questions

WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday for Todd Blanche, President Trump’s pick for attorney general, will be a referendum on far more than his individual merits.

Blanche, the acting attorney general, served as Trump’s defense attorney before taking office and has been closely linked to many of the most consequential — and controversial — issues that have dominated the first two years of Trump’s second term.

Blanche is set to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will decide whether to approve his nomination and send it to the full Senate for a confirmation vote. The committee hearing will continue Thursday.

“I would expect committee Democrats to treat Mr. Blanche’s hearing as an opportunity to conduct oversight of the Department of Justice,” said Phil Brest, president of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal nonprofit and a former top Democratic staffer on the committee. “It’s a test of the Senate’s willingness to probe the department’s operations and to actually serve as a check on the department and the administration more broadly.”

Democrats on the committee are expected to push Blanche on a host of topics, including the $1.8-billion “anti-weaponization fund” that critics derided as a slush fund for the president’s allies, the Justice Department’s rollout of the so-called Epstein files, and the department’s prosecution of several perceived enemies of Trump, notably former FBI Director James Comey.

“While deploying the Justice Department as a shield for the president and his cronies, Blanche has also used our top law-enforcement agency as a sword against Trump’s political opponents,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the ranking Democrat on the committee last month. “The independence of DOJ has been decimated under Blanche’s authority.”

Blanche was confirmed by the Senate as deputy attorney general in March, 2025, and was elevated to his current role after Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi was fired in April.

More critical to the success of Blanche’s nomination will be whether he can win the support of two lame-duck Republican senators, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas, who expressed some reservations about Blanche soon after his nomination was announced.

Cornyn raised concern about Blanche’s independence from Trump, while Tillis said Blanche’s stance on protesters who violently stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, would be critical to his consideration.

Some of those Jan. 6 protesters were expected to be the beneficiaries of the $1.8-billion fund announced as part of a settlement to a lawsuit Trump and his sons and business brought against the IRS.

In a scathing ruling this week, the federal judge wrote that the lawsuit was improper and recommended sanctions against two Justice Department attorneys who worked on the case, though not Blanche himself.

Cornyn told Semafor on Tuesday that the ruling raised a number of issues, including “the potentially collusive nature of the lawsuit.”

He has said previously that he will hold off on making a decision about whether to approve Blanche until after the hearing.

Tillis, meanwhile, told CNN’s Manu Raju on Tuesday that the weaponization fund would need to be completely off the table for him to support Blanche’s nomination.

Trump touted Blanche’s record ahead of the hearing.

“Todd Blanche is doing a PHENOMENAL job as Acting Attorney General of the United States,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “He is a great lawyer, always very fair, and every Republican Senator should vote to CONFIRM Todd Blanche, ASAP!”

Sen. Lindsey Graham’s death means that Republicans currently only enjoy a one-seat majority, but a replacement for Graham on the committee could be in place before it votes on whether to move his nomination to the Senate floor, which will likely come two weeks after the hearing.

Blanche, 51, spent 12 years working for the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, working largely on drug and violent crime cases, and rose to the level of co-chief of the district’s White Plains division.

He left the office in 2014 for private practice and joined the prominent law firm Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft in 2017 as a partner. He left the firm in 2023 and went independent after other partners expressed concern when he took Trump on as a client.

Blanche went on to represent Trump in several criminal matters, including the New York case about hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, and cases brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith about Trump’s alleged efforts to block the transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election and his alleged retention of classified documents.

He listed all three as among the 10 most significant cases of his career in the questionnaire he completed ahead of the hearing, along with his work at the Justice Department on a lawsuit challenging the construction of a new White House ballroom.

A group of more than 1,200 former Justice Department attorneys wrote a letter opposing Blanche’s nomination, asserting that his leadership has resulted in mass departures of career staff. That has “meant that much of the department’s vital work isn’t being done, or isn’t being done as well – leaving communities less safe, Americans’ rights less protected, and our national security more vulnerable,” the lawyers wrote.

Former Justice Department pardon attorney Liz Oyer is scheduled to testify as a witness for Democrats on Thursday. She has said she was fired for refusing to recommend the restoration of actor Mel Gibson’s gun rights.

Oyer will be joined Thursday by Dani Bensky, one of many victims of the deceased sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein who has criticized Blanche’s handling of the release of the so-called Epstein files — millions of pages of records detailing the Justice Department’s investigations into Epstein’s crimes.

Numerous victims have said that their names and other sensitive information were not properly redacted in the files and criticized Blanche and the department for failing to investigate Epstein’s potential co-conspirators.

Blanche has also come under criticism from survivors of Epstein’s abuse for the interview he conducted in July, 2025, with Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in facilitating and participating in Epstein’s abuse.

Days after their interview, Maxwell was moved from her prison in Florida to a minimum-security prison in Texas.

NEW YORK — The sudden death of Sen. Lindsey Graham, a top ally of President Trump and one of Washington’s best-known politicians, is renewing focus on the country’s aging lawmakers.

Graham, a South Carolina Republican who had turned 71 just two days before dying on Saturday, was far younger than many of his Senate colleagues and appeared to have been in good health. He suffered a tear in his aorta, according to a preliminary report from the medical examiner.

It was the second time in less than a month that emergency personnel were dispatched to the home of a U.S. senator. In early June, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the former Republican Senate leader, was hospitalized for undisclosed reasons.

After weeks of increasingly dire speculation about his health, he finally revealed on Sunday that he had fallen and suffered from mild pneumonia. He released a photo, complete with a copy of the day’s newspaper.

Graham’s death and McConnell’s hospitalization have come amid an ongoing reckoning about the nation’s aging leaders, two years after the disastrous presidential debate that sparked widespread panic among Democrats about then-81-year-old President Biden’s capacities and accusations of a cover-up.

Some politicians have continued to obscure details about their health challenges, asking for privacy despite their public positions, and fueling conspiracy theories.

“I think we need some transparency,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Monday. “I wish Sen. McConnell and his team would have done that earlier. I think it would have resolved a lot of questions.”

McConnell is admitted to a hospital

McConnell, who at 84 is only the third-oldest member of the Senate, was admitted to the hospital on June 14 with barely any explanation. Aides said he was “receiving excellent care” but offered no details about his condition.

The dearth of information fueled a wave of speculation about his prognosis, with Laura Loomer, a Trump ally and conspiracy theorist, claiming on social media that a “high level source close to the White House” had told her he was “officially brain dead.”

But McConnell, who will retire from Congress at the end of January after serving as the longest-ever Senate leader, said in a statement that he is on the mend. He said a fall had led to his hospitalization and that he was “briefly unconscious” and treated for mild pneumonia.

“You all know how folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older,” he said. “Even in the public eye, I feel that same instinct — I can’t help it.”

That wasn’t enough to put speculation to rest. On social media, many refused to believe the veracity of a photo his office released that included the front page of the sports section of the Washington Post.

Conspiracy theories about McConnell’s health are “a symptom of our times,” said Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican who is also from McConnell’s home state of Kentucky. Paul said people should “give him a break.”

“People think they have a right to know everyone’s medical problems,” he said, “but I don’t know, where does it begin and where does it end?”

Trump’s medical reports offer limited details

The oldest person ever elected president, at age 78, has long offered only the rosiest picture of his health.

“Everything checked out PERFECTLY,” he boasted after his last physical in May, adding that he took yet another cognitive test aimed at detecting early dementia and has “aced them all.”

His past medical reports have been criticized for offering limited detail and including statistics that some health professionals have viewed with skepticism.

When he first ran for president in 2016, Trump declined to release his health records, breaking with longtime precedent. He instead offered a four-paragraph note from his doctor declaring that he would be “the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), White House doctor during Trump’s first term, later drew headlines when he extolled the president’s “incredibly good genes.”

When he was infected with COVID-19 in the midst of his 2020 reelection campaign, Trump’s doctors and aides withheld key details of his treatment and tried to downplay the severity of his illness.

And after an attempted assassination at a Pennsylvania rally, Trump aides kept the public in the dark for days, declining to discuss the extent of his injuries or release medical records after assuring he was “fine.”

Kean Jr. goes absent for months

The obfuscation extends beyond the septuagenarian and octogenarian set. New Jersey Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr. spent four months missing without explanation before he finally disclosed late last month that he had been in treatment for depression.

He said in a brief floor speech after his return that he had remained silent about his condition because he is a “private person by nature.”

He won an uncontested primary during his absence, despite missing more than 100 votes in the House, and is running for reelection.

The approach stood in contrast to Sen. John Fetterman, a Pennsylvania Democrat, who disclosed his hospitalization for clinical depression the day after he was admitted to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for treatment. He also suffered a stroke while running for office.

Biden’s stumbles doom his reelection effort

Biden’s halting gait, frail appearance and frequent verbal stumbles eventually doomed his 2024 reelection campaign. After a debate in which he frequently lost his train of thought, he chose to withdraw from the race, sparking an unprecedented swap at the top of the Democratic ticket that ultimately paved the way for Trump’s return to office.

Many others have refused to retire. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, died in office in 2023 at the age of 90, after years of declining health, including a bout of shingles. Though she returned to the Senate after her illness, she appeared frail and confused at times. It was later revealed that her office had failed to disclose in real time that she had contracted encephalitis while recovering.

Longtime Republican Rep. Kay Granger of Texas spent the final months of her more than two decades in Congress, when she was in her early 80s, suffering from what her office called “unforeseen health challenges” that made travel to Washington difficult.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, 89, the longtime House delegate for the District of Columbia, announced earlier this year that she would not run for reelection amid questions about her competency.

Colvin writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Lisa Mascaro in Washington contributed to this report.

Question: What is the maximum size of a tennis racquet? James in Dorset and David in Llanwnog

Jamie: Most standard tennis racquets are 27 inches in length. Some players play with longer ones, so a quarter or a half-inch more. The most you are allowed is 29 inches, but I don’t know anyone who gets near that!

Question: Does the heat affect the tennis balls? Richard in Purley

Jamie: I think it does, yes. It makes them travel faster through the air and they probably will be livelier off the bounce, because the surface will be reactive. It definitely helps them to fly quicker through the air when it’s hot.

Question: What are the players looking for when checking tennis balls at each serve? Margaret in Kent

Jamie: All players will take three or four balls to choose from before serving. The reason they do that is they are trying to find the newest, smoothest ball, because it will fly quicker through the air, which will help them with their serve and with trying to get more free points.

Question: What do the pros do with last year’s tennis bag, and are their tennis shoes custom-made? If so, do they get more width around the toes? Gordon in Newcastle

Jamie: I think most players take their bags home after Grand Slams, and either give them away or they get stored. With shoes, I don’t think players get them custom made, I think footwear brands just make standard shoes and hope that the players like them.

Question: Jamie Murray would wear sunglasses during doubles matches. Are all players allowed to wear them? Hilary in Leighton Buzzard

Question: Why don’t professional tennis players wear sunglasses? Jane in Wedmore, Rona in Helensburg, Alec in Leeds and Jill in Hampshire

Jamie: I don’t know why professional tennis players tend not to wear them. I wore them for 13 years of my career, to protect my eyes and help with all the glare in the sunny conditions we play in, particularly across Australia and the United States. The lens quality from the companies is so good these days – I don’t understand why more players don’t use them!

Question: Do the players use sunscreen, because I don’t see them putting on? Richard in Plymouth and Jane in Northampton

Jamie: All players wear sunscreen, but they would apply it in the locker rooms before going out. They would never apply it as they walk on to court. Firstly, because they would just immediately sweat it off, and secondly because it would make their hands really slippy. Most players would then wear a cap so they don’t have to apply sun screen to their forehead, which would be problematic if it dripped in their eyes.

This article is the latest from BBC Sport’s Ask Me Anything team.

The clamour surrounding the World Cup’s controversy involving US President Donald Trump and FIFA chief Gianni Infantino had barely died down when another arose in the aftermath of Argentina’s controversial 3-2 win over Egypt in the round-of-16 match in Atlanta.

As the defending champions staged a stunning comeback against the Pharaohs in the knockout match on Tuesday, questions were raised about an unusually late VAR call that saw Egypt’s second goal rescinded, followed by a chain of events that led to Argentina’s victory.

A day earlier, Trump had revealed that he had asked FIFA to review, and overturn, USA striker Folarin Balogun’s one-game suspension for a red card, and the governing body controversially obliged. The matter was dusted off by Belgium as they dumped the hosts out of the tournament with a 4-1 win in the match Balogun was initially suspended from but ended up playing – to no avail.

Trump watch on the World Cup

While the anger surrounding FIFA’s red-card decision was directed at both the football governing body and Trump, Egypt’s outburst was solely aimed at the organisation, which, according to Egypt’s manager, had “wanted to keep the world champions in the competition”.

Head coach Hossam Hassan speculated that match officials had been put under pressure to ensure that one of the biggest names, Argentina’s Lionel Messi, stayed in the tournament.

“Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running,” Hassan told beIN Sports after the match.

“In football, there are sometimes external factors that go beyond the technical aspects. The world champions received support at every level.”

While the tournament has been no stranger to the political spotlight of questionable integrity, experts say the lines between sport and politics have been blurred even further.

“After the Balogun affair, who knows which decisions are legitimate and can be trusted, and which can’t?” Simon Chadwick, professor of Afro-Eurasian sport at the Emlyon Business School in Shanghai, told Al Jazeera.

