Eamonn Holmes and new partner Katie Alexander, 43, are said to be ‘under strain’Credit: Simon JonesThe couple went public with their romance last yearCredit: instagram/@katster32
And it appears things are still rocky, with a source telling the Mail that they’re spending an increasing amount of time apart.
The insider said: “He’s grumpier than ever and his health problems really aren’t helping, but instead of moving closer to Katie and settling, he’s spending more time with his family in Belfast, often without her.”
The couple, who first began speaking as friends on social media platform X in 2015, became romantic last year – just months after Eamonn’s split from wife Ruth Langsford was made public.
To make matters worse, Eamonn is no longer represented by InterTalent Rights Group and his manager Jonathan Shalit, who has overseen his career since 2022.
Prior to that, Eamonn had enjoyed a fruitful relationship with YMU, who continue to represent his ex-wife Ruth Langsford.
Relations between Eamonn and YMU soured in 2021 when the GBNews star allegedly felt his telly rival Phillip Schofield was receiving preferential treatment.
This was prior to Schofield being axed from ITV for lying about a relationship with a younger male member of staff.
At the time, Eamonn was livid that he and Ruth had been let go from their Friday slot on the show after 14 years of service. They were replaced by Alison Hammond and Dermot O’Leary.
Now, Eamonn has lost another longstanding gig.
Virgin radio host Ryan Tubridy has replaced him as host of The Irish Post Awards in London – a role Eamonn has held since 2013.
A difficult performance last year, in which Eamonn struggled with mobility issues amid chronic health problems, reportedly prompted bosses to look for an alternative.
A source said: “The truth is that Eamonn is an Irish legend but things didn’t really go well last time – and it’s felt that it’s time he moved over for the more appropriate talent waiting in the wings.
“This time around, it just felt foolhardy to stick with him even though he’s been such a big part of things for so long.”
The Sun has contacted an InterTalent representative for comment.
Despite the reports of low mood, Eamonn isn’t resting on his laurels.
Casualty aired a dramatic final episode of its latest boxset recently – but the BBC show’s cast has teased some huge scenes ahead, new arrivals and much more drama
08:00, 11 Oct 2025Updated 08:05, 11 Oct 2025
Casualty aired a dramatic final episode of its latest boxset recently but there’s more drama ahead(Image: CREDIT LINE:BBC STUDIOS)
Casualty ended this latest boxset with a dramatic series finale, which saw drama, heartbreak and a tragic death. The BBC show is very popular amongst their fans – and it looks like there’s some huge drama ahead in the coming months.
The BBC drama ended last month with some devastating scenes, as it seemed Ngozi had died after suffering a relapse at the airport as her and her young son plan to travel back to Nigeria. Elsewhere, there was trouble for Iain and Faith, who seemed on the verge of splitting from one another as Iain continues to struggle over his mum’s death.
The Mirror got all the gossip from the cast at the Inside Soap Awards, where the stars dropped some huge hints about what’s coming next and what the future holds for their characters.
Two new arrivals
Olly Rix – who plays Flynn – teased there would be drama ahead, and some new arrivals. “We have two new characters coming into Holby and that’s a big part of the next season,” he said.
“When any new character comes in, everyone has to re-orientate themselves. So you see everybody across the breadth of the NHS dealing with these two people.”
Relationship drama
Anna Chell – who plays Jodie – warned it wouldn’t be plain sailing for some of the couples. She said: “There’s quite a few relationship break-ups and new relationships formed. Some maybe the audience don’t expect.”
Naomi Wakszlak – who plays Indie – also gave us an insight on what we can expect for Indie and Cam (Barney Walsh) after the pair finally found love with one another this series.
“We’re going to see them getting a lot closer, which is really nice. I think at first Indie is a bit more into it than Cam is so we have to pull Cam out of his shell, which is really nice. It’s been a lot of fun, I love Barney so it’s been really great working with him. We don’t really get to go inside that much and be with the doctors and nurses so it’s nice to do a bit inside!” she said.
Past wounds revealed
Last series, we learned that Flynn had suffered a devastating loss of a child. This devastating past trauma is set to continue to be explored over multiple boxsets going forward.
“I think when you join this show, everybody’s so well drawn that when you come in, you’re relentlessly exploring this new character and you have to serve everybody else still,” Olly said.
“So it’s something that you do over quite a dragged out period of time, so each boxset, we’re pulling another thread and there’s space to do it over multiple boxsets.”
Real-life drama
Documenting the real life struggles of the NHS – like the BBC drama did one Christmas about the issues with blood supply – is important to the cast, and raising awareness of conditions that might not be well documented on TV.
Sammy Dobson – who plays Nicole – shared: “Doing the postpartum psychosis storyline, the amount of people that reached out to me who have been in a similar situation who have never ever seen that reflected in TV.
“Casualty finds those stories and connects with people who might not see those things on TV and in other places. I think it’s so important to tell those stories.”
Milo Clarke, who plays Teddy, added: “It’s a privilege to be able to tell these stories. For as long as we’ve known, we’ve all been affected or used the NHS or known someone who works for the NHS. It’s very important to represent that.”
Benidorm star Crissy Rock, who played hotel manager Janey York on the beloved ITV show, has announced that she has separated from her husband after marrying him in 2018
Sacramento, California – On a sunny August morning, 60-year-old Gurtej Singh Cheema performed his morning prayers at his home in Sacramento. Then, the retired clinical professor of internal medicine made his way downtown to join more than 150 other Sikh Americans at California’s State Capitol.
