RACE

AN ULTRA-MARATHON runner has won an epic 100km race – whilst stopping to BREASTFEED along the way.

Stephanie Case, 43, took on the gruelling Ultra-Trail Snowdonia race in Wales on May 17.

2

2

Case had not raced in three years before lining up on the start line for the outrageous physical test.

It was the first time the human rights lawyer from Canada had run competitively since the birth of her daughter Pepper in November.

And she wasn’t about to let the race get in the way of the six-month-old’s meal times.

Case’s partner John met her at checkpoints throughout the race, handing the 43-year-old food to refuel.

While Stephanie would also feed Pepper before getting back into her running.

She said: “It was truly like riding a bike – every kilometre that passed reminded me that I hadn’t lost a thing over the last three years.

“In fact, I have gained way more joy and strength from this sport as a mum than I ever did before. 

“While it broke my heart to leave little Pepper at the aid stations, I wanted to show her – both of us – how amazing mum runners can be.”

BEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UK

After starting 30 minutes behind the elite runners, Case had no idea she had crossed the finish line in the fastest time.

She laughed: “The race officials came to me and they were like, ‘You actually won.’

“They asked me ‘Can you run through the tape again for the cameras?'”

Case added: “I’m not extraordinary.

“I had a baby, I ran a race. It should be a totally normal thing.

“Everyone has an opinion about what new mums should or shouldn’t be doing, and that doesn’t open up a lot of. space for out there ideas like running an ultra.

“I’m lucky to be physically okay after childbirth. Others aren’t so lucky.

“There is no ‘comeback’ after childbirth. There is just the next phase.

“And whatever it looks like, whether on or off the trail, it’ll be right for you.”

SACRAMENTO — The big question in California politics is, “Will Kamala Harris run for governor?” But that’s the wrong question. Far more important is, “Should she?”

And that’s not a question to be answered based strictly on her prospects for winning.

Initially, at least, the former vice president would be the heavy favorite to succeed termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom — although, eventually, she could find herself in a tough election fight next year.

Rather, the answer should be determined based on what strengths, goals and ideas she would bring to the table — her specific plans for fixing California’s enormous problems, her eagerness to fight even political allies to achieve her objectives and her own desire to lead the state’s comeback.

She shouldn’t view the job as a consolation prize after losing the presidential election to Donald Trump. Voters would smell that and, anyway, Harris would be miserably bored in the state Capitol dealing with budget minutiae and relatively inexperienced legislative leaders.

So far, since returning from Washington to her native state, Harris, 60, has displayed none of the above criteria that California needs in its next governor.

But neither did she previously in any noteworthy way as a U.S. senator or — particularly — state attorney general. As attorney general, Harris refused to take positions on important ballot measures, including those dealing with her role as California’s so-called top cop — propositions to stiffen criminal sentences and both abolish and expedite the death penalty.

Harris has a record of being overly cautious about taking positions that could alienate interests she deems important to her political career.

Sure, Harris isn’t running for anything right now. So, she deserves a pass on issuing 10-point plans to patch up the state.

But, look, you don’t need to be a gubernatorial candidate to express concerns about your state. Any resident who’s conscious should be alarmed.

“Home prices have skyrocketed as supply slumped over the past three decades,” the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California noted in a report last week.

California’s median home price in March was $884,000 — very tough if not impossible for many middle-class families. The housing shortage is largely due to over-regulation, tangled red tape that slows issuance of building permits and abuse of California’s environmental protection laws.

There’s a strong move in the Legislature to ease regulations, but it’s highly controversial. Does Harris have a thought on this?

Homeowner insurance rates are rising fast in the aftermath of wildfires. And in many fire-prone regions, traditional policies are impossible to obtain. The next governor needs to fix this.

California’s poverty rate is the nation’s highest when the cost of living is considered, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Despite our spending many billions of dollars and regardless of ugly finger-pointing at each other by Newsom and local officials, 187,000 Californians are homeless — a 35% increase in 17 years. That’s the highest in the nation — only partly because we’ve got the largest population.

Gasoline prices are roughly $1.60 a gallon higher in California than the U.S. average. And two oil refineries are planning to shut down, invariably hiking pump prices even higher.

We’re a high-tax state, a fact Newsom is in denial about. We lean too heavily on the wealthy for tax revenue and that produces roller-coaster budget deficits and surpluses depending on the stock market. It’s ridiculous. State taxes should be modernized. But no politician has the guts to attempt that.

Then there’s California’s historic problem of not enough water for its thirst.

Does Harris have anything to say about any of this? She hasn’t so far.

Of course, the seven leading announced Democratic candidates have been practically mute themselves on matters that risk aggravating party interest groups.

One exception is former Los Angeles Mayor and state Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, who has been bolder than most of his rivals.

Harris has said she’ll decide by the end of summer whether to run for governor in 2026. Maybe she’ll seek the presidency again in 2028 or retire from politics and make a bundle in the private sector.

But Villaraigosa already is taking shots at her — including last week for allegedly helping to cover up former President Biden’s cognitive decline while in the Oval Office. Villaraigosa included in the attack another gubernatorial candidate: former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra.

Harris is a lot more vulnerable than Becerra on the issue.

But it’s a cheap shot. How many people would publicly accuse their boss of being mentally incompetent? And Harris would have instantly been blasted for being self-serving by plotting to push the president aside so she could grab the Democratic nomination.

Harris could help herself and California’s voters, however, by occasionally voicing some anxiety about her home state.

The little we’ve heard from her this year are attacks on Trump. She also has been lending her name to anti-Trump fundraising appeals by the Democratic National Committee.

But the last thing California Democrats need is another politician — especially a potential governor — telling them that Trump is an evil, ignorant con artist. They’re fully aware of that. They need someone who can tell them how their state can be fixed.

If she ran, Harris would be the initial favorite because of her broad name recognition, past election successes in California and fundraising ability. Some current candidates would probably drop out.

But there doesn’t seem to be a public clamoring for her to run.

Harris needs to start showing people why she should even consider seeking the job. Because, so far, she’s sounding more like a 2028 presidential retread.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Villaraigosa blasts Harris and Becerra for not speaking out about Biden’s decline
The TK: Trump’s housing cuts could push thousands onto SF streets
The L.A. Times Special: Antonio Villaraigosa is dying to run against Kamala Harris for governor. Here’s why

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

As California positions itself as a leader on climate change, former Los Angeles mayor and gubernatorial candidate Antonio Villaraigosa is pivoting away from his own track record as an environmental champion to defend the state’s struggling oil industry.

Villaraigosa’s work to expand mass transit, plant trees and reduce carbon emissions made him a favorite of the environmental movement, but the former state Assembly speaker also accepted more than $1 million in campaign contributions and other financial support from oil companies and other donors tied to the industry over more than three decades in public life, according to city and state fundraising disclosures reviewed by The Times.

Since entering the race last year to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, Villaraigosa has accepted more than $176,000 from donors with ties to the oil industry, including from a company that operates oil fields in the San Joaquin Valley and in Los Angeles County, the disclosures show.

The clash between Villaraigosa’s environmentalist credentials and oil-industry ties surfaced in the governor’s race after Valero announced in late April that its Bay Area refinery would close next year, not long after Phillips 66 said its Wilmington refinery would close in 2025.

Villaraigosa is now warning that California drivers could see gas prices soar, blasting as “absurd” policies that he said could have led to the refinery closures.

“I’m not fighting for refineries,” Villaraigosa said in an interview. “I’m fighting for the people who pay for gas in this state.”

The refineries are a sore spot for Newsom and for California Democrats, pitting their environmental goals against concerns about the rising cost of living and two of the state’s most powerful interest groups — organized labor and environmentalists — against each other.

Villaraigosa said Democrats are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good in their approach to fighting climate change.

He said he hoped no more refineries would close until the state hits more electrification milestones, including building more transmission lines, green-energy storage systems and charging stations for electric cars. The only way for the state to reach “net zero” emissions, he said, is an “all-of-the-above” approach that includes solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, nuclear power and oil and gas.

“The notion that we’re not going to do that is poppycock,” Villaraigosa said.

Villaraigosa’s vocal support for the oil industry has upset some environmental groups that saw him as a longtime ally.

“I’m honestly shocked at just how bad it is,” said RL Miller, the president of Climate Hawks Vote and the chair of the California Democratic Party’s environmental caucus, of the contributions Villaraigosa has accepted since entering the race in July.

Miller said Villaraigosa signed a pledge during his unsuccessful run for governor in 2018 not to accept campaign contributions from oil companies and “named executives” at fossil-fuel entities. She said he took the pledge shortly after accepting the maximum allowable contributions from several oil donors in 2017.

Miller said that more than $100,000 in donations that Villaraigosa has accepted in this gubernatorial cycle were clear violations of the pledge.

That included contributions from the state’s largest oil and gas producer, California Resources Corp. and its subsidiaries, as well as the founder of Rocky Mountain Resources, a leader of the oil company Berry Corp., and Excalibur Well Services.

“This is bear-hugging the oil industry,” she said.

Environmental activists view the pledge as binding for future campaigns. Villaraigosa said he has not signed it for this campaign.