“If the Trump administration is maintaining a watching brief over the tournament, it’s worth remembering: Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, is a staunch Trump supporter.”

Trump and his Argentinian counterpart share a close relationship. Milei is a regular feature at pro-Trump political gatherings in the United States, and Trump has described Argentina’s far-right populist leader as his “favourite president”.

Chadwick also opined that Hassan’s vociferous support for Palestine at the World Cup could have prompted some officials to “have built-in biases when making decisions”.

Hassan dedicated part of his pre-match news conference on Monday to making an impassioned plea for the people of Palestine, especially those in the besieged Gaza Strip.

Advantage, Argentina

Circling back to the VAR call that sliced Egypt’s lead in half and was followed by decisions that conveniently favoured Argentina, Chadwick said the period of play was “unusual”.

He wondered why the referee had not called a foul in real-time that VAR picked up several moments later and only once Egypt scored their second goal.

“There was something distinctly unusual about the goal and VAR decision, something that was amplified when Argentina scored one of its goals,” Chadwick said, questioning refereeing standards in the match.

“In the build-up, an infringement was perpetrated by an Argentina player, which could have been interpreted as a similar offence to that supposedly committed earlier by the Egyptian player. At the very least, refereeing standards during the game were somewhat inconsistent, although critics are clearly making much more serious claims.”

But while many social media commentators and football experts were outraged at the decisions – Portuguese football icon Jose Mourinho reportedly termed the match “daylight robbery” – some football experts said it was a closer call.

“Robbed might be a strong word,” football analyst Ali El Garni said.

“I’d say decisions made by both the referee and VAR could have gone either way, and Argentina benefitted from all the 50/50 incidents.

“The incident leading to the Egyptian disallowed goal was an indisputable foul. The question is how far VAR should go back to check the legitimacy of a goal,” said El Garni, who has extensively reported on European and North African football.

However, he did wonder if VAR would have been involved had the scoreline been 2-0 in Argentina’s favour instead.

“Would the goal have been disallowed had it been scored by Argentina? It’s unlikely,” he said.

“What’s making it worse for Egypt is the fact that a similar incident involving what appeared to be a foul on [Mohamed] Salah took place before Argentina’s third goal, and VAR didn’t intervene,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chadwick questioned why VAR officials had raised the issue if the on-field officials did not call a foul when Egypt‘s Marwan Attia lightly tugged the shirt and stepped on the foot of Lisandro Martinez.

A logical solution to the VAR issue, Chadwick proposed, would be “for fans and viewers to listen to an assessment of the alleged offence, hear the various arguments, and have a clear insight into the basis for a decision”.

Chadwick admitted that although Egyptian players should not have become overwhelmed with emotion, “a sense of injustice was induced by the VAR decision”.

“This technology was supposed to minimise doubt and bring consistency. Instead, its use during this match had significant cognitive and behavioural effects,” he said.

“Indeed, rather than brandishing cards and inflaming the situation even further, the referee should have used his discretion and judgement to defuse the situation.”

While Chadwick dismissed rumours of match-rigging in favour of Messi and Argentina, he acknowledged the pull of the iconic footballer’s star power.

“There is no doubt that Messi is a box office attraction the tournament really can’t afford to be without.”

MAREN Morris managed to dodge questions about her friend Taylor Swift’s wedding on live TV just hours before the pop superstar is scheduled to tie the knot.

The country singer performed on Today Friday morning in front of a packed crowd in the sweltering NYC heat as part of the morning show’s summer concert series.

After performing her hits Hard Liquor and Soft Rock and 80s Mercedes early Friday, Today’s Craig Melvin dropped a Taylor wedding question on Maren, taking her by surprise.

“It was reported yesterday by Variety that you are going to the wedding. What do you get as a gift for someone like that? Do you get a juicer?” Craig asked, as Maren nervously played with her hair and stuttered.

“I don’t know, what do you get? That would be a hard person to buy for,” she said uncomfortably.

“I’m so happy for them. This is such an incredible thing. I think she has such a close tie to New York.

Swiftly Wed

Who is performing at Taylor Swift’s wedding? Line-up rumours at MSG

“And yeah…I’m so excited for them to celebrate their love. It’s so cool.

“There’s a lot going on this weekend. I’m happy to be here during this frenzy.”

According to Variety, Maren is attending the festivities on Friday evening, alongside fellow country stars Miranda Lambert and Kelsea Ballerini.

Taylor and Maren have been friends for years, and the latter even made a guest appearance on the pop superstar’s Eras tour in 2023.

The massive reception is expected to kick off later in the afternoon on Friday at New York’s Madison Square Garden, with other big-name guests including Zoe Kravitz, Adam Sandler, Sabrina Carpenter and Graham Norton.

As The U.S. Sun first reported, Gigi Hadid and Selena Gomez are expected to be bridesmaids, and both have been spotted out and about in NYC this week.

Last night, Taylor and Travis’ close friends and family members attended the rehearsal dinner, and emerged from the venue with little black boxes.

The boxes had a TT – the couple’s initials – on the outside.

It was billed as a World Cup Golden Boot showdown between France superstar Kylian Mbappe and Norway goal machine Erling Haaland.

In the end Haaland started on the bench and it quickly turned into the Ousmane Dembele show after the Ballon d’Or winner hit a stunning 25-minute first-half hat-trick as Les Bleus coasted to a 4-1 win at Boston Stadium.

While France went with an array of attacking talent they hope will fire them to World Cup glory in New Jersey on 19 July, Norway decided this final group game was the right time to exclude Manchester City forward Haaland from the starting XI for the first time since 2024.

It wasn’t just Haaland though as Norway boss Stale Solbakken, with his side already through to the knockout stages, opted to make a whopping 10 changes.

“A no-brainer,” he said when asked why he decided to rest so many.

“Both my part and from the physio, health and medical department, and from some of the players themselves.

“The only consideration was for the Norway fans. They would have wanted to see Erling and Martin [Odegaard] play.

“We did a summary after the Senegal game and five or six players [were] very affected after 80 minutes. The entire defensive line and one or two midfielders.”

As a result of the changes, Dembele filled his boots after Mbappe struck the underside of the crossbar inside the opening minute.

“If Erling Haaland needs a rest for the latter stages of the tournament he will take that,” former England striker Ian Wright told ITV Sport before the game.

With Haaland, who had scored four goals in the previous two group games, sat on the bench, his deputy Jorgen Strand Larsen missed a penalty that would have made it 3-2 after half-time.

Haaland had already made his feelings clear about facing France after scoring two in a 3-2 win over Senegal on Tuesday.

“I couldn’t care too much about that game now,” he said after Norway qualified for the knockout stages.

“They’re probably going to win against us. They’re probably going to win the whole tournament.”

So was it a shrewd move by Norway to make so many changes – or the wrong decision?

Hi, and welcome to another edition of Dodgers Dugout. My name is Houston Mitchell.

We received more than 500 questions for Justin Turner after putting out the plea a couple of weeks ago, which is a record. (Some were the same question asked by multiple people.) I selected a few, and Turner answered them via email between games with the Tijuana Toros.

Mark Haendel in Santa Monica asks: Any ideas of staying in baseball after you actually retire? Coaching, managing, college or pro level, etc.?

Turner: I will definitely stay in the game in some capacity. I love it too much and my son loves being around it too much to step away.

Kristen Lazalier in Norman, Okla., asks: Please share three favorite memories of your years with the Dodgers. Thank you for always bringing such passion and joy to your play — both on and off the field!

Turner: It would have to be winning the World Series in 2020. Winning the Roberto Clemente Award in 2022. The walk-off homer in the NLCS and winning the fan vote for my first All-Star Game in 2017.

Chris Nayve asks: What is your go-to mindset or thought that helps you when things get challenging in baseball or just in life?

Turner: The best thing is just to simplify things and not try to do too much. Take the results out and trust the process. Live in the moment and control what is in front of me.

Robert Scott Wallace asks: First and foremost, I wanted to thank JT and his wife for all the good they do for the city of Los Angeles. A basic question: Who is the toughest pitcher you had to ever face in the big leagues and why?

Turner: Felix Hernández was the nastiest. Cliff Lee and Tyler Glasnow, after the 2020 World Series, own me. (Editor’s note: Turner was 0 for 3 with two strikeouts against Hernández, one for 20 against Lee with four strikeouts and 0 for 11 against Glasnow with 10 strikeouts.)

Paul Mihalow asks: Did anybody on your MLB teams ever complain about the “pine tar” on the back of your jersey — like clubhouse managers or laundry guys?

Turner: No. I asked the clubhouse guys and they said it was actually very easy to get out every night.

Jeff Plotkin asks: Who were some of your favorite teammates?

Turner: That’s a tough one. I get along great with just about everyone. But my favorite baseball guy of all time is, hands down, Chase Utley.

Gabriel Ortega asks: What is one lesson you’ve learned from fatherhood that has surprised you the most, and how has it changed the person you are both on and off the field?

Turner: Being a dad definitely taught me patience and understanding. That just because i know what I’m saying or asking doesn’t mean Bo or anyone else does. Sometimes you have to get creative to get your message across.

Robert Shannon asks: Where does the 2004 College World Series championship with Cal State Fullerton rank on your career highlights?

Turner: That has to be way up near the top. That’s one of the hardest tournaments to win and that was always a special group of guys.

Marshall Fong asks: What adjustments did you make as you aged to remain a competitive player?

Turner: The biggest thing is time management and learning how to get my work in that needs to be done without killing myself and my energy for the game.

Thanks again to Turner for taking the time to answer reader questions.

Andy Pages has a burden

Last week, colleague Liana Handler wrote a nice story on Andy Pages and the struggle he has as his family lives in Cuba. He is unable to see them and sometimes he can’t get reach them on the phone, which is when the fears really loom large.

A few key passages from Handler’s story:

Unlike his teammates — both American and those on visas — Pages is distinctly cut off in the United States, where he lives with his wife, Alondra, but is separated from his parents and sister in Mantua. The third-year Dodgers center fielder is making $800,000 this year but can’t spend his money on flights home or on bringing his family to the country where he plays baseball. The tense relations between the U.S. and Cuba — the Trump administration has imposed economic sanctions and made diplomatic threats — don’t allow for that.

“I haven’t found any way that gives me that tranquility and peace,” he told The Times in Spanish two weeks ago. “Because the way things are there, what’s always on your mind is that it could happen. Anything, any time. And I have all my family in Cuba. So, you have to live with that worry all the time.”

Most of Pages’ family can only listen to his baseball games on the radio or through fuzzy images on the television.

No one understands that more than Dodgers infielder Miguel Rojas. A Venezuelan immigrant, Rojas said he felt a personal responsibility for Pages, who is caught between wanting to speak more about the situation and being guarded because of his budding career and the fact that he’s not yet eligible to be a free agent.

“We need to preserve our job, because this is our only way to make an income, and a lot of us are the head of the family, so we got to continue to think about it that way,” Rojas said. “I would like to be more vocal and be a little bit more present for my community, but it’s really hard because I’m performing my job, and if I stop doing this, I don’t know how to do anything else.”

As Rojas describes, it is not easy to focus on your job when you see people you know at home suffering.

“We are here to perform and actually provide entertainment to people, and sometimes we are seen like that,” he said. “The problem is when the lights are off at night, when you have to go home, when you become a regular human being that is on the streets.”

The story is well worth your time and can be read here.

Perfect Father’s Day present

Shohei Ohtani missed Friday’s game to be present for the birth of his second child with his wife, Mamiko.

“We are again overjoyed to experience this wonderful day in our lives together,” Ohtani said on Instagram. “Thank you for being born safely. We would also like to express our heartfelt gratitude to everyone who has supported us throughout this journey.”

Injury updates

—Will Smith has an inflamed disk in his neck and recently had an injection there to help reduce it. The earliest he will be back is Friday, as he is not going on the team’s trip to Minnesota.

—Teoscar Hernández will begin a rehab assignment in triple-A this week and could be back before the end of the month.

—An MRI on Blake Treinen‘s elbow showed no structural damage, so he should be back as soon as he can come off the 15-day IL.

—Reliever Edwin Díaz is progressing well and remains on track to return after the All-Star break.

—Reliever Evan Phillips has pitched in six games for triple-A Oklahoma City. In 5-1/3 innings, he has given up five hits, walked four and struck out five. He should return in early July.

—Reliever Brock Stewart could be activated before today’s game against Minnesota. If not, then sometime this week.