He was there to speak in support of a state bill that, to many Sikhs, represents a matter of safety for the community.
California is home to an estimated 250,000 Sikhs, according to the community advocacy group, Sikh Coalition. They represent 40 percent of the nation’s Sikhs – who first made California their home more than a century ago.
But a spate of attacks and threats against community activists in North America over the past two years, which United States and Canadian officials have accused India of orchestrating, have left many Sikhs on edge, fearing for their safety and questioning whether law enforcement can protect them.
That’s what a new anti-intimidation bill seeks to address, according to its authors and advocates: If passed, it would require California to train officers in recognising and responding to what is known as “transnational repression” – attempts by foreign governments to target diaspora communities, in practice. The training would be developed by the state’s Office of Emergency Services.
“California can’t protect our most vulnerable communities if our officers don’t even recognize the threat,” Anna Caballero, a Democratic state senator and author of the bill, said in the statement shared with Al Jazeera. “The bill closes a critical gap in our public safety system and gives law enforcement the training they need to identify foreign interference when it happens in our neighborhoods.”
But the draft legislation, co-authored by California’s first Sikh Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains, and Assemblywoman Esmeralda Soria, has also opened up deep divisions within an Indian American community already polarised along political lines.
Several influential American Sikh advocacy groups – the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, Sikh Coalition and Jakara Movement among them – have backed the bill. Groups representing Indians of other major faiths, such as Hindus for Human Rights and the Indian American Muslim Council, have also supported the draft legislation, as has the California Police Chiefs Association.
But in the opposite corner stand Hindu-American groups like the Hindu American Foundation and the Coalition of Hindus of North America, as well as a Jewish group, Bay Area Jewish Coalition and even a Sikh group, The Khalsa Today. The Santa Clara Attorney’s office and Riverside County Sheriff’s Office have also opposed the bill.
Critics of the bill argue that it risks targeting sections of the diaspora – such as Hindu Americans opposed to the Khalistan movement, a campaign for the creation of a separate Sikh nation carved out of India – and could end up deepening biases against India and Hindu Americans.
The Riverside County Sheriff’s Office said that it had “concerns regarding the bill’s potential implications, particularly its impact on law enforcement practices and the inadvertent targeting of diaspora communities in Riverside County”.
But as Cheema stood with other Sikh Americans gathered at the state legislature on August 20 to testify before the Assembly Appropriations Committee, the urgency felt by many in the room was clear: Some had driven all night from Los Angeles, 620km (385 miles) away from Sacramento. Others took time off from work to be there.
“Any efforts that help a community feel safe, and you are a part of that community – naturally, you would support it,” Cheema, who also represented the Capital Sikh Center in Sacramento at the hearing, told Al Jazeera.
Gurtej Singh Cheema in front of the State Capitol complex in Sacramento [Gagandeep Singh/Al Jazeera]
‘Harassment by foreign actors’
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines transnational repression as the acts of foreign governments when they reach beyond their borders to intimidate, silence, coerce, harass or harm members of their diaspora and exile communities in the United States.
The bill marks the second major legislation in recent years that has split South Asian diaspora groups in California. A 2023 bill that specified caste as a protected category under California’s anti-discrimination laws was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom after several Hindu-American groups lobbied against it. They argued that the state’s existing anti-discrimination laws already protected people from caste-based bias, and that specifying the new category was an indirect attack on Hinduism.
The California Assembly has now passed the new anti-intimidation bill. It will now return to the California Senate – which had passed an earlier version of the legislation – for another vote, expected this week. If it passes in the upper house of the California legislature, the bill will head to Newsom’s desk for his signature.
Thomas Blom Hansen, professor of anthropology at Stanford University, said the bill addresses concerns around online trolling, surveillance and harassment of individuals based on their political beliefs or affiliations – often influenced by foreign governments or political movements.
“The bill doesn’t name any specific country – it’s a general framework to provide additional protection to immigrants and diaspora communities from harassment by foreign actors,” Hansen told Al Jazeera.
But the backdrop of the bill does suggest that concerns over India and its alleged targeting of Sikh dissidents have been a major driver. Hansen noted that Senator Caballero comes from the 14th State Senate district, which has a significant Sikh population.
In 2023, Canada officially accused India of masterminding the assassination in June that year of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in British Columbia. India has rejected the accusation, but relations between the two nations plummeted as a result – and remain tense, as Canada continues to pursue the allegations against individuals it arrested and that it says worked for New Delhi.
In November that year, US prosecutors also accused Indian intelligence agencies of plotting the assassination of Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a New York-based Sikh activist. That plot was exposed after an alleged Indian agent accidentally ended up hiring an FBI informant for the hit job. Pannun leads Sikhs of Justice, a Sikh separatist advocacy group that India declared unlawful in 2019.
Several other Sikh activists in Canada and the US have received warnings from law enforcement agencies that they could be targeted.
Even Bains, the co-author of the new bill, has faced intimidation. In August 2023, after California recognised the 1984 massacre of thousands of Sikhs in India – following the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards – as a genocide, four men, apparently of Indian origin, visited her office. They allegedly threatened her, saying they would “do whatever it takes to go after you”.
Harman Singh, executive director of the Sikh Coalition, said the bill was timely.
“If a gurdwara committee leader calls the police to report a man who claims to be from the government of India coming to the gurdwara asking about other committee members’ immigration status, the trained officers will react to that very differently than those who aren’t,” Singh told Al Jazeera.
Vivek Kembaiyan of Hindus for Human Rights echoed Singh. The majority of crime is investigated at the local level, he said, and local law enforcement needs training to investigate transnational crimes.
