-American “preposterous.”

“We wouldn’t be out there spending our time and energy if we weren’t desperately worried for our country. Of course we love America,” she said.

Here’s where I eat my own: Media are failing miserably and unforgivably in covering this issue — this terrifying march to turn peaceful protest into a criminal offense. We shouldn’t be asking Grossman whether she hates America. We should be pushing Johnson and his ilk to defend his attack on people like her.

“We can both recognize that it’s ridiculous and also that it’s pretty sinister,” Leah Greenberg told me.

She’s the co-executive director of Indivisible, the organization behind the No Kings effort, and she’ll be at the D.C. event — the one Johnson specifically condemned. At the first No Kings rally in Philadelphia, her husband led more than 1,000 people in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, some real anti-American stuff.

“We have to see what is currently happening here, not only as Republicans desperately grasping for a message, but also of them creating a permission structure to, you know, invite a broader crackdown on peaceful dissent,” Greenberg warned.

I asked Grossman whether she felt personally at risk by taking on this organizing role at such a fraught moment, even in Beverly Hills, that hotbed of radicalism. At first, she said she didn’t. But when I asked her why not, she paused for a bit.

“We have to put ourselves out there and it takes risk sometimes,” she finally said. “I mean, I don’t consider myself a freedom fighter by any means. I consider myself a woman of a certain age, you know, who has to stand up and be loud and noisy.”

In her regular life, Grossman runs one of the preeminent literary salons in Los Angeles, drawing authors and luminaries including Rob Reiner, Rep. Jasmine Crockett and legal podcaster Joyce Vance. She was also one of the “abortion yentas” who last year fought a losing battle to protect a controversial abortion clinic in the neighborhood. So she knows risk and doesn’t shy away from it.

But this moment is different, because it’s not normal for a president to declare protests to be terrorism, or for legislators to deem them un-American. It is not normal to fear that the military will be used to silence us.

Which is why No Kings is so crucial to this moment.

It is a movement that seeks to draw the most normal, the most average, the most mild of people to highlight just how abnormal this government is. No flags are going to be burned (though that is a protected 1st Amendment right, no matter what Trump says). No Molotov cocktails will be tossed. Hamas is not invited.

Greenberg said that “anybody with eyes” can see who comes to a No Kings rally.

“You see veterans, you see members of faith communities. You see federal workers, dedicated public servants. You see parents and grandparents and kids all coming together in this joyous and defiant opposition,” she said.

Those are exactly the types that turned out in June, when somewhere between 3 million and 6 million people marched in what felt like a cross between a fall school carnival and a Fourth of July parade. People sauntered, they sat, they sang. But most of all, they showed up.

“If we’re going to be afraid and not say anything, then [they] win,” Grossman said. “The only way to stand up to oppression is to get out there in huge, great numbers.”

So like her mom, she’ll march and she’ll ignore the poison — and much to the dismay of MAGA, I suspect millions of others just like her will too.

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: Justices lean toward rejecting race in redistricting, likely boosting GOP in 2026
The what happened: Mike Johnson’s nightmare: Kevin Kiley is unhappy with the speaker and has nothing to lose
The L.A. Times special: USC finds itself in funding battle between Trump and Newsom over the campus’ future

P.S. This is another bit of propaganda from the Department of Homeland Security. “Remigrate” is a term often embraced by the far right that alludes to the forced deportation of immigrants, legal or not, especially those who are not of European origin.

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

A prominent lawmaker in the United States has announced he will return donations from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), highlighting the powerful pro-Israel lobby group’s waning appeal among Democrats.

Congressman Seth Moulton distanced himself from AIPAC on Thursday, citing the group’s support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Moulton is slated to challenge progressive Senator Ed Markey in next year’s Democratic primaries, ahead of the midterm elections.

The move by Moulton, a centrist and strong supporter of Israel, shows that backing from AIPAC is increasingly becoming a political liability for Democrats after the horrors Israel has unleashed on Gaza.

“In recent years, AIPAC has aligned itself too closely with Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu’s government,” Moulton said in a statement.

“I’m a friend of Israel, but not of its current government, and AIPAC’s mission today is to back that government. I don’t support that direction. That’s why I’ve decided to return the donations I’ve received, and I will not be accepting their support.”

For decades, Israel has leveraged its political connections and network of wealthy donors to push for unconditional support for its policies.

In 2022, AIPAC organised a political action committee (PAC) to exert sway in US elections, mostly using its financial might to help defeat progressive candidates critical of Israel in Democratic primaries.

Last year, the group helped oust two vocal critics of Israel in Congress – Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush – by backing their primary challengers with tens of millions of dollars.

I am returning AIPAC donations and refusing to accept any donations or support from them.

The FEC filing I made yesterday reflects that we are returning donations. pic.twitter.com/shBgHmYB1s

— Seth Moulton (@sethmoulton) October 16, 2025

Increased scrutiny

But Israel’s war on Gaza has led to an outpouring of criticisms, with leading rights groups and United Nations investigators calling it a genocide.