These names seem familiar

How notable players who were with the Dodgers the last couple of seasons are doing with their new teams (through Sunday). Click on the player’s name to be taken to their full stats page:

Anthony Banda, Twins: 2-0, 4.22 ERA, 2 saves, 32 IP, 26 hits, 14 walks, 29 K’s, 104 ERA+

Cody Bellinger, Yankees: .276/.370/.473, 324 PA’s, 15 doubles, 3 triples, 11 homers, 49 RBIs, 133 OPS+

Walker Buehler, Padres: 4-3, 3.96 ERA, 72.2 IP, 73 hits, 23 walks, 65 K’s, 105 ERA+

Mike Busch, Cubs: .247/.377/.396, 337 PA’s, 13 doubles, 2 triples, 8 homers, 42 RBIs, 122 OPS+

Michael Conforto, Cubs: .222/.328/.434, 116 PA’s, 9 doubles, 4 homers, 13 RBIs, 116 OPS+

Justin Dean, Cubs: .500/.500/1.500, 2 PA’s, 1 triple, 3 RBIs, 443 OPS+

Caleb Ferguson, Reds: 0-0, 1.50 ERA, 12 IP, 10 hits, 5 walks, 12 K’s, 302 ERA+

Jack Flaherty, Tigers: 1-8, 5.35 ERA, 65.2 IP, 69 hits, 34 walks, 78 K’s, 81 ERA+, on the IL

Kenley Jansen, Tigers: 1-3, 4.00 ERA, 9 saves, 18 IP, 10 hits, 10 walks, 22 K’s, 110 ERA+

Craig Kimbrel, Rays: 0-2, 5.50 ERA, 18 IP, 19 hits, 8 walks, 18 K’s, 78 ERA+

Gavin Lux, Rays: on the IL

Dustin May, Cardinals: 5-6, 4.30 ERA, 83.2 IP, 78 hits, 22 walks, 77 K’s, 94 ERA+

Zach McKinstry, Tigers: .177/.272/.259, 171 PA’s, 4 doubles, 1 triple, 2 homers, 11 RBIs, 48 OPS+

James Outman, Tigers: .169/.238/.286, 84 PA’s, 4 doubles, 1 triple, 1 homer, 5 RBIs, 44 OPS+

Joc Pederson, Rangers: .237/.333/.419, 235 PA’s, 7 doubles, 2 triple, 9 homers, 25 RBIs, 119 OPS+

Luke Raley, Mariners: .241/.303/.503, 210 PA’s, 6 doubles, 1 triple, 14 homers, 35 RBIs, 126 OPS+

Ben Rortvedt, Mets: in the minors

Corey Seager, Rangers: .186/.284/.373, 204 PA’s, 6 doubles, 9 homers, 24 RBIs, 91 OPS+, on the IL

Justin Turner, Tijuana (Mexican League): .273/.483/.461, 196 PA’s, 14 doubles, 6 homers, 25 RBIs

Trea Turner, Phillies: .227/.280/.336, 328 PA’s, 12 doubles, 7 homers, 22 RBIs, 67 OPS+

Miguel Vargas, White Sox: .236/.353/.465, 324 PA’s, 12 doubles, 1 triple, 16 homers, 44 RBIs, 126 OPS+

Kirby Yates, Angels: 0-3, 3.68 ERA, 1 save, 14.2 IP, 9 hits, 7 walks, 19 K’s, 116 ERA+

Up next

Monday: Dodgers (*Eric Lauer, 2-5, 5.37 ERA [1-0, 3.22 ERA with Dodgers]) at Minnesota (Zebby Matthews, 3-4, 4.78 ERA), 4:40 p.m., SportsNet LA, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

Tuesday: Dodgers (*Justin Wrobleski, 8-2, 2.72 ERA) at Minnesota (Joe Ryan, 5-3, 2.99 ERA), 4:40 p.m., SportsNet LA, TBS, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

Wednesday: Dodgers (Shohei Ohtani, 7-2, 1.47 ERA) at Minnesota (*Connor Prielipp, 2-5, 5.17 ERA), 4:40 p.m., SportsNet LA, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

All times Pacific

*-left-handed

In case you missed it

Dodgers star Shohei Ohtani announces birth of second child

Shaikin: Why MLB’s Pride Night cap condemnation isn’t the anti-Christian crackdown conservatives claim

Lopez: There might be one advantage to climate change: More home runs at Dodger Stadium

Dodgers Debate: BLISTER WATCH. Should Shohei Ohtani be shut down?

Shaikin: The Dodgers are ruining baseball! Stop them! But first let me vote for all their players

And finally

Vin Scully tells us “Don’t be afraid to dream.” Watch and listen here.

Until next time …

Have a comment or something you’d like to see in a future Dodgers newsletter? Email me at houston.mitchell@latimes.com. To get this newsletter in your inbox, click here.

The Senate Armed Services Committee believes that the U.S. Air Force is currently unable to support combat search and rescue (CSAR) operations “in a major contingency.” Legislators say they are concerned about the CSAR force structure after the Air Force trimmed its buy of HH-60W Jolly Green II helicopters and also elected to transfer some of these aircraft to the so-called Air Force District of Washington (AFDW) mission set, as you can read about here. This comes on top of concerns that the HH-60W fleet isn’t well suited for the realities of a war in the Pacific while no better solution is being sought.

The Senate Armed Services Committee released a full copy of the proposed legislation earlier this week. In this, it states that it is “concerned about CSAR force structure” in the Air Force.

Up close with the HH-60W Combat Rescue Helicopter at Nellis AFB for The War Zone.

The importance of the Air Force CSAR mission, and the role of the HH-60W specifically, was underscored earlier this year when the type took part in efforts to rescue the crew of an F-15E Strike Eagle shot down in Iran.

Now, the committee points to the Air Force’s decision to truncate its buy of heavily modified HH-60Ws, followed by the transfer of 26 of these from CSAR units to the AFDW to replace UH-1N Twin Huey helicopters. AFDW uses these helicopters to support continuity of government plans, contingency response, homeland operations, and ceremonial honors in the National Capital Region. Under normal circumstances, the vast majority of AFDW missions involve VIP movements.

“The committee believes that these actions have left CSAR forces unnecessarily short of the forces needed to support CSAR operations in a major contingency,” the legislators say. The committee has now called upon the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a study of CSAR requirements and capabilities, including HH-60Ws and HC-130J Combat King IIs, and provide a report briefing to Congress before the end of March 2027.

Until that study is completed, the committee has called upon the Secretary of the Air Force to avoid making any more changes in CSAR force structure.

The Air Force had once planned to replace its AFDW UH-1Ns with new MH-139A Grey Wolf helicopters, but revealed last year it was considering using HH-60Ws for this role instead. The Air Force’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year confirmed that it was moving ahead with these plans.

As we have discussed in the past, the HH-60W will bring a substantial increase in speed, range, and payload capacity compared with the aging UH-1Ns now flying AFDW missions, while also outperforming the smaller, lighter MH-139 in each of those key metrics.

The Air Force’s current plan calls for development of the HH-60W AFDW variant to begin in Fiscal Year 2027, starting October 1, with the first aircraft entering modification the following fiscal year. Those reconfigured Jolly Green IIs would then begin replacing the increasingly outdated UH-1Ns assigned to the AFDW mission at Andrews Air Force Base (now part of Joint Base Andrews).

TWZ had previously raised the question of how the transfer of 26 HH-60Ws for the AFDW role might affect the operational capacity of the rest of the CSAR-focused fleet.

In particular, the Air Force has no plans to procure additional Jolly Green IIs despite the upcoming transfer.

As the Senate Armed Services Committee points out, the Air Force already decided to scale back HH-60W purchases, from an original program of record for 113 of the helicopters. The total planned fleet now stands at 91. This amounts to the CSAR fleet losing roughly 30 percent of its entire Jolly Green II fleet, the first of which began entering Air Force service in 2022.

The legislators point to the ongoing demand for CSAR capabilities, not just in lower-end conflicts such as the war with Iran, but especially in potential future high-end fights, such as one between the United States and China in the Pacific, where aircrew losses would be greater by an order of magnitude.

For years, TWZ has warned that the growing reach and sophistication of modern air defenses are calling into question the viability of traditional fixed-wing and helicopter CSAR missions. In a high-end conflict, especially against China in the Pacific, even stealth aircraft are expected to face significant risks inside contested airspace. The idea that a Black Hawk helicopter, no matter what is bolted onto it, is going to survive in that same environment is highly questionable, and that’s if it can even reach the rescue point at all. The distances involved in the Pacific are far greater than those in Europe or the Middle East, which the legacy CSAR fleet was largely optimized around.

Back in 2023, one of the Air Force’s senior procurement officers asserted that the HH-60W fleet would not be “particularly helpful in the Chinese area of operations” due to these reasons. The Air Force’s cuts to planned purchases of HH-60Ws reflected this reality, while other senior officials have acknowledged that the service will need to rethink how it carries out this critical mission in future wars. The issue is that the cuts didn’t result in other capabilities taking the HH-60W’s place, like uncrewed systems and tiltrotors. So now there is an emerging gap in CSAR capabilities, both in terms of new ones more aligned with the challenges of the Pacific and just any kind of CSAR capability at all. Turning a large portion of the HH-60W fleet into VIP transports certainly doesn’t help with problem.

For the time being, at least, the Air Force is heavily reliant upon its HH-60Ws, regardless of potential vulnerabilities. With orders for the Jolly Green II slashed, and more than two dozen examples slated to switch to another mission, it is perhaps not surprising that legislators want to know how the Air Force will be able to conduct CSAR in the future.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio stood silent and stone-faced behind Donald Trump on Wednesday as the president joked of passing the buck if his deal with Iran, under increasingly withering criticism and scrutiny, ultimately falls apart.

The blame, Trump said, would likely fall on his vice president, JD Vance, who led the negotiations toward a memorandum of understanding with Iran and will sign the agreement this week in Switzerland — a ceremony that will generate indelible images for a politician openly considering a run for the White House.

The controversial diplomatic breakthrough poses a quandary for Vance, whose aides see Rubio as his most viable challenger for the Republican presidential nomination should the secretary choose to run.

“If it works out, I’m going to take the credit,” Trump said of the Iran deal, with Rubio by his side.

“If it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming JD,” he joked. “You better be careful, JD!”

Silent secretary

Rubio, who also serves as the president’s national security advisor, has remained effectively mum since news of a preliminary peace deal was announced by the administration on Sunday.

His absence has drawn notice across foreign policy circles — not only because Rubio has served as chief architect of the administration’s global strategy thus far, but also because he has become one of the president’s most effective communicators, both at home and abroad.

By contrast, Vance, on a scheduled press tour promoting his new book, has emerged as the face of an agreement that appears to be fracturing a Republican Party already divided over America’s role in the world.

The administration’s internal divide over Iran extends beyond the war to broader U.S. support for its historic allies, including Israel in the Middle East, Canada and Mexico in this hemisphere, and Ukraine and Europe against a revanchist Russia.

“Rubio has always been a hawk on Iran, and Vance has always been an appeaser,” said Danielle Pletka, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, describing the vice president as positioning himself “as Trump without the flaws.”

“Rubio has a harder job because he’s more of a traditional Republican,” she said, adding that a competitive presidential run by the secretary might require him to pitch “a return to normalcy.”

No guarantee of success

Behind closed doors, Rubio advocated against the deal in its current form, citing intelligence reports that found it highly unlikely Tehran would give up its nuclear ambitions, according to two sources familiar with the matter. Rubio’s internal skepticism was first reported by Axios.

The deal kicks down the road highly technical discussions over the mechanics of unwinding Iran’s nuclear program — with no guarantee of success — while granting Tehran immediate relief, lifting a U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports that will allow Iranian imports and exports to resume.

In exchange, Iran has only agreed in principle not to pursue nuclear weapons — a vow it has made multiple times before — and to do its “best” to return commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz back to prewar levels. It commits in the deal to refrain from implementing a toll system in the strait, according to U.S. officials, for a mere 60-day period.

“This agreement is a road map for Iran to become a rising, stronger power in the [Persian] Gulf — stronger than it is even today,” said Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago.

“That is going to be an issue for the balance of power with Israel, which before the Iran war was the rising power. Now it’s lost that paradigm,” Pape said. “And this is going to be an issue with the future disposition of American forces in the region, because the [memorandum of understanding] states quite clearly that Iran is expecting those forces to withdraw.”

Positioning by the vice president

Despite mounting skepticism, Vance has embraced his role in ending a war that a powerful faction of Trump’s base aggressively opposed from the start.

“I think there are some people who just want the bombing to continue, regardless of whether it accomplishes anything for Americans,” Vance told CBS News on Wednesday.

“I do think there are people,” he added, “who sometimes confuse the ends with the means.”

Because the preliminary Iran deal leaves key details unresolved, further negotiations virtually ensure the agreement remains in flux through the election season — potentially thrusting the talks into the center of the presidential primary campaign.

“Given the distance between the parties on the core nuclear issues, as well as the Trump administration’s poor track record with coercive diplomacy, I fully expect the 60-day window for talks to be extended, as the [memorandum of understanding] text permits, taking this issue to the heart of the midterms and beyond,” said Reid Pauly, a professor of nuclear security and policy at Brown University.

“There will be a lot of incentive in the administration,” Pauly added, “to distance oneself from this fiasco.”

As a guest on Megyn Kelly’s podcast this week, Vance acknowledged the political realities of Trump’s base splintering over the Iran war, noting that a coalition of isolationists — as well as those advocating what he called a more “aggressive” foreign policy — had together swept Trump back into office.

The war may be breaking that coalition apart, he said.

“We have a constituency right now that is saying, we’re going to send boots on the ground — they want Donald Trump to send hundreds of thousands of ground troops into Iran,” Vance told the former Fox News host.

“Those are Republicans,” Kelly said.

“We need people to be pushing back from inside the tent,” Vance replied.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: He graduated high school with honors. ICE detained him the next day
The deep dive: What we know about two SoCal men arrested in alleged plot to attack White House UFC fight
The L.A. Times Special: L.A. defies the skeptics for a World Cup marked by unity, mutual respect, fearlessness

More to come,
Michael Wilner
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Those of us who have a fear of flying, also known as aviophobia, probably have all the same questions.

Flying fills me with dread, meaning every holiday is a rollercoaster of anticipation and anxiety. Aviophobia, or fear of flying, is remarkably widespread and, for those of us who suffer from it, likely stems from the same fundamental issue — our brains struggling to cope with an environment where we feel utterly powerless. Chances are we’re all asking the same questions:.