Worshippers pray at the Karya Siddhi Hanuman temple in Frisco, Texas, October 22, 2022 [Andy Jacobsohn/ AP Photo]
Could ‘institutionalise biases’
But not everyone agrees.
Some groups argue that the bill is primarily meant to target India and Indian Americans, and especially suppress opposition to the Khalistan movement.
Samir Kalra, the 46-year-old managing director at the Hindu American Foundation, has emerged as one of the bill’s most vocal opponents.
“I believe that they have not gone far enough in providing adequate guardrails and safeguards to ensure that law enforcement does not institutionalise biases against groups from specific countries of origin and or with certain viewpoints on geopolitical issues,” Kalra, a native of the Bay Area, told Al Jazeera.
Kalra pointed to the supporters of the bill.
“The vast majority of supporters of this bill who have shown up to multiple hearings are of Indian origin and have focused on India in their comments and press statements around this bill. India is listed as a top transnational repression government,” he said. “It’s very clear that the true target of this bill is India and Indian Americans.”
Many Hindu temples, he said, had been desecrated in recent months with pro-Khalistan slogans.
“How can the Hindu American community feel safe and secure reporting these incidents without fear of being accused of being a foreign agent or having law enforcement downplaying the vandalisms?” he asked.
But Harman Singh rejected the suggestion that the bill was dividing the Indian American community along religious lines. “The coalition of groups supporting includes both Sikh and Hindu organisations as well as Muslim, Kashmiri, Iranian, South Asian, immigrants’ rights, human rights, and law enforcement organisations,” Singh said.
Some critics have expressed fears that activists training officers in recognising transnational attacks could institutionalise biases against specific communities.
But the Sikh Coalition’s Singh said those worries were unfounded. The training, he said, “will be created by professionals within those organisations, rather than ‘a small group of activists,’ so this criticism is not based in reality.”
People gather at Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara, site of the 2023 murder of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in Surrey, British Columbia, Canada, on May 3, 2024 [Jennifer Gauthier/ Reuters]
‘My voice is being heard’
Rohit Chopra, a professor of communication at Santa Clara University in California, said critics of other governments “are all too routinely harassed, threatened, or even assaulted by foreign governments or their proxies within the US”.
“Even if the bill has some deterrent effect, which I believe it will, it will be well worth it,” Chopra told Al Jazeera. He emphasised that the bill does not restrict its ambit to any one country or a particular group of nations.
To Stanford University’s Hansen, that in effect raises questions about why some groups are opposed to the bill.
“When an organisation comes out strongly against such a bill, it almost feels like a preemptive admission – as if they see themselves as being implicated by what the bill seeks to prevent,” Hansen said.
Back in Sacramento, Cheema remains hopeful that the bill will pass. For him, the bill represents something far more significant than policy – recognition and protection on US soil.
“I could be the next victim if the law enforcement in my community is not able to recognise foreign interference,” Cheema said. “It doesn’t matter who is indulging in it or which country, I would naturally like my police officers to be aware of the threats.”
“If any group feels threatened, then all sections of society should make efforts to protect their people. This reassures me that my voice is being heard”, Cheema said.
New Delhi, India – When United States President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin meet in Alaska on Friday, their summit will be followed closely not only in both those countries, Europe and Ukraine – but also more than 10,000km (6,200 miles) away, in New Delhi.
Since the end of the Cold War, India has juggled a historically strong relationship with Russia and rapidly blossoming ties with the US. New Delhi’s relations with Washington grew particularly strong under the presidencies of George W Bush and Barack Obama, and remained that way during Trump’s first term and under Joe Biden.
At the heart of that US warmth towards India, say analysts, was its bet on New Delhi as a balancing force against Beijing, as China’s economic, military and strategic heft in the Asia Pacific region grew. With Soviet communism history, and China, the US’s biggest strategic rival, Washington increased its focus on Asia – including through the Quad, a grouping also including fellow democracies India, Australia and Japan.
But a decade after Obama famously described the US and India as “best partners”, they appear to be anything but.
Trump has imposed a 50 percent tariff on Indian imports, among the highest on any country’s products. Half of that penalty is for India’s purchases of Russian oil during its ongoing war with Ukraine – something that the Biden administration encouraged India to do to keep global crude prices under control.
Meanwhile, China – which buys even more Russian oil than India – has received a reprieve from high US tariffs for now, as Washington negotiates a trade deal with New Delhi.
That contrast has prompted questions over whether Trump’s approach towards China, on the one hand, and traditional friends like India on the other, marks a broader shift away from the US pivot to Asia.
President Donald Trump and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi shake hands during a news conference in the East Room of the White House, in Washington, DC, on Thursday, February 13, 2025 [Alex Brandon/AP Photo]
Troubles for India, and Modi
Since the early 2000s, successive governments in New Delhi have embraced closer ties with Washington, with its stocks rising in the US as an emerging strategic partner in security, trade and technology.
Trump made that relationship personal – with Modi.
During Trump’s first term, he shared the stage twice in public rallies with Modi, as they also exchanged frequent bear hugs and described each other as friends.
But none of that could save New Delhi when Trump hit India with tariffs only matched by the levies issued against goods from Brazil.
“The tariff moves have triggered the most serious rupture in the US-India relations in decades,” said Milan Vaishnav, the director of the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
For months after Trump threatened tariffs on Indian imports, New Delhi tried to placate the US president, refusing to get drawn into a war of words. That has now changed, with India accusing the US of hypocrisy – pointing out that it still trades with Russia, and that Washington had previously wanted New Delhi to buy Russian crude.
