president

President Obama is planning to speak in the “near future” on U.S. policy in the Mideast, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday.

“It’s a speech to a broader audience than just the Arab world,” Carney said at his televised briefing. He didn’t specify when or where the president will speak, but said it will be in “the relatively near future.”

Obama is scheduled to begin a five-day European trip May 23.

The speech will come as the United States faces a slew of issues in the Middle East, including pro-democracy uprisings in several countries, a stalled Mideast peace process between Israel and the Palestinians, and the ongoing issue of nuclear proliferation and Iran.

The speech also will come within weeks of the U.S. raid in Pakistan during which terrorist leader Osama bin Laden was killed. The raid has raised questions from some about the future of U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, which the West invaded seeking to end the Taliban state that was sheltering terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The raid has also raised questions about what Pakistan leaders knew about Bin Laden and whether the founder of Al Qaeda was being protected by elements of the Pakistani intelligence community.

Obama is scheduled to meet next week with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, a strong U.S. ally, and with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been invited to address Congress. Efforts to bring peace between Netanyahu’s government and the Palestinians have bogged down despite early U.S. efforts. Complicating that issue is the apparent reconciliation between Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian National Authority, and Hamas, which controls Gaza, the other part of the Palestinian entity. Israel and the United States view Hamas as a terrorist group.

In 2009, Obama visited Cairo in what was billed as an overture to the Islamic world, still smarting from the Bush years and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama mainly spoke of the positive power of Islam as a world force.

Since then, much of the Arab world has been shattered by ongoing pro-democracy revolutions and, in some cases, civil wars and extensive state repression.

In some countries, notably Syria and Libya, where the United States has had long-term questions about the rulers, the United States strongly condemned the use of force against citizens and took even more severe actions. The Obama administration helped engineer a United Nations resolution that has imposed a no-fly zone on Libya, which is being enforced by NATO. The Obama administration has also spoken out forcefully against Syria’s violence against its citizens.

Though it has condemned state violence, the Obama administration has been less forceful with some nations with friendlier governments, such as Yemen and Bahrain, and it was slow to condemn Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, who was eventually deposed by the military after extensive demonstrations.

Michael.muskal@latimes.com

Twitter.com/LATimesmuskal

WASHINGTON — Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger met privately with President Trump and administration officials Wednesday to press for federal support and yet-unpaid wildfire recovery funding as the region continues to rebuild from the 2025 fires.

“This afternoon we met with President Trump and Administration officials to advocate for families who lost everything,” Bass and Barger said in a statement. “We had a very positive discussion about FEMA and other rebuilding funds as well as the support of the President to continue joining us in pressuring the insurance companies to pay what they owe — and for the big banks to step up to ease the financial pressure on L.A. families.”

Barger said the two leaders had a “high-level discussion” with the president in the Oval Office, sharing stories about what fire survivors are experiencing day to day. She added that “we left details behind with the President,” but did not specify whether Trump made any funding or policy promises during the meeting.

“First and foremost, today’s meeting was to thank the President for his initial support of infusing federal resources to expedite debris removal, as well as his recent tweet about insurance companies, which have already proven fruitful,” she said in a statement provided to The Times.

Bass was similarly reserved about the discussions, telling reporters that “we will follow up with the details,” but signaled progress is being made on federal support.

“I think what’s important is that we certainly got the president’s support in terms of, you know, what is needed, and then the appropriate people were in the room for us to follow up. And that was Russ Vought, who is the head of the Office of Management and budget,” Bass told KNX on Wednesday.

The meeting comes on the heels of a yearlong standoff between California leaders and the Trump administration over wildfire recovery funding, disaster response and whether the federal government should have a say in local rebuilding permitting.

California leaders, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, have accused the Trump administration of withholding billions in critical wildfire aid, prompting a lawsuit over stalled recovery funds. Officials allege political bias in the delay of billions of dollars from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Newsom visited Washington in December. When he made his rounds on Capitol Hill, he met with five lawmakers, including three who serve on the Senate and House appropriations committees, to renew calls for $33.9 billion in federal aid for Los Angeles County fire recovery.

But the governor said he was denied a meeting with FEMA and would not say whether he had attempted to meet with Trump to discuss the issue.

Bass, meanwhile, appears to have found a path to the president on a subject that has been paramount for her community.

The fruitful meeting comes after Trump lobbed insults at the mayor at a news conference earlier this year, where he called her “incompetent” for how she handled last year’s wildfire recovery efforts. He alleged that under Bass’ leadership, the city’s delay in issuing local building permits will take years when it should have taken “two or three days.”

California officials, including Newsom, have urged the Trump administration to send Congress a formal request for the $33.9 billion in recovery aid needed to rebuild homes, schools, utilities and other critical infrastructure destroyed or damaged when the fires tore through neighborhoods more than 15 months ago.

What Bass and Barger’s meeting with the president ultimately produces remains to be seen.

The billions in recovery aid have not yet materialized, but the meeting could potentially give those discussions new momentum.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment about the meeting.

Earlier this month, Trump criticized insurance provider State Farm on Truth Social for its handling of the devastating Los Angeles County wildfires. He accused the insurance giant of abandoning its policyholders when tragedy struck.

“It was brought to my attention that the Insurance Companies, in particular, State Farm, have been absolutely horrible to people that have been paying them large Premiums for years, only to find that when tragedy struck, these horrendous Companies were not there to help!” Trump wrote.

But the rebuke didn’t come out of the blue. It stemmed from a controversial February visit to Los Angeles by Trump administration officials.

Trump tapped Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin in an effort to strip California state and local governments of their authority to permit the rebuilding of homes destroyed in the Eaton and Palisades fires.

Within the week, Zeldin was in Los Angeles, bashing Newsom and Los Angeles officials at a roundtable with fire victims and reporters, saying that residents were suffering from “bureaucratic, red tape delays and incompetency” and that leadership was “denying them … the ability to rebuild their lives”.

During the trip, officials heard direct complaints from local leaders and fire victims about insurers being slow, restrictive and insufficient with their claim payouts.

After these meetings, Trump directed Zeldin to investigate the insurers’ responses. State Farm, facing roughly $7 billion in fire-related claims, is also under formal investigation by California’s insurance commissioner over its handling of the crisis.

Despite tensions with the administration, Bass and Barger appeared confident that progress was being made on the insurance and funding issues.

“Our job is to fight for our communities,” their joint statement concluded. “When it comes to this recovery, our federal partners are essential, and we are grateful for the support of the President.”

Two cabinet-level ministers in Peru have resigned after interim President Jose Maria Balcazar announced he would defer a decision to buy F-16 fighter jets from the United States company Lockheed Martin.

Defence Minister Carlos Diaz and Foreign Minister Hugo de Zela cited their opposition to the move in their resignation letters on Wednesday.

“A strategic decision has been taken in the area of national security with which I have a fundamental disagreement,” Diaz wrote.

The fighter jets have long been a source of controversy in Peru, where critics have questioned whether the purchase is a sign of deference to US President Donald Trump.

Last week, the left-wing Balcazar — Peru’s ninth president in a decade — announced he would leave the decision about whether to invest $3.5bn in the purchase to the country’s next elected leader.

Balcazar himself had only been in office since February, selected by Congress to replace the latest in a string of impeached presidents.

Last week, he abruptly cancelled a signing ceremony for the F-16 deal, which would have seen an initial batch of 12 new planes added to Peru’s ageing air force. The country aims to acquire 24 jets overall.

Balcazar explained he was not pulling out of the deal, but that he felt the next presidential administration should be involved in making such a hefty financial commitment.

“For us to commit such a large sum of money to the incoming government would be a poor practice for a transitional government,” Balcazar said at the time.

“We remain firm in respecting all agreements that may have been reached at the level of the armed forces, or in this case, with the relevant ministry of the air force, to carry out the corresponding negotiations.”

His decision, however, was met with pushback, both domestically and from the US. The US ambassador to Peru, Bernie Navarro, responded on April 17 with a warning posted on social media.

“If you deal with the U.S. in bad faith and undermine U.S. interests, rest assured, I, on behalf of
[President] Trump and his administration, will use every available tool to protect and promote the prosperity and security of the United States and our region,” Navarro wrote.

Critics of the deal, however, have argued that Peru has received more competitive offers from French and Swedish aircraft makers like Dassault Aviation and Saab AB, respectively.

But Navarro on Wednesday denied that the US had been outcompeted. In a statement, he wrote that the “bid was made at a high level of competitiveness” and called the plane fleet “the most technically advanced fighter jets ever built”.

He also denounced the delay as an unreasonable stoppage on a deal he characterised as already signed.

“In planning the delivery of a product of this calibre, there is no such thing as an inconsequential delay,” he wrote.

“Every delay results in significant costs. The same package cannot be available in a couple of months, or even weeks.”

The decision to spend the $3.5bn on 24 fighter jets was made in 2024 under former President Dina Boluarte. The purchase was to be financed by $2bn in domestic borrowing in 2025 and $1.5bn in 2026.

In September, the US Department of Defense approved a potential sale of F-16s to Peru.

But Boluarte was removed from office in October, and her successor, Jose Jeri, lasted just four months in office before he too was impeached.

The instability in Peru’s presidency comes at a time when the Trump administration is seeking greater influence over Latin America, as part of what the US president has called his “Donroe Doctrine”.

Already, the Trump administration has pushed Peru to distance itself from Chinese investment. In February, for instance, it publicly protested against Chinese ownership in the Pacific port of Chancay.

“Peru could be powerless to oversee Chancay, one of its largest ports, which is under the jurisdiction of predatory Chinese owners,” the Trump administration wrote in a social media post.

“We support Peru’s sovereign right to oversee critical infrastructure in its own territory. Let this be a cautionary tale for the region and the world: cheap Chinese money costs sovereignty.”