• Can turbulence bring down a plane?
• Can someone open the cabin door mid-flight?
• What if the plane gets hit by lightning?
• What happens if an engine fails?
• What happens if we hit a bird?
• Are budget airlines less safe?

Sound familiar? Sadly, while anyone can turn to Reddit or Facebook for tips from fellow nervous passengers, very few of us ever get the chance to quiz the real experts — the pilots themselves. Fortunately, I managed to put my questions to Simon Tranter, a pilot with 18,000 flight hours spanning a 17-year career in the Royal Air Force and 25 years as a commercial pilot at British Airways who is now head of training at EmPower Flight, reports the Express.

I also had the opportunity to speak with Dan Bubb, a former commercial pilot who currently teaches aviation courses at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Are budget airlines actually less safe?

“In the aviation world, the price for your ticket dictates your legroom and whether you get a free sandwich – it has zero bearing on safety,” said Simon. “Every single airline operating in our skies must adhere to the exact same stringent regulatory laws and safety standards. Budget airlines actually tend to fly younger fleets of aircraft, which means they are equipped with the newest safety technology. They save money on business models, not on maintenance or pilot training.”

Dan continued: “Budget airlines are just as safe as safe as more expensive airlines. Even though the pay scale is different, all airline pilots are trained and held to the same rigorous standard whether they fly a 15-passenger Beech 99 or a 400-passenger Boeing 747.”

Can turbulence bring down a plane?

“Aircraft are engineered to withstand forces far greater than anything nature can throw at them,” Simon explained.

“Higher levels of turbulence can be uncomfortable for the pilots, crew and passengers, but generally the most turbulence will affect a flight is intermittent and rather like driving slowly over cobblestones. Most importantly, if you don’t have your seatbelt fastened, a sudden turbulent bump can cause you to spill your drink – that’s one of the main reasons we ask you to buckle up.”

Could a passenger to open the aircraft door?

“It is physically impossible for a passenger to open the plane door because aircraft doors are designed as ‘plug doors’,” Simon stated. “Due to the air pressure inside the cabin being much higher than the thin air outside at 35,000 feet, the cabin pressure effectively seals the door shut with thousands of pounds of force. You could get the strongest person on Earth, give them a crowbar, and they still couldn’t open that door while we are in flight.”

Dan added: “In the past, we have seen passengers try to open the door, but they were unsuccessful.”

Are cabin crew trained to hide concern during an emergency that passengers are not aware of?

Dan explained: “Cabin crew are trained to handle emergencies with calm and discretion to avoid alarming passengers. Even though the situation might be stressful, pilots and flight attendants are trained to remain calm and keep passengers calm.”

Simon added: “Cabin crew are primarily safety professionals and they undergo rigorous, regular emergency training. If you look at a crew member and they look calm, it’s because they are in control of the situation.”

What happens if the landing gear fails to deploy at landing?

“This is something we practice to perfection in flight simulators,” Simon said. “Aircraft have multiple backup systems to get the wheels down. If the main hydraulic system fails, we can use an alternate system, or even let gravity ‘free-fall’ the gear into place where it locks automatically. In the extremely rare event that the gear completely jams, planes are designed to land safely on their bellies. Fire crews might decide to foam the runway, and the aircraft slides to a halt. It makes for a dramatic news headline, but it is entirely survivable.”

What happens if an engine fails?

“Modern airliners are built with massive amounts of redundancy,” said Simon. “If one engine fails, the aircraft is completely capable of climbing, cruising and landing safely on the remaining engine. Even if both engines were to fail (which is virtually unheard of), a plane does not suddenly drop but instead becomes a very large glider. From a normal cruising altitude, an airliner can glide for about 80 to 100 miles, giving us plenty of time to head for a safe runway and to re-start the engines in the glide.”

Dan revealed he has actually witnessed an engine failure mid-flight – it occurred during take-off while transporting passengers to the Grand Canyon: “We shut down the failed engine, declared an emergency and landed on the single, good engine without any problem.”

How likely is a plane crash?

“Statistically, you are far safer in a commercial airliner than you are walking down the pavement or driving to the supermarket,” said Simon. “The International Air Transport Association (IATA) say there is ‘one fatal accident for every 5.6 million flights (2021-2025)’. You’d have to fly every single day for thousands of years to statistically encounter an accident.”

Dan explained: “Given the rigorous training through which pilots have to do, the chance of a commercial passenger plane crashing is slim. As a colleague of mine likes to say, you have much higher chances of getting into a car accident on your way to the airport than in a commercial passenger plane.”

Why do passengers have to switch off mobiles during take-off and landing? Will they disrupt the plane’s system?

“The technical reason is that older phones used to occasionally cause a harmless but annoying ‘click-click-buzz’ sound in the pilots’ headsets, similar to putting a mobile phone right next to an old audio speaker,” Simon revealed.

“The real-world reason is that take-off and landing are the most dynamic parts of the flight. We need you alert and not looking at a screen, in case we need to give you important instructions.”

Dan supported this, stating: “Take-off and landing are the most critical phases of flight, which is why flight attendants are adamant about enforcing this regulation.”

Could a passenger shatter a window and what would happen if they did?

“No,” Simon stated. “The windows you see are made of incredibly tough, multi-layered aerospace acrylic, not household glass. They can easily withstand immense pressure and impact. If an outer pane were to crack, the inner layers are more than strong enough to hold the cabin pressure perfectly.”

Meanwhile, Dan also noted it would be “difficult for a passenger to break a window”, but referenced a harrowing 2018 incident in which a window shattered, apparently as a result of an exploding engine, tragically claiming the life of a woman who was partially sucked out.

Is it safe to fly during a storm? What happens if the plane gets hit by lightning?

“We don’t fly through severe storms,” said Simon. “Our onboard weather radar allows us to see them miles in advance and simply steer around them. If a plane does happen to get struck by lightning, it’s surprisingly uneventful. The skin of the aircraft acts like a protective shield (a Faraday cage). The electricity strikes the plane, flows harmlessly along the outside skin and through specific lightning conductors, and leaves through the tail. Passengers might hear a loud crack or bang, but the aircraft systems are built to handle it effortlessly.”

In 2019, a plane landing in Cardiff Airport from Ibiza was hit by lightning and passengers reported a “huge bang”. The flight landed safely with no reported injuries.

Are bird strikes dangerous?

“Most bird strikes happen at low altitudes, when the aircraft is at slower speeds near airports, and the vast majority of them are entirely harmless events”, said Simon. “Aircraft engines and structures are specifically designed and tested to ingest birds without catastrophic failure. As a precaution, if we suspect a bird strike, we will always make an assessment of any possible damage and let our engineers give the plane a thorough inspection.”

Nevertheless, Dan warned that bird strikes “can be very dangerous”, pointing to the famous incident where Captain Chelsey Sullenberger landed his US Airways Airbus on the Hudson River in New York City after a flock of Canadian geese struck and disabled both of the aircraft’s engines.

What happens if the pilot arrives at work extremely fatigued?

“We have a very strict, no-blame safety culture in aviation called fatigue reporting,” Simon explained. “If a pilot hasn’t slept well or feels unfit to fly for any reason, they simply log into the system and declare themselves unfit due to fatigue. The airline immediately calls in a standby pilot, no questions asked. There is absolutely no pressure to fly if you aren’t at 100%.”

How much does a computer control a plane compared to how much the pilot controls it?

“The computer — or autopilot in an aircraft — is like a highly sophisticated cruise control on a modern car,” Simon noted. “It’s an incredible tool that does the heavy lifting of flying the aircraft while the pilots are managing the busy flight.

“However, the computer only does what we tell it to do. We manually fly the aircraft during take-off and generally during the landing. The humans are always the ones making the strategic decisions. Occasionally, the autopilot will land the aircraft but this is only in situations of extreme fog when the aircraft is programmed by the pilots for an automatic landing and the airport is specifically authorised to apply the very special protections and safeguards needed for an ‘autoland’.”

What stops pilots from becoming distracted or nodding off on lengthy flights?

“We have highly structured protocols whilst airborne to keep us engaged,” Simon explained. “We are constantly monitoring aircraft performance, the autopilot function, fuel logs, cross-checking weather reports and communicating with air traffic control. On ultra-long-haul flights, we carry an ‘augmented crew’ (three or four pilots total). This allows us to take turns sleeping in dedicated pilot bunk beds built into the aircraft, ensuring that the two pilots at the controls are always fresh and focused.”

Is flying at night more dangerous?

“Not at all,” Simon responded. “In fact, at night the high-intensity lights of other aircraft and runways stand out perfectly against the dark background.”

Have you ever seen another aircraft too close to yours?

“Not in civil flying, but yes as an RAF fighter pilot!” said Simon. “Furthermore, all commercial planes are fitted with a system called TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System). It talks to other aircraft automatically and if another plane ever wandered even slightly too close, our cockpits would warn us and tell us exactly what manoeuvre to fly to stay completely safe.”

What does it take to become a commercial airline pilot?

“It’s a rigorous journey,” Simon explained. “It starts with strict medical clearance, followed by months of ground school training where you learn everything from meteorology to aerodynamics. From there, you start in small, single-engine aircraft to master the basics, progress to twin-engine planes, and eventually step into full-flight simulators to learn the specifics of the jet you will be flying for the airline.

“After a pilot passes all their simulator checks, they step into the real cockpit with real passengers. However, they are not amateurs. They are already fully qualified commercial pilots. During this phase, they fly with a highly experienced training captain (someone like me) sitting next to them, guiding them through the real-world nuances of airline operations until they are completely polished.”

FInally, what’s the most frightening thing you’ve ever had to deal with while flying?

“Honestly, after many years flying fighter jets in the Royal Air Force and later as an airline captain, the thing that would raise my heart rate in commercial aviation is a very, very occasional turbulent and gusty crosswind landing towards the maximum crosswind component allowed,” said Simon.

“But in fairness, after 44 years as a professional pilot it’s not overly difficult, it’s simply a matter of following procedure. As our training is so intensive, when something unexpected does happen – like a sudden change in weather or a technical glitch – fear doesn’t enter the equation. Your brain instantly switches into ‘training mode’ and you calmly execute the checklist. It feels like just another busy day at the office.”

Meanwhile, Dan revealed his most terrifying moment in the cockpit came when an engine failed during take-off while carrying passengers to the Grand Canyon. Despite the harrowing ordeal, he recalled: “We shut down the failed engine, declared an emergency and landed on the single, good engine without any problem. Even though we appeared calm and collected, our adrenaline was pumping.”

WASHINGTON — The terms of a deal to end President Trump’s war with Iran remained a secret on Monday as both sides claimed victory and the months-long conflict reached a nebulous end.

The memorandum of understanding, providing a rough framework to conclude the war, was signed digitally Sunday, with a ceremony scheduled to take place on Friday in Switzerland, U.S. officials said.

Trump hailed the document as a breakthrough after months of negotiations. Yet its broad contours remained unclear more than a day after the deal was announced, as each side offered conflicting public messaging about what had been agreed.

Iran said it would continue regulating traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic paradigm shift from the prewar status quo that was denied by the White House. The two sides expressed disagreement over whether the status of Iran’s ballistic missile program would be addressed in future negotiations, or whether Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon was a part of the deal.

And Trump administration officials rejected Iranian claims that the United States would provide immediate sanctions relief as misleading “spin.”

Hours later, another U.S. official suggested that Iran, in fact, might receive some relief at the front end.

“We are prepared to release frozen funds, and we are prepared to release sanctions,” a senior U.S. official told reporters on a call. “And we’ll do some small gestures of that in the beginning, if they make some small gestures to us that show they’re willing to meet their commitments as well.

“We’ll know over the next two to three weeks whether those understandings will turn into actual agreement,” the official added.

Trump started the war in February citing Iran’s nuclear program, which had expanded after he withdrew from a prior nuclear agreement negotiated by President Obama. That deal capped more than two years of intensive diplomacy but ultimately failed under the weight of political criticism from Republicans — led by Trump — over its inclusion of sanctions relief for Tehran.

Trump administration officials said the new agreement would include a commitment from Iran not to develop or purchase nuclear weapons — a vow the Islamic Republic has repeatedly made through the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Obama-era deal and a religious edict from the late supreme leader. Yet the enforcement mechanisms for policing Iran’s nuclear work were left to negotiate another day.

Iran could get sanctions relief

In an interview with CBS News, Vice President JD Vance acknowledged that Iran could get significant sanctions relief — and up to $300 billion in reconstruction funds — if they abide by U.S. terms, such as the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important commercial waterways.

“Our expectation is that the strait is going to be opened in a toll-free way for the long term, and that’s the sort of thing that we’re going to figure out in these technical negotiations,” Vance said.

In a separate interview, he described the president’s policy as “extending an open hand” to Tehran.

“The hard-liners of the Iranian system will overemphasize the benefits that Iran gets,” he added, “while underemphasizing all the things that they have to concede, and all the things that they have to provide, in order to get these benefits.”

Uncertainty across the region

The news of peace came with a sense of bewilderment and uncertainty in a region that suffered as collateral damage through months of war.

Sunni Arab states that once hoped Iran would emerge weakened from the war issued tepid support for an agreement that could ultimately leave the fate of their oil exports at the whims of an emboldened adversary. And Israeli leaders, across the political aisle, expressed deep concerns over the deal in private, warning they would not be bound by an agreement to which they were not a party.