The economy is dramatically different than it was in 2018, Villaraigosa said, and working-class Americans are being hammered, which he said was a major factor in recent Democratic losses.

“We’re losing working people, particularly working people who don’t have a college education,” he said. “Why are we losing them? The cost of living, the cost of gas, the cost of utilities, the cost of groceries.”

Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego, said such statements are consistent with Villaraigosa’s messaging in recent years.

“Villaraigosa is squarely in the moderate lane in the governor’s race. That doomed him in 2018, when voters wanted to counterbalance President Trump and Villaraigosa was outflanked by Newsom,” Kousser said. “But today, even some Democrats may want to counterbalance the direction that they see Sacramento taking, especially when it comes to cost-of-living issues and the price of gas.”

He added that the fossil-fuel donations may not be the basis for Villaraigosa’s apparent embrace of oil and gas priorities.

“When a politician takes campaign contributions from an industry and also takes positions that favor it, that raises the possibility of corruption, of money influencing votes,” Kousser said. “But it is also possible that it was the politician’s own approach to an issue that attracted the contributions, that their votes attracted money but were not in any way corrupted by it. That may be the case here, where Villaraigosa has held fairly consistent positions on this issue and consistently attracted support from an industry because of those positions.”

Other Democrats in the 2026 governor’s race, including Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter, former state Controller Betty Yee and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, have signed the pledge not to accept contributions from oil industry interests, Miller said.

Former California Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and businessman Stephen Cloobeck have not. (Cloobeck has never run for office before and has not been asked to sign.)

Other gubernatorial candidates have also accepted fossil-fuel contributions, although in smaller numbers than Villaraigosa, state and federal filings show.

Becerra accepted contributions from Chevron and California Resources Corp., formerly Occidental Petroleum, while running for attorney general. Atkins took donations from Chevron, Occidental and a trade group for oil companies while running for state Assembly and state Senate. And while running for lieutenant governor, Kounalakis took contributions from executives at oil and mining companies.

Campaign representatives for the two main Republican candidates in the race, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton, said they welcomed oil-industry donations.

Villaraigosa is a fierce defender of his environmental record dating back to his first years as an elected official in the California Assembly.

As mayor of Los Angeles from 2005 to 2013, Villaraigosa set new goals to reduce emissions at the Port of Los Angeles, end the use of coal-burning power plants and shift the city’s energy generation toward solar, wind and geothermal sources.

The child of a woman who relied on Metro buses, he also branded himself the “transportation mayor.” Villaraigosa was a vocal champion for the 2008 sales tax increase that provided the first funding for the extension of the Wilshire Boulevard subway to the Westside.

But, he said, Democrats in 2025 have to be realistic that the refinery closures and their goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions could disproportionately affect low-income residents who are already struggling to make ends meet.

Villaraigosa’s comments underscore a broader divide among Democrats about how to fight climate change without making California even more expensive, or driving out more high-paying jobs that don’t require a college education.

Lorena Gonzalez, a former state lawmaker who became the leader of the California Labor Federation in 2022, said that while climate change is a real threat, so is shutting down refineries.

“That’s a threat to those workers’ jobs and lives, and it’s also a threat to the price of gas,” Gonzalez said.

California is not currently positioned to end its reliance on fossil fuels, she said. If the state reduces its refining capacity, she said, it will have to rely on exports from nations that have less environmental and labor safeguards.

“Anyone running for governor has to acknowledge that,” Gonzalez said.

Villaraigosa said that while the loss of union jobs at Valero’s Bay Area refinery worried him, his primary concern was over the cost of gasoline and household budgets.

His comments come as California prepares to square off yet again against the Trump administration over its environmental policies.

The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to revoke a federal waiver that allowed California to set its own vehicle emission standards, including a rule that would have ultimately banned the sale of new gas-fueled cars in 2035. Villaraigosa denounced the vote, but said that efforts to fight climate change can’t come at the expense of working-class Americans.

President Trump has also declared a national energy emergency, calling for increased fossil-fuel production, eliminating environmental reviews and the fast-tracking of projects in potentially sensitive ecosystems and habitats. The Trump administration is also targeting California’s environmental standards.

Villaraigosa, an Eastside native, started his career as a labor organizer and rose to speaker of the state Assembly before becoming the mayor of Los Angeles. Now 72, Villaraigosa has not held elected office for more than a decade; he finished a distant third in the 2018 gubernatorial primary.

Over the years, donors affiliated with the fossil-fuel industry have contributed more than $1 million to Villaraigosa’s political campaigns and his nonprofit causes, including an after-school program, the city’s sports and entertainment commission and an effort to reduce violence by providing programming at city parks during summer nights, according to city and state disclosures.

More than half of the contributions and support for Villaraigosa’s pet causes, over $582,000, came during his years at Los Angeles City Hall as a council member and mayor.

In 2008, billionaire oil and gas magnate T. Boone Pickens donated $150,000 to a city proposition backed by Villaraigosa that levied a new tax on phone and internet use.

Pickens made the donation as his company was vying for business at the port of Los Angeles, which is overseen by mayoral appointees and was seeking to reduce emissions by replacing diesel-powered trucks with vehicles fueled by liquid natural gas.

The rest of the contributions and other financial support flowed to Villaraigosa’s campaign accounts and affiliated committees while he served in the Assembly and during his two gubernatorial runs. These figures do not include donations to independent expenditure committees, since candidates cannot legally be involved in those efforts.

Villaraigosa said that while such voters don’t subscribe to Republicans’ “drill, baby, drill” ethos, he slammed the Democratic Party’s focus on such matters and Trump instead of kitchen-table issues.

“The cost of everything we’re doing is on the backs of the people who work the hardest and who make the least, and that’s why so many of them — even when we were saying Trump is a threat to democracy — they were saying, yeah, but what about my gas prices, grocery prices, the cost of eggs?” he said.

Times staff writer Sandra McDonald in Sacramento contributed to this report.

INDIANAPOLIS — Alex Palou took the ceremonial swig of milk in victory lane at the Indianapolis 500. His wife had a sip, she in turn gave a sip to their baby, and team owner Chip Ganassi ended up with the bottle and took a drink, as well.

“Whole milk,” he said before switching to Spanish. “Esta muy, muy buena.”

Then, the first Spaniard to win “The Greatest Spectacle in Racing” took a victory lap with them around Indianapolis Motor Speedway in the back of a pickup truck. At one point, Palou climbed onto its roof and raised his arms in triumph, the winning wreath draped around his neck. He briefly lost his balance and Ganassi instinctively reached out to grab his star driver.

No need.

Palou rarely makes a wrong move.

“All my family around, it’s amazing, honestly,” he said, smiling. “All the team around, they make me look really good on the track.”

Palou came to the speedway as the two-time defending IndyCar champion — he has three titles in four years — and had opened this year with victories in four of the first five races. It’s the kind of start not seen since 1964, when A.J. Foyt won the first seven races of the season, including the Indy 500.

But until Sunday he had never won at an oval track like Indy.

“I’m glad that today was our day,” he told The Los Angeles Times. “I think I had tools to to to win at other oval races, but today was the first one that we were able to put everything together and and get it.

“This has been the biggest win. By very, very far.”

Without an Indy 500 win, he said, his career would be incomplete.

“Like he said last week, if he was to go through his whole career and not win here at Indianapolis, it wouldn’t be a complete career,” Ganassi said. “I don’t want to say his career is complete now — he’s got a lot in him yet. Look at the last five, six races we’ve had. It’s just incredible. He’s on a roll.”

Palou was in fuel-saving mode over the closing laps, following former Chip Ganassi Racing teammate Marcus Ericsson. Palou got tired of staying put with 16 laps remaining and charged ahead — a move Ericsson said “will keep me up at night. What I did and what I didn’t do.” Palou was never challenged from there, taking the checkered flag as a crash brought out a caution.

“You never know you have it until you cross the start-finish line,” he said. “I knew I had an amazing car. I knew that I was going to have a chance at the end. But I didn’t know that we were going to have a chance to win until we crossed that start-finish line.”

He stopped the car just beyond the Yard of Bricks, climbing out of it and nearly losing his balance as he raised his arms in triumph. Palou jumped down and took off in a run down the front stretch, pulling off his gloves and tossing them behind him, and ultimately was engulfed by his father, Ramon, and his team in a jubilant celebration.

Scott Dixon and Dario Franchitti both hugged him, a pair of former Ganassi Indy 500 winners welcoming him into their exclusive club.

“I cannot believe it. What an amazing day. What an amazing race,” Palou said. “I cannot believe it. It was tough. Tough conditions out there, especially if you were like, third or fourth in the pack. Even leading, the fuel consumption was super high, so they didn’t want me to lead. I wanted to lead, honestly, so yeah, made it happen.”

Marco Andretti loses control of his car on the start of the Indianapolis 500.

(Michael Conroy / Associated Press)

Meanwhile, Ericsson climbed from his car in pit lane and pressed his hands to his face, the disappointment of coming oh-so-close to a second Indianapolis 500 victory etched across his face. David Maluks was third for A.J. Foyt Racing.