In light of that outcry, AIPAC’s role in US politics has come under greater scrutiny, particularly in Democratic circles where support for Israel has slipped to historic lows.

Moreover, AIPAC has endorsed far-right candidates like Congressman Randy Fine – who celebrated the killing of a US citizen by Israel and openly called for starving Palestinians in Gaza – which further alienated some Democrats.

AIPAC’s critics often liken it to the National Rifle Association (NRA), the once-bipartisan gun rights lobby that Democrats now reject nearly universally.

Usamah Andrabi, a spokesperson for the progressive group Justice Democrats, said AIPAC and its affiliates “are transforming from a lobby that establishment Democrats could rely on to buy a seat in Washington into a kiss of death for candidates who have their support”.

“Our movement’s work to demand the Democratic Party reject AIPAC as a toxic pariah is not only working but ensuring that the pro-genocide Israel lobby’s influence in Washington is waning,” Andrabi told Al Jazeera.

Even on the right of the ideological spectrum, some figures in President Donald Trump’s “America First” movement have been critical of AIPAC’s outsized influence.

In August, the lobby group accused right-wing Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of betraying “American values” over her criticism of Israel.

Greene shot back, saying that AIPAC serves the interests of a foreign government. “I’m as AMERICAN as they come! I can’t be bought and I’m not backing down,” she wrote in a social media post.

AIPAC is expected to target some key races in next year’s midterm elections, including the Democratic Senate primary in Michigan, where progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed is facing off against staunch Israel supporter Haley Stevens.

In 2022, the lobby group helped Stevens defeat then-Congressman Andy Levin, who hails from a prominent Michigan Jewish family, in a House primary.

While it is one of the better-known lobby groups in the US, AIPAC is among dozens of pro-Israel advocacy organisations across the country, including some that also raise funds for candidates, such as NORPAC.

Throughout the assault on Gaza, AIPAC echoed the falsehood that there is no Israeli-imposed famine in the territory and defended the Israeli military’s genocidal conduct while calling for more US aid to the country.

AIPAC argues that it is a thoroughly American organisation with 100 percent of its funding coming from inside the US. It denies taking direction from Israel.

But the lobby group is almost always in full alignment with the Israeli government.

AIPAC members also often meet with Israeli leaders. The group also organises free trips for US lawmakers to travel to Israel and meet with Israeli officials.

‘It’s interesting’

The pro-Israel group’s unflinching support for Netanyahu’s government puts it at odds with the overwhelming majority of Democrats.

A poll this month from the Pew Research Center showed only 18 percent of Democratic respondents have favourable views of the Israeli government.

Still, Democratic Party leaders have continued to associate with AIPAC and accept its endorsement. In August, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar joined lawmakers on an AIPAC-sponsored trip to Israel.

That same month, AIPAC-endorsed House Minority Whip Katherine Clark earned the group’s praise after walking back comments where she decried the “starvation and genocide and destruction of Gaza”.

California Governor Gavin Newsom – who is widely seen as a potential presidential candidate in 2028 – also skirted a question about AIPAC in an interview this week.

Asked about the organisation on the Higher Learning podcast, Newsom said AIPAC is not relevant to his day-to-day life.

“I haven’t thought about AIPAC, and it’s interesting. You’re like the first to bring up AIPAC in years, which is interesting,” he said.

In response to Moulton’s comments on Thursday, AIPAC issued a defiant statement, accusing the Democrat of “abandoning his friends to grab a headline”.

“His statement comes after years of him repeatedly asking for our endorsement and is a clear message to AIPAC members in Massachusetts, and millions of pro-Israel Democrats nationwide, that he rejects their support and will not stand with them,” the group said in a social media post.

CHICAGO — Since the Trump administration announced its intention to accelerate and forcefully detain and deport thousands of immigrants here, the Chicago area is a split screen between everyday life and a city under siege.

As many people shop, go to work, walk their dogs and stroll with their friends through parks, others are being chased down, tear-gassed, detained and assaulted by federal agents carrying out immigration sweeps.

The situation is similar to what occurred in Los Angeles in summer, as ICE swept through Southern California, grabbing people off the street and raiding car washes and Home Depots in predominantly Latino areas, while leaving large swaths of the region untouched.

Take Sunday, the day of the Chicago Marathon.

Some 50,000 runners hailing from more than 100 countries and 50 states, gathered downtown to dash, jog and slog over 26.3 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline and city streets.

The sun was bright, the temperatures hovered in the upper-60s, and leaves of maple, oak, aspen and ginkgo trees colored the city with splashes of yellow, orange and red.

Demonstrators march outside the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Broadview, Ill., on Oct. 10.