Israel’s decisions moving forward — particularly in Lebanon— may ultimately decide whether the agreement survives over the next 60 days, when Washington and Tehran plan on ironing out its more technical details.

Hours after word of the signing came out, a stream of cars crowded the highway leading to southern Lebanon, full of displaced families desperate to check on homes and villages they hadn’t seen for more than 100 days.

They did so in defiance of Lebanese officials, who called on people to remain where they were until an official end to war in Lebanon — a secondary front in the larger U.S.-Israel war on Iran that has nevertheless seen staggering levels of destruction.

A woman and her children return to their Lebanese village Monday following the ceasefire announcement.

(Mohammed Zaatari / Ap Photo/mohammed Zaatari)

In the more than three months since the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah attacked Israel, nearly 3,800 people have been killed, and almost a quarter of the country’s 6 million people are displaced. Israeli troops occupy more than 10% of Lebanese territory, leaving a trail of destruction that has seen swaths of the country’s south all but razed.

‘Everything is gone’

None of that discouraged Hassan Shareef from leaving where he was staying in Beirut at 7 a.m. to head to Nabatieh, one of south Lebanon’s largest cities and a frequent target of Israeli strikes in recent weeks, to check on his tailoring business.

“I wasn’t afraid. I had to come. But what I saw would make you cry,” he said. “Everything is gone. My house, I can’t live in it. And the business is destroyed.”

Aqeel Khalaf, an herbalist, hit the road in the early morning with his brother, son and daughter-in-law. They reached Nabatieh in two hours.

Yet it was less of a homecoming than Khalaf hoped: Israeli troops were still stationed near his village, a few miles down the road from where he stood in Nabatieh’s central market. Their house was tantalizingly close, but for the moment it might as well have been on the moon.

“It’s hard for me, but the Lebanese army told us we can’t go yet. We have no choice,” Khalaf said. “Maybe in 24 hours, when things crystallize with the deal.”

He could at least check on his shop here in the central market, though he already knew there would be damage: The family regularly checked satellite images of the area and saw the building was hit about a week ago.

Standing before it, Khalaf saw how the wall of the adjacent building had toppled onto the ground floor, flooding the shop with rubble and coating everything with a film of fine gray dust. A nearby blast had collapsed the roof.

“Nabatieh was hit very hard this time,” he said. Still, he could salvage something, he said, pointing to his son as he fished out boxes of herbal treatments from under the rubble.

Two ceasefires in the last two months, forged during U.S.-led talks between the Lebanese and Israeli governments but without Hezbollah or Iran’s involved, were broken as soon as they were announced. A previous ceasefire from November 2024 saw Hezbollah stop all attacks while Israel continued military operations in south Lebanon.

This iteration of the truce appeared to have more success: On Monday, Hezbollah launched no missiles but announced an attack on an Israeli force to stop its advance; and the Israeli military mostly stayed its fire as well, barring a number of shelling incidents and a drone strike on a car in the village of Kfar Tebnit that injured a journalist and killed one person, according to Lebanese media.

Obstacles to a durable peace

Lebanese army units, meanwhile, deployed in parts of the south, barring motorists from reaching areas near Israeli troops. Lebanon’s army remained on the sidelines during the war, but 30 soldiers, including a general, having been killed in Israeli attacks since March 2. Hezbollah attacks killed at least 30 Israeli soldiers and one civilian contractor.

Obstacles to a more durable peace remain. Israeli officials insist on freedom of action against Hezbollah, and they will create a so-called security zone in Lebanon indefinitely so to protect Israel’s northern border. For its part, Hezbollah says it will respond to any attack and will continue fighting until Israel withdraws.

Though the truce appeared to be holding for now, Khalaf, who had raced to reopen his Nabatieh shop after the 2024 ceasefire, was waiting this time. For now, he would take what stock he could and open a shop in Sidon or Beirut.

“We have to work and feed our families. But the damage is too much this time. I’ll come back when things are better,” he said. “And my home too. When I get to see it, even if it’s a mound of rubble, I’ll pitch a tent on it and rebuild.”

Wilner reported from Washington and Bulos from Nabatieh.

Was Switzerland’s Remo Freuler offside before he was brought down by Qatar goalkeeper Mahmoud Abunada?

It is the question that, for many, remains unanswered despite Fifa finally releasing images four and a half hours after the incident happened.

The move led to a penalty, converted by Breel Embolo, as the teams drew 1-1 in Saturday’s World Cup Group B match in Santa Clara.

Before the tournament Fifa put a lot of stock in its new, enhanced semi-automated offside system.

World football’s governing body scanned every player at the World Cup to create unique, lifelike avatars.

It was supposed to provide the most accurate illustration of offside decisions we have ever seen.

But it did not work and Fifa had to revert to drawing lines to the players and on the pitch.

Fifa released a statement saying “a brief technical outage prevented the onside animation graphic from being generated”.

It went on to say the lines drawn by the video assistant referee (VAR) showed no offside and released two images – which remain unconvincing – but not the usual avatar graphics.

Within the move, two Switzerland players could potentially have been offside.

Fifa released an image for both as evidence they were onside. The first was for Embolo in the build-up, the second for Freuler before he was fouled by Abunada.

Fifa’s statement read: “The workflow of the VAR was not affected by this issue and followed the normal procedure in checking the on-field decision.

“The lines used by the VAR to check the position of the relevant players did not show the attacking player to be in an offside position in either of the two situations immediately before the penalty decision.”

The semi-automated technology is not flawless. It can be impacted by many things, such as players being close together or even something as random as ticker tape on the pitch.

When the technology fails in the Premier League there is the option to fall back to the old technology where the VAR draws the lines.

But the offside image is produced straight away, not several hours later.

“We all think [it was offside],” Gary Neville said on ITV before the statement was released.

“Everybody at home thinks it. Fifa are the host broadcaster and they have the semi-automatic decision that they can show us.

“There is a massive question over that because it is offside in my eyes until they prove to me different.”

If there is one thing that is guaranteed to create doubt it is delay. It creates a vacuum that feeds conspiracy theories. It might give the impression Fifa is hiding something.

OK, I’ll admit it. I’m going to miss Spencer Pratt.

I had never heard of the former reality TV star before he said God wanted him to be mayor of Los Angeles. And now that he’s out of the race, he’s still serving up lazy fastballs down the middle of the plate, calling the top two vote-getters — Mayor Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman — dummies and morons.

Quick question for Pratt: If you’re on record claiming that 9/11 was an inside job and the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax, and you run for office in a deep blue city with President Trump’s backing but not much of a plan or even a clue as to what a mayor can or can’t do, should you be calling other people morons?

And yet the pouting Pratt pulled more than 200,000 votes. So sore loser or not, he tapped into a lack of faith in elected officials and simmering frustration with City Hall, which happen to be the essence of today’s column.

I have five questions for Bass and Raman. They’re somewhat inter-related and have to do with matters I hear about regularly from readers:

Infrastructure (sidewalks, streets, etc).

Homelessness (billions of dollars spent, and a long way to go).

Parks (L.A.’s national ranking for quality and accessibility just dropped again).

Trash and blight (no explanation needed, right?).

And focus. (Do the candidates have a clear set of goals and a plan for achieving them?)

We’ve got five months to visit and revisit these topics, and today I’m going to focus on the first, so here we go.

Infrastructure:

A few days ago, I met with Earl Ofari Hutchinson of the Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable. Hutchinson is a longtime community activist and commentator, and he had just launched a torpedo in the direction of City Hall.

“There are hundreds of busted, dangerous sidewalks in South L A that have gone unrepaired for years,” he wrote to his network of followers. “They cause hundreds of injuries, and have resulted in massive numbers of claims and payouts in settlements. LA City Officials must act now to jumpstart a crash program to fix these sidewalks.”

On my way to meet Hutchinson, I traveled west along Florence Avenue and saw dozens of typical rough patches on the street and sidewalks. But if there were a contest to identify the all-time worst sidewalks in Los Angeles, Hutchinson’s discovery of the one at 71st Street and 11th Avenue would be a Hall of Fame contender.

For starters, it’s got the classic uplift, and the villain is the usual suspect — ficus tree roots. A 20-foot slab of sidewalk is pitched sharply, as if designed by trip-and-fall lawsuit lawyers. Way back in 2014, in my early days on sidewalk patrol, I was able to crawl under a similarly ruptured sidewalk in West L.A., and I could’ve done the same at 71st and 11th.

But I thought better of it after Hutchinson peered into the opening and said it looked like a comfy home for rats and other vermin.

The homeowner, Sharon Kelly, can’t use her front gate because of the lopsided sidewalk. She let me borrow her tape measure, which revealed a 16-inch rise in the pavement.

“It keeps rising,” Kelly said. “But it was already lifted when we came here.”

That was in 1997. I asked if she’s called the city for help.

“Several times,” she said, and the only response was a slapdash temporary asphalt patch.

Hutchinson said residents have responded in force to his call for emergency sidewalks repairs, just as they did when he crusaded for a crackdown on widespread illegal dumping.

“Dozens of residents have come out of the woodwork, and here’s what they all say: ‘We have called our city council person and various city departments repeatedly, over and over again.’”

And the response?

“Nothing,” Hutchinson said.

While we were talking, two people with walkers steered clear of the worst spot near Kelly’s property. Charles McQuarn, 77, said traversing the neighborhood means zigzagging around all the hazards.

“I gotta come out into the streets, too,” he said.

When he was a teenager, McQuarn said, he worked for a community group that fixed sidewalks. I mentioned that Councilmember Monica Rodriguez has been using Conservation Corps youths to do the same, but it’s time to scale up that program and come up with other remedies to speed the process.

The city is fixing about 600 sidewalks each year, the backlog of requested repairs stands at about 30,000 and if you get onto the waiting list, you’re looking at about 10 years before help arrives.

When we were done on 71st Street, Hutchinson led me over to a nearby stretch of Florence where, for blocks and blocks, it appears as if there have been volcanic eruptions around the trees. Large chunks of cracked sidewalk form mounds, one after another. The Hutchinson Himalayas are a site to behold — a mile-long museum of municipal neglect.

And it’s been like this, Hutchinson said, “for years.”

The question for Bass and Raman: What will you do to speed the repairs?

Homelessness:

Voters have been generous when it comes to repeatedly taxing themselves more, and more, to address homelessness. There’s been Measure H, Measure A, Measure ULA and Proposition HHH.

Yet although billions of dollars have been spent and tens of thousands of people have been helped and housed, more than 40,000 people are homeless in the city and roughly 70,000 in the county. In her primary victory speech, Bass said families shouldn’t have to step around encampments, and Raman has said greater urgency is needed.

Questions for Bass and Raman: Why haven’t taxpayers gotten more for their money with the two of you at the helm, what are you going to do to speed progress and create more accountability, and what distinguishes you from each other?

Parks:

In the annual rankings by the National Trust for Public Lands, Los Angeles has dropped from 90th to a tie for 93rd in park investment and accessibility among the nation’s 100 most populous cities.

The City Council is about to consider a motion to increase park funding through charter reform (with dozens of community groups in support), and progress is ridiculously slow on an agreement to use schools as after-hours playgrounds.

Question for Bass and Raman: Do you support the charter reform, and what else are you going to do to address the sad state of the city’s parks?

Trash and blight:

In downtown L.A., vandalism, shuttered storefronts and post-COVID abandonment have crippled what was a vibrant, revenue-generating economy that benefited the whole city.

In Hollywood, a resident hired her housekeeper to help report illegal dumping of goods that are often used to construct more homeless encampments, leading to all sorts of problems.

On the south lawn of City Hall, a graffiti-tagged monument and fountain have been out of commission for most of the last six decades.

Question for Bass and Raman: At the very least, can you fix the fountain?

Focus:

Like any big city with great assets and unlimited challenges, many residents have a love-hate relationship with L.A. But years ago, someone told me he loves Los Angeles because it’s a messy, multi-cultural work in progress, set on a dramatic landscape between mountain and sea, trying to figure out what it wants to be.

Question for Bass and Raman: Whether in the realm of basic services or grand visions, what three or four primary objectives do you have over the next four years?

In other words, what do you want L.A. to be?

steve.lopez@latimes.com

A UN spokesman says forced evacuation orders issued across southern and eastern Lebanon are nearly impossible to follow safely, and calls into question whether Israel is complying with international humanitarian law.

Hi, and welcome to another edition of Dodgers Dugout. My name is Houston Mitchell and I’m wondering why no one ever talks about Roy Hobbs as one of the all-time greats. It’s like he didn’t even exist.

The next part of our “Ask …” series is here, and it’s a big one. Former Dodgers third baseman Justin Turner, now playing for the Tijuana Toros in the Mexican League, has agreed to answer selected questions from Dodgers Dugout readers.

Do I really need to remind you of who Turner is and his feats as a Dodger? I don’t think so. He is one of the most beloved Dodgers in recent times.

Turner agreed to answer questions from readers of this newsletter. Please send me an email with your question to houston.mitchell@latimes.com. Please make sure the subject line reads Ask Justin Turner. I will select some questions for him to answer. His answers will appear in a future newsletter. You have until Sunday at 6 p.m. to send in your question.

Ohtani is a decent player

It appears reports of Shohei Ohtani‘s demise were greatly exaggerated.