“It’s pretty painful,” Ericsson said of his second career Indy 500 runner-up finish. “I need to look at it again. You replay it in your head a million times after the finish, wondering what I could have done differently. Second means nothing in this race.”

Josef Newgarden’s bid to win three consecutive Indy 500s ended with a fuel pump issue. He was trying to become the first driver to come from the back row to win because he and Team Penske teammate Will Power were dropped to the back of the field for failing inspection before the final rounds of qualifying.

Power wound up 19th, the highest-finishing Penske driver on a miserable day for the organization owned by Roger Penske. He earlier this week fired his top three IndyCar executives for a second technical infraction in just over a year, and has had to defend the optics of his teams failing inspections when he also owns IndyCar, Indianapolis Motor Speedway and the Indy 500.

Penske has won the Indy 500 a record 20 times.

It was the sixth Indy 500 win for Ganassi, who has been on a dominating wave since hiring Palou before the 2021 season. Palou won the championship in his first year with the team, added two more titles, and now seems on pace for a fourth one.

“I’ll tell you what, that kid’s a good driver. I think he’s off to a good start,” Ganassi said. “We’re gonna have a good season. It might be OK. Yeah, might be okay. Might be looking at a championship.”

Ganassi also vowed that winning the Indy 500 win “is going to make Alex Palou’s career. It is going to make his life.”

Palou started the race tied with Pato O’Ward as the co-favorites, listed at +500 by BetMGM Sportsbook. O’Ward finished fourth — the fifth time in six career starts the Mexican has finished sixth or higher. Kyle Larson won’t complete “the double” after crashing out of the Indianapolis 500 before he headed to North Carolina to compete in the Coca-Cola 600 NASCAR race.

WASHINGTON — How can Congress cut Medicaid without explicitly cutting Medicaid?

That has been a years-long dilemma facing fiscal conservatives in the Republican Party who have sought cuts to the country’s deficit-driving social safety net programs, including Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare, without generating political fallout from the tens of millions of Americans who will suffer the consequences.

Now, GOP lawmakers have settled on a strategy, outlined in legislation expected to pass the House in the coming days amid ongoing negotiations over the package that President Trump is calling his “Big Beautiful Bill.”

Rather than lowering the income eligibility limit for coverage — an old policy proposal that would cut off Americans at the higher end of the eligibility range — Trump’s bill will instead require applicants to provide proof of their work hours and apply for specific exceptions, creating new barriers for individuals to maintain insurance.

House passage of the bill is far from assured, and the Senate will still have its say. But if it does become law, the policy would affect more than 71 million of the poorest Americans, more of whom live in California than any other state.

Barriers to entry are the point

If everyone eligible under the new work requirements were to apply for and receive Medicaid coverage, the cost savings to the government would be minimal. But the barriers themselves are the point, making it more likely that people with a right to Medicaid won’t ultimately receive it, experts said.

“If you want to make a substantial cut to the program, how do you do that in a systematic way?” said Matt Bruenig, founder of People’s Policy Project and a former lawyer at the National Labor Relations Board.

“With the work requirements, the number of people who seem to be actually ineligible because of it is quite small — so if it actually is perfectly administrated, you’re not going to see a whole lot of savings,” Bruenig said. “But if it’s not well administrated and it creates all these problems, then you could see significant savings.”

Existing government programs, such as Social Security, unemployment and supplemental nutrition assistance for women, infants and children, determine eligibility for those benefits based on an individual’s income. But creating a new set of criteria for Medicaid based on hours worked will require a new reporting system that is not outlined in the bill.

“We have all these systems that are based around making sure people have the earnings that they can report to all these agencies, but you don’t really report hours in any context,” Bruenig added. “Monthly hours — that’s just not a thing. And it’s not clear how that’s going to work, at all.”

Who counts as ‘waste, fraud and abuse’?

Trump and members of the House Freedom Caucus, a group of Republican fiscal hawks, have argued for a strict hourly work requirement to eliminate “waste, fraud and abuse” in Medicaid by cutting off unproductive individuals from government benefits.

But exemptions suggested in the draft legislation — parents caring for young children or elderly parents, individuals dealing with health issues, those between jobs — reflect the range of reasons why Medicaid recipients may fall below the proposed hourly requirement. And each time an exception arises, individuals will have to refile, increasing the likelihood they will simply let their coverage lapse.

It also will force working individuals who would otherwise be eligible — such as Americans working gig jobs for DoorDash or Uber, for example — to account for hours worked transiting between jobs that don’t generate receipts.

“They just are not finding very much at all,” said John Schmitt, a senior research fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, when asked whether ineligible individuals are routinely receiving Medicaid.

“The real problems are not with individuals taking advantage of Medicaid,” Schmitt added. “It is with healthcare providers taking advantage of Medicaid, in the sense of the way they bill and provide services to people. And that is not going to be changed in any way, whatsoever, by imposing a work requirement.”

The Congressional Budget Office said it is these Medicaid recipients who will either fall behind or grow fed up with the paperwork, resulting in 7.6 million losing coverage under the plan and saving the federal government roughly $800 billion.

California will be hit hardest

The effects of Medicaid cuts will be felt nationwide, but most pointedly in states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act. On that score, Democratic states such as California lead the way.

A state assessment published Sunday found the GOP bill would “cause serious harm to California’s health care system,” possibly resulting in up to 3.4 million residents losing coverage.

No state has more workers on Medicaid than California, where 18% of its workforce receives benefits from the program, according to a study from the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

“Millions will lose coverage, hospitals will close, and safety nets could collapse under the weight,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “We must sound the alarm because the stakes couldn’t be higher.”

But the political stakes are high for Republicans as well.

Stephen K. Bannon, a former campaign aide and White House strategist to Trump, warned in recent days that the party has “gotta be careful” with Medicaid, given its widespread use among low-income GOP voters.

“A lot of MAGAs are on Medicaid, I’m telling you,” Bannon said on his podcast. “If you don’t think so, you are dead wrong.”

Trump, for his part, seems of two minds on the matter. Cuts to Medicaid, as well as to food stamp programs and green energy tax benefits, will be required to get the bill passed with support from the Freedom Caucus, which says the renewal of tax cuts initially passed in the first Trump administration must be offset with savings elsewhere.

“Here’s what I want on Medicaid: We’re not touching anything,” Trump said Tuesday, taking questions from reporters on Capitol Hill. “All I want is one thing. Three words. We don’t want any waste, fraud or abuse. Very simple — waste, fraud, abuse.”

But in a private meeting with GOP lawmakers, his guidance was sharper. “Don’t f— around with Medicaid,” the president reportedly said.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: White House pushes for quick approval of ‘big, beautiful bill,’ but key hurdles remain
The deep dive: Villaraigosa blasts Harris and Becerra for not speaking out about Biden’s decline
The L.A. Times Special: Congressional leaders call for streamlined visa process ahead of World Cup, L.A. Olympics

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

CHELSEA’S Champions League qualification clash with Nottingham Forest has been picked for TV.

The Premier League has confirmed which fixtures will be broadcast on the last day of the season.

1

Chelsea’s visit to Nottingham Forest will decide which team qualifies for next season’s Champions League.

The match will be shown on Sky Sports, with the broadcaster also set to air Liverpool vs Crystal Palace.

Kick-off times for the two fixtures remain the same – Sunday 4:00pm – with all ten matches starting at the same time.

THIS IS A DEVELOPING STORY..

The Sun is your go to destination for the best football, boxing and MMA news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.Like us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/TheSunFootball and follow us from our main Twitter account at @TheSunFootball.

Matthew Wolfenden has spoken for the first time about being suspended from his role on ITV’s Emmerdale after appearing to mimic a Chinese accent on the set

Emmerdale actor Matthew Wolfenden has revealed why he was suspended from the ITV soap opera and how it saw him suffer a nervous breakdown. The actor who plays local businessman David Metcalfe vanished from screens in 2021 alongside his co-star, Isabel Hodgins, who plays Victoria Sugden, leaving fans baffled.

At the time, it was reported that the pair had been embroiled in a heated row while filming scenes for Super Soap Week in the same year. Reports claimed that the pair came to blows while filming a scene which involved a waterfall, which aired on October 19, 2021. However, it later emerged that the soap had launched an investigation following claims of a race row.

But until now, Matthew, 45, has remained tight-lipped about his exit from the soap and has confirmed it came after they were accused of mimicking a Chinese accent around the workplace. “We were falsely accused of doing an accent on set,” he said.

Matthew went on to explain: “Whenever the word race is used, they have to take it seriously.” He explained that a young cast member had mistakenly thought they’d heard the pair putting on a Chinese accent and later complained to a producer about the incident.

He stated that the younger cast member told a producer they were “not very happy” about what they had heard on the set of the Yorkshire-based soap opera. “So, because of this, we did have to get suspended because as soon as that’s an issue, they have to go down the correct routes while they investigate what happens,” Matthew said.

Speaking on Lewis Nicholls Life Stories, he went on to say: “Unfortunately when you get suspended from a continuing drama, you have to get written out of storylines and that is not an easy process because the storylines are written six weeks in advance, you film six weeks in advance and then it’s on screen.