Just this week, one of Trump’s allies, Representative Maria Elvira Salazar, warned that the Chinese-owned port was a danger to the US.

“That’s a direct threat in our hemisphere, right in the country of Peru,” she told a congressional committee. “For that reason, the new Peruvian government, which will be elected next June, must take it back.”

She added that, if the Peruvian government responded accordingly, “the United States will help them under the Trump administration”.

The country, however, is enmeshed in a messy presidential race replete with vote-counting delays and accusations of malpractice.

Election experts have said there is no evidence of voter fraud. But the slow vote count has left the race’s outcome undetermined, more than a week after the ballots were cast on April 12.

Right-wing leader and former First Lady Keiko Fujimori is all but assured of progressing to a run-off in June. But who will join her is uncertain.

Left-wing Congress member Roberto Sanchez is currently in the lead in the race for second place, with 12 percent of the votes tallied, but far-right candidate Rafael Lopez Aliaga, a former mayor, is close behind with 11.9 percent. Lopez Aliaga has been a vocal supporter of the Trump administration.

The final vote count for the first round of the election is expected to be delivered in May.

Traditionally, Peru’s new president should be sworn in on July 28, the country’s independence day.

Former Fox News host and ex-Trump advocate Tucker Carlson is feeling remorse for the role he and others played in publicly promoting Donald Trump as a candidate and as the president.

“In very small ways, but in real ways, you and me and millions of people like us are the reason this is happening right now,” Carlson said Monday on his podcast, “The Tucker Carlson Show.” He was chatting with Buckley Carlson, his brother and a former Trump speechwriter, about the erosion of conservative values within the Republican Party under Trump.

“I do think it’s a moment to wrestle with our own consciences,” Carlson said. “You know, we’ll be tormented by it for a long time. I will be, and I want to say I’m sorry for misleading people. It was not intentional, and that’s all I’ll say.”

After nearly 10 years of yammering nightly about the greatness of Trump, Carlson picks now to cut the conversation short?

There’s a lot more to say, but this time, it’s about Carlson’s too-little, too-late mea culpa. His claim that he did not intentionally mislead the public is in itself misleading. While Carlson promoted Trump and the Big Lie ad nauseam on his prime-time Fox News show, “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” he was privately disparaging the president and discrediting Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

His off-camera thoughts were revealed when internal communications between Fox staffers went public in 2023 due to Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation lawsuit against Fox News for knowingly broadcasting false claims that its machines rigged the 2020 election. Texts and emails from Carlson and other high-profile hosts suggested they knew Trump’s election fraud claims were unfounded, yet they still pushed the “rigged” narrative on air.

In one such example, Carlson texted that Trump needed to concede, and agreed that “there wasn’t enough fraud to change the outcome” of the election, according to the filing. Yet three nights later, he was on air claiming that there were “legitimate concerns” about election integrity. There were several more communications from Carlson where he expressed doubt about Trump’s claims. But in the public eye, he continued to assail the election results and the legitimacy of Biden’s win.

The Fox News host also privately scorned the first Trump presidency as a “disaster,” then turned around and stumped for Trump in 2024, praising him as a “national leader” at the Republican National Convention and campaigning with him in Arizona just days before the election.

If that’s not intentionally misleading the public, then what is?

Perhaps Carlson should have heeded his initial instincts about Trump. Before gaining notoriety with his Fox show, he posted on the website Slate about Trump in 1999, referring to him as “the single most repulsive person on the planet.”

Today the podcaster is among a growing number of right-wing influencers who have turned on their former leader. Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones want to push Trump out of office by invoking the 25th Amendment. Carrie Prejean Boller, who was a Trump-appointed member of the Religious Liberty Commission up until February, simply called him an “evil psychopath”.

Carlson has criticized the Trump administration’s decision to go to war in Iran, calling it “absolutely disgusting and evil” in March, and later said it was the “single biggest mistake” of Trump’s presidency. And when Trump demanded on Truth Social that Iran “open the F—– Strait, you crazy bastards,” Carlson said the post was “vile on every level” and “the most revealing thing the president has ever done. … Who do you think you are? You’re tweeting out the F word on Easter morning?” Carlson said in his podcast.

The president has responded to criticism from Carlson by telling the New York Post that his detractor is a “a low-IQ person” who has “absolutely no idea what’s going on.”

But Carlson is hardly the only American with buyer’s remorse. A recent NBC poll found that Trump is facing the lowest job approval rating of his second term, largely due to strong disapproval of how the president has handled inflation and the cost of living. Carlson, unlike the rest of the country, rode the MAGA wave to prosperity. His show kicked off in 2016, within weeks of the election, and he rose to prominence on the fervor of Trumpism. Supporting Trump was a family business. From his brother, a Republican operative who previously wrote speeches for Trump, to his son, who worked until recently in Vice President JD Vance’s press office.

Now Carlson is making his way back into the conversation by opposing the man he once claimed to revere.

He is asking for forgiveness for backing a faulty product, while also claiming to be a victim of its beguiling charms. “You and I and everyone else who supported him … you wrote speeches for him, I campaigned for him. We’re implicated in this for sure,” Carlson told his brother on the podcast. “It’s not enough to say, ‘Well, I changed my mind,’ or ‘Oh, this is bad. I’m out.’”

True, that’s not enough. Carlson should apologize for misleading the public, intentionally.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s nominee to chair the Federal Reserve said Tuesday that he never promised the White House that he would cut interest rates, even as the president renewed his calls for the central bank to do so.

“The president never once asked me to commit to any particular interest rate decision, period,” Kevin Warsh, a former top Fed official, said under questioning by the Senate Banking Committee. “Nor would I ever agree to do so if he had. … I will be an independent actor if confirmed as chair of the Federal Reserve.”

Warsh’s comments came just hours after Trump, in an interview on CNBC, was asked if he would be disappointed if Warsh didn’t immediately cut rates and responded, “I would.”

The comments underscore the challenge faced by Warsh, 56, a financier and former member of the Fed’s board of governors whom Trump named in January to replace the current Fed chair, Jerome H. Powell. Democrats on the committee accused Warsh of flip-flopping on interest rates over the years, supporting higher interest rates under Democratic presidents and advocating rate cuts during Trump’s time in office. Investors are watching the hearing closely to see how Warsh balances Trump’s demands with worsening inflation, as the war in Iran pushes up the price of gasoline.

Higher inflation typically leads the Fed to raise rates, or at least keep them unchanged, rather than cut them. When the Fed changes its key rate, it can affect mortgages, auto loans and business borrowing.

Yet Warsh’s account was challenged by Sen. Ruben Gallego, an Arizona Democrat, who said that Wall Street Journal reporting last year found that Trump had urged Warsh to reduce borrowing costs.

“Who’s lying here? Is it you or the president?” Gallego asked.

“I think those reporters need better sources,” Warsh responded.

For all the back and forth, the hearing didn’t appear to advance Warsh’s nomination, which has been delayed by a Justice Department investigation into the Fed and Powell, over brief testimony Powell gave last June before the same panel about a building renovation.

Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican on the committee, reiterated Tuesday he wouldn’t vote for Warsh until the investigation is dropped. With the committee closely divided and all Democrats opposed to his nomination, Tillis’ opposition is enough to bottle it up in committee.

“We have got to get rid of this investigation,” Tillis said, “so I can support your nomination.”

Tillis has previously said that all seven Republicans on the committee have signed a letter stating that Powell did not commit a crime when he testified before the panel last June. Federal prosecutors, led by U.S. Atty. Jeanine Pirro, are investigating his testimony for potential perjury, though a judge said last month they offered no evidence to support the charge when he threw out subpoenas Pirro had issued.

Prosecutors from her office as recently as last week sought access to the Fed’s building project but were turned away, revealing that the Trump administration has not reversed course despite opposition from members of his own party that are essential to Warsh’s confirmation.

In his opening remarks, Warsh told the Senate Banking Committee that one of his top goals would be to fight inflation, which remains elevated at 3.3% annually.

“Congress tasked the Fed with the mission to ensure price stability, without excuse or equivocation, argument or anguish,” Warsh said. “Inflation is a choice, and the Fed must take responsibility for it.”

Warsh would be in a tough spot if confirmed. Inflation is worsening, making it much harder for the Fed to implement the interest rate cuts Trump so desperately seeks. The conflict could also slow the economy, as well as hiring. And if Warsh ultimately becomes chair, he may very well find his predecessor, Powell, still sitting on the Fed’s governing board, an uncomfortable arrangement that hasn’t occurred since the late 1940s.

Warsh said the Fed’s political independence is “essential,” and that the central bank wasn’t threatened when “elected officials — presidents, senators, or members of the House — state their views on interest rates.” Trump has repeatedly urged Powell to cut the Fed’s key rate from its current level of about 3.6% to as low as 1%, a view almost no economist shares.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, said that Trump has not just stated his opinions on rates, but has sought to fire a Fed governor and is investigating Powell.

“The Senate should not be aiding and abetting Donald Trump’s illegal takeover of the Fed by installing his chosen sock puppet as chair,” she said Tuesday.

Warren also noted that Warsh has not disclosed all of his financial holdings, which include investments in startups and private companies, or the size of those financial stakes. For example, Warsh has said he has holdings in SpaceX and Polymarket, but has not said how large those investments are.

Warren charged that Warsh is not in compliance with ethics requirements. Warsh argued that the Office of Government Ethics has signed off on his plan to sell all his assets within 90 days of his confirmation.

The turmoil could make a potential transition from Powell to Warsh an unusually turbulent one for the world’s most pivotal central bank, which has historically experienced smooth transfers of power. Should the change in leadership prove particularly bumpy, it could unnerve markets and lift longer-term interest rates.

Powell’s term as chair ends May 15. He said last month that he would remain as chair until a successor is named. Powell also is serving a separate term as a member of the Fed’s governing board that lasts until January 2028. Fed chairs typically leave the board when their terms as chair end, but Powell said last month he would remain on the board, even if a new chair is approved, until the investigation is dropped.