On April 24 against the Chicago Cubs, he went 0 for 3, striking out all three times. His batting splits (batting average/OB%/SLG%) dropped to .237/.361/.433), his worst numbers in a few seasons. Stories started to appear everywhere that pitching and hitting is too much for him. The Dodgers needed to give him a lot more days off, or, have him stop pitching altogether, since no one can do what he is trying.

Ohtani heard all of that, I’m guessing, and used it to stoke his competitiveness.

His numbers since April 24:

Hitting: .344/.461/.576. He’s now hitting .301/.420/.521 this season. Last season he hit .282/.392/.622. His power is down, but power is down across the majors this season. At current projections, there will be 400 fewer home runs this season.

On the mound since April 24, Ohtani is 4-2 with an 0.97 ERA.

Will he become the first person to win MVP and Cy Young in the same season? Well, on Wednesday, MLB.com announced the results of a survey of 35 experts, asking them to vote as if the season ended that day. Here are the results:

NL MVP
1. Ohtani
2. James Wood, Nationals
3. Corbin Carroll, Diamondbacks

They didn’t do voting for Cy Young, but most places have Ohtani third right now, behind Cristopher Sánchez of the Phillies and Jacob Misiorowski of the Brewers.

Comparison

The Dodgers have played 63 games this season and are 40-23. How do they compare to last season’s team at the same point in the season?

Record
2026: 40-23
2025: 38-25

Runs per game
2026: 5.24
2025: 5.69

Batting average
2026: .264
2025: .265

OB%
2026: .343
2025: .341

SLG%
2026: .443
2025: .466

Doubles
2026: 108
2025: 106

Triples
2026: 7
2025: 9

Home Runs
2026: 85
2025: 101

Walks
2026: 249
2025: 234

Batter Strikeouts
2026: 483
2025: 515

Grounded into double play
2026: 56
2025: 47

Left on base
2026: 438
2025: 416

Stolen bases
2026: 27
2025: 40

ERA
2026: 3.08
2025: 4.12

Starters’ ERA
2026: 2.96
2025: 3.69

Relief ERA
2026: 3.31
2025: 4.27

Hits per 9 IP
2026: 6.87
2025: 8.09

Walks per 9 IP
2026: 2.79
2025: 3.54

K’s per 9 IP
2026: 8.99
2025: 9.13

IRS%
2026: 26.8%
2025: 23.4%

Don’t be like these people

I’m sure some readers get annoyed when during my semi-annual reminder that it’s only a game, and if you are angry five minutes after a game is over, perhaps you should find a new hobby.

But there was a reminder last week as to why it is so necessary to keep it in mind. The world is a much angrier place now than when I was younger (uh oh, old man rant). I blame social media. Everyone can find their own echo chamber of people who agree with them and never have to see an opposing opinion. And when they do, they can’t handle it (generally speaking, of course).

And the anonymity of social media gives people false bravado, causing them to say things they never would in person. Such was the case Saturday, after Dodgers reliever Tanner Scott had his first blown save in what has been a good season for him.

The next day his wife, Maddie, shared some messages the Scott family received on social media. One of them was, ““Hope this mutt d i e s soon,” on a photo of the Scott’s child on Instagram. And that was the most tame of the messages. All because Tanner Scott blew a save and the Dodgers lost.

Disturbing? That doesn’t begin to describe it. While I’m sure none of the Dodgers Dugout readers are this depraved, it serves as a reminder that these people are human beings trying their best. Be critical of their performance when warranted. But don’t get angry. You should see some of the emails I get after the Dodgers lose two in a row. Some people are just beyond furious, calling players names, etc.

“I don’t speak out often. Ever actually,” Maddie Scott wrote over a screenshot of the hatred she received. “I promise you, you don’t know what it’s like unless you’re living it. When did it stop being a game?”

Astros pitcher Lance McCullers Jr. received death threats after a loss last season, telling reporters, “I understand people are very passionate and people love the Astros and love sports, but threatening to find my kids and murder them is a little bit tough to deal with just as a father, I think. So just as a father, I think there have been many, many threats over the years aimed at me. But I think bringing kids into the equation, threatening to find them or next time they see us in public they’re going to stab my kids to death, things like that, it’s tough to hear as a dad,” McCullers said, in the understatement of the year.

I realize the stupid people doing this are a small, small percentage of any team’s fan base. But, don’t give in to the anger when the Dodgers lose. Be disappointed, sure. But just think, if the worst thing in your day is that the Dodgers lost, then you’ve had a pretty good day.

Scott got the loss Thursday when he gave up a walk-off homer. Disappointing? Sure. Ruin the rest of your night? I hope not.

It’s All-Star time

Time to vote for who you think should start in this year’s All-Star game. You can click here to vote. I still miss the days at Dodger Stadium when ushers (wearing their straw hats) would hand people stacks of ballots. Some ushers even had ballots with the Dodgers already selected for you.

Up next

Friday: Angels (*Reid Detmers, 2-5, 4.63 ERA) at Dodgers (Roki Sasaki, 3-3, 4.59 ERA), 7:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, KTTV, AM 570, KLAA 830, KTNQ 1020

Saturday: Angels (Jack Kochanowicz, 2-4, 5.23 ERA) at Dodgers (Yoshinobu Yamamoto, 5-4, 2.86 ERA), 7:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, KCOP 13, AM 570, KLAA 830, KTNQ 1020

Sunday: Angels (José Soriano, 6-4, 2.72 ERA) at Dodgers (Emmet Sheehan, 3-2, 4.50 ERA), 1:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, KCOP 13, AM 570, KLAA 830, KTNQ 1020

All times Pacific

*-left-handed

In case you missed it

Shaikin: MLB’s wild pitch: Using fan-despised TV blackouts as leverage against players

Dodgers pitcher Tanner Scott’s wife reveals death threats she received about their child

Plaschke: Ryan Ward becomes an unlikely star in memorable Dodger Stadium debut

And finally

Justin Turner‘s walk-off homer against the Cubs in Game 2 of the 2017 NLCS. Watch and listen here.

Until next time …

Have a comment or something you’d like to see in a future Dodgers newsletter? Email me at houston.mitchell@latimes.com. To get this newsletter in your inbox, click here.

Welcome back to The Times’ Lakers newsletter, where we’re calling in reinforcements for the home stretch of the NBA season.

The Finals begin Wednesday. All but the New York Knicks and the San Antonio Spurs are left to reckon with their rosters from the sidelines. Some of the recently eliminated teams have major decisions that could affect the market for the Lakers, who, I’m sure you know, are facing some huge roster questions. To break down the offseason, I sent the bat signal out to some of my favorite co-workers for their thoughts.

What say you?

Joining me at our virtual roundtable are Los Angeles Times reporters Broderick Turner and columnists Bill Plaschke and Mirjam Swanson. With an assist from our assistant editor Dan Loumena, we examine the upcoming offseason.

The biggest question facing the Lakers: Re-sign LeBron James, let him walk as a free agent or hope he retires?

Nguyen: LeBron deciding to retire would definitely make things simpler for the Lakers, but nothing about this franchise can be simple. With how the season ended and the way he played, it feels unlikely that he would walk away at this point. It’ll come down to the money. This free agency class is not very strong. A soon-to-be 42-year-old could be the best of the bunch. But if the Lakers are on the hook for something close to what James made last year, building out the rest of the roster seems untenable. At the right price, he still feels like a player who could help the Lakers.

Plaschke: There is no “right price” for the Lakers and LeBron. He’s still one of the best players in the game, and he’ll demand to be paid like it, but the Lakers aren’t going to want to pony up. Not for a third option. Not for a 42-year-old consistent injury threat. And not for a guy who, if they give him what he wants, they’ll have no chance to begin building what they want, which is a championship. Bring back LeBron James? Pass.

Swanson: There absolutely is a right price — for the Lakers. Will that be the right price for LeBron? What if a low-low price of $20 million-ish would do it? Higher than the mid-level but far less than he’s used to? I think there’s a world where the Lakers can make a $20-million to 30-million pay cut make sense for LeBron — and I think he’s waiting to see if they can do it.

LeBron is such a Rorschach test because everyone hears what he says and so many of us perceive it differently. What I heard when he spoke about his future on the recent “Mind the Game” podcast was A) not someone who’s lost his love for the game, B) someone who really enjoyed last season’s Lakers team, C) someone who’s L.A.-lifestyle-loving family is going to have a lot of sway in this latest Decision and D) someone who was letting it be known that he isn’t making the call until “late-June into August,” by which time the music will have all but stopped on the NBA’s annual musical chairs number.

I take that to mean that LeBron is going to sit back and see what the Lakers do with the money they’re going to be reallocating to other players and whether it brings them closer to contention. If they do that, I think he comes back for another hurrah for substantially less — and they should want him! He’s not only one of (if not the) best players of all time. He was still a massively productive player at 40 and 41. He led the Lakers to a playoff series victory against Houston and was their most dependable player on the court for much of the Oklahoma City series in which they were otherwise completely overmatched.

Turner: Let’s be clear first: LeBron is one of the best free agents in a market that is not strong this offseason. That, alone, puts the Lakers in a precarious situation, because they know it’s a weak market and so do James and his representatives. James’ asking price and what the Lakers are willing to pay him will be the test for both sides. It’s called negotiations and James and his people already are letting the media machine suggest James wants the same $52.3 million he earned last season again. Or if not, James, rightfully, wants to know how the Lakers will build their team if he does take a pay cut. He proved his worth again in the playoffs, leading the Lakers past the Houston Rockets with Doncic out and Reaves playing in just two of those games. The Lakers will have to pay The Man.

Austin Reaves is expected to opt out of his contract to enter unrestricted free agency. The Lakers can bring him back for up to five years and $241 million. Other teams can sign him for up to four years and $178 million. What should the Lakers do?

Austin Reaves controls the ball during the first half of Game 6 against Houston.

(Ashley Landis / AP)

Plaschke: Bring back AR. He got batted around a bit in the playoffs, but he was trying to return too soon from his oblique injury. Judge him by his entire body of work, which meshes perfectly with Luka’s body of work. Give AR what he wants. Bring him back.

Swanson: Unless the Brooklyn Nets or Atlanta Hawks or Memphis Grizzlies want to massively overpay, Austin is coming back. He loves L.A. and L.A. loves him back. But I don’t think anyone thinks Austin is going to get $240 million from the Lakers, it’s more likely going to be a five-year, $200-million deal — that extra year the Lakers can offer being the sweetener in any potential bidding war.

And the Lakers shouldn’t overpay him, because they need to make sure he’s on a tradeable contract — in case they can’t figure out how to overcome Austin’s and Luka’s redundancies as defensively suspect shot-makers. Or if his toughness doesn’t override his unfortunate susceptibility to injury. Or if uneven playoff performances in the future put a lid on the Lakers’ postseason potential. You know, just in case.

Turner: He wants to return and the Lakers want him back. At what price is the question. Reaves earned $13.9 million last season and has a player option for next season at $14.8 million. He’s going to bet on himself and decline that option for a bigger payday. At the very least, Reaves will earn $40 million or more per season. The Lakers know a few teams have their eyes on Reaves. Reaves and his representatives know they can get up to five years and $241 million from the Lakers, and that’s what they want.

If the Lakers and LeBron do not come to an agreement, what other options do they have via trade or trying to sign a star?

Nguyen: The Lakers are trying to remodel the roster to fit around Luka Doncic, which means they need shooting, defense and a perfect pick-and-roll partner. Despite lingering hamstring injuries, Denver’s Peyton Watson, who is a restricted free agent, was an intriguing name, especially with a potential homecoming for the former UCLA Bruin. Detroit’s Jalen Duren is a restricted free agent and coming off an underwhelming postseason run, which could complicate negotiations for the third-team All-NBA player. If Cleveland is willing to part with one of their big men after getting swept out of the Eastern Conference finals, maybe the Lakers could lurk around for a big trade. Come draft night, the Lakers have three first-round picks available to trade: 2026, 2031 and 2033.

Swanson: The Lakers need to target stars in their roles. Most of those guys Thuc Nhi mentioned would be good — though Duren’s playoff nosedive would make me not want him at his going price. For the Lakers, it’s: Shooters wanted, defenders wanted, ATHLETES wanted. Think the New Orleans Pelicans’ Trey Murphy or maybe Herb Jones. And bring back Rui Hachimura, a big-bodied shooter who we trust in the clutch. Build Luka a suitable army, as much as possible, with the cap space and draft picks they’ve been saving for this offseason.

Turner: Here’s the thing: The Lakers can re-sign LeBron and AR and still use the mid-level exception that will be about $15 million to sign a free agent. Denver’s Peyton Watson is a name that has been attached to the Lakers. The problem is he is a restricted free agent and the Nuggets can match any offer he receives. Also, if the Lakers make him an offer, the Nuggets have 48 hours to make a decision. During that waiting period, the Lakers would have cap space tied up and could lose out on other free agents. But word around the NBA is that the Nuggets will shed some salaries so they can pay Watson because they need young, athletic wings.

Then there’s the Deandre Ayton situation. Can the Lakers upgrade at center?

Deandre Ayton defends against Oklahoma City Thunder guard Luguentz Dort during the playoffs.

(Kyle Phillips / Associated Press)

Nguyen: It feels likely that Deandre Ayton will be back on his player option. It’ll be hard for him to get anything better on the open market. But the Lakers definitely need more out of that position. If he comes back with Luka and Austin, “run it back” is starting to give “running in circles” while Oklahoma City and San Antonio run circles around everyone else in the West.