“So even if you’re off for two weeks that could be three months of not being on screen.” He said that he and Isabel had worked together a lot in the lead up to the suspension due to their characters being in a relationship and the pair loved watching comedies.

“So we were sat one day talking about what comedies we loved to watch and we were doing scenes, mimicking the scenes, doing the lines from the scenes,” he said. He went on to add: “And I said to her, ‘Have you ever seen the League of Gentlemen?’

“And there’s a scene in the League of Gentlemen where Reece Shearsmith dresses up as a lady called Pam Doove and it’s called the Orange Juice Scene if anyone wants to Google it and see what I mean. And he’s playing an actress who comes into an audition room and is very eloquent – it’s an old acting joke – and then the director says, ‘Go out of the room and come back in and say ‘Has anyone got a bottle of orange juice?’ for an audition. [She returns and does it in a different accent]. “

He stated that the younger star had overheard the conversation and assumed that Matthew was mimicking the Chinese accent, which led to him being suspended over the alleged “race row”. Matthew claims that bosses behind the soap urged him not to speak out publicly about the reason behind his suspension.

He told the podcast he “didn’t have a leg to stand on” as the Emmerdale press team had instructed him to “stay quiet.” Despite this, Matthew stated he was desperate to tell the truth and found it “difficult” not to speak out over an accusation of something he hadn’t done.

He later explained he became unwell due to the mounting stress and suffered a nervous breakdown. “I ended up in The Priory for a month,” he said. Matthew feared he’d lose his job and ended up hitting a “big spiral down” following the rumours. Despite his suspension, Matthew returned to the programme, but fortunately for him, the cast member who made the claim left while he was absent.

Matthew’s character eventually left Emmerdale in 2023 after two decades on the soap. It was initially suggested that David could be killed off after Matthew expressed an interest in taking on other roles. However, David didn’t die and he instead left to be with his ex Priya and their daughter Amba after learning that his son Jacob had fallen for his former partner Victoria. He couldn’t cope with the new romance and decided he had no choice but to make his departure from the Dales, leaving both Jacob and Pollard devastated.

If you are struggling with mental health, you can speak to a trained advisor from Mind mental health charity on 0300 123 3393 or email [email protected]

The Mirror approached Emmerdale for comment.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

Four years later, the memory remains uncomfortably fresh.

The last time the Dodgers tried to defend a World Series title, they racked up 106 victories. They matched the best winning percentage in the franchise’s Los Angeles history. They had seven All-Stars and three Cy Young vote-getters.

And it still wasn’t enough to win them the National League West.

The San Francisco Giants, the Dodgers still well remember, won 107 games in the 2021 season, marking the only time in the last dozen years someone else has claimed the division crown. The Dodgers eventually knocked the Giants out of the playoffs that October, but their elongated path through the postseason as a wild card team left them gassed in the NL Championship Series. They were eliminated six wins shy of a repeat title.

For president of baseball operations Andrew Friedman, the experience underscored an all-important truth.

“Our primary goal during the regular season is to win the division,” Friedman said. “That is what we feel like puts us in the best position to accomplish our ultimate goal.”

Thus, with another tight division race looming this year, the Dodgers didn’t wait to act aggressively this week.

Austin Barnes and Chris Taylor were struggling. Dalton Rushing and Hyeseong Kim looked like intriguing big-league options. And in two moves that were made in an effort to “win as many games as we can” in this season’s World Series title defense, Friedman said, the longtime veterans were released to make room for the rookies. Sentimentality lost out to the odds of even slightly better regular-season success.

“This has been a very emotional week for all of us,” Friedman said, addressing reporters hours after Taylor was released on Sunday. Barnes was designated for assignment earlier in the week. “Barnsey and CT have been in the middle of some huge moments for this organization. Both guys have left an indelible mark on our culture and where we’re at this point. So the decisions were incredibly difficult. The conversations were tough.”

“But,” Friedman countered, “with where we are, the division race, the composition of roster, everything — we felt like this was in the Dodgers’ best interest … [to] put us in a position to best win the World Series this year.”

Note the first factor Friedman mentioned in his answer.

Though the Dodgers are tied for the best record in the National League at 29-18, they continue to nurse the slimmest of NL West leads, entering Monday just one game up on the rival San Diego Padres (27-18) and upstart San Francisco Giants (28-19), and only four games clear of even the fourth-place Arizona Diamondbacks (25-22).

With their pitching staff already in tatters, at least temporarily, because of a wave of early-season injuries, the importance of consistent offense has also suddenly heightened; the Dodgers needing to maximize the production of their lineup to help offset a 4.18 team ERA that ranks 21st in the majors.

In a world where the Dodgers were running away with the division, or pitching the way they expected after two offseasons of spending heavily on the mound, maybe they could have tolerated Barnes’ and Taylor’s combined .208 batting average. They might have been more comfortable giving two longtime cornerstones of the franchise a longer leash to turn things around.

• Share via Close extra sharing options

Instead, as club brass surveyed this year’s competitive division landscape, they recognized that — this season more than most — every single victory could matter come the end of the campaign. That every single loss would make the challenge of winning another World Series incrementally tougher.

So, as Rushing crushed triple-A pitching and Kim excelled in what was initially planned to be only a brief big-league call-up, the Dodgers did what they felt like they must. Rushing replaced Barnes as backup catcher. Taylor was cut loose so Kim wouldn’t be sent back to the minors. And a roster that once seemed too top-heavy now has, at least in theory, more potential impact options to bring off the bench.

“We didn’t feel like coming into the season this was something that we would necessarily be doing in May,” Friedman said. “But with where we were, all things factored in, while not easy, we felt like it was the right thing to do.”

There were other reasons, of course, the Dodgers felt motivated to make such emotionally conflicting decisions now.

Manager Dave Roberts noted that Rushing (who was batting .308 in the minors this year, and has started his big-league career an impressive four-for-10) and Kim (who has hit .452 since arriving in the majors, and has impacted games with his versatile glove and lightning-quick speed) deserved opportunities for more prominent roles.

With most of the team’s core players on the wrong side of 30, there are longer-term considerations about developing younger talent as well.

“I think some of it is the [division] race,” Roberts said. “Some of it is, you still want to continue to develop young players and give them opportunities with a veteran ball club.”

Eventually, it was always likely that Rushing would force his way to the majors, and that Kim would carve out a niche with his well-rounded skill set.

But the early pressure being applied by the team’s NL West rivals still sped up that timeline. The Dodgers remember what happened in 2021. And, wary of having that reality repeat itself, they didn’t wait to begin acting with urgency this year.

“We saw it in 2021, winning 106 games and not winning the division,” Friedman said. “We have a tough division [again this year]. We’ve got some really good teams in our division who are playing well. And so for us, it’s about doing everything we can each night to try to win a game.”

SACRAMENTO — When the top Democratic candidates for governor took the stage at a labor forum last week, the digs at Gov. Gavin Newsom were subtle. The message, however, was clear. Newsom’s home stretch as California governor may be a bumpy ride.

Newsom hopes to end his time as governor in an air of accomplishment and acclaim, which would elevate his political legacy and prospects in a potential presidential run. But the Democrats running to replace him have a much different agenda.

“Lots of voters think things are not going well in California right now. So if you’re running for governor, you have to run as a change candidate. You have to run as ‘I’m going to shake things up,’ ” said political scientist Eric Schickler, co-director of the Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) at UC Berkeley. “In doing that, you’re at least implicitly criticizing the current governor, right?”

Not only must Newsom swim against that tide until his final term as governor ends in less than two years, he’s being buffeted by the perception that he’s moving rightward to broaden his national appeal in preparation for the 2028 presidential race.

A new IGS poll, co-sponsored by the L.A. Times, earlier this month found that California registered voters by a more than two-to-one margin believe Newsom is more focused on boosting his presidential ambitions than on fixing the problems in his own state.

Newsom faced criticism for showcasing conservative activists on his podcast, “This is Gavin Newsom,” especially when he agreed with Trump loyalist Charlie Kirk that it was “unfair” for trans athletes to compete in women’s sports.

But he also pushed back against Kirk and others during the interviews. He said from the outset that he intended to engage with people on the opposite side of the political spectrum, but that did not blunt the criticism he received. Assemblymember Christopher M. Ward (D-San Diego), the chair of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, said he was “profoundly sickened and frustrated” by Newsom’s remarks about trans athletes.

The Democratic governor took heat last week from progressives for his proposed budget cuts to close a $12-billion deficit, including cuts to free healthcare for eligible undocumented immigrants. Sociologist G. Cristina Mora, also co-director of Berkeley’s IGS, said it’s not surprising “knives are going to be out” during tough budget times, but there’s more to Newsom’s current predicament.

“The big problem for Newsom is that most people see him as focused outside of California at a dire time,” Mora said. “So all his moves that he’s making, whether this is truly him being more educated and coming to the middle, are seen through that lens.”

Not-so-friendly fire

Though Newsom’s name was not uttered when seven of the Democratic candidates for California governor took the stage last week in Sacramento, his presence was certainly felt.