(Kayana Szymczak/For The Times)

It was one of those rare, glorious Midwestern fall days when everyone comes outside to soak in the sunlight, knowing the gloom and cold of winter is about to take hold.

At 12:30, Ludwig Marchel and Karen Vanherck of Belgium strolled west along East Monroe Street, through Millennium Park. They smiled and proudly wore medals around their necks commemorating their marathon achievement. They said they were not concerned about coming to Chicago, despite news stories depicting violent protests and raids, and the Trump administration’s description of the city as “war torn,” a “hellhole,” a “killing field” and “the most dangerous city in the world.”

“Honestly. I was mostly worried that the government shutdown was somehow going to affect my flight,” said Marchel. He said he hadn’t seen anything during his few days in town that would suggest the city was unsafe.

Another man, who declined to give his name, said he had come from Mexico City to complete the race. He said he wasn’t concerned, either.

“I have my passport, I have a visa, and I have money,” he said. “Why should I be concerned?”

At that same moment, 10 miles northwest, a community was being tear-gassed.

Dozens of residents in the quiet, leafy neighborhood of Albany Park had gathered in the street to shout “traitor” and “Nazi” as federal immigration agents grabbed a man and attempted to detain others.

According to witness accounts, agents in at least three vehicles got out and started shoving people to the ground before throwing tear gas canisters into the street. Videos of the event show masked agents tackling a person in a red shirt, throwing a person in a skeleton costume to the ground, and violently hurling a bicycle out of the street as several plumes of smoke billow into the air. A woman can be heard screaming while neighbors yell at the agents.

Last week, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order requiring agents to issue two warnings before using riot control weapons such as tear gas, chemical sprays, plastic bullets and flash grenades.

Witnesses told the Chicago Sun-Times that no warnings had been given.

Deirdre Anglin, community member from Chicago, takes part in a demonstration near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Broadview, Ill., on Oct. 10.

(Kayana Szymczak/For The Times)

Since Trump’s “Operation Midway Blitz” was initiated more than six weeks ago, roughly 1,000 people have been arrested or detained.

At the ICE detention facility, in Broadview — a suburb 12 miles west of downtown — there have been daily protests. While most have been peaceful, some have devolved into physical clashes between federal agents or police and protesters.

In September, federal agents shot pepper balls and tear gas at protesters peacefully gathering outside the facility. On Saturday, local law enforcement forced protesters away from the site with riot sticks and threats of tear gas. Several protesters were knocked to the ground and forcefully handcuffed. By the end of the evening, 15 people had been arrested.

Early Sunday afternoon, roughly two dozen protesters returned to the site. They played music, danced, socialized and heckled ICE vehicles as they entered and exited the fenced-off facility.

In a largely Latino Chicago neighborhood called Little Village, things appeared peaceful Sunday afternoon.

Known affectionately by its residents as the “Midwestern capital of Mexico,” the district of 85,000 is predominantly Latino. Michael Rodriguez, a Chicago city councilman and the neighborhood’s alderman, said 85% of the population is of Mexican descent.

On Sunday afternoon, traditional Mexican music was being broadcast to the street via loudspeakers from the OK Corral VIP, a western wear store.

Demonstrators protest near an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Broadview, Ill., on Oct. 10.

(Kayana Szymczak/For The Times)

Along East 26th Street, where shops and buildings are painted with brightly colored murals depicting Mexican folklore, history and wildlife — such as a golden eagle and jaguar — a family sat at a table eating lunch, while two young women, in their early 20s, laughed and chattered as they strolled west toward Kedzie Avenue.

Rodriguez said that despite appearances, “people are afraid.”

He said he spoke with a teacher who complained that several of her elementary-school aged students have stopped coming to class. Their parents are too afraid to walk them or drive them to school, hearing stories of other parents who have been arrested or detained by ICE agents at other campuses in the city — in front of their terrified children.

Rodriguez’s wife, whom he described as a dark-skinned Latina with degrees from DePaul and Northwestern universities, won’t leave the house without her passport.

At a barber shop called Peluqueria 5 Star Fades Estrellas on 26th, a coiffeur named Juan Garcia sat in a chair near the store entrance. He had a towel draped over the back of his neck. He said his English was limited, but he knew enough to tell a visitor that business was bad.

“People aren’t coming in,” he said. “They are afraid.”

Victor Sanchez, the owner of a taco truck parked on Kedzie Road, about a half-mile south of town, said his clientele — mostly construction workers and landscapers — have largely disappeared.

“Business is down 60%,” he said to a customer. “I don’t know if they have been taken, or if they are too afraid to come out. All I know is they aren’t coming here anymore.”

Rodriguez said that ICE agents have arrested people who live in his neighborhood, but those arrests took place outside the borders of his district.

“I think they know this is a well-organized and aware neighborhood,” he said. “I think they’ve cased it and decided to grab people on the outskirts.”