Plaschke: DA is going to take the Lakers’ money, so this feels like a moot point. A better question is, how can they get rid of him once he’s back? His motor doesn’t run at 100% all the time, and at this level, that is inexcusable.

Swanson: Yeah, DA proved he is who we all thought he was: A great talent with wavering focus. But remember, he’s not taking very much of the Lakers’ money; dude is on an $8-million contract. Together he and [Jaxson] Hayes make close to $13 million. Considered the price tag, the Lakers actually got a lot of bang for their buck.

Now, can either of those guys stop Wemby? Of course not. Can anyone on the planet, though? Uh, no. So, sure, the Lakers could spend big to upgrade at center, but it wouldn’t make much of a difference. They’d be better served to save money in the post — and potentially on LeBron — and spend it on wing defenders and shooters, which is where they can hope to counteract the top teams.

Turner: DA underperformed most of the season and was even less impressive in the playoffs against OKC. Teams are not lining up to get him, so he’ll probably pick up his player option of $8.1 million next season. Portland center Robert Williams is an unrestricted free agent that, when healthy, is an upgrade if the Lakers look his way. He earned $13.3 million last season and the Lakers could use the mid-level exception to entice him. He’s a really good defender and the sort of lob threat that Doncic loves to have on his team.

Favorite thing I ate this week

A Vietnamese bar spread: Salt and pepper chicken (top left), salt and pepper tofu (bottom left), baby clams with shrimp chips and sesame crackers (center), Vietnamese BBQ pork skewers (top right) and mango salad (bottom right).

(Thuc Nhi Nguyen / Los Angeles Times)

When I was growing up, my parents had an open door policy. Family members dropped by basically unannounced on random weekdays after work or weekend afternoons to sit around our table, share a few drinks and snack on some bites. In Vietnamese, we call it “nhậu.”

It means “to go drinking,” but just as important as the cold beer is the spread of snacks that kept my uncles and aunts drinking, laughing and hanging out for hours together.

You don’t need a reason to nhậu. You just need friends, food and beer. While my friends helped stock the fridge with drinks this week, I shared some of my Vietnamese favorites. We grazed on salt and pepper chicken, salt and pepper tofu, baby clams with shrimp chips and sesame crackers, BBQ pork skewers and mango salad. It was just like Vietnam except without the oppressive humidity.

In case you missed it

Luka Doncic invests in purchase of Italian basketball team with eye on NBA Europe

Shaikin: For Dodgers, getting to playoffs is not good enough for Mark Walter. For Lakers?

Lakers layoffs part of sweeping changes to business operations

Swanson: NBA’s anti-tanking draft reform might be great for Lakers but is bad for basketball

Lakers hire former Pelicans executive Rohan Ramadas amid front office expansion

Firing Jason Kidd removes the last reminder of the Luka Doncic trade from Dallas

A new board game mocks Shai Gilgeous-Alexander for ‘foul baiting.’ He wants it destroyed

‘Bonkers’ bribery case raises questions about why NBA star Terry Rozier would allegedly risk millions by participating

Until next time…

As always, pass along your thoughts to me at thucnhi.nguyen@latimes.com, and please consider subscribing if you like our work!

WASHINGTON — Mired in a persistent cost of living crisis and an unpopular war with Iran, President Trump reached a perilous milestone last week, registering an approval rating of 34% in a top-tier poll — a record low less than halfway through his second term.

The results mark one of the sharpest polling collapses of any modern president. The data, from the Economist and YouGov, brings Trump back down to his political nadir, matching a number he hasn’t seen since the immediate aftermath of the Jan. 6 attack five years ago.

It follows on several other surveys published in recent days showing the president entering precarious political territory roughly six months ahead of the midterm elections, raising alarm bells in Republican campaign offices across the country over the party’s prospects in the fall.

It has also led pollsters to question long-standing assumptions about the president’s floor of support, wondering whether it is at risk of giving way.

“It’s harder to get lower, but it’s possible depending on what he does,” said Christopher Wlezien, a political scientist at the University of Texas at Austin. “To get that number down, you are going to have to eat into his core.”

Trump’s base of support remains strong, reinforcing a long-standing theory among pollsters that partisanship now serves as a direct proxy for presidential approval. But softening Republican support on specific policy matters — including top voter priorities, such as the economy — have begun raising questions among experts whether further erosion is possible.

A New York Times poll found his approval at 38%, and a Politico poll recorded a similar erosion, driven by a majority of Americans — including 18% of Trump supporters — stating they are financially worse off than they were before he resumed office.

Roughly 2 out of 3 Americans oppose the war Trump started with Iran. And the coalition that swept him back into office — including a surge in support from Latino, independent and young voters — has effectively disappeared.

While the downward trend looks like a story of a presidency in perpetual trouble, political scientists see a more complicated picture.

“Polarization has raised the floor and lowered the ceiling for approval ratings,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a professor of political science at the University of Houston. “Dramatic swings are less common because approval ratings are now fixed to partisanship.”

The comparison to George W. Bush, whose numbers famously soared after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and cratered into the mid-20s after Hurricane Katrina and the Iraq war, is instructive of how polarization has changed in the Trump era.

Bush governed in a country capable of moving together, in favor or against a president, in response to major events. Americans are no longer swayed in that way when it comes to their views of the president, Rottinghaus argues.

“Approval ratings today are increasingly a measure of who the president is rather than what the president does,” he said.

Trump, in his own way, has seemed to nod at this dynamic. When challenged on his standing with the public, or when a Republican lawmaker breaks with him over a policy issue, he has made the argument that he and the MAGA movement are inseparable. In other words, that opposition to any decision he makes is opposition to the movement itself.

“MAGA is me. MAGA loves everything I do, and I love everything I do,” Trump said in a January interview with NBC News when asked if his base supports long-term military interventions abroad.

Rottinghaus compared the questions about presidential approval as the “same as asking whether you’re Republican or not.”

“So why ask it,” he said.

Gallup, the organization that had tracked presidential approval for eight decades, announced earlier this year that it would stop publishing approval ratings of individual political figures, a shift that underscores how the traditional measure of a politician’s popularity has evolved.

When asked about the change, a Gallup spokesperson told the Washington Post at the time that “the context around these measures has changed.”

“They are now widely produced, aggregated and interpreted, and no longer represent an area where Gallup can make its most distinctive contribution,” the spokesperson added.

A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder has come to an end on BBC and Netflix, but there are plenty of loose ends to tie up in a potential third season

Pip Fitz-Amobi has one final mystery left to unravel.

A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder made its eagerly anticipated return this week for a second thrilling season, adapted from the bestselling novels by Holly Jackson.

On this occasion, Pip Fitz-Amobi (played by Emma Myers) investigates the disturbing disappearance of Jamie Reynolds (Eden H Davies), the elder brother of her friend Connor (Jude Morgan-Collie).

Elsewhere, Max Hastings (Henry Ashton) stands trial for drugging and assaulting female classmates, yet proceedings are thrown into disarray when Jamie surfaces before crucial evidence can be presented.

Now that another compelling six-part series has concluded with a breathtaking cliffhanger, we examine all the loose ends that a potential third season would need to resolve, reports Bristol Live.

**Warning – this article contains major spoilers for A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder season 2 and minor spoilers from the third book, As Good As Dead.**

Will Charlie and Flora face justice?

By the conclusion of Pip’s second investigation, the truth behind Jamie’s disappearance is revealed to be her neighbour Charlie Green (Jack Rowan), who had been hunting for Child Brunswick — the son of a notorious child killer who had lured his sister to her death.

Child Brunswick had been assigned a fresh identity under a witness protection scheme, and is unmasked as security guard Stanley Forbes (Misia Butler). Stanley meets his end in the finale at Charlie’s hands, who subsequently flees alongside his wife Flora (Anna Brindle).

By the season’s conclusion, audiences might question whether police eventually apprehend them. The third instalment in Jackson’s series, As Good As Dead, offers some resolution to this, though the adaptation may potentially pursue an alternative direction.

When will Max Hastings get taking down?

Pip finds herself incensed at the close of the second series when predator Max evades punishment, despite testimony from his victim Becca Bell (Carla Woodcock), after he attributed his offences to murder victim Sal Singh (Rahul Pattni), who couldn’t refute the accusations.

In the final episode, Pip conducts a funeral for Stanley and endures harassment from Max, who appears to have acquired a new girlfriend. She’s additionally enraged by graffiti daubed on a neighbouring structure stating “Child killer burn in hell Child Brunswick”, presumably created by Max or his associates.

Max cannot face retrial, but has Pip devised a plan to bring about his downfall? Again, this matter is explored in As Good As Dead and will presumably feature in the third series.

Who is Pip’s stalker?

Season two featured Pip receiving threatening communications from an unidentified stalker, which could represent further provocations from her adversary Max or potentially sinister warnings from another danger concealed in the darkness.

In the finale, her bedroom suffers an intrusion and she discovers repeated instances of the message “Who will look for you when you’re the one who disappears?” on her laptop.

This enigma provides the foundation for Jackson’s third instalment in the series, so everything will be unveiled should A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder progress.

Will Lauren and Robin split up?

A significant departure from the novels in season two involves the arrival of Max’s cousin, Robin Hastings (Freddie England), who starts a relationship with Pip’s friend Lauren (Yali Topol Margalith).

In the penultimate episode of season two, Lauren is last spotted at a family meal with Robin, Max, and their relatives, suggesting they remain together by the finale.

Nevertheless, in Jackson’s books, Lauren actually starts seeing a character named Ant Lowe, who hasn’t featured in the television adaptation. Fans may consequently witness her romance with Robin take a somewhat different trajectory in the third season.

What’s season three’s storyline?

Fans eager to discover what unfolds next are urged to read the third and concluding book in the series, As Good As Dead.

For non-readers, here’s a brief synopsis, according to HarperCollins: “Pip Fitz-Amobi is haunted by the way her last investigation ended. Soon she’ll be leaving for Cambridge University but then another case finds her… and this time it’s all about Pip.

“Pip is used to online death threats, but there’s one that catches her eye, someone who keeps asking: who will look for you when you’re the one who disappears? And it’s not just online. Pip has a stalker who knows where she lives. The police refuse to act and then Pip finds connections between her stalker and a local serial killer.

“The killer has been in prison for six years, but Pip suspects that the wrong man is behind bars. As the deadly game plays out, Pip realises that everything in Little Kilton is finally coming full circle. If Pip doesn’t find the answers, this time she will be the one who disappears…”

A Good Girl’s Guide to Murder season 2 is available to stream on BBC iPlayer.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Saturday that the United States and Iran have agreed on the basic terms of an agreement to end the two countries’ nearly three-month-long war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“An Agreement has been largely negotiated,” Trump wrote in a social media post. “Final aspects and details of the Deal are currently being discussed, and will be announced shortly. In addition to many other elements of the Agreement, the Strait of Hormuz will be opened.”

Iran’s state television network quoted Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei as saying the draft pact will be a “framework agreement” that defers talks toward limiting Iran’s nuclear program until later. Trump did not mention the nuclear issue in his statement.

If that is the form the deal takes, it would represent at least a short-term concession from the president, who initially demanded a definitive end to Iran’s nuclear program as the price of peace.

Trump has also relaxed an earlier U.S. demand that Iran give up its right to enrich uranium and says he would be satisfied with a deal to “suspend” enrichment for 20 years.

Those signs of U.S. flexibility have raised alarm from Iran hawks, reportedly including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They say they fear Trump is so intent on restoring the flow of oil from the gulf that he might agree to a deal that falls far short of U.S. goals.

Mark Dubowitz, a leading critic of past agreements with Iran, said he worries that Trump might settle for “a foolish agreement” to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“I’m concerned that the administration is looking to cut some ‘Phase One’ deal” in which Iran is given “significant sanctions relief in exchange for agreement to reopen the strait,” he said in an interview Friday. “I think that would be a foolish agreement. Iran would get real money, but they could continue to close the strait any time they wanted simply by making threats.”

Robert Kagan, a conservative foreign policy scholar at the Brookings Institution, wrote that a deal to reopen the strait while deferring the nuclear issue would amount to a U.S. “surrender.”

“On the present trajectory, Iran will emerge from the conflict many times stronger and more influential than it was before the war,” Kagan wrote in the Atlantic.

When the war began in February, Trump said he wanted not only to end Iran’s nuclear activities and destroy its ballistic missile program, but bring about regime change as well.

Instead, the nuclear talks have focused on narrower, more achievable goals: a “suspension” of nuclear enrichment for 20 years or less and removal or destruction of Iran’s highly enriched uranium, the essential ingredient for a nuclear weapon.

“A basic agreement shouldn’t be impossible to achieve,” said John W. Limbert, who worked on Iran policy at the State Department for three decades, and was one of the American hostages seized by Iranian militants in 1979. “The deal would be some kind of verifiable limits on the nuclear program in return for economic relief.”

“The fact that we’re talking about a suspension of all enrichment, and the question is whether it will be five years, 20 years or halfway in between — that’s important,” said Nate Swanson, an Iran expert who worked at the National Security Council under President Biden and Trump. “That sounds like you really have the basis for an agreement. … But don’t fool yourself to think that completely addresses the situation.”

Swanson said other issues, including Iran’s nuclear research and its advanced ballistic missiles, haven’t been addressed.

Despite signs of progress toward an agreement, the gaps between the two countries remain large.