The event was held by the California Federation of Labor Unions and the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, so there was ample praise for California workers and plenty of epithets hurled at President Trump.

And a healthy dose of dissatisfaction about the tough economic times facing many Californians. Notably, Newsom had just a couple of weeks before he celebrated California’s rank as the fourth-largest economy in the world; for years he has boasted of the state’s innovative and thriving economy.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa didn’t appear that impressed, saying California also has the highest cost of living in the nation.

“We love to say we’re the fourth-largest economy in the United States, what we don’t say is we have the highest effective poverty rate,” Villaraigosa said to a hotel ballroom packed with union leaders. “So let’s deal with the issues that are facing us here in California.”

Former Controller Betty Yee offered a similar assessment.

“In California, we are the fourth-largest economy in the world, but when you peel that back, how’s that working for everybody?” she asked.

Six of the seven Democratic candidates said they would support providing state unemployment benefits to striking workers. Villaraigosa was the sole candidate who expressed reservations. Newsom vetoed a bill in 2023 that would have provided such coverage, saying it would make the state’s unemployment trust fund “vulnerable to insolvency.”

Every candidate present vowed to support regulating how employers use artificial intelligence in the workplace, technology that labor leaders fear, if unchecked, would put people out of work. Newsom has signed legislation restricting aspects of AI, but he has also said he wants to preserve California’s role at the forefront of technology.

Afterward, Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Labor Federation, complained that labor leaders “can’t even get a conversation out of Gavin Newsom” about regulating AI.

Barbs from labor aren’t a new experience for Newsom. Union leaders have at times clashed with the ambitious governor over legislation he opposed that supported pro-union labor agreements with developers and regulating Big Tech.

Gubernatorial candidates taking direct or indirect shots at the incumbent, even those who belong to the same party, also is nothing new. During a candidate debate in 2018, Newsom took a subtle jab at then-Gov. Jerry Brown for the state’s response to the homelessness crisis.

“What lacks is leadership in this state,” Newsom said.

To this day, Newsom says he is the only California governor to launch a major state effort to address the crisis.

Knives out during tough budget times

Newsom also faces the difficult task of having to wrestle with an additional $12-billion state budget shortfall next year, a deficit caused mostly by state overspending Newsom says is being exacerbated by falling tax revenues due to Trump’s on-again-off-again federal tariff policies.

The governor’s proposed cuts drew criticism from some of his most progressive allies and again stirred up rumblings that he was trying to recast himself as a moderate.

To save money, Newsom proposed scaling back his policy to provide free healthcare coverage to all low-income undocumented immigrants. The governor’s budget also proposes to siphon off $1.3 billion in funding from Proposition 35, a measure voters approved in November that dedicated the revenue from a tax on managed care organizations to primarily pay for increases to Medi-Cal provider rates.

Jodi Hicks, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, called the governor’s proposed budget cuts “cruel.”

Sen. Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach), co-chair of the Latino Legislative Caucus, said members would oppose Newsom’s Medi-Cal cuts, and rallies against Newsom’s proposal are planned at the Capitol this week.

During his budget news conference on Wednesday, Newsom also took aim at California’s cities and counties, blasting them for not doing enough to address the state’s homelessness crisis. Newsom also renewed his call for cities and counties to ban homeless encampments.

“It is not the state of California that remains the biggest impediment,” Newsom said. “The obstacle remains at the local level.”

Carolyn Coleman, executive director of the League of California Cities, returned fire, saying Newsom’s proposed budget “failed to invest” adequately in efforts by cities to not only alleviate homelessness, but also improve public safety and address climate change.

The Onion, the satirical website that delights in needling politicians in faux news stories, didn’t miss the opportunity to send a zinger Newsom’s way at the end of last week.

Under the headline “Gavin Newsom Sits Down For Podcast With Serial Killer Who Targets Homeless,” the fake article mocks both the governor’s podcast and efforts to address homelessness and purports that Newsom asked the killer what Democrats could learn from his tactics.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: For Kamala Harris, it’s not just whether to run for California governor. It’s why
The deep dive: Europe’s free-speech problem
The L.A. Times Special: When the deportation of an illegal immigrant united L.A. to bring him back

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

FLYING abroad soon and worried about paying extra for overweight luggage?

Head over to Amazon, where shoppers are snapping up a handy gadget that’s been reduced from £19.99 to just £9.40.

1

Freetoo Digital Luggage Scale, £9.40 (was £19.99)

The Freetoo Portable Digital Luggage Scale has been described as a ‘lifesaver’ for travellers who want to avoid those annoying baggage fees.

Now 53% cheaper, it’s currently a number-one bestseller on the Amazon website.

With summer just around the corner, many people have travel on the agenda – and airlines, of course, are super strict with luggage weight limits.

Thing are often trickier on the return flight home, when you’ve bought loads of souvenirs (or just gone a bit mad in the duty-free section).

This digital luggage scale is a cheap, easy way to make sure your bags stay within the weight limit.

It can measure up to 50kg and, according to the maker, is accurate down to 0.01kg.

It’s simple to use: just turn it on, attach the strap to your luggage, lift, and read the weight on the screen.

There’s a large LCD screen that’s easy to read, even in low light, and you can switch between weight units – pounds, grams, ounces or kilos.

The tare function lets you measure net weight easily, so you can figure out how much you’ve added or need to remove.

At just 90g, it’s (appropriately enough) very lightweight, and can easily go into your pocket or the luggage you take on to the plane.

This handy little gizmo has racked up nearly 50,000 reviews on Amazon, with shoppers loving how reliable and easy it is to use.

“Great travel device!” one review reads. “Easy to use, accurate readout. Does the job nicely.”

One happy customer shared: “[I] have used these for 16 flights recently.

“Gives you some peace of mind before arriving at the airport when you have loads of luggage.”

Another shopper called it “an absolute must-have for frequent travellers”.

For the reduced sum of £9.40, this is a real bargain for guaranteed peace of mind at the airport check-in desk.

And for shoppers not just worried about the weight but the size of their luggage, Amazon has slashed the cost of an underseat cabin backpack that’s designed with Ryanair restrictions in mind.

Freetoo Digital Luggage Scale, £9.40 (was £19.99)

And if you’re looking for more travel essentials, an Anker portable charger is now 65% cheaper – perfect for keeping your phone alive on long-haul flights.

And more good news for travellers: 9 UK airports have scrapped a hand luggage rule.

BALTIMORE — Trainer Bob Baffert loves to come to the Preakness. He loves the fact that all the top horses are in the same barn, so he can kibitz with his fellow trainers, such as an extended conversation with Mark Casse about the best crabcakes in town. He loves the casual atmosphere, in contrast to the high stakes, high pressure feeling at Churchill Downs for the Kentucky Derby.

Or maybe it’s because he’s won the second leg of the Triple Crown eight times, more than any other trainer in history.

So, he was asked why he was bringing Goal Oriented, an undefeated two-time starter who has never run in a stakes race, to the Preakness.

“FOMO,” Baffert said with a laugh, referring to the acronym for “fear of missing out.”

Make no mistake, Baffert doesn’t run a horse in a race this big just because he likes the crabcakes.

Baffert had actually planned to also run Rodriguez in the Preakness. Rodriguez, the easy winner of the Wood Memorial, was supposed to run in the Kentucky Derby but scratched because of a sore hoof. He was being pointed to the Preakness. But that didn’t work out either.

“[Goal Oriented] ran well, and he worked well and came out of [the race on the Derby undercard] really well,” Baffert said. “I was thinking Rodriguez. But, I didn’t get to train him. It took me a long time. I put in a whole week to get that foot right, and then I breezed him.

“But I really think [Goal Oriented] is a bigger, stronger horse, and I think Rodriguez was not quite ready. I’d rather just shoot for the Belmont with him. He’s a lighter horse.”

No one, including Baffert, knows how good Goal Oriented is. He is the fourth favorite on the morning line at 6-1. But, given that he’s trained by Baffert, will likely go off at lower odds.

“Oh, we don’t know, [how he’ll run],” Baffert said. “We’re just going to throw him in there. He’s handled everything here. He handled the ship, and he handled Churchill, came back like it was nothing. I can tell after they win. In the winner’s circle, he just stood there, stoic, didn’t even take a deep breath. He was like, ‘Hey, that’s it?’ I like that. Some horses come back and they’re blowing (breathing heavy), they’ll blow your hat off. He wasn’t that. He handled it pretty well. We’ve always been very high on him.”

Goal Oriented, a $425,000 purchase for the same ownership consortium that also has Rodriguez and Citizen Bull, ran his first race on April 6 at Santa Anita, winning by 3 ¼ lengths. His second race was on the undercard on Derby day, winning an allowance on three-quarters of a length.

“He’s an eyeful, he’s handsome, he’s beautiful,” said Tom Ryan, who heads the ownership group. “He’s a May 15 baby who is just now coming into his own. He hasn’t done anything wrong. He’s gone short, he’s gone long, he’s handled the slop.