“One thing is clear: Trust in the United States has eroded sharply in recent days, casting a long shadow over the bilateral relationship,” Vaishnav told Al Jazeera.
To Praveen Donthi, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, the crisis in the relationship also reflects a dramatic turn in the personal equation between Modi and Trump. The state of ties, he said, is “a result of a clash of personalities between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi”.
India has previously faced the threat of US sanctions for its close friendship with Russia, when it decided to buy S-400 missile defence systems from Moscow. But in 2022, under the Biden administration, it secured a waiver from those proposed sanctions.
“Not long ago, India could avoid sanctions despite purchasing S-400 weapon systems from Russia. However, now, India’s policy of multi-alignment clashes with President Trump’s transactional approach to geopolitics,” said Donthi.
To be sure, he pointed out, America’s Cold War history of bonhomie with Pakistan has meant that “a certain distrust of the US is embedded in the Indian strategic firmament”. The Trump administration’s recent cosiness with Pakistan, with its army chief visiting the US this year, even getting a rare meeting with the president at the White House, will likely have amplified those concerns in New Delhi.
But through ups and downs in India-US ties over the years, a key strategic glue has held them close over the past quarter century: shared worries about the rise of China.
“A certain bipartisan consensus existed in the US regarding India because of its long-term strategic importance, especially in balancing China,” said Donthi.
Now, he said, “the unpredictable Trump presidency disrupted the US’s approach of ‘strategic altruism’ towards India”.
It is no longer clear to Asian partners of the US, say experts, whether Washington is as focused on building alliances in their region as it once said it was.
President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi walk around NRG Stadium waving to the crowd during the ‘Howdy Modi: Shared Dreams, Bright Futures’ event in Houston, the US, September 22, 2019 [Evan Vucci/AP Photo]
Turn from Asia
Under the Obama administration in 2011, the US adopted what was known as the “Rebalance to Asia” policy, aimed at committing more diplomatic, economic and military resources to the Asia Pacific region, increasingly seen as the world’s economic and geopolitical centre of gravity.
This meant deeper engagement with treaty allies like Japan, South Korea, and Australia, strengthening security ties with emerging partners such as India and Vietnam, and pushing forward trade initiatives like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
The idea was to shape a regional order that could balance China’s rise.
During Trump’s first term, the economic leg that gave the pivot its weight hollowed out. The US withdrawal from the TPP in early 2017 removed the signature trade pillar, leaving behind a strategy that leaned heavily on military cooperation and less on binding economic partnerships.
Yet, he refrained from the bulldozing negotiations that have shaped his approach to tariffs, even with allies like Japan and South Korea, and from the kind of tariffs Trump has imposed now on India.
“There is currently a period of churn and uncertainty, after which clarity will emerge,” Donthi said. “There might be some cautious rebalancing in the short term from the Asian powers, who will wait for more clarity.”
India, which, unlike Japan and South Korea, has never been a treaty ally to the US – or any other country – might already be taking steps towards that rebalancing.
President Barack Obama, left, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have coffee and tea in the gardens of the Hyderabad House in New Delhi, India, on January 25, 2015 [Carolyn Kaster/AP Photo]
Russia-India-China troika?
Faced with Trump’s tariff wrath, India has been engaged in hectic diplomacy of its own.
Its national security adviser, Ajit Doval, visited Moscow earlier this month and met Putin. Foreign Minister S Jaishankar is scheduled to travel to the Russian capital later this month. Also in August, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is expected to visit New Delhi. And at the end of the month, Modi will travel to China for a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, his first trip to the country in seven years.
India has also indicated that it is open to considering the revival of a Russia-India-China (RIC) trilateral mechanism, after Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov proposed the platform’s resurrection.
The concept of trilateral cooperation was first proposed in the 1990s and formally institutionalised in 2002, an idea Lavrov credited to the late Yevgeny Primakov, former chair of the Russian International Affairs Council.
Although the RIC met regularly in the years following its creation, there has been a gap in recent times, with the last meeting of RIC leaders in 2019, on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan.
India’s Modi faces some “very difficult choices”, said Michael Kugelman, a senior fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation. “Clearly, India is not going to turn on Russia, a very special partner. And India does not turn on its friends.”
But doubling down on its strategic independence from the US – or multi-alignment, as India describes it – could come with its costs, if Trump decides to add on even more tariffs or sanctions.
“The best outcome for India immediately is the Russians and Ukrainians agree to a ceasefire,” said Kugelman, “because at the end of the day, Trump is pressuring India as a means of pressuring Russia.”
Even as questions rise over Washington’s pivot to Asia under Trump, such a rebalance will not be easy for countries like India, say experts. Ultimately, they say, the US will find its longtime partners willing to return to the fold if it decides to reinvest in those relationships.
Chinese President Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi take part in a photo ceremony before a plenary session of the BRICS 2024 summit in Kazan, Russia, October 23, 2024 [Alexander Kazakov/Sputnik/Pool via Reuters]
The cost of a rebalance
An RIC troika would ultimately be “more symbolic than substantive”, Kugelman said.
That’s because one of the sides of that triangle is “quite small and fragile: India-China ties”.
While there have been “notable easing of tensions” in recent months, “India and China remain strategic competitors,” added Kugelman. After four years of an eyeball-to-eyeball standoff along their Himalayan border, they finally agreed to withdraw troops last year, with Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping meeting in Kazan.
But “they continue to have a long disputed border”, Kugelman said, and trust between the Asian giants remains low.