Oct. 16 (UPI) — The Senate failed for the 10th time to approve a temporary funding bill to reopen the federal government and voted down a Defense Department appropriations bill on Thursday.

The Senate voted 51-45 in favor of a funding resolution to reopen the federal government, but the vote total was less than the 60 needed for approval.

Two Senate Democrats, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, and independent Sen. Angus King of Maine, voted in favor of the temporary government funding measure, according to CNN.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky was the lone GOP member to vote against the measure.

The Senate later in the day voted 50-44 on a year-long appropriations bill to fund the Defense Department as the government enters the 16th day of its shutdown over a stopgap funding bill.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., opposed considering the Defense Department spending bill without also considering the Labor, Health and Human Services appropriations bill, The Hill reported.

Like the government funding measure, the defense budget needs 60 votes to pass. It also would have given a raise for military personnel.

Senate Democrats have voted consistently with no change during the 10 votes to reopen the federal government, as have GOP senators, including Paul in his funding opposition.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., responded to the legislative stalemate by offering to hold floor debates on respective spending bills to fund federal agencies for the 2026 fiscal year, Politico reported.

Thune also suggested Senate Democrats, who have proposed an alternative temporary funding measure, might have some caucus members vote for the House-approved funding resolution due to the effects of an extended government shutdown.

The House already approved the measure favored by the GOP, which simply extends the 2025 funding through Nov. 21 while continuing negotiations on a full-year funding bill.

Senate Democrats have proposed an alternative measure that would fund the federal government through Oct. 31 and extend Affordable Care Act tax credits on insurance premiums and expand Medicaid access.

Schumer blamed the GOP for the budget impasse by refusing to negotiate a proposed $1.5 trillion in additional spending over the next decade that Senate Democrats want to include in the stopgap funding.

“The Trump shutdown drags on because Republicans refuse to work with or even negotiate with Democrats in a serious way to fix the healthcare crisis in America,” Schumer said, as reported by Politico.

Thune in an interview that aired on MSNBC on Thursday morning said Senate Republicans will not negotiate the ACA tax credits until the government is open again, according to ABC News.

The fiscal year started on Oct. 1, which is the first day of the government shutdown due to a lack of funding.

Thune said his party plans to attach additional funding bills to the Pentagon measure, though it’s unclear if Democrats support the idea, CBS News reported.

The additional bills would seek to fund the Departments of Health and Human Services and Labor.

In an analysis published in September, the Urban Institute said the number of uninsured people between the ages of 19 and 34 would increase by 25% if the subsidies expire in the new year.

There would be a 14% increase among children. In all, 4.8 million people would lose health insurance coverage.

The Trump administration has said it’s against extending the ACA subsidies, and has accused Democrats at the state level of using federal tax dollars to provide undocumented immigrants with healthcare services, which Democrats have denied.

Undocumented immigrants are not eligible for health insurance under the ACA, the federal healthcare.gov website states.

In an appearance on MSNBC on Wednesday night, Thune said he told Democratic leaders he’d be willing to hold a vote on the subsidies in exchange for their help reopening the government.

“We can guarantee you a vote by a date certain,” he said. “At some point, Democrats have to take ‘yes’ for an answer.

“I can’t guarantee it’s going to pass. I can guarantee you that there will be a process and you will get a vote.”

Lindsey Horvath knew all the words to “Pink Pony Club.”

It was an overcast Sunday in June, the WeHo Pride parade was in full swing and the hit song about an iconic West Hollywood gay bar was blasting at full volume.

Sure, the county supervisor’s sequined, rainbow muumuu was giving her an angry rash. But that did little to dampen her spirits as she danced atop her pink pony-themed Pride float, swaying and mouthing the lyrics.

Five hours later, Horvath had traded her sequins and rainbow sneakers for a simple black dress and heels.

Now, she sat on a wooden pew for evening Mass at her 121-year-old Catholic parish in Hollywood.

But she still knew all the words, albeit this time to a traditional hymn about the holiness of the Lord. And then she knelt down in quiet prayer.

Horvath, 43, defies easy characterization.

She is the first millennial member of the county Board of Supervisors, a governing body that wields tremendous power despite remaining unknown to most Angelenos.

When elected in November 2022, she went from representing roughly 35,000 people as a West Hollywood City Council member to having more than 2 million constituents across a sweeping, 431-square-mile district that sprawls from the Ventura County line down to Santa Monica, east to Hollywood and up through much of the San Fernando Valley.

While attending the University of Notre Dame, Horvath held a leadership position with the school’s College Republicans chapter, helped create Notre Dame’s first gay-straight alliance and drew national opposition for staging “The Vagina Monologues” at the Catholic university — all while working three jobs to pay off her student loans. (She’s still paying them off.)

During her 2022 campaign for supervisor, she had the backing of some of the most progressive politicians in the city, including then-Councilmember-elect Eunisses Hernandez, as well as then-Councilmember Joe Buscaino, one of the more conservative members of the body.