“We don’t run in Grade 1s just to have a look at a horse. We think he’s in form and deserves a shot. He has to improve for sure. He’s been great in the morning and now we’re hoping he can continue it to the afternoon.”

Goal Oriented certainly looks like he is in form, but the question remains what specifically is his form and style.

“We don’t even know his style,” Baffert said. “We put him on the lead because of the mud [at Churchill Downs] and we didn’t want to mess around. [Jockey Flavien] Prat knows him now. He’s got tactical speed, but he doesn’t have to be rushed off his feet. He’s a big strong horse.”

Baffert doesn’t claim to have any super secret key to his success at the Preakness.

“I had the best horse,” Baffert said simply. “You have to have the best horse to win. And that’s usually the best secret a trainer can have in these big races is if you have the best horse.”

He won his first Preakness in 1997 with Silver Charm. His other winners were Real Quiet (1998), Point Given (2001), War Emblem (2002), Lookin at Lucky (2010), American Pharoah (2015), Justify (2018) and National Treasure (2023).

This will most likely be the last time Baffert runs at Pimlico as it is currently constructed. The track is scheduled to be torn down almost immediately after Saturday’s race and the Preakness will move to nearby Laurel for two years during the rebuild.

The track surface and configuration will pretty much be the same. However, the place where the fans watch the race will be very different.

Baffert was more concerned that the stakes barn will remain. It will but it’s unclear if the same structure will remain or if a new barn will be built

“I like this barn,” Baffert said. “I would like to take this barn to Santa Anita.”

On Baffert’s long list of accomplishments, that’s one he may fall short on.

WASHINGTON — Markets rejoiced this week over news that the Trump administration, after six weeks of maximalist rhetoric, had struck a preliminary deal with China to lower tariff rates between the two countries. Tech stocks led the rally, with investors hopeful that President Trump had finally retreated from plans for a protracted trade war with a vital trading partner.

But the celebration may be premature, industry insiders, foreign diplomats and market experts said, telling The Times that Silicon Valley will face strong headwinds in the months ahead — the makings of a perfect storm of uncertainty that could still tip the U.S. economy into recession.

Investigation at Commerce

Wall Street reacted with similar exuberance last month on word that tech products, such as smartphones and computers, would be exempt from Trump’s 145% tariffs on China — a figure that was reduced in the deal struck on Monday to 30%, marking a significant reduction, but still far higher than tariffs have ever been on Chinese imports.

And yet the April 12 White House announcement outlining exemptions was widely misunderstood as a walk-back. In fact, those tech products, including the iPhone, are exempted from existing tariff rates only temporarily, because the Commerce Department is conducting an ongoing review of whether to impose separate import duties on the sector over specific national security concerns.

The investigation, under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, is progressing, with the Commerce Department recently ending its acceptance of public comments. The department, led by Secretary Howard Lutnick, could issue findings anytime in the coming months, alongside a tariff rate of unknown size that may severely affect Silicon Valley companies.

The review is causing uncertainty in its own right. But Lutnick has indicated that action is forthcoming. He has repeatedly advocated for the iPhone to be manufactured in the United States — a process that would require a large, skilled workforce in high-tech manufacturing produced by the very universities being targeted by the Trump administration, and would substantially increase the price of computing products for American households.

Scott Bessent, the Treasury secretary who has earned greater confidence than Lutnick from the business community, is the one leading trade negotiations with China, where many of those products are made. That has Silicon Valley executives questioning which one of them is in charge, and whom they should be speaking with, according to one tech executive, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.

“The core issue for Silicon Valley lies in the uncertainty and potential cost disruption these bring to critical technology components, especially semiconductors,” said Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay, a professor of information systems and operations management at the University of Florida.

“While ostensibly about national security, the application of these investigations can introduce significant volatility into supply chain planning and investment decisions. Companies might hesitate to commit to certain sourcing strategies if there’s a persistent threat,” he added. “All of which is to say that there will be quite a bit of turbulence ahead for strategic planners of Silicon Valley firms.”

Looming battle with Europe

Announcing the reduction in trade tensions with China on Monday, Trump turned his attention to the European Union, another major trading partner, and levied a threat.

“The European Union is in many ways nastier than China,” the president said. “They’ll come down a lot. You watch. We have all the cards. They treat us very unfairly.”

But the Europeans believe they have some cards, as well.

Trump’s focus on trade with Europe has been on tangible goods, such as agricultural products, manufactured items, pharmaceuticals and cars — a grouping of products that on their own would show a significant U.S. trade deficit with the continent. But European officials use different math. They want to account for European use of U.S. digital services to level the playing field.

One European official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said that the taxation of digital services — such as online advertising, social media platforms and streaming services — is expected to be a “significant” component of the upcoming negotiations.

“Silicon Valley should be very concerned,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. “The U.S. really stands to lose if there are certain tariffs that are brought to services, and I think people in the U.S. understand that, and would try to prevent it from happening.”

Targeting the U.S. digital sector offers Europe potent leverage in negotiations with the Trump administration, not only because it represents such a large portion of the American economy, but also because it applies acute pressure on Trump’s political allies in Silicon Valley — a tactic that could ultimately persuade him to cave.

“Trump blinked on the China tariffs at least in part because China aggressively retaliated,” Strain said. “That will be interesting to watch if other trading partners modify their strategy: learning that punching the bully in the nose is the right thing to do.”

Rates remain high on China

One of Trump’s first calls on Monday morning after announcing his temporary truce with China was to Apple’s chief executive, Tim Cook. “He’s going to be building a lot of plants in the United States for Apple,” Trump said. “We look forward to that.”

Apple can’t build them fast enough. Although it committed $500 billion in investments over the next four years in U.S. production, including new plants and a manufacturing academy, uncertainty in the interim will force the company to make hard decisions on its product lines.

Despite some protection from the exemptions in place as the Commerce investigation proceeds, the California tech giant still faces hurdles from the tariffs that remain high across supply chains — not just in China, where rates remain at 30%, but also elsewhere in Asia, including India and Vietnam, which face 10% import duties. In the most recent earnings call, before the China deal was announced, Cook estimated that Apple could incur a $900-million hit from tariffs.

“For companies like Apple, and indeed much of Silicon Valley, this overall environment isn’t just about weathering a storm; it’s about fundamentally rethinking global operations,” Bandyopadhyay said. “We’re already witnessing the strategic pivots.”

To offset the costs of tariffs, Apple could increase the prices of iPhones in the fall. But the company also has to walk a fine line both politically and financially. The Trump administration has been critical of companies such as Amazon that have considered showing consumers the impact of tariffs.

“This is all sort of a game of poker, and also remember, Tim Cook is 10% politician, 90% CEO,” said Dan Ives, a Wedbush Securities analyst who covers the technology sector.

Ives said the upcoming iPhone 17 could cost $100 more than the current model, but his firm estimates that could reduce demand by 5%, delaying consumers’ purchases of new devices. Other analysts said it is tough to say if prices will increase, with the smartphone maker keeping prices relatively stable in recent years.

The debate over Apple’s fate has proved to be a sensitive point in U.S. negotiations with Beijing. Last month, the Chinese Foreign Ministry recirculated a video from a visit Cook made to China in 2017, in which he explained why Silicon Valley companies find themselves so reliant on the Chinese supply chain.

“The popular conception is that companies come to China because of low labor costs. I am not sure what part of China they go to, but the truth is China stopped being a low-labor-cost country many years ago,” Cook said at the time. “The reason is because of the skill, the quantity of skill in one location, and the type of skill it is.”

“The products we do require really advanced tooling and the precision that you have to have in tooling and working with materials that we do are state-of-the-art,” he added. “If you look at the U.S., you could have a meeting of tooling engineers and I’m not sure we could fill a room. In China, you could fill multiple football fields.”

Times staff writer Queenie Wong in San Francisco contributed to this report.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: California to ask federal judge for sweeping pause to Trump’s tariffs
The deep dive: Trade truce with China is hailed, but it may not be enough to stop shortages
The L.A. Times Special: Newsom claims Trump’s tariffs will reduce California revenues by $16 billion

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

As Bolivia hurtles towards a hotly contested August 17 presidential election, two major shake-ups may shape the outcome of the race.

On Wednesday, incumbent President Luis Arce announced he would abandon his bid for re-election after a five-year term defined by turmoil.

“Today I firmly inform the Bolivian people of my decision to decline my candidacy for presidential re-election in the elections next August,” he wrote on social media.

“I do so with the clearest conviction that I will not be a factor in dividing the popular vote, much less facilitate the making of a fascist right-wing project that seeks to destroy the plurinational state.”

That same day, Bolivia’s constitutional court also ruled that Arce’s former political mentor, now rival, Evo Morales, could not run for another term as president, upholding a two-term limit.

But the left-wing Morales, the embattled former president who previously served three terms in office and attempted to claim a fourth, remained defiant on social media afterwards.

“Only the people can ask me to decline my candidacy,” Morales wrote. “We will obey the mandate of the people to save Bolivia, once again.”

The two announcements on Wednesday have added further uncertainty to an already tumultuous presidential race, where no clear frontrunner has emerged so far.