Trump said he would fire Powell if he attempted to remain at the Fed. Yet Trump’s previous attempt to remove a Fed governor, Lisa Cook, has been tied up in court. During oral arguments in January, a majority of justices on the Supreme Court appeared to lean toward leaving Cook at the Fed.

Rugaber writes for the Associated Press.

Bulgaria’s eighth parliamentary election in five years has concluded with former president Rumen Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria party emerging as the clear winner. Radev will be the next prime minister.

While pollsters predicted a win for Radev ahead of the election, they did not necessarily expect it to be such a large one.

With 98.3 percent of ballots tallied on Monday, official figures show Radev’s party taking 44.7 percent of the vote, and likely to secure roughly 130 of the 240 seats in parliament. The centre-left party has come in far ahead of rivals, raising hopes among voters for a more stable government after years of fragile coalitions and repeated votes.

However, questions remain over what Radev’s foreign policy will entail and what his election means for Bulgaria’s position within the European Union and NATO.

Here is what you need to know:

Who is Rumen Radev?

The 62-year-old served as Bulgaria’s president for nearly a decade before stepping down in January this year to launch his bid to become prime minister.

The former air force commander has positioned himself as an outsider, saying he wants to rid the country of its “oligarchic governance model”, amid widespread frustration with corruption and political turmoil that has gripped the country of 6.6 million people.

In 2025, Radev supported anti-corruption protests that brought down the conservative-backed government of former Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov. He urged voters to turn out in large numbers to counter vote-buying.

At a pre-election rally on Wednesday last week, he pledged to “remove the corrupt, oligarchic model of governance from political power”.

Radev’s stance on foreign policy has drawn attention in Europe, however.

Although he publicly condemned Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, he has also opposed providing military support to Ukraine and called, instead, for renewed, “practical relations with Russia based on mutual respect and equal treatment”.

Radev objected to a 10-year defence pact concluded between Bulgaria and Ukraine in March.

He has also called for the resumption of Russian imports to Europe, despite EU sanctions on Russian oil and a decision at the end of last year to cease all energy imports from Russia by 2027.

All this has led to critics labelling him “pro-Russian”. Radev, however, says he is merely taking a pragmatic approach.

“We are the only member state of the European Union that is both Slavic and Eastern Orthodox,” he said in an interview with Bulgarian journalist Martin Karbovski.

“We can be ‌a very important ⁠link in this whole mechanism … to restore relations with Russia,” he added.

Following the election, Russia congratulated Radev, welcoming his victory.

“Of course, we are impressed by the statements made by Mr Radev, who won the election, and by some other European leaders regarding their willingness to resolve problems through pragmatic dialogue,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Monday.

On Europe, some label Radev a eurosceptic, as he has criticised aspects of EU policy, including reliance on renewable energy and Bulgaria’s adoption of the euro.

At his campaign rally on Wednesday last week, he said: “The coalition-makers introduced the euro in Bulgaria without asking you. And now, when you pay your bills, always remember which politicians promised you that you would be in the ‘club of the rich’.”

Following his victory, he told reporters: “A strong Bulgaria and a strong Europe need critical thinking and pragmatism. Europe has fallen victim to its own ambition to be a moral leader in a world with new rules.”

Nevertheless, Radev has signalled his willingness to cooperate with pro-European parties on issues like judicial reform and has stated that Bulgaria will “continue on its European path”.

Following his win, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said: “Bulgaria is a proud member of the European family and plays an important role in tackling our common challenges.”

How significant is this result?

Since 2021, Bulgaria has been through multiple governments, many brought down by protests or parliamentary disagreements.

The election result places Radev’s party, with 44 percent of the vote, well ahead of the centre-right GERB party of former Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, which secured 13.4 percent of the vote, and the reformist PP-DB coalition, with 12.7 percent.

The margin between the parties is wider than pollsters predicted. On Friday last week, according to Bulgaria’s Alpha Research, Radev’s Progressive Bulgaria was projected to win, but with only 34.2 percent of the vote, followed by Borissov’s GERB-UDF with 19.5 percent. This led observers to predict that a coalition government would be necessary.

Despite securing a clear majority, however, Radev has yet to rule out creating a coalition with a smaller party to form a government.

“We are ready to consider different options so that Bulgaria can have a regular and stable government,” he told reporters on Sunday.

This latest election was called after former PM Zhelyazkov announced in December that his cabinet would resign, amid a looming no-confidence vote.

The election campaign centred heavily on cost-of-living pressures, corruption, and other economic concerns, with many voters expressing frustration at the lack of credible political alternatives.

What will Radev’s role as prime minister be?

Although Radev is best known for holding the title of president, that is a largely ceremonial role in Bulgaria’s political system.

The president serves as head of state, representing national unity and playing a role in foreign policy; executive power lies primarily with the prime minister and his cabinet.

The prime minister appoints his cabinet ministers, sets the government agenda, and is the key representative of Bulgaria in international affairs, including within organisations like the European Union and NATO.

The prime minister remains in office unless he chooses to resign or is removed in a no-confidence motion.

WASHINGTON — Amid the din of battle over the federal budget, President Clinton summoned Democratic congressional leaders to the White House last week and gave them an unexpectedly upbeat message: With a little discipline and a little luck, they might win this fight yet.

“The Republicans are very disciplined and very good,” Clinton warned his war council around the Cabinet Room’s long mahogany table, according to people who were present. “But we’re making headway.”

Congress’ drive to cut the budget this spring was launched by triumphant GOP leaders, confident that they had a mandate from voters to slash government programs and shrink the federal budget deficit to zero.

But after three months of rhetorical battle, Clinton believes that he has begun to turn the Republicans’ issue around–into a major political opportunity for himself.

The budget battle is “the centerpiece” of Clinton’s work this year, said White House Chief of Staff Leon E. Panetta. “It will determine a lot about the priorities of the country; it will determine a lot about our economy in the future; it will determine a lot about the role of government.”

It will also determine a lot about how voters view Clinton as the election year of 1996 approaches. “It . . . will better define who the President of the United States is, and I think that’s helpful,” Panetta said in an interview.

Transforming budget-cutting from a liability into an asset would be a startling turnaround for a President whom Republicans succeeded in painting as a “tax-and-spend Democrat” only last year. But public opinion polls read raptly by White House aides suggest that the voters are moving Clinton’s way: An ABC News-Washington Post poll last week found that while respondents by a wide margin once trusted Congress over Clinton to deal with the deficit, the President has nearly closed the gap.

Clinton’s biting attacks on GOP plans to shrink Medicare, education and veterans programs have helped lift his approval rating in the poll to 51%, its highest level in a year.

White House strategists said they were not worried that the House Republicans passed their GOP budget plan last week, as was long expected. More important, they said, was that Clinton apparently succeeded with his threat to veto a GOP spending-cut bill, since the GOP leadership acknowledged that they probably wouldn’t have the votes to override a veto. It showed that the President can still make himself relevant.

Clinton is betting that House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and other GOP leaders overestimated the public’s desire for cutting government–especially once the public realizes that the savings would come not only from unpopular programs, such as welfare and foreign aid, but also from middle-class benefits.

Political strategists note that Clinton’s argument may attract some swing voters–especially white women older than 35, one of the President’s critical demographic targets. Making up more than one-fourth of the electorate, they largely voted for Clinton in 1992, abandoned the Democrats in 1994–and could be key to his prospects in 1996.

At the same time, Clinton and his aides believe that they must eventually seek a budget compromise with the Republicans–if only to avoid the charge that the President has become irrelevant to the process of shrinking the government, a goal most voters still want.

“Preserver of the Big Government status quo is not a place you can end up in a fight this big,” one presidential adviser said.

So Clinton, Panetta and other aides have devised a two-part strategy to try to stop the GOP juggernaut and turn the budget battle to their advantage.

The first phase has been to shift the topic away from the deficit, force the public to confront the kind of cuts the Republicans want and paint the GOP as heartless vandals who would loot Medicare and student loans to give tax cuts to the wealthy.

“Less government? That’s not the issue. The issue is: Do you want your kids to go to college?” Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich said.

If that tactic works, and Republicans retreat from their proposed spending and tax cuts, then the Administration wants to sit down and try to negotiate a compromise, a budget “that might be nobody’s first choice but that is really quite a good budget,” said Alice Rivlin, director of the Office of Management and Budget.

But Clinton doesn’t want to begin those negotiations until “his leverage is at a peak,” Panetta said, meaning the President wants to continue whipping up public opposition to GOP budget cuts and threatening to veto a budget he doesn’t like, at least for a while.

“The Republicans are beginning the budget triage, amputations and decapitations, and for the moment the Democrats are happy to sit in the surgical theater and watch the blood flow,” said Ross K. Baker, an expert on Congress at Rutgers University.

Already, however, Panetta and other Administration officials have begun sending signals to Capitol Hill about the kind of deal Clinton might eventually want to make.

“Yes, we want additional deficit reduction,” Panetta said. “But in order to engage, the Republicans have to back off these huge tax cuts, they have to recognize that any Medicare or Medicaid savings have to be done in the context of [health care] reform, and they have to be willing to protect education as a key investment.” Almost everything else is “on the table,” he said.

One key concession the White House has quietly offered: Clinton is willing to drop most or all of his proposed $500-per-child tax credit–the core of his long-promised “middle-class tax cut”–if Congress agrees to make college tuition tax-deductible.

Those early signals suggest to some members of Congress, including some worried liberal Democrats, that Clinton may be willing to give up quite a lot–except for his major concerns on Medicare, Medicaid and education–for the chance to claim a victory.

When bargaining can begin in earnest depends mostly on the GOP’s tolerance for pain. Aides say Clinton will stay on the attack for at least three weeks as Republicans pass their budget resolutions and begin making decisions on the discretionary portion of the budget.

