stage

Women’s Giro d’Italia 2026: Demi Vollering wins shortened queen stage on day eight

Demi Vollering claimed victory on a shortened queen stage of the women’s Giro d’Italia on Saturday but admitted it was the “weirdest finish line of my life”.

A summit finish in Sestriere had been scheduled for the eighth and penultimate stage, but organisers reduced the route by 28 kilometres as an unstable slab of ice was threatening to fall on to the route.

Ice had already been cleared from an avalanche shortly before the riders passed through the Italian Alps.

Instead the line was hastily moved to one kilometre below the Colle delle Finestre, where Vollering, of FDJ United–Suez, prevailed in a four-way sprint finish.

The pre-race favourite edged out Isabella Holmgren, Antonia Niedermaier and fellow Dutch rider Anna van der Breggen to claim her second stage win of this year’s race.

“It was strange because the Finestre was suddenly the final climb,” said the 29-year-old Vollering. “It was the weirdest finish line of my life, but I’m very happy to take the win.”

Team SD Worx–Protime rider Van der Breggen retains the pink jersey for the final stage, over 145km around Saluzzo at the foot of the Alps, with Vollering having cut the four-time winner’s lead slightly to 49 seconds.

“We hoped that we could get closer to the maglia rosa today,” said Vollering. “Tomorrow’s stage is not as hard as today’s, but we will make a plan and think about how to try to win the Giro.”

Source link

The White House as a stage: Trump’s hosting streak meets America’s 250th birthday and the World Cup

When nearly all the scheduled musical performers pulled out of a concert series marking America’s 250th anniversary — fearing the event had become too closely tied to President Trump — he responded by making it official.

Trump announced he’d now be the headlining act of the Great American State Fair.

That put to rest any possible scenario where a president who has built his personal and political persona on seizing the spotlight might cede the stage to avoid overshadowing a national celebration bigger than himself. It also offered a peek into how the president is likely to approach hosting the upcoming World Cup.

From his reality shows before becoming a politician, to hours spent entertaining at events in ways planned and impromptu, to proudly showing off his various properties and efforts to overhaul the White House, the president relishes hosting. Last year he even jokingly mused about leaving the presidency to do it again full time on TV.

Trump can be a gracious, personable and highly watchable master of ceremonies — but he’s also one who tends to make every event about himself.

“The president has an outsized personality,” said Timothy Naftali, former director of Richard Nixon’s presidential library and professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. “There’s a predictability to the way in which the president frames his actions — or any actions around any event associated with him — and that’s just part of who he is, and his makeup and his professional background.”

Exhibit A is the fair, which begins June 25 and was supposed to feature concerts but now will be kicked off by a Trump rally. That will follow a UFC bout at the White House on June 14. Trump is a longtime cage match fan and the event marks his 80th birthday, but the president has sought to bill it as part of the anniversary festivities.

Many presidents relished hosting — but not like this

Andrew Jackson threw open the White House for an 1829 Inauguration Day bash so unruly that staff eventually dispersed the crowd by moving tubs of whiskey and ice cream to the lawn. Franklin D. Roosevelt mixed pre-dinner cocktails for friends and aides at White House gatherings he playfully dubbed “The Children’s Hour.” Audrey Hepburn was among the luminaries Ronald Reagan hosted at the White House.

Trump frequently had first-term dinners with business leaders but has more fully embraced the role since returning to the White House. He built a patio area similar to one at his Mar-a-Lago estate and frequently travels to Florida and his properties in Bedminster, New Jersey, and Sterling, Virginia, to headline fundraisers and other swanky gatherings.

Asked if Trump might overshadow events meant to bring the country and the world together, White House spokesman Davis Ingle pointed to the president’s efforts to lead extensive renovations at the White House and around Washington. He said in a statement that the “historic beautification” gives the city “the glory it deserves during our nation’s historic semiquincentennial celebration — something everyone should celebrate.”

Still, Trump has found unprecedented ways to inject himself into the anniversary.

The State Department is issuing passports with the president’s picture and officials have designed a new $250 bill with his likeness. The Trump Organization, being run by Trump’s children while he’s president, applied to trademark “Trump 250” logos and other merchandise.

The U.S. Mint is also producing a 24-karat gold commemorative coin with Trump’s face, though that recalls a half-dollar silver coin bearing the likeness of President Calvin Coolidge to help mark America’s 150th anniversary in 1926.