Vaishnav of the Carnegie Endowment agreed.
“There may be opportunistic venues and moments where the countries’ interests converge. But I think, beyond defence and energy, Russia has little to offer India,” he said. “With China, while we may see a thaw in economic relations, it’s difficult to see a path to resolving broader security and geostrategic disputes.”
Jon Danilowicz, a retired diplomat who worked in the US State Department, said that a total breakdown of the US-India partnership is in neither’s interest. “The cooperation in other areas will continue, perhaps with less open enthusiasm than had been the case in recent years,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Trump tariffs could help Modi domestically.
“Trump’s hardball tactics could bolster Modi’s domestic standing. They highlight Washington’s unreliability, allowing Modi to frame himself as standing firm in the face of the US pressure,” said Vaishnav.
Modi had been facing pressure from the opposition over the ceasefire with Pakistan after four days of military hostilities in May, after 26 civilians were killed in an attack by gunmen in Kashmir in April. The opposition has accused Modi of not going harder and longer at Pakistan because of pressure from Trump, who has claimed repeatedly that he brokered the ceasefire between New Delhi and Islamabad – a claim India has denied.
“Any further appearance of yielding – this time to the US – could be politically costly. Resisting Trump reinforces Modi’s image as a defender of national pride,” added Vaishnav.
Many analysts have said they see Trump’s tariffs also as the outcome of as-yet unsuccessful India-US trade talks, with New Delhi reluctant to open up the country’s agriculture and dairy sectors that are politically sensitive for the Indian government. Almost half of India’s population depends on farming for its livelihood.
Modi has in recent days said that he won’t let the interests of Indian farmers suffer, “even though I know I will have to pay a personal cost”.
“He is demonstrating defiance to the domestic electorate,” said Donthi, of the International Crisis Group.
Ultimately, though, he said, both India and the US would benefit if they strike a compromise that allows them to stop the slide in ties.
“But the warmth and friendliness won’t be present, and this will be evident for some time,” Donthi said.
NBC News correspondent Jacob Soboroff will join MSNBC full time once the progressive cable channel is spun off into a new company, which will be called Versant.
Later this year, MSNBC is heading to Versant, which will be the new stand-alone home for current parent company Comcast’s cable networks.
As a result, MSNBC will no longer have the resources of NBC News and is putting together its own editorial operation. The stylized NBC peacock will also disappear from the MSNBC logo.
NBC News correspondents who moved seamlessly between NBC’s broadcast programs and MSNBC will no longer appear on both platforms once the spin-off is complete. (The one exception is expected to be Willie Geist, who has anchor roles on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and NBC’s “Sunday Today.”)
Soboroff, a Los Angeles native who earlier this year reported on how his childhood home was lost in the Palisades fire, is the highest profile talent so far to leave NBC News in the split. He will remain based on the West Coast.
Jacob Soboroff is joining MSNBC after the network spun off from Comcast.
(Patrick Randak)
Soboroff, 42, was hired as an MSNBC correspondent in 2015. He was later named an NBC News correspondent and in recent years has frequently appeared as a fill-in co-host on the network’s morning franchise “Today.”
NBC News employees who worked both on the broadcast and cable sides have been asked to choose which entity they will join. Most NBC News staffers are choosing to stick with the network. Steve Kornacki, the number-crunching star of MSNBC’s election nights, chose the broadcast network over cable as he also works for NBC Sports.
But a number of NBC News correspondents, producers and executives are choosing to go to the cable side. The migration to MSNBC is surprising, considering the business environment.
Comcast is spinning off the cable networks because it believes the mature outlets face a bleak future due to pay TV cord-cutting and are an albatross weighing down its stock price. MSNBC, the second most watched cable news channel behind leader Fox News, is seen its reach into pay TV homes decline by 33% over the last 10 years.
That has not kept some significant names from giving the start-up a shot. Earlier this week, Versant announced that “NBC Nightly News” executive producer Meghan Rafferty is joining the company as vice president of news standards.
NBC News correspondents moving to the cable side include Ken Dilanian, who covers the Justice Department. Vaughn Hillyard is moving over to become senior White House correspondent, and David Noriega will be a national correspondent based in Los Angeles.
The new company has also attracted talent and executives from CNN, Politico and the New York Times.
TV news agents say privately that many NBC News staffers are expecting layoffs in the division over the next year as ratings and advertising revenue for broadcast TV decline. (The division has not announced any such plans).
While the channels going to Versant, which include CNBC, Golf Channel and USA Network, face similar challenges, the spinoff group is aggressively hiring and promises substantial investment in the channels that still turn a profit.
Correspondents are also attracted to the platform that a 24-hour cable network provides.
Soboroff, the son of Los Angeles civic leader Steve Soboroff, has focused on issues that appeal to the MSNBC audience.
He aggressively covered the family separation crisis at the southern border in 2018, which earned a Cronkite Award. He wrote a book on the topic and executive produced an Emmy-nominated documentary in 2024.
Most recently in June 2025, Soboroff led MSNBC’s coverage of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles and the resulting protests. His upcoming book, “Firestorm: The Great Los Angeles Fires and America’s New Age of Disaster,” will be released in January.
WASHINGTON — The widening and increasingly bitter divide between Republicans and Democrats defines American politics, but in recent weeks, it’s the divisions inside each of the two parties that have dominated headlines.
Republicans have denounced 13 of their House colleagues who sided with Democrats earlier this month to pass Biden’s $1.2-trillion infrastructure bill. After conservative Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) posted their phone numbers on social media, some of the 13 reported getting death threats.