As a member of the West Hollywood City Council, she helped approve what was then the highest minimum wage in the country, yet her county reelection bid was just endorsed by one of the region’s most prominent pro-business groups.

In the three years since she was elected to the county Board of Supervisors, she has effectively rewritten the structure of county government and drastically changed its approach to homelessness response.

Horvath’s Midwestern mien, unflagging politeness and warm smile belie her fierce ambition.

She has long been seen as someone who does not — to crib a phrase occasionally used about her behind closed doors — “wait her turn.” And that impatience has worked out OK for her so far.

All of which raises the question, will Horvath challenge Karen Bass in the June 2026 Los Angeles mayoral race?

Horvath speaks as supporters rally in September for her motion to pass an emergency rent relief program.

(Al Seib / For The Times)

Her name has been bandied as a potential Los Angeles mayoral candidate since early in the year, when her public profile exploded in the wake of the devastating Palisades fire and tensions between her and Bass first became public.

She has done little to tamp the speculation since, though some posit she is merely expanding her profile ahead of a run for county executive in 2028.

Still, the political rumor mill went into overdrive in early summer, as word trickled out that the erstwhile mayor of West Hollywood had moved into a two-bedroom apartment at the edge of Hollywood — firmly in the city of Los Angeles.

When asked about her mayoral intentions late last month, Horvath demurred, but made clear the door was open.

“I have no plans to run for mayor,” she said, sitting under the sun in Gloria Molina Grand Park, just outside her office in the Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration, within direct view of City Hall.

“I continue to be asked by people I deeply respect, so I continue to listen to them and consider their requests, and I’m taking that seriously,” she continued. “But I’m focused on the work of the county.”

Horvath, left, embraces Mayor Karen Bass in August at an event in Pacific Palisades.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Horvath declined to share specifics about who was pushing her to run, though she said they were “significant stakeholders” that didn’t hail from any single community.

On Monday, former schools chief Austin Beutner kicked off his campaign for mayor, becoming the first serious candidate to challenge Bass. Political watchers have speculated that Beutner’s entrée could potentially open the floodgates by offering a permission structure for others to challenge the mayor of the nation’s second-largest city.

In the immediate wake of the January firestorm, Bass’ political future appeared to be in real jeopardy, but she has since regained some of her footing and shored up support with powerful interests, such as local labor groups.

***

Horvath was 26 and had lived in West Hollywood for all of 18 months when Sal Guarriello, a 90-year-old West Hollywood council member, suddenly died.

It was spring 2009. The advertising executive and Ohio transplant was active in Democratic and feminist circles, co-founding the Hollywood chapter of the National Organization for Women and leading the West Hollywood Women’s Advisory Board. (Raised by conservatives, Horvath started college as a Republican but soon evolved into a staunch Democrat.)

Former Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti — who was then president of the Los Angeles City Council — had become a friend and mentor to Horvath through her activism. He and others urged her to throw her hat into the ring for the open seat.

More than 30 people applied, but Horvath was ultimately chosen by the remaining members of the council to join them — an outcome that was stunning, even to her.

After two years in her appointed role, she lost an election bid in 2011 but continued to make a name for herself in the tight-knit, clubby world of progressive West Hollywood politics.

Undeterred, she ran again for West Hollywood City Council in 2015 and won.

Horvath is sworn in as the new county supervisor for District 3 in December 2022.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Horvath remained on the council for the next seven years and twice served as mayor before turning her ambitions toward the county Hall of Administration.

She was seen as an underdog in her supervisor’s race, running against former state Sen. Bob Hertzberg, a political veteran who had a 3-to-1 fundraising advantage and first took elected office as she was entering high school.

Hertzberg had far more name recognition, but Horvath ultimately defeated him with a coalition that included local Democratic clubs and some of labor.

***

On the Board of Supervisors, Horvath has been unafraid to take chances and ruffle feathers.

Less than two years into her first term, Horvath was leading the charge to fundamentally reinvent the structure of county government, which hadn’t been meaningfully changed in more than a century.

Horvath’s bold plan to increase the size of the board from five to nine supervisors and create a new elected county executive position was approved by voters last November.

Voters will choose the county’s first elected executive in 2028. Opponents (and even some allies) have long griped that Horvath has her sights set on the very position she helped create, which will undoubtedly be one of the most powerful elected offices in the state.

“There are people who are never going to be convinced that I created this measure without seeing a seat for myself in it,” she says. “I’m not interested in convincing people of that. I’m interested in doing the work.”

As she campaigned for Measure G, critics also said Horvath and her allies were moving too fast, with too much left to figure out after the vote, including the price tag.

“Not everybody always loves you when you do things that upset the status quo. But I think history judges people not by ‘Did everybody love them in a given moment?’ … It’s were they smart and were they brave,” Garcetti said of Horvath.

“And she’s both,” he added.