Past presidents had starring anniversary roles

Ulysses S. Grant opened a Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia to mark the 100th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1876. Richard Nixon, in 1971, inaugurated a five-year “Bicentennial Era” ahead of the 200-year mark, though he resigned before the big day arrived.

Nixon’s successor, Gerald Ford, then in the midst of an ultimately unsuccessful reelection campaign, began the week of July 4, 1976, by inaugurating the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum and attending a Kennedy Center event featuring Bob Hope, OJ Simpson and others reading patriotic texts.

On Independence Day, Ford spoke at historic Valley Forge, then traveled to Philadelphia’s Independence Hall, declaring, “Liberty is a living flame to be fed, not dead ashes to be revered.“ He also went to New York Harbor for a tall ship parade, presided over naturalization ceremonies at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello estate and hosted a state dinner for Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II.

Still, “while Ford certainly hoped to use the bicentennial to promote his reelection campaign, he didn’t do it in such a self-aggrandizing, self-centered, narcissistic way,” said Marc Stein, a history professor at San Francisco State University and author of “Bicentennial: A Revolutionary History of the 1970s.”

Ford, added Naftali, “knew when to step out of the limelight and make sure the focus was on what mattered, which was the United States of America and the Declaration of Independence.”

Trump, by contrast, “generally has contempt for norms” and rarely mentions “the great sweep of history,” Naftali said.

Dueling anniversary planners as Trump pushes to revise history

Congress charged a national organization, America250, with planning commemorative events. Ahead of the 2024 election, the group drafted a memo asking whomever the incoming president was to mobilize federal agencies and welcoming presidential involvement in events and initiatives.

Asked about Trump, America250 Chair Rosie Rios said the group “has had a very supportive and collaborative relationship with the organizations planning initiatives on behalf of the president.”

But Rios’ organization is separate from Freedom 250, a mix of public and private partnerships which the Trump administration established to fund and prepare anniversary events — which has caused confusion.

America250 aims to “inspire our fellow Americans to reflect on our past, strengthen our love of country, and renew our commitment to the ideals of democracy through programs that educate, engage, and unite us as a nation.”

That might seem a departure from the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” executive order Trump signed last year. It sought to beat back a “revisionist movement” responsible for “replacing objective facts with a distorted narrative driven by ideology rather than truth.”

Stein, now serving a one-year term as president of the Organization of American Historians, is helping organize “We Want More History,” a push to coordinate local events celebrating the public’s love for the subject in fact-based ways.

He said Trump’s version of history is “closer to propaganda, and it’s closer to cheerleading.”

World Cup gives Trump another platform to play host

The president has similarly taken his exceeding-normal-limits approach to the soccer tournament the U.S. is co-hosting with Mexico and Canada.

He created a federal World Cup task force, and leads it. He collected a peace prize from soccer’s governing body, FIFA, and said he’d be on stage to present the tournament’s golden trophy to the winning team.

Trump even oversaw the tournament’s draw at the Kennedy Center, which he’s sought to rename for himself, sparking legal challenges.

He returned to the same building to headline December’s Kennedy Center Honors, noting, “We never had a president hosting the awards before.” He later posted on social media, “Would you like me to leave the Presidency in order to make ‘hosting’ a full time job?”

Naftali noted, “Whatever filters there were in the first term — and there weren’t many — are gone.”

“It’s undiluted Donald Trump.”

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

California to play big role in fight for Congress. Tuesday’s primary sets the stage

California’s decision to redraw its congressional map to flip as many as five House seats to Democrats in November is poised to play a big and potentially decisive role in the nation’s broader, bare-knuckle fight for control of Congress.

Tuesday’s primary races — where the top two candidates will advance to November runoffs — won’t determine which Republicans are ousted in most cases, but they will provide an important first look at voter sentiment and bring the fall’s most crucial head-to-head contests into focus.

“There will be some real cues and signals about what to expect,” said Christian Grose, a redistricting scholar and political science professor at USC. “We’re going to know how strong the Democrats’ chances are going to be based on who advances.”

As one example, Grose pointed to the redrawn 22nd Congressional District in the Central Valley, where incumbent Rep. David Valadao (R-Hanford) is facing challenges from moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Kaur Bains (D-Delano) and progressive college professor Randy Villegas.

Grose said Bains is probably a stronger challenger than Villegas in a district that’s still a reach for Democrats — even if “either one could probably beat Valadao if 2026 is a big Democratic wave.”