What issues create the deep fissures within the two parties, and which Americans make up the conflicting factions?
Newsletter
Get our L.A. Times Politics newsletter
The latest news, analysis and insights from our politics team.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Pew released its latest typology on Tuesday, the eighth in the series. The results are key to understanding why American politics works the way it does.
Parties driven by their extremes
For this latest effort, Pew surveyed 10,221 American adults, asking each of them a series of questions about their political attitudes, values and views of American society. Researchers took the results and put them through what’s called a cluster analysis to define groups that make up U.S. society.
The new typology divides Americans into nine such groups — four on the left, which make up the Democratic coalition, four on the right, making up the Republican coalition, and one in between whose members are largely defined by a lack of interest in politics and public affairs.
Nearly all the Democrats agree on wanting a larger government that provides more services; nearly all the Republicans want the opposite.
And nearly all Democrats believe that race and gender discrimination remain serious problems in American society that require further efforts to resolve. On the Republican side, the belief that little — if anything — remains to be done to achieve equality has become a defining principle.
On other issues, however, the parties have deep internal splits. In each, the most energized group — the people who most regularly turn out to vote, post on social media and contribute to campaigns — stands at the edges.
On the right, that would be an extremely conservative, religiously oriented, nationalistic group which Pew calls the Faith and Flag conservatives. At the other end of the scale stands a socialist-friendly, largely secular group it calls the Progressive Left.
On several major issues, those two groups have views that are “far from the rest of their coalitions,” yet they’re “the most politically engaged groups, and they’re driving the conversation,” said Carroll Doherty, Pew’s director of political research.
The Faith and Flag conservatives, who make up about 10% of American adults and almost 25% of Republicans, have shaped the party’s policies on some social issues such as abortion, but have even more strongly affected its overall approach to politics. A majority (53%) of the group, for example, says that “compromise in politics is really just selling out.”
That has strongly shaped the GOP’s approach to legislation and helps explain the bitter, angry response to the Republicans who voted for Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure compromise.
The group is overwhelmingly white (85%), relatively old (two-thirds are 50 or older) mostly Christian (4 in 10 are white, evangelical Protestants) and heavily rural.
Their mirror image, the Progressive Left, is a significantly smaller group, only about 6% of Americans and 12% of Democrats. Despite their smaller size, however, they have had a strong impact, moving their party to the left, especially on expanding government and combating climate change.
That group is in several ways the opposite of the Faith and Flag conservatives: urban, secular and significantly more college-educated than the rest of the country.
Like the Faith and Flag group, however, the Progressives are mostly white (68%) — the only Democratic faction with a white majority.
The groups have one other trait in common — each has a deep, visceral dislike of the other party.
While those two set the parameters of a lot of American political debate, it’s the other groups in each party’s coalition that explain why the Democratic and Republican approaches to government have diverged so widely.
On the Democratic side, the two biggest blocs, which make up just over half of Democratic voters, fit comfortably into the party establishment.
The Establishment Liberals (think Vice President Kamala Harris or Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg) are a racially diverse, highly educated (one-quarter have post-graduate degrees), fairly affluent group that is optimistic in its outlook, liberal in its politics and strong believers that “compromise is how things get done” in politics.
The Democratic Mainstays (think House Democratic Whip James E. Clyburn of South Carolina or President Biden) are more likely to define themselves as political moderates and are significantly more likely than other Democrats to say that religion plays a major role in their lives. Roughly 40% of Black Democrats fit into this group.
The Mainstays are more likely than other Democrats to favor increasing funds for police in their neighborhoods and somewhat less likely to favor increased immigration, but are extremely loyal to the Democratic Party.
Together, those two groups give Democrats a strong orientation toward cutting deals, making incremental progress and getting the work of government done.
Virtually the opposite is true of Republicans, whose two largest groups, the Faith and Flag conservatives and what Pew calls the Populist Right, dislike compromise and harbor deep suspicions of American institutions. Together, those groups, which make up nearly half the GOP’s voters, have produced a party that revels in opposition but has often found itself stymied when trying to govern.
The Populists group, the one most closely identified with former President Trump‘s style of politics, has a negative view of huge swaths of American society — big corporations, but also the entertainment industry, tech companies, labor unions, colleges and universities, and K-12 schools.
Nearly 9 in 10 of them believe the U.S. economic system unfairly favors the powerful, and a majority support raising taxes on big companies and the wealthy. Both of those views put them at odds with the rest of the GOP, helping explain why the party struggles to come up with economic proposals beyond opposition to Democratic plans.
The Populist Right also overwhelmingly says that immigrants coming to the U.S. make the country worse off. That puts them in conflict with the party’s smaller but still influential business-oriented establishment.
About half the Populist group say that white people declining as a share of the U.S. population is a bad thing, more than in any other group.
The Republican establishment faction (think Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky or Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah) is what Pew calls the Committed Conservatives, pro-business, generally favorable to immigration and more moderate on racial issues.
A lot of Republican elected officials fall into that group, but unlike the very large establishment blocs on the Democratic side, relatively fewer voters do — 7% of Americans and 15% of the GOP. That creates a pervasive tension between GOP elected officials and many of their constituents.
Unlike the two larger conservative blocs, in which majorities want to see Trump run again, most Republicans in this group would prefer him to take a back seat.
Each of the coalitions also has a group that is alienated from its party.
A significant number in the Ambivalent Right, a younger, socially liberal, largely anti-Trump group within the GOP, voted for Biden in 2020.