Arce’s decline

Since his election in 2020, Arce has led Bolivia, following a political crisis that saw Morales flee the country and a right-wing president briefly take his place.

But Arce’s tenure has been similarly mired in upheaval, as his relationship with Morales fractured and his government saw its popularity slip.

Both men are associated with a left-wing political party known as the Movement for Socialism (MAS), which Morales helped to found. Since its establishment three decades ago, the group has become one of the most prominent forces in Bolivian politics.

Still, in the lead-up to August’s election, Arce saw his poll numbers decline. Bolivia’s inflation over the past year has ballooned to its highest level in a decade, and the value of its currency has plummeted.

The country’s central bank has run low on its reserves of hard currency, and a black market has emerged where the value of the Bolivian currency is half its official exchange rate. And where once the country was an exporter of natural gas, it now relies on imports to address energy shortages.

While experts say some of these issues predate Arce’s term in office, public sentiment has nevertheless turned against his administration. That, in turn, has led some to speculate that Bolivia could be in store for a political shift this election year.

Arce himself has had to deal with the power of a rising right-wing movement in Bolivia. In 2022, for instance, his government’s decision to delay a countrywide census sparked deadly protests in areas like Santa Cruz, where some Christian conservative activists expected surveys to show growth.

That population increase was expected to lead to more government funds, and potentially boost the number of legislative seats assigned to the department.

Arce also faced opposition from within his own coalition, most notably from Morales, his former boss. He had previously served as an economy and finance minister under Morales.

The division between the two leaders translated into a schism in the MAS membership, with some identifying as Morales loyalists and others backing Arce.

That split came to a head in June 2024, when Arce’s hand-picked army general, Juan Jose Zuniga, led an unsuccessful coup d’etat against him. Zuniga publicly blamed Arce for Bolivia’s impoverishment, as well as mismanagement in the government.

Morales has seized upon the popular discontent to advance his own ambitions of seeking a fourth term as president. After the coup, he launched a protest march against his former political ally and tried to set an ultimatum to force changes.

After dropping out of the 2025 presidential race on Wednesday, Arce called for “the broadest unity” in Bolivia’s left-wing political movement. He said a show of strength behind a single candidate was necessary for “defeating the plunderers of Bolivia”.

“Only the united struggle of the people ensures the best future for Bolivia. Our vote will be united against the threat of the right and fascism,” he wrote on social media.

Morales continues to fight term limits

But a wild card remains on the left of Bolivia’s political spectrum: Morales himself.

Considered Bolivia’s first Indigenous president, Morales remains a relatively popular figure, though recent scandals have dented his broad appeal.

First elected as president in 2005, Morales was re-elected twice. But his attempts to remain in office culminated with the 2019 election and subsequent political crisis, which saw Morales resign and flee abroad amid accusations that his victory was the result of electoral fraud.

Morales has long sought a fourth term as president. In 2016, a referendum was put to Bolivia’s voters that would have scrapped presidential term limits, but it was rejected. Still, Morales appealed to Bolivia’s Constitutional Court, and in 2019, it allowed him to seek a fourth term.

That led to accusations that Morales had overturned the will of the voters in an anti-democratic power grab.

But the court has since walked back that precedent, reversing its decision four years later in 2023. It has since upheld that decision on term limits multiple times, most recently on Wednesday, effectively barring Morales from the upcoming August race.

Separately, last October, Morales faced charges of statutory rape for allegedly fathering a child with a 15-year-old girl while president. Morales has denied any wrongdoing and has sought to evade warrants issued for his arrest.

Media reports indicate he is holed up with supporters in the rural department of Cochabamba in the north of Bolivia.

Still, in February, Morales announced his bid for re-election. And on Wednesday, he denounced the Constitutional Court’s latest ruling upholding Bolivia’s two-term limit as a violation of his human rights. He also framed it as part of a broader pattern of foreign interference.

“It is a political and partisan ruling that obeys the orders of the eternal enemy of the people: the US empire,” he wrote on social media.

Police say the trio espoused hatred for Muslims and immigrants and discussed attacking mosques or synagogues.

Police in the United Kingdom say three men have been convicted of planning to carry out an attack on mosques or synagogues in anticipation of a coming race war.

Brogan Stewart and Marco Pitzettu, both aged 25, and Christopher Ringrose, 34, all pleaded not guilty but were convicted of all charges by jurors at Sheffield Crown Court on Wednesday. Sentencing is scheduled for July 17.

“Stewart, Pitzettu, and Ringrose have today been rightfully convicted of multiple terrorism offences,” Detective Chief Superintendent James Dunkerley, head of Counter Terrorism Policing North East, said in a statement.

“They were a group that espoused vile racist views and advocated for violence, all to support their extreme right-wing mindset.”

The convictions come amid a debate in the UK over immigration rights as the left-of-centre Labour Party adopts increasingly harsh rhetoric on migration amid increasing public support for the far right. Critics said a recent speech by Prime Minister Keir Starmer in which he said immigration threatened to turn the UK into an “island of strangers” helps legitimise a view perpetuated by the far right that immigration is a destructive and dangerous force.

The convicted far-right group was part of a Telegram channel named Einsatz 14, in which they talked about executing former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and torturing imams.

“It was their belief that there must soon come a time when there would be a race war between the white and other races,” prosecutor Jonathan Sandiford told jurors.

Conspiracy theories that Muslims and immigrants are carrying out a “great replacement” of white people in Western nations have become increasingly widespread on the right in recent years.

That conspiracy often involves an anti-Semitic angle, portraying Jews as supporters of pro-immigration policies meant to weaken Western nations from the inside.

All three men were convicted of planning an act of terrorism and multiple firearms offences. They were found guilty of two counts of collecting information that could be useful to someone preparing a terrorist act, and Ringrose was additionally charged with manufacturing a component for a 3D-printed FGC9 firearm.

Prosecutors said the group was preparing for an act of terrorism when they were arrested in February 2024. Their trial began in March.

“Some of their defence in court was that it was all fantasy or just part of harmless chat, however all three took real world steps to plan and prepare for carrying out an attack on innocent citizens,” Dunkerley said.

Australia’s code-crossing star Joseph-Aukuso Suaalii is to have surgery to fix a fractured jaw, putting the 21-year-old under pressure to be fit for the British and Irish Lions tour.

Suaalii was concussed in a collision with Waratah’s team-mate Andrew Kellaway during their defeat by Queensland Reds on Friday.

It was then found that he had a “small, undisplaced fracture” which needed an operation.

Suaalii is likely to be sidelined for at least four weeks.

“This is unfortunate for us and especially for Joseph. We wish him all the best in his recovery and return to full health,” Waratahs coach Dan McKellar said.

“We will do all we can to facilitate his recovery in consultation with Rugby Australia to have him in the best shape possible for his availability for the Wallabies.”

PALM SPRINGS — In a ballroom packed with more than 1,000 people raising money for LGBTQ+ youths, veteran California legislative leader Toni Atkins didn’t mince words: To be a gay or transgender teenager right now, she said, must feel like “a rug has been pulled from beneath your feet.”

In her fiery speech at the annual Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast, Atkins, who is running for California governor, said President Trump and other Republicans are working to “legislate our trans siblings out of public life.”

“These aren’t just political stunts: These are acts that put lives in danger and strip away basic human dignity,” Atkins said. “So hear me, as I say: Trans people belong. Trans youth deserve love, joy and our protection.”

Atkins’ speech, which drew rousing applause, offered a glimpse of how Trump’s efforts to undermine California’s liberal values — including support for transgender Americans — will be at the heart of the state’s 2026 campaign for governor.

In his first 100 days, Trump issued executive orders banning trans women from women’s sports and barring the federal government from recognizing genders other than male or female.

Trump is also pushing to ban transgender Americans from the U.S. military, writing in an executive order that transgender identity is a “falsehood” inconsistent with the “humility and selflessness required of a service member.” The Supreme Court cleared the way last week for that ban to take effect.

“Cruelty, and an attempt to humiliate, seems to be the point of what they are doing,” said Lisa Middleton, a transgender woman and former mayor of Palm Springs.

The LGBTQ+ community has become a political force in shaping statewide policy and campaigns.

Other top Democrats running to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom have also voiced strong support for LGBTQ+ rights, including Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former Controller Betty Yee and Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond.

About 2.8 million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people live in California, more than in any other state, and Californians overwhelmingly support laws that protect the LGBTQ+ community, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.

Last year, California voters overwhelming passed a ballot measure to enshrine the right to same-sex marriage into the state Constitution. A proposed ballot initiative that would have limited transgender youth medical care and required schools to notify parents about their child’s gender identity failed to get enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot.

Polling by the Los Angeles Times last year found that more than 3 in 4 Americans see issues related to transgender and nonbinary people — which affect a fraction of the American population — as a distraction from more pressing policy matters.

“It is a trap that conservatives are utilizing to distract from the real issues at hand,” said Evan Low, a former California Assembly member and the new president of the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund.

Atkins, a former state Senate president pro tempore, former Assembly speaker and the only gay major candidate in the governor’s race, said in an interview that she’s “mindful that as a woman and as a member of the gay community, what I do matters.” She said she supported the bill passed by the California Legislature a decade ago that allows students to play on sports teams that match their gender identity.