Grose will also be closely watching the race between incumbent Reps. Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) and Ken Calvert (R-Corona) in the redrawn Congressional District 40, which covers a swath of inland Orange County and portions of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, including parts of Kim’s and Calvert’s current districts.

The district race wasn’t designed to deliver Democrats a seat, but will produce “one of the first casualties for Republicans from the new map” — months before other expected ousters — if Kim and Calvert don’t both advance.

The national picture

The redistricting war was prompted by President Trump’s unprecedented pressuring of Republican-controlled states to redraw their maps mid-decade for partisan advantage in order to retain control of Congress, given his sinking approval ratings and a history of midterm voters punishing the president’s party.

After Texas Republicans heeded Trump’s call to redraw five districts in their party’s favor, California Democrats responded with Proposition 50, a ballot measure passed by voters in November to sideline the state’s independent redistricting committee and allow Democrats to redraw five congressional districts in their favor.

The war ratcheted up — with more Republican states suddenly considering map changes — after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in April that weakened the 1965 Voting Rights Act and its long-standing protections for majority-Black districts in the South.

Republicans have now acted to redraw congressional maps in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio and Tennessee, with varying degrees of success, while a battle in Utah could add a single additional Democratic seat there. Attempts in other states have failed, including by the GOP in South Carolina and Democrats in Virginia.

Experts say the net result from the flurry of redistricting will probably be a gain of a handful or more seats for Republicans — but in a year when Democrats are expected to make gains more broadly, leaving control of the House up for grabs. California’s new map is “a huge deal” precisely because that math is so close, said David Wasserman, senior editor and elections analyst for the independent, nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

“Democrats are modest favorites for House control based on the political environment, but also because of California,” Wasserman said in an interview with The Times. “Picking up these four or five seats is a prerequisite to Democrats getting the majority.”

California seats in play

California has 52 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, by far the most of any state. With their new map, California Democrats are hoping to increase their 43 House seats to 48. That would leave just four seats represented by members of the GOP despite Republicans accounting for a quarter of the state electorate.

But that outcome isn’t guaranteed.

Paul Mitchell, a Democratic redistricting expert who devised California’s new map, said the reconfigured congressional districts had to create a pathway for new Democrats to win additional seats without undermining incumbent Democrats’ reelection. And the result is a map with three pretty safe pickups for Democrats, and two districts that are “100% on the table, ready for Democrats to win,” but will nonetheless “require shoe-leather and grit.”

The redrawn congressional district boundaries enacted by Proposition 50 promise to shake up at least three seats, experts said.

Congressional District 1: Held by the late Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) for 13 years until his death in January, the district is currently rural and conservative, stretching from the Sacramento outskirts through Redding to the Oregon border and California’s northeastern corner. Under the state’s new congressional district map, it loses some of its rural reaches and picks up liberal coastal communities, and favors a Democrat such as state Sen. Mike McGuire, who is one of the leading candidates.

Congressional District 3: The seat is currently held by Rep. Kevin Kiley (I-Rocklin) and stretches from the Sacramento suburbs through Lake Tahoe and south along the Nevada border. Under the new map, it holds more tightly to the Sacramento suburbs, favoring a Democrat.

The changes were enough to convince an incumbent Democrat, Rep. Ami Bera (D-Elk Grove), to leave his current district — Congressional District 6, which includes the city of Sacramento and the suburbs of Roseville and Rocklin in Placer County — and run in District 3 instead.

Meanwhile, Kiley did the reverse. He quit the Republican Party, became an independent and announced he would be leaving District 3 and running instead in District 6 — the one Bera is leaving — against a slate of new Democratic challengers.

Congressional District 41. The seat is now held by Calvert, a 17-term incumbent, and currently stretches from Corona to the Coachella Valley. The new map made the district more liberal, losing voters in Riverside County and gaining them in Los Angeles County, and Calvert decided to run instead in Kim’s redrawn but still Republican-leaning Congressional District 40 that is just to the west.

The two toughest flips for Democrats, experts said, are Congressional District 22, Valadao’s heavily Latino district in the Central Valley, followed by Congressional District 48 in San Diego and Riverside counties, where Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall) decided to retire rather than run for reelection.