But White House officials hope that the solid Republican line will begin to fracture as members of Congress read the mood of their constituents. Some in Congress predict a turning point could come as early as the Memorial Day recess, which begins Saturday, but others warn that it might be September before negotiations start.

The White House strategy is not assured of success, of course. At least three problems loom:

First, Clinton has succeeded only partially in changing the focus of the debate from deficits to middle-class benefits. By a wide margin, the public still says it wants a balanced federal budget, with no deficit. The President’s dirty little secret is that he doesn’t think a balanced budget can be achieved in the foreseeable future at reasonable cost.

In fact, the public is inconsistent on these issues. Large majorities say they want to balance the budget, but equally large majorities say they are opposed to significant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, student loans and other education programs.

Second, Democrats aren’t entirely unified behind Clinton’s strategy, which is why the President spent much of his meeting in the Cabinet Room last week appealing for more discipline.

Some strains were already evident in the closed-door session, participants said. House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) urged Clinton to give the Republicans no quarter, but Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) said: “It’s not enough to complain; we need to say where we go from here.”

Third, and most important, the Republicans may not cooperate. “Democrats have no standing to say anything about what we are doing in the House and the Senate,” House Budget Committee Chairman John R. Kasich (R-Ohio) said last week. Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) often disagree with each other, but they agree on one point: They don’t want Clinton to win credit for their hard work in fashioning a leaner federal budget. So they may be tempted to pass a budget bill of their own design and dare Clinton to veto it this fall.

That would lead to a messy confrontation that could require the federal government to halt routine operations until a solution is found.

“I don’t think anyone comes out a winner” in an impasse like that, Panetta said. “I don’t think the President wins; I don’t think Republicans or Democrats win.”

Moorpark athletic director Rob Dearborn officially has a new title: president elect of the Southern Section.

The Southern Section Council elected him on Thursday. He will serve as president elect under the new president, Alexis Barile, the former principal at Corona Centennial, for 2026-27 and 2027-28 before taking over a two-year term.

Dearborn, 62, a former track and football coach, is in his 40th year participating in high school sports. He started out at Newbury Park before moving to Moorpark. He directs the Southern Section track and field championships at Moorpark. His wife, Denise, ran track at UCLA.

Asked if his wife will now salute him, Dearborn said, “No, I still salute her.”

It’s a two-year term to preside over Southern Section Council meetings.

“I grew up with Southern Section sports that have been a big part of my life,” he said. “It’s exciting.”

His son is football coach at Moorpark.

This is a daily look at the positive happenings in high school sports. To submit any news, please email eric.sondheimer@latimes.com.

Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has described the five permanent members of the UN Security Council as “Lords of War.” He called on them to stop acting like “emperors” and waging war on poorer countries.

WASHINGTON — Lawyers for President Trump are engaged in talks with the IRS to resolve a $10-billion lawsuit the president filed against his own tax collection agency over the leak of his tax information to news outlets between 2018 and 2020.

In a federal court filing Friday, Trump asks a judge to pause the case for 90 days while the two sides work to reach a settlement or resolution.

“This limited pause will neither prejudice the parties nor delay ultimate resolution,” the filing says. “Rather, the extension will promote judicial economy and allow the Parties to explore avenues that could narrow or resolve the issues efficiently.”

Tax and ethics experts say the lawsuit raises a plethora of legal and ethical questions, including the propriety of the leader of the executive branch pursuing scorched-earth litigation against the very government he oversees.

Earlier this year, Trump filed a lawsuit in a Florida federal court, alleging that a previous leak of his and the Trump Organization’s confidential tax records caused “reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump, and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing.”

The president’s sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, are also plaintiffs in the suit.

In 2024, former IRS contractor Charles Edward Littlejohn, of Washington — who worked for Booz Allen Hamilton, a defense and national security tech firm — was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to leaking tax information about President Trump and others to two news outlets between 2018 and 2020.

The outlets were not named in the charging documents, but the description and time frame align with stories about Trump’s tax returns in the New York Times and reporting about wealthy Americans’ taxes in the nonprofit investigative journalism organization ProPublica. The 2020 New York Times report found Trump paid $750 in federal income tax the year he first entered the White House, and no income tax at all some years, thanks to reported colossal losses.

When asked in February how he would handle any potential damages from the case, Trump said, “I think what we’ll do is do something for charity.”

“We could make it a substantial amount,” he said at the time. “Nobody would care because it’s going to go to numerous very good charities.”

Several ethics watchdog groups have filed friend-of-the-court briefs challenging the president’s lawsuit.

The watchdog group Democracy Forward’s February filing states that the case is “extraordinary because the President controls both sides of the litigation, which raises the prospect of collusive litigation tactics,” and “the conflicts of interest make it uncertain whether the Department of Justice will zealously defend the public fisc in the same way that it has against other plaintiffs claiming damages for related events.”

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

President Joseph Aoun promised to work to preserve Lebanon’s sovereignty and freedom.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has said that the country would no longer be an “arena for anyone’s wars”, and that the ceasefire with Israel should lead to work on permanent agreements.

In a televised address to the Lebanese public on Friday, he said that Lebanon was no longer “a pawn in anyone’s game, nor an arena for anyone’s wars, and we never will be again”.

His speech comes a day after a 10-day ceasefire was announced between Lebanon and Israel, bringing respite from Israeli attacks that began on March 2, after Hezbollah fired at Israel, and have left more than 2,200 dead and more than a million displaced.

Aoun said that they were entering a phase of “transition from working on a ceasefire to working on permanent agreements that preserve the rights of our people, the unity of our land, and the sovereignty of our nation.”

He expressed gratitude to those who he said helped end the hostilities, naming United States President Donald Trump and “all our Arab brothers, foremost among them the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”.

Aoun promised that any agreement reached would not infringe on the country’s rights or relinquish any of its land, and that the negotiations were not a weakness or a concession.

The ceasefire was announced days after Lebanon and Israel held their first direct talks in decades in Washington, which prompted criticism from the Lebanese population.

“Our objective is clear and declared: to stop Israeli aggression against our land and our people, to obtain Israeli withdrawal, to extend state authority over all its land by its own forces, to ensure the return of prisoners, and to enable our families to return to their homes and villages, in safety, freedom and dignity,” the president said.

Israel continues to occupy areas of southern Lebanon despite the truce, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying troops would not withdraw during the ceasefire.

WASHINGTON — President Trump had something urgent to address while flying back to Washington from his Mar-a-Lago estate on a recent Sunday.

It wasn’t the Iran war, nor the partial government shutdown over Department of Homeland Security funding. He was focused on a monumental issue of a different kind, hoisting artist renderings of the $400-million White House ballroom he’s building, complete with hand-carved “top-of-the-line” Corinthian columns.

“I’m so busy that I don’t have time to do this. I’m fighting wars and other things,” Trump said before extensively detailing plans for “the greatest ballroom anywhere in the world.”

His divided attention has become a Democratic point of attack and a concern for some Republicans who worry he’s not spending enough time on issues that voters care most about ahead of November’s midterm races.

The contrast was on full display Thursday, when, as Trump flew to Las Vegas to discuss tax cuts for Americans earning tips, his administration was pushing ahead with another of his splashy projects: Plans to build a 250-foot Triumphal Arch near the Lincoln Memorial replete with a Lady Liberty-like statue and a pair of golden eagles.

The president’s ability to speak to the concerns of working people has always seemed incongruous with his biography as a billionaire real estate developer. Yet his populist policies and emphasis on the economy during his 2024 campaign helped catapult him back to the White House.

Republican strategist Rick Tyler noted that, when Trump first ran for president in 2016, his wealth was a selling point.

“While other people, like Mitt Romney, played down how rich he was, Trump was giving free helicopter rides at the Iowa State Fair,” Tyler said. “People loved it.”

Still, Trump’s preoccupation with some of the gilded trappings of the presidency, as more Americans worry about bills, has drawn accusations that he’s a modern-day Marie Antoinette.

“ ‘Fighting wars’ and surging gas prices, yet Trump has time to brag about his billionaire backed ballroom,” Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) responded on X to Trump’s Air Force One presentation.

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a potential 2028 presidential hopeful, has been more direct in comparing Trump to the last queen before the French Revolution, who has come to embody extravagant opulence — even posting an AI-generated image of Trump’s face on her body on social media.

“TRUMP ‘MARIE ANTOINETTE’ SAYS, ‘NO HEALTH CARE FOR YOU PEASANTS, BUT A BALLROOM FOR THE QUEEN!’” Newsom wrote in October 2025, at the start of last fall’s 43-day government shutdown.

White House says Trump’s success benefits all Americans

Asked about opponents invoking Marie Antoinette, White House spokesman Davis Ingle said Trump “is going to go down in history as the most successful and consequential president in our lifetime.”

“His successes on behalf of the American people will be imprinted upon the fabric of America and will be felt by every other White House that comes after him,” Ingle said in a statement.

The president faced similar critiques during his first term. But lately he’s been unabashed about accusations he’s disconnected from Americans’ worries about high costs, which could leave Republicans with an uphill battle to retain control of Congress.

Republicans have been loath to question Trump, though notably there has been little criticism of a federal judge’s ruling that work on the project must stop until it has congressional approval. The GOP-controlled House and Senate also haven’t prioritized legislation to move the ballroom project forward.

“I’m not much into architecture,” Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana said last fall.

About two-thirds of Americans said Trump is “out of touch” with the concerns of most people in the United States today, according to an ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll from February, though the same percentage said the same about the Democratic Party.

Presidents are usually removed from voters, separated by layers of security and surrounded by adoring subordinates. In her book “Why Presidents Fail and How They Can Succeed Again,” Elaine Kamarck argues that presidents get too focused on their own political narratives rather than the public’s concerns. Yet, when it comes to Trump, “All of this stuff is frankly unique to him.”