“This administration is using that as a weapon and politicizing it,” Atkins said. “That’s just cruel.”

An Associated Press poll found in early May that Trump’s handling of transgender issues is more popular with Americans than his job performance overall. And polling done in January by the New York Times found that nearly 80% of Americans, including more than two-thirds of Democrats, opposed the idea of trans women competing in women’s sports.

“The Democrats, who are trying to find their voice on so many things right now, don’t know how to handle it,” said Hank Plante, a political journalist and former fellow at the USC Center for the Political Future who lives in Palm Springs with his husband. “They want to be true to their base and to their principles of equal rights. But at the same time, it’s a loser politically when you start talking about nonconforming gender issues and young people.”

One of the Trump campaign’s most bruising attack ads last fall showed a clip of former Vice President Kamala Harris saying she would support gender-transition surgery for inmates in California’s prisons, then concluded with: “Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”

“She didn’t even react to it, which was even more devastating,” Newsom said on a recent episode of his podcast. “Brutal. It was a great ad.”

On the same episode, Newsom told conservative commentator Charlie Kirk that it was “deeply unfair” for transgender girls to play on girls’ sports teams. Newsom previously supported a California law signed by former Gov. Jerry Brown that allowed trans students to compete in sports and use bathrooms based on their gender preference.

The uproar that followed Newsom’s comments underscored the complexities Democrats face on the issue, with some Democrats alleging that Newsom strategically abandoned a vulnerable group of people to prepare for a future presidential run.

Assemblymember Christopher M. Ward (D-San Diego), the chair of the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, said the governor’s remarks left him “profoundly sickened and frustrated.”

But Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, one of the best-known Republicans running for governor, said he agreed with Newsom — and, if elected, would sign an executive order banning “boys competing in girls’ sports.”

Ron deHarte, the first gay Mexican American mayor of Palm Springs, warned in his speech at the Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast that the LGBTQ+ community and its allies will “march with greater fervor — we will do more than ever before.”

“If you are a member of the military — transgender or not — if you are willing to fight for me, then I must be willing to fight for you,” deHarte told the crowd.

In an interview, deHarte said that elected officials are now facing an ethical test over whether to speak out against Trump administration policies that they see as hurting their communities, at the risk of losing federal funding.

He said all eyes are on Maine, where the Trump administration stopped all federal education funding after Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, refused to comply with Trump’s directive to ban trans girls from girls’ sports.

“It’s a challenging line to walk,” deHarte said. “You have to make sure you have not only the right moral standing, but the right legal standing too.”

Since Trump’s inauguration, federal officials have targeted California over laws aimed at protecting trans students.

The U.S. Department of Education is investigating the California Interscholastic Federation, which oversees sports at more than 1,500 high schools, and the California Department of Education over a law that bars schools from automatically notifying families about issues related to students’ gender identities.

Gay and trans high school students right now are experiencing fear that is “like being a little more closeted,” said Delana Martin-Marshall, 38, an art teacher at A.B. Miller High School in Fontana.

She and her wife, a physical education teacher at the school, drove a dozen students from the school’s gay-straight alliance in two vans to the Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast.

“Students are really scared,” she said. “Scared of being themselves.”

There’s little that state-level officials can do to reverse decisions from the White House on issues like military eligibility and passports, but the state can still be a refuge for gay and trans students, attendees said, including shoring up funding and legal protections for gender nonconforming students and for gay couples.

“The state has to prepare for what’s coming,” Plante said. He pointed to Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion when the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, which said that the court “should reconsider” past rulings codifying Americans’ rights to contraception, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage.

Christopher Martinez, 32, attended the Harvey Milk Diversity Breakfast with fellow students from College of the Desert who said they hope the next governor will focus on the day-to-day issues that affect transgender and gay college students, including the rising cost of living and housing insecurity.

“Everything is getting really expensive,” Martinez said.

California voters have sharply differing views over two of the state’s most prominent Democrats, according to a new poll.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who is expected to decide by the end of the summer whether she runs for California governor in 2026, has near universal name recognition among California voters, and 50% view her favorably, according to a survey by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies that was co-sponsored by The Times.

In contrast, California voters, notably residents of the city of Los Angeles, are more likely to view Mayor Karen Bass unfavorably. In the aftermath of the devastating fires in Altadena and Pacific Palisades earlier this year and criticism of the city’s response, Bass’ approval ratings are dire among Angelenos, who are overwhelmingly Democratic. Voters’ unhappiness with the mayor could create difficulties for her reelection campaign next year if the mood persists.

“When you’re underwater and almost universally known — 82% of voters can offer an opinion of Bass in Los Angeles city — one of the hardest things to overcome is an accumulated negative image,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the IGS poll. “Once you develop an unfavorable image, it’s hard to overcome. It almost requires another major event she can take credit for or look good in handling.”

The Democrats are longtime allies — Harris swore Bass in when she was elected mayor of Los Angeles in 2022 after defeating real estate developer Rick Caruso by nearly 10 points.

Both women were among the elected officials vetted to be Joe Biden’s running mate in the 2020 election. Harris ultimately prevailed, was elected vice president and then became the Democratic presidential nominee in 2024 after Biden decided not to run for reelection.

But California voters have strikingly different thoughts about the veteran elected officials.

Perceptions of Bass, a longtime member of Congress and the state Legislature, have faltered in the aftermath of the fires — a notable reversal among Californians who were optimistic about her prospects shortly before she won the mayoral election in 2022.

In October of that year, 50% of likely voters in Los Angeles had a positive opinion of Bass, while 35% had a negative view, according to a UC Berkeley/Times poll conducted at the time.

Now, half of the city’s voters surveyed perceive her negatively, while 32% have a favorable impression, according to the new poll. In Los Angeles, with the exception of Black voters and senior citizens, Bass is viewed more unfavorably than positively among voters of every other age group, and men and women. Statewide, 42% of voters do not have a favorable view of Bass, who is facing a recall effort that is unlikely to make the ballot. Only 1 in 5 (19%) give her high marks.

Harris, despite losing the presidential election to Donald Trump in 2024, is faring better than Bass among California voters as she weighs a gubernatorial bid next year to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for the seat again because of term limits.

Roughly 96% of California voters know enough about Harris to have an opinion about her, according to the poll. That’s a stratospheric level of name identification in an enormous state where lesser-known candidates must spend tens of millions of dollars in hopes of raising their profile.

Voters’ views of Harris, a former U.S. senator, state attorney general and San Francisco district attorney, are split, with 50% having a positive image of the Bay Area native, compared with 46% holding a negative impression, according to the poll. She drew stronger support from voters who tend to cast ballots more frequently in statewide elections — women, younger and older voters, and residents of the Bay Area and Los Angeles County.

Voters’ views of Harris varied dramatically over the past 15 years. She barely won the state attorney general’s race in 2010 and was unknown by a large segment of voters, DiCamillo said. By the time Harris ran for the U.S. Senate in 2016, she was viewed favorably by the state’s voters, though many did not know enough about her to offer an opinion.

“As she settled into her job as U.S. senator, people started to pay more attention to her. Obviously, she was getting a lot of attention when she was grilling Supreme Court nominees,” DiCamillo said, with voters becoming far more familiar with Harris and having positive views of her.

Those impressions sank during her unsuccessful run for president in 2020, improved in the early days of the Biden administration, and then dipped again when she was vice president and assigned intractable issues such as the flow of immigrants fleeing Central America, he said. Her image has improved slightly since then, but is strong among Democrats, frequent voters, women and residents of the Bay Area and Los Angeles County, subgroups that would be critical sources of support if she decides to run for governor.

Harris has kept a relatively low profile since her November loss in the presidential race, but delivered her most full-throated remarks about Trump in late April. Blasting his policies as a betrayal of the nation’s founding principles, the former vice president warned of a looming constitutional crisis.

But fellow Democrats have criticized Harris for not planning on making a decision about whether to run for governor until the end of the summer. Her delayed plans have put the race in limbo and made some deep-pocketed political donors hesitant to write checks.

Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a Harris supporter in prior elections, is among the Democrats running for governor who have publicly expressed frustration about her delay in announcing her intentions.

Harris’ team has a “level of arrogance” about their lackadaisical approach to leading a state with the fourth-largest economy in the world, he said in an interview in Sacramento on Tuesday, six days before the poll was published.

“California is not a steppingstone,” Villaraigosa said, shortly after speaking at a Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California conference. “Stop playing footsie. Either run for governor or not.”

The Berkeley IGS poll surveyed 6,201 California registered voters online in English and Spanish from April 21 to 28, including 611 voters living in the city of Los Angeles. The results are estimated to have a margin of error of 2 percentage points in either direction in the overall sample, and larger numbers for subgroups. Details of the poll results on Harris and Bass will be made public on Tuesday.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Despite political promises, Californians are stressed about their finances
The TK: The Partisan Mind Virus
The L.A. Times Special: Trump is wrong. My dad was a trucker, and he didn’t need much English to do his job

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