Still, some of those criticisms came to bear in July, when it was revealed that county officials committed a near-unthinkable administrative screwup. When voters approved the sprawling overhaul to county government in November, the move unintentionally repealed Measure J, the county’s landmark criminal justice reform passed by voters in 2020.

Horvath said she didn’t think she and other proponents moved too fast, arguing that if they hadn’t seized the moment, they would have missed the opportunity “to bring about the change that has been stuck for far too long.”

Horvath argues that the fact that Measure J could have been unwritten in the first place is why Measure G was so needed.

***

Horvath was, briefly, everywhere during the fires.

While Mayor Bass receded into the background, Horvath was a constant presence at media briefings and on the news.

Her face was so omnipresent that a man she’d recently gone on a date with — someone who didn’t fully understand what she did for a living — spotted her on television with some confusion.

That was the last she heard from him, she said. (Dating as a public official is “very weird,” and not just because the one time she tried to use Tinder while abroad, she was seemingly banned for impersonating herself.)

She also tussled with Bass behind closed doors in late January, as revealed in text messages obtained by The Times that highlighted an increasingly fractious relationship.

The two women were at odds even before flames laid waste to a wide swath of coastal paradise.

Last November, Horvath went public with a proposal to shrink the duties of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, which is overseen by city and county political appointees.

Horvath called for hundreds of millions of dollars to be shifted out of the agency and into a new county department focused on homelessness — a proposal to which Bass strenuously objected.

Horvath ultimately pushed her strategy forward in April, but not without warnings from Bass about creating a “massive disruption” in the region’s fight against homelessness.

Horvath attends a news conference celebrating the Army Corps of Engineers clearing debris from the final house in the Palisades in late August.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Horvath’s relationships in the Palisades have also not been without some tension.

The supervisor recently pledged $10 million of her county discretionary funds to help rebuild the Palisades-Malibu YMCA, but some in the community have felt betrayed by her, according to Pacific Palisades Residents Assn. President Jessica Rogers.

“We don’t believe that she’s properly engaging her community,” Rogers said, citing the independent commission that Horvath convened in the wake of the fires. “She put a lot of time and energy into creating this report. The intentions might have been good, but she didn’t include proper community participation.”

Rogers was particularly bothered by Horvath’s proposal for a countywide rebuilding authority, since Rogers felt like Horvath hadn’t earned their trust. The rebuilding authority, which was supported by the mayor of Malibu, did not come to fruition.

“There’s a perception that [Horvath] is too aggressive,” said another community leader, who asked to speak anonymously because they hope to get things done without alienating anybody. “But there’s more of a mix to how people feel about her than you can see.”

The loudest voices, particularly in community WhatsApp groups, NextDoor and other forums, tend to be the most vitriolic, the community leader said, positing that some of the gripes about Horvath had more to do with her progressive politics than her leadership.

“People are suffering, and I will always show up for my constituents — especially when the conversations are difficult. The Blue Ribbon Commission provided independent, expert guidance on a sustainable rebuild. Its recommendations were meant to inform, not replace, community engagement,” Horvath said.

***

The chances of Horvath entering the mayoral race still remain far slimmer than the alternative, particularly because she is up for reelection in 2026 — meaning she would have to sacrifice her safe board seat for an uphill battle challenging an incumbent who still has deep wells of support in the city.

Former Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin, who long represented the Westside and now directs the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs at Cal State LA, said he wondered why someone would want the job of mayor while in the comparatively plush position of county supervisor.

Supervisors have more power and suffer far less scrutiny, he argued. Still, there were benefits to remaining in the mix.

“Being mentioned as a potential candidate is one of the greatest places a political figure can be. Because when you’re in the mentioning stage, it’s all about your strengths, your assets, your positive attributes,” Bonin said with a laugh. “Once you declare, it’s the reverse.”

Times staff writers David Zahniser and Rebecca Ellis contributed to this report.

It was a major talking point in the final months of Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign: If re-elected, the Republican leader pledged to make in vitro fertilisation (IVF) free for those seeking to get pregnant.

“Under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment,” Trump told NBC News last year, adding that his plans would cover “all Americans that get it, all Americans that need it”.

“We’re going to be paying for that treatment. Or we’re going to be mandating that the insurance company pay.”

While that campaign promise remains unrealised, the Trump administration took a step on Thursday to make the procedure more accessible.

Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump announced a collaboration with the company EMD Serono, a subsidiary of the pharmaceutical giant Merck, to offer lower-priced fertility drugs on his upcoming prescription marketplace, TrumpRx.

“ EMD Serono, the largest fertility drug manufacturer in the world, has agreed to provide massive discounts to all fertility drugs they sell in the United States, including the most popular drug of all, the IVF drug Gonal-F,” Trump told reporters.

Expanding TrumpRx project

The announcement marks the third major pharmaceutical company to agree to provide discounted products on TrumpRx, a direct-to-consumer website slated to launch in 2026.