On the Democratic side, the mostly young people in the Outsider Left are very liberal, but frustrated with the Democrats and not always motivated to vote. When Democratic political figures talk about the need to boost voter turnout, those are the potential voters many of them picture.
By the way, there’s a long connection between the Los Angeles Times and the political typology project. The first version of the political typology dates back to 1987 and was developed by the long-ago Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press, a research organization founded by the company that owned The Times.
To allow readers to see how they compared to the political types in that era, The Times published the typology quiz as a full-page in print, inviting people to fill it out, mail it in and get a letter back telling them what group they belonged to. Today, you can do it all online.
Where do you fit?
From the hard-right Faith and Flag Conservatives to the socialist-friendly Progressive Left, with seven stops in between, Pew’s political typology describes nine groups into which Americans can be divided. The typology comes along with a quiz that allows you to see which group most closely matches your views on major issues.
The vice president abroad
On a trip this week to France, Harris is introducing herself to the world in personal terms, Noah Bierman wrote. The trip, he said, has given Harris a chance “to reveal herself on the world stage — highlighting her status as the first woman and the first woman of color to serve in such high office — after 10 months of focusing on responding to the COVD-19 pandemic and other crises,” which have taken a political toll.
Part of Harris’ goal in the trip is to further mend relations with France, which were strained when the administration struck a deal with Australia to help build nuclear submarines, which wiped out a major French contract to build boats for the Australian navy. In her speeches, however, Harris has also tried to make the case that the U.S. has moved past the Trump era and once again can be relied upon as an ally, Bierman wrote. That’s met with some skepticism from Europeans, who wonder what will happen in the next election.
Meantime, Mark Barabak looked at how Harris has adopted a much lower public profile of late. As past occupants of the office, including George H.W. Bush and Al Gore have found, the number-two job is an “inherently diminishing one,” he wrote.
Our daily news podcast
If you’re a fan of this newsletter, you’ll love our daily podcast “The Times,” hosted every weekday by columnist Gustavo Arellano, along with reporters from across our newsroom. Go beyond the headlines. Download and listen on our App, subscribe on Apple Podcasts and follow on Spotify.
Their investigation, based on thousands of documents and Transportation Department data, shows that more than 200,000 people have lost their homes nationwide to federal road projects over the last three decades. In many cases, predominantly Black or Latino communities that were torn apart by freeway construction a generation or more ago have been dislocated once more by new projects.
Inflation has seriously damaged several presidencies in the last half century; now, rising prices threaten Biden, Chris Megerian and Erin Logan wrote.
At the international climate conference in Glasgow, the U.S., Britain and 17 other countries agreed to reduce emissions from the shipping industry, which is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gases, Anna Phillips reported. Large container ships use fuel that is dirtier by far than the diesel that powers cars. Ships can also be a major source of air pollution in port cities, including Los Angeles.
As Democrats continue to haggle over the details of their big social spending proposal, Jennifer Haberkorn took a look at one of the plan’s largest elements — a major increase in money for early childhood education. The bill would devote about $390 billion over the next 10 years to providing preschool access to all 3- and 4-year-olds. That would mark the largest expansion of free education since high school was added about 100 years ago.
The latest from California
The state’s independent Citizens Redistricting Commission has come up with a draft map of new congressional and legislative districts, and it’s already causing heartburn for a number of incumbent lawmakers, Seema Mehta and John Myers reported.
The new maps may strengthen Latino political clout in California overall, but the most heavily Latino district in the state would be eliminated. The 40th District, represented by Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, covers parts of East and South L.A. and would be parceled out among neighboring districts, Mehta reported. Roybal-Allard, 80, has raised very little money amid speculation that she has plans to retire next year. The state is losing one congressional district after last year’s census, and the loss was widely expected to come in the Los Angeles area, which has grown more slowly than other parts of the state.
The redrawn boundaries may force some incumbents to run against each other or run in districts that have suddenly become less politically secure. The Central Valley districts of GOP Rep. Devin Nunes of Tulare and Democratic Rep. Josh Harder of Turlock would both be significantly altered, according to redistricting analysts in both parties. Reps. MikeGarcia of Santa Clarita, Michelle Steel of Seal Beach and Darrell Issa of Bonsall would all find their districts becoming less secure.
But there’s a good chance the maps will change again after a two-week public comment period, which began with the commission’s approval of the maps on Wednesday night.
The Biden administration will extend a major homelessness initiative that has allowed Los Angeles and other cities to rent hotel rooms as temporary housing for thousands of people. As Ben Oreskes reported, the administration will extend the program through March. It was slated to expire at the end of the year.
In another development related to homelessness, a group looking to oust Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Bonin says it has submitted more than 39,000 signatures on recall petitions. If the signatures hold up to scrutiny, that would qualify the measure for the ballot. Bonin’s opponents have accused him of failing to take seriously the impact of crime that they say is connected to homeless encampments.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court dealt an unexpected blow Thursday to the conservative drive for religious charter schools.
The justices announced they were split 4-4 in a test case heard last month from Oklahoma, which blocks the new Catholic charter school in the state.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett had announced in advance she would not participate in the decision. A former Notre Dame law professor, she was a close friend of law professor Nicole Garnett, who led the drive for faith-based charter schools.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts sounded uncertain during the oral argument in late April. In the past, he had said states may not discriminate against religious groups, but Oklahoma’s law applied only to public schools, not private ones that were religious.
Defenders of church-state separation had argued that charter schools by law were public, not “sectarian” or religious. They urged the court to uphold the laws as written.