She pointed to the ballroom as well as Trump’s other White House renovations, soon adding his signature to paper currency and renaming the Kennedy Center after himself.

“It’s a reflection, I think, of his own background as a businessman and somebody who made his fortune selling his name,” said Kamarck, who worked in Bill Clinton’s White House.

While Trump focuses on the ballroom and other Washington projects, some public work projects in other parts of the country have languished.

Joe Meyer, the former mayor of Covington, Ky., spent years pushing for critical improvements to the Brent Spence Bridge connecting his town with Cincinnati, a project listed as a top federal priority dating back to Trump’s first administration.

Federal funds for improvements were approved under President Biden but held up by a Trump-ordered review. Work is finally set to begin later this year, though delays will likely limit design options and slow the project, Meyer said.

“The ballroom is Washington inside-baseball,” Meyer said. “The bridge is just a wreck. It’s frustration that we’ve been dealing with forever.”

A $100 tip and a golden tractor

Trumpeting new tax deductions for tips, Trump staged ordering McDonald’s to the Oval Office — which he has adorned with gold flourishes — and tipped the grandmother making the delivery $100. When she described large medical bills from her husband’s cancer treatments, Trump said she should bring him to an upcoming UFC fight on the White House lawn.

When hundreds of farmers were invited to the White House for an agricultural policy speech, they stood on the South Lawn beside a tractor that had been painted gold. It drizzled, but Trump stayed dry, addressing them from a covered second-floor balcony.

“You don’t mind rain,” the president told the farmers below.

He then flew to Miami for a conference of Saudi investors who, the president noted, were too rich to be impressed by U.S. families scrounging to save up $5,000.

“I know they’re looking like, ‘What the hell is $5,000?’ ” Trump joked. “Their shoes cost them more than $5,000.”

When asked in February, meanwhile, for his message to young people wanting to buy a home, Trump replied: “Save a little longer. Wait a little longer.”

Members of the Cabinet have also fed the perception that Trump’s promised “Golden Age” may not be arriving for everyone. Health Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. advised Americans to buy liver instead of beef.

“If you go and buy a steak, it’s still pretty expensive. But if you buy the cheaper cuts, it’s great meat. And it is very, very affordable. Or liver, or, you know, all these alternatives,” he told podcast host Joe Rogan.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said people could still afford meals consisting of “a piece of chicken, a piece of broccoli, corn tortilla and one other thing.”

Texas-based Republican consultant Brendan Steinhauser said he thinks that Trump “can kind of get away with” building a ballroom because voters have come to expect that from him as a brash dealmaker and businessman.

But Steinhauser said he worries that dramatic increases in gas prices and a potentially weakening economy could resonate with voters. Ahead of the midterms, Steinhauser said, Democrats could score points “trying to make it more about Trump and his oligarch friends.”

Price and Weissert write for the Associated Press. AP writers Linley Sanders in Washington and Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.

Caracas, April 17, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuela has reestablished ties with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) after a seven-year hiatus.

Acting President Delcy Rodríguez confirmed the news on Thursday night, calling it a “great achievement of Venezuelan diplomacy” and a “very important step” for the Venezuelan economy.

“This is the result of months-long negotiations that the Venezuelan far-right unsuccessfully tried to sabotage,” she stated in a televised broadcast. “Good has triumphed.”

The IMF announced the “resumption of dealings” with Venezuela in a statement on Thursday, stating that the decision was “guided by the views of IMF members representing a majority of the total voting power.”

Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva stated earlier this week that the IMF had been approached by Venezuelan authorities at a technical level and that the Caribbean nation “desperately needs help.”

The World Bank likewise issued a statement disclosing the resumption of dealings with the acting Rodríguez government. Venezuela’s last loan with the institution concluded in 2005.

Venezuela had its relationship with the IMF suspended in 2019 after the first Trump administration and allies recognized the self-proclaimed “interim government” led by Juan Guaidó as the Caribbean nation’s legitimate authority.

In March, the White House recognized Rodríguez as Venezuela’s “sole leader” and later withdrew sanctions against her, while US officials spoke of efforts to reincorporate Caracas into the IMF fold.

Though relations were officially frozen in 2019, Venezuela had sought to distance itself from the Washington-based institution more than a decade prior. In 2007, former President Hugo Chávez formally withdrew Venezuela from the IMF and the World Bank, calling them “weapons of US imperialism.”

Chávez repeatedly denounced the US-controlled multilateral institutions’ role in promoting debt and underdevelopment in Global South countries and pushed for the creation of lending institutions as part of Latin American integration efforts. Under Chávez’s predecessors, Venezuela implemented draconian IMF-conditioned structural adjustment policies that saw over half of Venezuelans living in poverty by 1998.

Last year, President Nicolás Maduro stated that Venezuela had “broken the shackles” of the World Bank and the IMF and was instead building its own “self-sustainable model and relations with a new world.”

Venezuela’s priority will be accessing US $5.1 billion in Special Drawing Rights (SDR) that it is entitled to as an IMF member. In 2021, the lending institution issued $650 billion amid the Covid-19 pandemic as an effort to help countries boost reserves and address fiscal needs. 

However, Venezuela was blocked from accessing the funds as the IMF refused to rule on the country’s legitimate authorities.

Caracas’ reengagement with the IMF and the World Bank also comes amid growing speculation about the fate of Venezuela’s sizable foreign debt. The Caribbean nation owes as much as $170 billion from a combination of defaulted bonds, unpaid loans, and international arbitration awards that have accrued interest for years as US sanctions battered Venezuela’s economy and cut it off from credit markets.  

Venezuelan bonds have been rallying in recent weeks following Washington’s rapprochement with Caracas as creditors bet on a debt restructuring deal that can bring significant windfalls.

Since the January 3 US military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, the Rodríguez administration has fast-tracked a number of pro-business reforms, including in the hydrocarbons and mining sectors. Upon enacting the Mining Law on Thursday, the acting president thanked Trump, Rubio, and other administration officials for their “good disposition” in establishing “cooperation.”

Rodríguez recently announced further plans to overhaul the South American country’s labor, pension, and tax legislation, while also identifying state assets that are “not strategic.” The Cisneros Group, one of Venezuela’s largest business conglomerates, recently announced the raising of funds ahead of expectations of a “wave of privatizations.”

Since January, the Trump administration has imposed control over Venezuelan oil revenues, mandating that royalties, taxes, and dividends be deposited in US Treasury accounts. In a congressional hearing on Thursday, Assistant State Secretary Michael Kozak stated that “around $3 billion” have moved through the dedicated accounts. 

He did not specify what portion of the revenues has been returned to Caracas, only that the funds had been used to pay public sector incomes and import oil industry inputs, while blocking any transactions with China, Cuba, and Iran.

Earlier this week, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued new restricted licenses allowing transactions with the Venezuelan Central Bank and public banks that are expected to facilitate the partial return of seized Venezuelan export revenues.

On Thursday, Venezuelan authorities additionally announced a change in the Central Bank leadership, with Luis Pérez replacing Laura Guerra as president of the institution. Guerra had been appointed to the post in April 2025 by Maduro.

Pérez is an economist who had served on the BCV board of directors since 2018. In his social media profile, he describes himself as a cryptocurrency enthusiast.

Edited by Lucas Koerner in Fusagasugá, Colombia.

Miguel Diaz-Canel marks anniversary of socialist revolutionary declaration under threat of US attacks.

Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel has said that his country does not seek conflict with the United States but is prepared to fight if necessary, as Cuba marks the anniversary of its socialist revolutionary character amid the threat of US attacks.

Diaz-Canel struck a defiant tone on Thursday in remarks before a crowd marking the 65th anniversary of Fidel Castro’s declaration of the socialist nature of the Cuban Revolution and the failed invasion at the Bay of Pigs by forces aligned with the US the day after.

“The moment is extremely challenging and calls upon us once again, as on April 16, 1961, to be ready to confront serious threats, including military aggression,” Diaz-Canel said. “We do not want it, but it is our duty to prepare to avoid it and, if it becomes inevitable, to defeat it.”

President Donald Trump has threatened that the US could overthrow the Cuban government, a longtime source of ire for Washington, and has ratcheted up energy restrictions meant to squeeze the island’s economy.

“We may stop by Cuba after we finish with this,” Trump said earlier this week, stating that his attention could turn to Cuba after the end of the US-Israel war on Iran.

A US energy blockade and an end to oil shipments from Venezuela after the US abducted former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January have caused deteriorating conditions on the island. Fuel shortages and energy blackouts have roiled the island for weeks, heaping strain on workers and businesses.

Even before those increased restrictions, Cuba’s economy had suffered from decades of economic embargo from the US, along with economic mismanagement and political repression that prompted many Cubans to leave the country.

A vote at the United Nations in 2025 demanding an end to the US embargo passed with 165 votes in favour and seven against, including the US, Israel, Argentina, and Hungary. The resolution has been passed annually for more than 30 years.

“Cuba is not a failed state. Cuba is a besieged state,” Diaz-Canel said on Thursday. “Cuba is a state facing multidimensional aggression: economic warfare, an intensified blockade and an energy blockade.”

Americans could be forgiven if they’re unaware that President Trump recently performed one of his most essential tasks and sent his annual budget request to Congress, though months late and stunningly incomplete.

After all, so much else has been dominating the news lately: the Mideast war that Trump promised not to start. Price rises he’d vowed to end. His repeated insults of Pope Leo XIV. His portraying himself as Jesus Christ, then lying about having done so. An incompetent attorney general to fire. And the president’s actual priorities — plans for a $400-million White House ballroom and a massive “Triumphal Arch” nearby!

It’s a lot.