Trump had threatened drug companies in September with a 100-percent tariff on their products unless they started to build manufacturing facilities in the US.

But that tariff was postponed after the pharmaceutical manufacturer Pfizer announced a deal with TrumpRx on September 30, a day before the tax hike was slated to hit. AstraZeneca, another power player in the industry, followed suit last week.

In Thursday’s news conference, Trump once again credited his tariff threats with bringing the companies to heel.

“They’ll bring a significant portion of their drug manufacturing back to the United States,” Trump said of EMD Serono. “That’s for a lot of reasons, but primarily because of the election result, November 5th, and maybe most importantly because of the tariffs.”

In addition to the forthcoming discounts from EMD Serono, Trump indicated he would encourage insurance companies to expand coverage for IVF treatments.

In the US, laws vary by state as to whether health insurance must cover fertility treatments like IVF. Trump touted the guidance as a breakthrough in making reproductive healthcare more accessible and affordable.

“Effective immediately, for the first time ever, we will make it legal for companies to offer supplemental insurance plans specifically for fertility,” Trump said.

“ Americans will be able to opt in, do specialised coverage, just as they get vision and dental insurance.”

Those plans typically come at an extra fee, on top of regular health insurance rates. That raises questions about how effective the new insurance guidance will be.

More than 26 million Americans – roughly 8 percent of the population – are uninsured, according to US census data. Even more lack access to supplemental policies for dental and vision care.

The American Dental Association, an industry professional group, estimates more than 22 percent of US adults lacked dental insurance as of 2021.

Trump seemed to acknowledge gaps in coverage during his remarks, but he maintained that the new government guidance would offer some adults a pathway to parenthood.

“They’re going to get fertility insurance for the first time,” he continued. “So I don’t know.  I don’t know how well these things are covered.”

A campaign-trail controversy

The Republican leader also credited a 2024 court decision with propelling him to focus on IVF treatments.

IVF involves removing eggs from a patient’s ovaries and fertilising them in a laboratory environment. These eggs are then inserted into the patient’s uterus or frozen for future use.

The use of such treatments is on the rise in the US: In 2023, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine found that 95,860 babies were born as the result of an IVF procedure.

But in February the following year, a ruling from the Alabama Supreme Court prompted fears about whether IVF would remain widely available.

In a novel decision, the court – located in a strongly conservative state – ruled that embryos created through IVF could be considered children under state law, thereby making the destruction of such embryos potentially a criminal act.

The decision sent shockwaves throughout the IVF industry, with clinics in Alabama temporarily suspending services. Discarding embryos is standard practice in IVF: Generally, more eggs are collected than will ultimately be used, and not all fertilised eggs will be suitable to start a pregnancy.

Within weeks, the Alabama state legislature stepped in to shield IVF providers from prosecution. But the ruling created lingering concerns that IVF could be targeted by anti-abortion rights advocates.

On Thursday, Trump revisited that controversy, which happened in the midst of his re-election bid. He called the court’s ruling a “bad decision” and credited it with helping to make him aware of IVF.

“I wasn’t that familiar with it,” Trump said. “Now I think I’ve sort of become the father.”

Senator Katie Britt, who represents the state of Alabama, echoed that evaluation, praising Trump for taking steps to protect IVF.

Thursday was not the first time Trump has gestured at lowering costs for the fertility procedure. In February, he also issued a presidential order calling on his administration to start “protecting IVF access and aggressively reducing out-of-pocket and health plan costs”.

“ Mr President, this is the most pro-IVF thing that any president in the history of the United States of America has done,” Britt told Trump on Thursday. “You are the reason why the Republican Party is now the party of parents.”

Addressing the US birthrate

Trump, who previously called himself the “fertilisation president”  during a Women’s History Month event, also framed the new measures as progress towards increasing the US birthrate.

In April, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that fertility remained at a historic low, rising slightly in 2024 to 1.6 births per woman.

Those numbers have fuelled a push within the Republican Party to ignite a new baby boom, with right-wing figures like tech billionaire Elon Musk going so far as to call the low birthrate “the biggest danger civilization faces by far”.

At Thursday’s meeting, top figures in the Trump administration echoed those concerns, including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.

“We are below replacement right now,” he said, referencing the number of births needed to outpace deaths in the US. “That is a national security threat to our country.”

Mehmet Oz, who serves under Kennedy as the administrator for Medicaid services, took a more positive approach, framing the new IVF guidance as the beginning of a reversal of that downward trend.

“There are going to be a lot of Trump babies,” Oz quipped. “I think that’s probably a good thing. But it turns out the fundamental creative force in society is about making babies.”

But it remains to be seen if insurance companies and employers will follow through with Trump’s guidance to offer supplemental fertility benefits for adults seeking to get pregnant.