Part of the problem is that both sides appear to believe they have won the war, said Danny Citrinowicz, a former Iran analyst at Israel’s defense intelligence agency.

Trump and other U.S. officials frequently assert that the United States has gained the upper hand by destroying Iran’s navy, air force and many of its missiles.

But the Iranians use a different scoring system, Citrinowicz said.

“Iran does not measure success the same way Washington often does,” he wrote in an email. “From Tehran’s perspective, simply holding firm in the face of American pressure can be framed as a win.”

“Tehran believes time is working against Trump politically and strategically,” he added. “Iran is prepared for prolonged confrontation; the United States, far less so.”

And even if a negotiated agreement is reached, the deals under discussion now won’t resolve all the conflicts between the two countries.

“An interim deal to buy time [is] probably where we end up,” Swanson said. “Buying time is not a bad thing. Ending a war is not a bad thing. But it’s not a comprehensive solution.”

Last year, Arsenal won the Champions League but will be mere spectators when Barcelona and Lyon face off next Saturday (17:00 BST).

The Gunners reaching the semi-finals but were dispatched by the French giants in a one-sided second leg.

Chelsea went out a round before, to Arsenal, while Manchester United were seen off by Bayern Munich.

The Ballon d’Or will likely reflect this European balance.

Nominations come later in the summer but with no international tournaments this year, it will be enlightening to see which WSL players make the shortlist.

Nine made the top 30 last August – and that did not include anyone from Manchester City, for whom Khadija Shaw, Vivianne Miedema and Yui Hasegawa among others have staked huge claims.

Others such as Arsenal’s Alessia Russo and Mariona Caldentey, Chelsea’s Alyssa Thompson and Manchester United’s Jess Park have also all had exceptional seasons and may feature.

Yet when the biggest award is doled out, it is still likely to be dominated by players from elsewhere. After all, a Barcelona player has won each of the past five years

Perhaps until Champions League success becomes commonplace, the leading WSL clubs must accept second billing to Europe’s other heavyweights.

Having said that, with Georgia Stanway, Ona Batlle and even Alexia Putellas linked with switches to England this summer, the balance could flip sooner than expected.

May 15 (UPI) — CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to Havana this week opened a new political chapter inside and outside Cuba, with analysts and opposition figures interpreting the meeting as a sign of direct pressure from Washington on a regime battered by massive blackouts, fuel shortages and an increasingly deep economic crisis.

The trip marked an unusual development in bilateral relations. The Cuban government confirmed that a U.S. delegation led by Ratcliffe met with his counterpart Thursday at Cuba’s Interior Ministry.

Washington had requested the meeting, which was approved by “the leadership of the Revolution,” according to the state-run newspaper Granma.

The CIA released photos of the meeting — “the most significant milestone so far in the two months of opaque negotiations taking place between Washington and Havana,” Spanish newspaper El País reported.

In another twist, according to reports by CBS News, USA Today and NBC News, a U.S. Justice Department official said the United States is considering formally charging former Cuban President Raul Castro over a 30-year-old incident in which the Cuban government shot down two aircraft operated by Cuban exile group Brothers to the Rescue.

The Ratcliffe visit, which lasted a brief time, was not announced in advance. He him Air Force plane flew from Joint Base Andrews in Maryland and returned hours later.

For decades, the Cuban government systematically accused opposition figures, independent journalists and dissidents of acting as agents or collaborators of the CIA. However, it was the regime itself that officially announced the meeting with agency director.

“The Cuban government announced the CIA visit first. For Cubans, that means important things are happening or about to happen,” Sebastián Arcos, acting director of the Institute for Cuban Studies, told UPI.

“This increases expectations and anxiety inside and outside the island.”

Energy has become the central focus of Cuba’s crisis. Ratcliffe arrived on the island precisely as Cuba declared a total energy collapse, formally running out of diesel fuel because of the U.S. naval blockade, while multiple technical failures at thermoelectric plants have left millions of people without electricity for up to 22 hours a day.

According to posts shared by activists and users on Facebook, protests have spread across the Cuban capital for four consecutive nights, while reports of internet outages in areas where gatherings have taken place have increased, Diario de Cuba reported.

Professor Jorge Piñón, director of the Latin America and Caribbean Energy Program at the University of Texas’ Energy Institute, said the visit by the CIA chief to Cuban territory “puts on the table what the rules of the game are from the point of view of the United States,” amid a crisis he described as “hour zero” for Cuba’s energy system.

Piñón told UPI that Cuba has practically exhausted its fuel reserves at storage facilities, ports and refineries, while thermoelectric plants operate on the verge of technical collapse.

The consequences extend far beyond the lack of electricity.

Piñón warned that the crisis affects ground transportation, water and food distribution, agriculture and even humanitarian operations by religious organizations that lack diesel to transport aid.

The deterioration of the electrical system also stems from structural problems accumulated over decades. Cuba depends on thermoelectric plants more than 40 years old, many adapted to burn extra-heavy domestically produced oil with high levels of sulfur and contaminating metals.

According to Piñón, that fuel accelerates the deterioration of already obsolete equipment, generating a “vicious cycle” of temporary repairs and new breakdowns.

He said the island produces about 40,000 barrels a day of heavy crude, but needs about 100,000 barrels a day to cover its energy demand, leaving a critical deficit of refined fuels mainly intended for transportation.

At the same time, Professor Raúl Rodríguez, director of the Center for Hemispheric and United States Studies at the University of Havana, described a society marked by daily exhaustion, uncertainty and the progressive deterioration of living conditions.

He told UPI that prolonged blackouts affect food preservation, access to drinking water and hospital operations.

The crisis also has deep economic consequences. Tourism, one of Cuba’s main sources of foreign currency, operates at less than 50% of capacity, affecting employment and the flow of resources into the country.

Rodríguez estimated that about 300,000 workers linked to the tourism sector face direct impacts from the economic slowdown.

Additional problems include health and environmental issues stemming from the lack of fuel for fumigation, garbage collection and basic urban services. The academic warned of growing risks of mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue and chikungunya.

Despite intensifying social unrest, the experts agreed that the crisis will not necessarily lead to an immediate political change.

Rodríguez argued that protests over blackouts and shortages “do not constitute, by themselves, a trigger capable of provoking regime change,” due to the absence of an organized political alternative with social legitimacy.

Piñón, meanwhile, said that although signs of social exhaustion exist, the country currently lacks leadership capable of channeling a political transition or with enough authority to organize a possible post-crisis scenario.

According to press reports, the U.S. demands delivered directly by the CIA director focus on an ultimatum conditioned on deep and immediate structural changes.

Washington is demanding that the Cuban government carry out political reforms toward democratization, release all political prisoners and fully open the economy to the private sector.

“From the information that has emerged, the CIA director traveled to Cuba to deliver an ultimatum: either you move, or the United States will,” the Institute for Cuban Studies’ Arcos said.

The reaction of Miguel Díaz-Canel’s government has reflected pragmatism forced by extreme economic suffocation and the collapse of basic services on the island.

Although Havana agreed to receive the CIA delegation to avoid a violent social outcome, it formally maintains its rhetoric defending national sovereignty, rejecting political conditions that threaten the socialist system.

Cuban officials used the meeting to present evidence that the island does not represent a threat to U.S. security, demanding in return its removal from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and an end to the naval blockade preventing fuel shipments from reaching the island.

Describing the country’s daily deterioration, Cuban writer Leonardo Padura recently portrayed Cuba as a nation where old social protections have collapsed, while the political structure remains intact.

In an essay published on the website La Carta de las Ideas, Padura recalled that July 2021 protests represented an unprecedented social explosion on an island historically marked by strong surveillance and state control mechanisms.

The government response, he wrote, was a severe “order to fight” accompanied by exemplary judicial proceedings aimed not only at punishing, but also at discouraging future public expressions of dissent.

Padura said that precedent helps explain why, despite economic and social conditions now being even worse than in 2021, street demonstrations have been more limited than many outside Cuba expected.

Another expert thinks the United States will dominate as Cuba sinks into crisis.

“The CIA currently has the upper hand. Without the CIA, [President Donald] Trump can do nothing, and [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio knows nothing because he has never even been to Cuba,” Lillian Guerra, professor of Cuban and Caribbean history and director of the Cuba Program at the University of Florida, told UPI.

Guerra argued that the agency holds a dominant position over the Cuban state because of its understanding of the regime’s “theater and discourse of lies and subterfuge” amid the crisis.

Guerra said “nobody is buying” the government’s official explanations anymore and warned that Cuban authorities “are running out of time” as public frustration grows across the island.

She added that the meeting shows Washington is negotiating with Cuba’s “real leaders” linked to the Ministry of the Interior, a structure she described as more powerful than the Revolutionary Armed Forces and primarily focused on preserving political control.

SACRAMENTO — Dana Williamson, one of the political heavyweights at the center of a financial scandal involving gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra, looked shell-shocked Thursday morning in a federal courtroom in downtown Sacramento, as most folks do when bad choices collide with the hard realities of the justice system.

A thousand-yard stare in her eyes, Williamson responded “guilty” three times in a voice that required a microphone to be heard as the judge walked her through a plea deal reached days before with the U.S. Department of Justice. She likely won’t be sentenced until fall (possibly close to the general election) but will — again, just a likely here — at best face home confinement and at worst upward of three years in prison.

It’s a colossal fall for a woman who wasn’t so much a consultant as a political operative to Becerra, Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Gov. Jerry Brown and a slew of companies including Meta and PG&E. She was known at the Capitol as a woman who got things done, sometimes with finesse, sometimes not.

It was her savvy and ability to deliver whatever was needed through her deep connections and knowledge of the complicated structures — official and cultural — that govern the California halls of power that make her predicament all the more confounding. Especially because, far from stealing money for self-enrichment, she actually paid money to be part of this scheme.

That alone, to me, raises questions.

Though Williamson’s guilty plea may seem like an ending to the saga, it shouldn’t be, because there’s still a lot lurking in the dark corners of this deal.

If Becerra makes it past the primary, which seems (I’ll use that word again) likely, voters have a right to know.

Here’s the simple backstory, according to court documents. Becerra’s close aide, Sean McCluskie, took a pay cut to remain with his boss when he moved to Washington to become President Biden’s secretary of Health and Human Services.

Strapped for cash, McCluskie asked Williamson to receive money from Becerra’s dormant campaign account — which Becerra was legally not allowed to manage while holding federal office — and pass it through a bunch of other accounts before giving it to McCluskie’s wife as payment for a nonexistent job.

Williamson’s attorney, McGregor Scott, said Thursday that Williamson received $7,500 each month from the Becerra account and added $2,500 from her own funds before sending it on to ultimately reach McCluskie — for a total of $10,000 a month.

McCluskie was “living on a government salary,” Scott said Thursday after court. “Wife is home with the kids. They didn’t have enough money, and that’s where this all originated. [Williamson] was simply trying to help a friend in a pinch as best she could.”

Scott, a former Bush and Trump United States attorney, managed to get Williamson’s original 23-count indictment knocked down to the Becerra account issue, along with lying to the FBI and filing a false tax return.

McCluskie entered his own guilty plea in the case last November and is scheduled to be sentenced, along with the third lobbyist, in June.

Becerra, who is a slim-margin front-runner for governor, was the victim in this case — or more precisely, his state campaign bank account was, according to court documents.

There has never been any indication that Becerra was investigated as a participant, and he has forcefully denied wrongdoing, calling it a “gut punch” that his advisers allegedly betrayed him.

That, of course, hasn’t stopped the other candidates from using the case against him.

“My opponents have spent millions spreading lies to purposefully mislead voters,” he wrote Thursday on social media. “Today confirms what I have said from day one: I did nothing wrong. Case closed.”

Meanwhile, Scott, the attorney, also said Thursday that Williamson assumed, based on her conversations with McCluskie, that McCluskie had spoken to Becerra about the concept of the money transfer. Text messages in court records show a brief and ambiguous exchange between McCluskie and Williamson that backs that up.

Scott said that Williamson never spoke directly with Becerra about the scheme.

That leaves the distinct possibility that Williamson believed Becerra knew what was happening — but never asked him. Dumb? Maybe. But Williamson isn’t usually dumb.

“The understanding that McCluskie conveyed to my client was it was OK to proceed,” Scott said.

Becerra has repeatedly said he believed the $10,000 a month was a legitimate fee being paid to manage the funds in the dormant account while he could not — though that is an amount above what is usual for such work, as my colleague Dakota Smith has reported.

Becerra has also repeatedly used some variation of the “case closed” line, seemingly hoping to move past this scandal without further answers.

But at the very least, it deserves some kind of mea culpa from Becerra or lessons learned, a more robust conversation than the brush-off it’s been getting. Because either McCluskie is one heck of a con man who rolled both Becerra and Williamson, making both believe what was happening was kosher with entirely different tales, or someone isn’t being entirely honest.

Did Becerra never question why an account with almost no activity was costing so much to manage? Did he never wonder what Williamson was doing to earn all that money? Should he, with his decades of legal and political experience, have seen red flags, even with a trusted adviser? Or is Williamson, facing sentencing, just trying to paint herself in a sympathetic light?

“I’m not trying to paint my client as a victim,” McGregor said. “She’s accepted responsibility today for what she did by pleading guilty. She’s now a felon. So you know, we’re not trying to do anything to dance away from that.”

Williamson may be done dancing, but the music’s still playing, and the fancy footwork of politics continues.