Once again, as in Trump’s first term, the public and press are inattentive to the nation’s fiscal health relative to past years. But that reflects the president’s own disengagement with reconciling spending and revenue — this from a president many Americans voted for based on his purported prowess as a businessman. For decades back to Ronald Reagan’s time, so-called deficit wars in Washington were a big story. Now, even Republicans in Congress complain of Trump’s absence from the fiscal fray as they struggle to belatedly finish this year’s budget work that was due last fall, and to end a weeks-old partial government shutdown, before turning to the budget for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1.

Yet it’s worth paying attention to U.S. budgets even if Trump won’t, for the sake of our children and grandchildren who’ll inherit the bills. In one document, a federal budget reflects the nation’s priorities. And these days, in the perennial guns-versus-butter debate, Trump has made his feelings all too plain.

“We’re fighting wars,” he told a group at the White House on April Fools’ Day. “We can’t take care of day care … Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things.”

Forget that Trump swore to end wars. Or that last year, long before he went to war against Iran, he cut $1 trillion over 10 years from Medicaid and other healthcare programs in his misnamed “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Yes, budgets can be boring, especially to a president with a famously short attention span. Trump and many of us Americans are distracted constantly by all the shiny objects he throws at the national consciousness by his words, acts and social media postings at all hours.

Yet the budgetary trend is clear to anyone bothering to look: As president, Trump is once again exacerbating the nation’s unsustainable course of piling up debt. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, among other credible sources, debt is now approaching the highest level in U.S. history, which was reached during World War II. It already surpasses the size of the entire economy and threatens higher borrowing costs and reduced investments.

For all the achievements Trump likes to claim — ending eight wars in a year! — here’s one that’s real: He is on a path to break his own record for the most debt in a single presidential term, $8.4 trillion in Trump 1.0, which was nearly double the increase under President Biden.

Need further proof of Trump’s brazen mendacity? Of course you don’t, but here it is: In the face of the well-documented budget record, Trump declared both this year and last year to a joint session of Congress, on national television, that he would balance the federal budget —“overnight,” he said in February.

The inequitable tax cuts and big spending increases for the military and immigration crackdowns that Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress enacted last year are significantly greater than in his first term, and are driving up the debt despite Republicans’ deep healthcare cuts. Just months after Trump took office, the ratings firm Moody’s downgraded the nation’s sterling credit rating for the first time in more than a century.

And now, in his new budget request, Trump seeks to inflate military spending from under $1 trillion when he regained office to $1.5 trillion, for the biggest year-to-year increase in military budgets since World War II.

This fiscal irresponsibility is happening at the worst possible time. For the last quarter of the 20th century, presidents and Congresses of both parties annually debated how to reduce deficits and several times reached consequential multi-year deals, culminating during the second Clinton term in four straight years of surpluses. (Those surpluses ended — wait for it — with Republicans’ tax cuts and war spending during the George W. Bush administration.)

Politicians back then were moved not just by the deficits of their time — deficits that, as a share of the economy, were less than half what they are now. They also were responding to experts’ warnings of a demographic tsunami by the 2020s: With the aging of the huge baby-boomer population, spending for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid would greatly increase even as the workforce whose payroll taxes support those programs shrank. Today the number of people 65 or older is almost three times what it was 50 years ago, and rising.

This reckoning is upon us, though you wouldn’t know it as Trump keeps calling for cutting revenue and spending more for lawless wars, immigration raids and monuments to himself. Barring bipartisan action, in 2033 Social Security’s retirement fund and Medicare’s hospital fund will no longer be able to cover beneficiaries’ full claims, according to their trustees’ annual report, necessitating reduced benefits or shifts of money from other worthy programs.

Trump did put Vice President JD Vance in charge of a “war on fraud.” But that holds about as much promise as Elon Musk’s fiscal fiasco — remember DOGE? — that cost money instead of cutting $2 trillion as promised.

Like other problems, Trump likely will leave the fiscal follies to his successor, who, should he or she win two terms, would preside as Social Security and Medicare become insolvent. I’ve yet to hear any of the early 2028 presidential aspirants — or Trump — address or be asked about that.

Let the debate, belatedly, begin.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Praise be to Allah.

For the second time in two weeks, President Trump used that phrase in a post about the Israel-U.S. war against Iran.

Crowing about the alleged destruction of Iran’s planes, ships and bases in a Truth Social post Saturday, he emphasized his greatest victory in the monthlong campaign: “Most importantly, their longtime ‘Leaders’ are no longer with us, praise be to Allah!”

Making sense of anything Trump says in the heat of posting is a fool’s errand, but it’s also entirely necessary. Sane wash his words we must, because no matter how unhinged or infantile, the world’s safety, fortunes and future are inextricably tied to America’s next move, and therefore to his next move.

So what is Trump trying to communicate, or provoke, by using the Arabic word for God, as Muslims do? Let’s translate.

The first and most likely explanation: “Praise be to Allah” was meant to disparage his adversaries in the Islamic Republic of Iran. They are Muslim, they refer to God as “Allah,” therefore, he will turn their phrasing against them. Word bombs to accompany the deadly ones falling in Iran and Lebanon.

All leaders deploy tough talk in times of war, but Trump’s posts read more like the feverish ramblings of mad Col. Kurtz (Marlon Brando) in “Apocalypse Now” — “You’re an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill” — than Winston Churchill’s galvanizing call to arms against the Nazis, “We shall fight on the beaches…”

Unlike the fictional Kurtz or the real Churchill, Trump has no military experience. He avoided the Vietnam War draft with four student deferments and one medical deferment for bone spurs. An area where he is experienced? Baiting foes. Antagonizing enemies, genuine or imagined, is a Trump specialty, be it from the Oval Office, on the campaign trail, or in the before times, as a reality TV personality.

Painting Muslims as the Other is nothing new for Trump, (unless they come bearing luxury airliners as gifts — then they’re friends). The same goes for others in his party. Since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) posted that Muslims don’t belong in American society. Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) wrote, “We need more Islamophobia, not less. Fear of Islam is rational.” And Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) reposted an image of the Twin Towers burning side by side with an image of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, with his own caption: “The enemy is inside the gates.”

The president’s first usage of “Praise be to Allah” as a middle finger to Iran landed on a Christian holy day, Easter Sunday. He posted a demand that Iran open the Strait of Hormuz: “Open the F— Strait, you crazy b—, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.” Hardly messaging that brings to mind Easter egg hunts on the White House lawn.

If the idea was to humiliate Iran into submission, it’s not working. Iran doesn’t appear to be backing down, even after Trump’s week-ago threat that a “whole civilization will die tonight” if it failed to meet his deadline to reopen the strait. The critical global shipping route is still closed. Trump didn’t appear all that interested in the art of the deal, either, even as Vice President JD Vance tried and failed to negotiate with Iranian leaders in Pakistan on Saturday. The president told reporters that he didn’t “care” what happens with Iran negotiations because “regardless what happens, we win.” He also said, “Whether we make a deal or not makes no difference to me.” He was seen later in Miami at an Ultimate Fighting Championship cage match with Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Making the Allah references all the stranger were Trump’s other religious-themed posts this past weekend. One was a lengthy screed against Pope Leo XIV, whom Trump described as too liberal and “weak on crime.” It’s worth noting that more than half of American Catholics voted for Trump in the last election, and that his vice president is Catholic, as is the secretary of State and the first lady.

The other was a stand-alone, AI-generated image of himself as a Christ-like figure. It showed the 79-year-old clad in a white robe and papal-red cape, a divine light emanating from the palm of one hand while the other hand was placed on an ailing man. The post was deleted Monday morning after a sizable backlash.

“I did post it, and I thought it was me as a doctor, and had to do with Red Cross, as a Red Cross worker there, which we support,” Trump said, responding to a reporter Monday during a presser at the White House as DoorDash delivered an order from McDonald’s to promote the president’s “no tax on tips” policy.

There was no mention of Allah during that particular event.

Alhamdulillah.

WASHINGTON — It was hard to miss President Trump’s very public spat with Pope Leo XIV this week.

The split was the first time in modern memory that an American president has so openly badmouthed a sitting pontiff, or, for that matter, distributed an image depicting himself as Jesus Christ. Critics cried “blasphemy!” even as supporters continued to stand behind the man whose presidency, some argue, was God sent.

Students of American history will recall an earlier incident that pitted papal and presidential authority against each other. The concern: that a president would align himself too closely to the church, or even take orders from the pope.

That anxiety seeped into the 1960 presidential campaign of John F. Kennedy, whose eventual victory would make him the first Catholic president.

Back then, Kennedy was constantly fending off accusations from Protestant ecclesiastic types who were wary that his nomination meant the pontiff, John XXIII, was already packing his bags for a move into the White House.

President John F. Kennedy meets with Pope Paul VI at the Vatican in July 1963, one month after Paul succeeded John XXIII as pontiff.

(Bettmann Archive / Getty Images)

The issue was so pronounced that 150 clergymen and laypeople formed Citizens for Religious Freedom, which in a pamphlet warned, “It is inconceivable to us that a Roman Catholic President would not be under extreme pressure by the hierarchy of his church to accede to its policies and demands.”

One particularly loud voice among the ministers was the Rev. Norman Vincent Peale, a popular and influential pastor and author. Peale was especially disturbed by Kennedy’s prospects.

“Our American culture is at stake,” he said at a meeting of the ministers. “I don’t say it won’t survive, but it won’t be what it was.”

The group asked Kennedy to “drop by Houston” to make clear his views on faith and government. He agreed, making a televised speech at the Rice Hotel, where he famously spelled out his firm opinions on the separation of church and state.

“I am not the Catholic candidate for president,” Kennedy told the group. “I am the Democratic Party’s nominee for president who happens to be Catholic.”

Time magazine reflected on the address some years later, concluding that the speech had gone so well for Kennedy “that many felt the dramatic moment was an important part of his victory.”

Since then, modern presidents have occasionally found themselves at odds with the Vatican. Typically Republican presidents would hear from the pope about foreign wars, while Democratic presidents were derided over abortion policies.