Most Americans receive health insurance as part of their workplace benefits. Senator Britt argued the guidelines would put employers “in the driver’s seat”, allowing them to shape the benefits they offer to their workers.

“Employers are going to be able to decide how to cover the root causes of infertility, things like obesity and metabolic health, and other things that are impacting infertility,” she said. “We want employers to be the ones that can make those decisions, not the government.”

But for Democrats, the guidance fell far short of what Trump promised on the campaign trail.

“Donald Trump lied when he pledged to make IVF available to every family for FREE,” Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts posted afterwards on social media. “It’s insulting – a broken promise.”

WASHINGTON — President Trump confirmed Wednesday that he has authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations inside Venezuela and said he was weighing carrying out land operations on the country.

The acknowledgement of covert action in Venezuela by the U.S. spy agency comes after the U.S. military in recent weeks has carried out a series of deadly strikes against alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean. U.S. forces have destroyed at least five boats since early September, killing 27 people, and four of those vessels originated from Venezuela.

Asked during an event in the Oval Office on Wednesday why he had authorized the CIA to take action in Venezuela, Trump affirmed he had made the move.

“I authorized for two reasons, really,” Trump replied. “No. 1, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America,” he said. “And the other thing, the drugs, we have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela, and a lot of the Venezuelan drugs come in through the sea.”

Trump added the administration “is looking at land” as it considers further strikes in the region. He declined to say whether the CIA has authority to take action against President Nicolás Maduro.

Trump made the unusual acknowledgement of a CIA operation shortly after the New York Times published that the CIA had been authorized to carry out covert action in Venezuela.

Maduro pushes back

On Wednesday, Maduro lashed out at the record of the U.S. spy agency in various conflicts around the world without directly addressing Trump’s comments about authorizing the CIA to carry out covert operations in Venezuela.

“No to regime change that reminds us so much of the [overthrows] in the failed eternal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and so on,” Maduro said at a televised event of the National Council for Sovereignty and Peace, which is made up of representatives from various political, economic, academic and cultural sectors in Venezuela.

“No to the coups carried out by the CIA, which remind us so much of the 30,000 disappeared,” a figure estimated by human rights organizations such as the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo during the military dictatorship in Argentina (1976-1983). He also referred to the 1973 coup in Chile.

“How long will the CIA continue to carry on with its coups? Latin America doesn’t want them, doesn’t need them and repudiates them,” Maduro added.

The objective is “to say no to war in the Caribbean, no to war in South America, yes to peace,” he said.

Speaking in English, Maduro said: “Not war, yes peace, not war. Is that how you would say it? Who speaks English? Not war, yes peace, the people of the United States, please. Please, please, please.”

In a statement, Venezuela’s Foreign Ministry on Wednesday rejected “the bellicose and extravagant statements by the President of the United States, in which he publicly admits to having authorized operations to act against the peace and stability of Venezuela.”

“This unprecedented statement constitutes a very serious violation of international law and the United Nations’ Charter and obliges the community of countries to denounce these clearly immoderate and inconceivable statements,” said the statement, which Foreign Minister Yván Gil posted on his Telegram channel.

Resistance from Congress

Early this month, the Trump administration declared drug cartels to be unlawful combatants and pronounced the United States is now in an “armed conflict” with them, justifying the military action as a necessary escalation to stem the flow of drugs into the United States.

The move has spurred anger in Congress from members of both major political parties that Trump was effectively committing an act of war without seeking congressional authorization.

On Wednesday, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said while she supports cracking down on trafficking, the administration has gone too far.

“The Trump administration’s authorization of covert CIA action, conducting lethal strikes on boats and hinting at land operations in Venezuela slides the United States closer to outright conflict with no transparency, oversight or apparent guardrails,” New Hampshire’s Shaheen said. “The American people deserve to know if the administration is leading the U.S. into another conflict, putting servicemembers at risk or pursuing a regime-change operation.”

The Trump administration has yet to provide underlying evidence to lawmakers proving that the boats targeted by the U.S. military were in fact carrying narcotics, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The officials, who were not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the administration has only pointed to unclassified video clips of the strikes posted on social media by Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and has yet to produce “hard evidence” that the vessels were carrying drugs.

Lawmakers have expressed frustration that the administration is offering little detail about how it came to decide the U.S. is in armed conflict with cartels or which criminal organizations it claims are “unlawful combatants.”

Even as the U.S. military has carried out strikes on some vessels, the U.S. Coast Guard has continued with its typical practice of stopping boats and seizing drugs.

Trump on Wednesday explained away the action, saying the traditional approach hasn’t worked.

“Because we’ve been doing that for 30 years, and it has been totally ineffective. They have faster boats,” he said. ”They’re world-class speedboats, but they’re not faster than missiles.”

Human rights groups have raised concerns that the strikes flout international law and are extrajudicial killings.

Madhani writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jorge Rueda in Caracas, Venezuela, contributed to this report.