Four other conservative justices had signaled they would vote to allow the religious charter school.
While Thursday’s split decision is a major setback for religious rights advocates, it does not finally settle the issue of religious charter schools. It’s possible, for example, that Justice Barrett may participate in a future case.
This is a breaking news story and will be updated.
National Party and Liberal Party part ways after more than 60-year alliance following election defeat.
Australia’s National Party has split from its conservative coalition partner of more than 60 years, the Liberal Party, citing policy differences over renewable energy and following a resounding loss in the national elections this month.
“It’s time to have a break,” the National leader, David Littleproud, told reporters on Tuesday.
The split shows the pressure on Australia’s conservative parties after Anthony Albanese’s centre-left Labor Party won a historic second term in the May 3 election, powered by a voter backlash against United States President Donald Trump’s policies.
Under the longstanding partnership in state and federal politics, the Liberal and National coalition had shared power in governments, with the Nationals broadly representing the interests of rural communities and the Liberals contesting city seats.
“We will not be re-entering a coalition agreement with the Liberal Party after this election,” Littleproud said, citing policy differences.
Liberal Party leader Sussan Ley, who was installed in the role last week, had pledged to revisit all policies in the wake of the election loss. She said on Tuesday she was disappointed with the Nationals’ decision, which came after they had sought specific commitments.
“As the largest nongovernment political party, the Liberals will form the official opposition,” she added.
The Liberals were reduced to 28 out of 150 seats in the House of Representatives, their worst result, as Labor increased its tally to 94 from 77, registering its largest-ever majority in an election. The National Party retained its 15 seats.
The Liberal Party lost key city seats to independents supporting gender equality and action on climate change.
Ley, a former outback pilot with three finance degrees, was elected as the party’s first female leader after opposition leader Peter Dutton lost his seat in the election.
“She is a leader that needs to rebuild the Liberal Party; they are going on a journey of rediscovery, and this will provide them the opportunity to do that,” said Littleproud.
The Nationals remain committed to “having the door open” for more coalition talks before the next election, but would uphold the interests of rural Australians, he said.
The Nationals had failed to gain a commitment from Ley that her party would continue a policy taken to the election supporting the introduction of nuclear power, and also wanted a crackdown on the market power of Australia’s large supermarkets, and better telecommunications in the Outback.
Australia has the world’s largest uranium reserves but bans nuclear energy.
Littleproud said nuclear power was needed because Australia’s move away from coal to “renewables only” under the Labor government was not reliable.
Wind farm turbines “are tearing up our landscape, they are tearing up your food security”, he said.
Michael Guerin, chief executive of AgForce, representing farmers in Queensland state, said the urban-rural divide was worsening.
“Perhaps we’re seeing that in the political forum,” he said, adding the Liberals and Nationals both needed to rebuild.
Labor Party treasurer Jim Chalmers said the split in the opposition was a “nuclear meltdown”, and the Liberals would have a presence “barely bigger” than the cross-bench of 12 independents and minor parties when Parliament sits.
For British drummer Zak Starkey, the last few months with rock band the Who have been quite the whirlwind.
Starkey, who the band fired in April and reinstated days later after “some communication issues,” announced Sunday the “Baba O’Riley” group had fired him again. The veteran drummer, son of Ringo Starr, shared his side of the split on Instagram and disputed the band’s separate announcement about his departure.
The Who, in a joint Instagram post with guitarist and songwriter Pete Townshend, said Sunday, “after many years of great work on drums from Zak the time has come for a change.”
“Zak has lots of new projects in hand and I wish him the best,” the post said, before adding that drummer Scott Devours would fill his seat for the band’s remaining farewell shows.
Starkey, 59, added his own text atop the band’s statement for his post. In his caption, he claimed he “was asked” to share his own announcement that he would leave the Who to pursue other projects. “This would be a lie,” he wrote. “I love The Who and would never had quit.”
He added: “So I didn’t make the statement…quitting The Who would also have let down the countless amazing people who stood up for me…thru the weeks of mayhem.”
Starkey, who has played with Oasis and the Icicle Works, among other acts, began performing with the Who in the mid-1990s and said he rarely faced conflict juggling his duties with the band and other endeavors. He also noted that the group has, for the most part, “been sporadic or minimalist in touring.”
“None of this has ever interfered with The Who and was never a problem for them,” he continued in his caption, which offered a timeline of his various musical commitments. “The lie is or would have been that I quit The Who — I didn’t. I love The Who and everyone in it.”
A representative for the Who did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment.
In a second Instagram post Sunday, the band noted that it is “heading for retirement” and their now-ex-drummer is younger and must “devote all his energy into making” new endeavors a success.
When the Who announced Starkey’s reinstatement, Townshend said in a blog post to the band’s website the drummer needed “to tighten up his latest evolved drumming style to accommodate our non-orchestral line up and he has readily agreed” and shared more details about the sound issues that seemingly led up to Starkey’s initial firing.
“Maybe we didn’t put enough time into sound checks, giving us problems on stage. The sound in the centre of the stage is always the most difficult to work with,” Townshend wrote. “[The Who co-founder] Roger [Daltrey] did nothing wrong but fiddle with his in-ear monitors. Zak made a few mistakes and he has apologised . Albeit with a rubber duck drummer.”
He added: “We are a family, this blew up very quickly and got too much oxygen. It’s over. We move forward now with optimism and fire in our bellies.”
The Who embarks on its Song Is Over North America Farewell tour in August. The group will make two stops at the Hollywood Bowl on Sept. 17 and 19.