But such disagreements tended to be handled with the decorous language of diplomacy.

President George W. Bush presents Pope John Paul II with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in Rome on June 4 , 2004. The pope reminded Bush of the Vatican’s opposition to the war in Iraq. Bush praised him as a “devoted servant of God.”

(Eric Vandeville/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images)

Then came Trump, who is now being accused of openly mocking the Catholic faith and the 1st Amendment. He called Leo weak on crime and foreign policy, among other things. A self-described nondenominational Christian who says his favorite book is the Bible, Trump’s hasn’t shied from bashing the pontiff, nor has he hesitated to blur the line separating church and state.

Where Kennedy argued for an absolute separation, Trump has advanced a model of religious resurgence, promising “pews will be fuller, younger and more faithful than they have been in years.” Through initiatives including the “America Prays” program launched last year, the White House has sought to bring “bring back God” by inviting millions of Americans to prayer sessions. The webpage for the program focuses features only Christian Scripture.

“From the earliest days of the republic, faith in God has been the ultimate source of the nation’s strength,” Trump said at a National Prayer Breakfast in February.

President Trump, then-Vice President Mike Pence and faith leaders say a prayer during the signing of a proclamation in the Oval Office on Sept. 1, 2017. .

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

In the United States, the Catholic Church historically has “loved the 1st Amendment” and its guarantee of religious liberty and, as a result, largely kept some distance from government, according to Tom Reese, a Jesuit priest and religious commentator. After its failures attempting to influence monarchs and politicians in Europe, the Catholic Church “didn’t want the government interfering with them and knew that it wasn’t their right to interfere with the government,” Reese said.

Kennedy loved the 1st Amendment too. He put it above his own religious beliefs, and said as much on his way to the White House.

“I would not look with favor upon a president working to subvert the 1st Amendment’s guarantees of religious liberty,” he said. “Nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so.”

Pope Leo XIV meets with members of the community in Algiers at the Basilica of Our Lady of Africa on April 13, 2026.

(Vatican Pool via Getty Images)

Want to sip on Hailey Bieber’s Strawberry Glaze Skin Smoothie after staring at Vincent van Gogh’s “Tarascon Stagecoach”? Los Angeles County Museum of Art has got you covered.

The museum announced Tuesday that it has partnered with Erewhon, the high-end L.A. health food chain and retailer, on a cafe located on the ground level of its new David Geffen galleries. The cafe, which has outdoor seating beside Alexander Calder’s fountain sculpture, “Three Quintains (Hello Girls),” will open Sunday for LACMA members visiting the David Geffen Galleries. The general public can get in on the coveted buffalo cauliflower when the new building opens to the public on May 4 — with the partnership continuing through the summer. No definite closure has been announced, so it’s possible the collaboration continues.

“We’re so proud to partner with LACMA, a meaningful milestone as our first museum collaboration,” said Tony Antoci, CEO and owner of Erewhon, and Josephine Antoci, president and owner of Erewhon in a statement. “It really feels like a celebration of Los Angeles, bringing Erewhon and LACMA together to nourish and inspire the community we love.”

The collaboration between the store, which enjoys a cult-like following, with one of the city’s most anticipated new cultural offerings is expected to draw an eager crowd. Guests can grab a ticket to the museum, or simply enjoy a drink while strolling around the museum’s 3.5 acres of new park space, and taking in a variety of newly installed public artwork including Jeff Koons’ towering topiary sculpture, “Split Rocker.”

Two additional drinking and dining options — a wine bar and a restaurant — will open later this year, but no establishments have been named yet for those spots.

Erewhon at LACMA will be open during museum hours.

Closing a two-day Western trip, President Clinton on Tuesday pledged to Los Angeles audiences his special commitment to help the California economy, while asking state residents to do their part for the economic plan he is pushing through Congress.

Clinton, in mobbed campaign-style stops in South-Central Los Angeles and at Los Angeles Valley College in Van Nuys, asserted that the U.S. economy won’t recover until the nation’s largest state can pull itself out of its slump. “We can’t turn this economy around unless we’re going to lift California up,” Clinton told students at the community college.

The President also signaled his interest in California immigration problems, saying that he will soon pick a “compassionate but hard-headed” person to head the Immigration and Naturalization Service. He said he hopes to get Atty. Gen. Janet Reno’s recommendation for that post as early as this week.

Clinton, who has traveled out of Washington for part of the past two weeks trying to drum up support for his economic plan, visited a black-owned apparel store on South-Central’s Florence Avenue to illustrate his view that the riot-torn area can only be rebuilt through a joint effort of government and business. He used the community college stop to stress his advocacy of continually retraining workers to make them competitive in a world economy.

The Clinton road show has been part economics seminar and part campaign extravaganza, and his visit to Los Angeles was no exception.

At the community college, he sat on a wooden stool under flowering mimosa trees to field questions from students on education, jobs, immigration and other subjects. At the South-Central stop, he and Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown toured the store, then stripped off their suit jackets and ties and shot baskets for a few minutes with a group of youngsters.

The crowds were large and warm, but Clinton’s most impassioned defense of his program came when hecklers taunted him at the community college. To their chants “You broke your promise”–referring to his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class–and “No new taxes,” the President rejoined:

“You know what the ‘no new tax’ crowd did for 12 years? They cut taxes on the rich, raised taxes on the middle class and left the country in a ditch,” he said. “The free lunch crowd has had their chance.”

He cited as proof of his commitment to California the efforts of Commerce Secretary Brown, who has visited the state seven times since January to help coordinate the government’s effort to help the economy. He said he had asked Brown to “map a specific plan to turn this economy around.”

The President told the college students he would like to help the state’s economy through increased aid for laid off defense workers and their communities, additional community policing and financial aid to offset immigration-related costs.

He made again a pitch for the central idea of his economic plan, that the country needs to cut its deficit while increasing spending–”investment”–for other purposes that will strengthen the economy over the long term.

In South-Central Los Angeles, Clinton visited The Playground, a community center and sporting goods store on Florence Avenue just one mile west of where rioting erupted last year. It was founded by a business person, a lawyer, a doctor and ex-gang members from the Crips. A basketball court was established in back so youths could play as well as buy merchandise.

While the store has received no federal aid, Clinton used it to illustrate his Administration’s redevelopment strategy, which also calls for the use of tax-advantaged “empowerment zones” to bring commerce to distressed areas.

After touring the store and meeting its owners, Clinton headed for the basketball court. He shed his coat, removed his shoes and socks and deposited the contents of his pockets in a shoe box.

In front of a phalanx of several dozen photographers, Leonard Baylor, 8, presented Clinton with a gift of size 13 sneakers.

“Thank you, Mr. President, for coming,” Leonard told the President. “Here, take these shoes.” Then, the boy said to the President: “Shoot some hoops with us?”

Baylor broke into tears–because he was overcome with emotion, a store owner later said. The President pulled Baylor close to comfort him.

Clinton pulled off his tie and pulled on athletic socks and the sneakers. Brown did the same. They then joined 18 youths on the court ranging in age from 6 to 17.

The President captained one team and Brown led another while a friendly crowd of about 200 as well as reporters and camera crews looked on.

Clinton, with shirttails flapping from the back of his baggy suit pants, missed his first two shots, then saved face by hitting from 10 feet out. Brown, however, swished from 20 feet away.

Clinton also grabbed five rebounds. “I made some good passes,” he said, but seemed to acknowledge that his commerce secretary stole the show, declaring, “Can Ron Brown shoot a jump shot or what?”

After the game, Clinton told the crowd: “I want everybody in America to know that there are people here in Los Angeles who believe that we can bring business to this area, that we can put people to work, if you have the help you need.”

“I wanted to come here today not just to have a little fun with a basketball, but to say to you and all of America that we’re going to have to rebuild this country from the grass roots up,” Clinton said. “This is an incredible untapped resource for America. If everyone in this country who wanted a job had one, we wouldn’t have half the problems we’ve got.”

Clinton said that he and Brown planned to go back to Washington to try to pass an economic program that will put “you back to work.”

The crowd in South-Central was clearly with him. Dorothy Redmond, a nursery school owner in the neighborhood, said: “I’m very encouraged. I am an entrepreneur of a small business and I think this is a step in the right direction.”

“I’m just speechless,” said Flora Lane, who traveled to South-Central from her home in the Wilshire district. “He is a person who cares about all people. I am for him 100%, plus his wife.”

But all the reviews of Clinton’s program weren’t favorable.

In Washington, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) characterized Clinton’s trip as “heading West while his poll numbers go South.”

“His West Coast public relations blitz is just another political make-over to try to convince people he’s cutting spending when he’s really breaking all world records for tax increases,” Dole said.

In Sacramento, the Wilson Administration released a report contending that Clinton’s five-year plan would cost Californians $11.6 billion more than their “fair share” of spending cuts and tax increases.

The state Department of Finance said it drew its figures from Clinton’s proposals for defense cuts, defense conversion and retraining, tax increases on personal income and energy, and tax credits for investment. The analysis also included estimates of the indirect effect of changes in spending and tax policy and a possible reduction in interest rates.

The study said it was assumed that “California will receive a disproportionate share of benefits included in the Clinton proposals–tax credits, investment spending and defense conversion spending.”

But those benefits, it said, will only partially offset the “dampening effect” of the defense cuts. Although California’s population is about 12% of the nation, the study said it appeared the state would absorb at least 25% of the cuts.

Overall, the report said, the plan would cost Californians $68.7 billion, or 14.6% of the total. Based on the state’s 12% share of the nation’s population, the “fair share” of the deficit-cutting burden would cost the state and its residents $57 billion, the report said.

Times staff writer Daniel M. Weintraub contributed to this story from Sacramento.

* RELATED STORIES: A3, B1

“I’m not afraid.”

With these three words Sunday morning, Pope Leo XIV offered as powerful a rebuke of President Trump and everything he has wrought on the world as anyone ever has.

Three words that mocked Trump for being the bully that he is.

Three words that undercut Trump’s self-hyped aura of invincibility.

Three words to inspire all good people to fight against Trump — because if a mild-mannered man of God such as Leo isn’t afraid, no one should be.

Pope Leo’s words thrilled me as an American but especially as a Catholic. His quiet, confident witness since becoming pontiff in May had already reignited a spiritual light in me to adhere closer to the faith I was brought up in.

Trump’s actions during his second term — war, deportations, nasty rhetoric and a love of himself above all else — have been like fuel to that fire. They stand against everything I was ever taught was good and holy.

Hearing Leo’s simple smackdown of the president, at a time when too many people insist we must sink to Trump’s lows to beat him, is like receiving a sacrament I never knew I needed.

Leo spoke a few hours after Trump trashed him on social media, calling him “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy” — all because of the pope’s critiques of perpetual wars and this country’s vile treatment of undocumented immigrants, while never mentioning anyone by name.

Until now.

“I’m not afraid of the Trump administration or of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel, which is what the church works for,” he told reporters while traveling to Algeria to kick off a 10-day African mission. He repeated the message later, stating: “I have no fear.”

In response, Trump melted down like the Nazis at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” critiquing the pope to reporters and then posting an image on social media of himself as a robed savior healing a sick man, light emanating from his hands.

This pathetic fusillade offended even Catholic League President Bill Donohue, who has made a career of trashing liberal Catholics and who defended Trump last year after the president shared an image of himself in papal robes and mitre after the death of Pope Francis. This time, Donohue deemed Trump’s Christ-like imagery “offensive and immature.”

President Trump waves as he returns to the White House on Sunday. During a short interaction with reporters, he blasted Pope Leo XI as “very liberal.”

(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

The president has a lot to fear these days, and not just because he violated most of the Ten Commandments with his bonkers Jesus post, which quickly disappeared. One of the few sane adults left in his administration must have reminded him that antagonizing Catholics is a terrible political move. About 55% of them voted for him in the 2024 election, many in swing states such as Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that had sided with Joe Biden — a Catholic — four years before.

A Fox News poll released last week found that only 48% of Catholics nationwide approve of Trump’s overall performance. While 57% of white Catholics still support Trump, a majority of them aren’t happy with his actions in Iran — the issue that’s turning out to be a millstone around his neck.

Trump’s second term has been a nightmare that seems to worsen every day. Yet not only is this country still standing, but more and more people are waking up to the mockery he’s made of American values. One of the new warriors is Leo, who told reporters he spoke out not to sway politics in his home country, but to offer, in his role as head of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics, a reminder of what Jesus practiced and preached.

No wonder Trump, who wants to erect idols to himself like a Canaanite king, is so upset.

May Leo’s words wake up more good people, regardless of their faith, to rise against Trump — and especially stir lapsed Catholics to return to Mother Church.

U.S. Catholics have long served as a barometer of acceptance for newcomers and the working class. But only about 20% of Americans identify as Catholic, per a Pew Research Center study released last year. And only 30% of those Catholics attend Mass weekly. Many more leave the faith than adopt it, at rates that far exceed other Christian denominations. This collapse has allowed the Catholic church’s conservative wing to take over, departing from the historic mission and instead leading us to Trump.

My lifelong commitment to social justice and my eternal skepticism of power and avarice comes from what I learned growing up at St. Boniface in Anaheim. I even had aspirations to become a priest, because I find few things more noble than dedicating your life to helping others.

I stopped attending Mass once I began covering the church’s sex abuse scandals as a journalist. I was outraged that men who held themselves up to be the custodians of God on Earth not only allowed such crimes to happen but usually covered them up and shunted off the offenders to poor parishes like mine.

I never stopped praying or considering myself a Catholic — but I couldn’t bring myself to support institutions headed by men such as L.A. Archbishop José H. Gómez and Diocese of Orange Bishop Kevin Vann, who always seem to have sharp words for progressives but never for Trump.

It’s been a long road back for me to openly write about my faith with pride — but Trump’s continued heresies have made it necessary. I still don’t know when or if I’ll start attending Mass again regularly, but the fact that I’m even thinking about it shows Leo’s impact on me.

Recently, someone I was interviewing noticed my scapular of the Santo Niño de Atocha with the word “Amor” on the other side. Last year, I tucked this simple necklace that’s a sign of devotion inside the plastic sleeve holding my Los Angeles Times badge, along with a few religious medals.

Pope Leo caused that. Trump caused that. Any chance to talk about my Catholic faith and why Trump is bad, I’m going to take.

I’m not afraid.

WASHINGTON — President Trump was propelled into office in large part by support from evangelicals and Catholics, at times framing his political rise in divine terms.

But that relationship is now fraying, and, in some corners of the Catholic Church, breaking, after Trump spent the weekend maligning Pope Leo XIV — “Leo is WEAK on Crime” — and circulating a widely condemned social media post depicting himself as Jesus Christ.

Leo, meanwhile, on Monday repeated his calls for an end of hostilities between the U.S. and Iran. “I have no fear of neither the Trump administration nor of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel,” Leo told reporters. “Blessed are the peacemakers.”

Trump had lashed out at the pontiff in a Truth Social post on Sunday night and repeated those criticisms Monday. “I’m not a big fan of Pope Leo,” he said. “He’s a very liberal person, and he’s a man that doesn’t believe in stopping crime. He’s a man that doesn’t think we should be toying with a country that wants a nuclear weapon so they can blow up the world.”

The tirade drew swift backlash from Catholic leaders and rank-and-file believers alike, who have increasingly withdrawn support from the president since he and Israel launched attacks on Iran, according to recent polls.

Also fueling backlash was the artificial-intelligence-generated image of Trump, in a white robe and a red stole, placing his hand on the forehead of a man in a hospital bed. Trump confirmed he had posted the image but insisted he thought it portrayed him as a doctor, not Jesus healing the sick.

That’s not how many people viewed it.

“In the Christian faith, this is considered blasphemy: depicting yourself as Christ, elevating yourself to the level of Christ,” conservative commentator Alyssa Farah Griffin said on “The View.” “Our faith is bigger than our politics. That is one thing that will always trump politics for people who are practicing in their faith. He clearly doesn’t understand that.”

The Rev. Thomas Reese, who also works as an analyst at Religious News Service, called Trump’s AI-generated image “an absolute disaster and blasphemous,” adding that it appeared to unsettle even some of the president’s religious supporters. The post was later removed from Truth Social.

More broadly, Reese said the war itself, and the way it has been framed, is colliding with core church teaching.

“To invoke God for a war of choice is just wrong,” he said, noting that Catholic leaders have increasingly emphasized diplomacy and reconciliation over military action.

“The Catholics who voted for him feel betrayed,” Reese said. “I think they’re beginning to say, ‘This is not what we voted for,’ especially when you tie the war to higher gasoline prices, higher food prices.”

In his Truth Social post, Trump also took some credit for Leo’s election as pontiff last year after the death of Pope Francis, writing that Leo was chosen “because he was an American, and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump. If I wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican.”

Tensions had been simmering between the two leaders for months, but boiled over after Trump issued a threat to use the U.S. military to wipe out all of Iranian civilization.

At a peace vigil at St. Peter’s Basilica on Saturday, Leo said that a “delusion of omnipotence” is fueling the war that has left thousands dead. Though he did not name Trump, the pope has repeatedly cautioned against invoking religion to justify violence.

Many Trump supporters have claimed he had a divine mandate, and Trump himself has repeatedly asserted that God saved him in the July 2024 assassination attempt so that he could lead the United States.

His administration has undertaken extraordinary efforts to infuse Christianity into government functions — establishing a White House Faith Office and holding prayer services at the Pentagon and the Labor Department.

After Iran shot down a U.S. fighter jet on April 3, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth compared the rescue of one of the aviators to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection: “Shot down on a Friday, Good Friday. Hidden in a cave, a crevice, all of Saturday and rescued on Sunday. Flown out of Iran as the sun was rising on Easter Sunday. A pilot reborn, all home and accounted for, a nation rejoicing.”

A military watchdog group last month said it had received more than 200 complaints from U.S. service members reporting that military commanders were telling troops that the Iran war was part of a divine plan by God to trigger Armageddon. A group of Democratic lawmakers called for an investigation into whether military operations were being guided by “end-times prophecy.”

Catholics rallied for Trump in 2024, when 55% of voting Catholics cast their ballots for Trump, clocking in at 12 points higher than his Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris.

But he’s steadily lost their support since the onset of the war, according to new bipartisan polling. Some 52% of Catholics say they disapprove of the president’s job performance, according to one survey by Republican pollster Shaw & Co. Research and Democratic pollster Beacon Research. Another 23% say they strongly approve of the job he is doing and another 25% somewhat approve.

Consisting of about a quarter of the U.S. population, the Catholic voting bloc has long been regarded as the bellwether demographic, having historically chosen the winner of the popular vote in nearly every presidential election for the last 50 years.

Since ascending to the throne of St. Peter, Leo has frequently clashed with the administration on issues ranging from immigration to foreign policy, emphasizing humanitarian concerns and diplomacy over force.

That attitude appears to be resonating in the pews. Reese, the commentator and priest, pointed to growing frustration among Catholic voters, including some who backed Trump in 2024 expecting an end to prolonged Middle East conflicts.

Reflecting on church history, he said: “The papacy survived Attila the Hun. They survived Napoleon, they survived Mussolini and they survived Hitler. They will survive Trump.”

In AD 452, when Attila the Hun sacked city after city in his conquest of the known world, it was the Catholic Church, not the Roman military, that met him in a show of diplomacy. The pontiff of the time, who persuaded Attila to turn his army back and spare Rome, was called Pope Leo I.