Valadao is viewed as especially vulnerable because of his recent support for Medicaid cuts, but he has proved resilient in the past. Meanwhile, his two leading Democratic challengers, Bains and Villegas, are in a bitter fight, with Bains receiving Democratic establishment support and Villegas winning endorsements from prominent progressives.

In Issa’s district, moderate Republican San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond is running against several infighting Democrats, including San Diego Councilwoman Marni von Wilpert and former Obama labor official Ammar Campa-Najjar.

Not new, or over

Jeff Wice, a New York Law School professor who was involved in California redistricting efforts in 2010, said the state “has long played hardball politics on redistricting,” including when then-Rep. Phil Burton, a powerful San Francisco Democrat, bragged more than 40 years ago that the complex congressional boundaries he’d crafted for Democrats were his “contribution to modern art.”

But in five decades studying redistricting, Wice said he has never seen such “politically driven, partisan politics” as are occurring now across the nation, which he said have “no root in law, reason or fairness” — and are only likely to continue.

“This state-by-state war is far from over, and may continue all the way through 2030,” he said. “A lot of it depends on the outcome of this November’s election.”

Wasserman said the country has “entered an era of no-holds-barred redistricting,” and he also sees redistricting efforts continuing — including in California, where they would present a distinct threat to the state’s few remaining Republicans.

Michael Li, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, said California is a “big part of the story” this election cycle, thanks to Proposition 50. “Democrats in California proved to be very determined and resourceful and managed to get that done, and right now California is the big offset to Republican gerrymandering around the country,” he said.

But what will come of it all — in California and across the country — is still to be determined.

“When you’re gerrymandering, you’re making a bet that you know what the politics of the future will look like, and it’s hard to predict,” he said. “It’s a high-risk, high-reward venture.”

Source link

Giro d’Italia: Jonas Vingegaard on verge of victory after winning stage 20

Overall leader Jonas Vingegaard launched an attack during the tough final climb to clinch victory in Saturday’s stage 20 of the Giro d’Italia.

It ensures the 29-year-old from Denmark will win the race as long as he safely finishes Sunday’s final stage in Rome and become just the eighth man to complete the triple crown of road cycling’s three-week showpieces.

The two-time Tour de France winner, who also won last year’s Vuelta a Espana, is making his first appearance in the Giro.

He started the penultimate stage covering 200km from Gemona del Friuli to Piancavallo four minutes three seconds ahead of second-placed Felix Gall of Austria in the general classification.

Vingegaard was happy to ride safely in the peloton for the first two-thirds of the stage between two Visma-Lease a Bike team-mates, before launching his attack in the final 10km.

Gall tried to chase him down during the attack, but the Dane pulled more than a minute ahead going into the final 5km to secure a sensational solo victory, one minute 15 seconds ahead of second-placed Gall with local favourite Giulio Ciccone completing the podium.

Source link

Olivia Rodrigo slams babydoll disses, says it normalizes pedophilia

Some are calling the controversy over Olivia Rodrigo’s recent outfit choices babydoll-dress-gate, Olivia Rodrigo calls it “weird.”

The dress debacle kicked up in early May when Rodrigo released the music video for “Drop Dead,” in which she runs through the Palace of Versailles wearing a pink-and-blue ruffled babydoll set while singing about the intensity of a crush. Then on May 8, she wore a cottage-core pink-and-white floral babydoll dress with knee-high Dr. Martens during a live performance in Barcelona.

Rodrigo was drawing from subversive feminist and punk fashion of yore, but internet critics were quick to slam the “deja vu” singer, saying the ensemble was sexualizing child-like imagery. In an hour-and-a-half interview with the New York Times Popcast that dropped on Thursday, Rodrigo staunchly defended the dress and called the criticism disturbing.

“I have worn outfits that are maybe revealing on stage, like I’ve been on stage in a sparkly bra and little shorts — which is my right — that’s fun,” she said. “I felt cool and comfortable in that, and that wasn’t inappropriate, but me fully covered up in a dress that people deemed to be, like, childlike was inappropriate, and I think it shows how we really normalize pedophilia in our culture.”

Rodrigo further decried the criticism as rhetoric that girls are fed from a young age, “which is ‘don’t wear that, because then a man is going to sexualize your body, and it’s your fault’ — it’s so weird.”

Rodrigo said she didn’t think she looked “sexy” in the babydoll dress; she was going for a cool look à la Kathleen Hannah or like Courtney Love, musicians whom the pop star said are her heroes. Love appeared to defend Rodrigo on social media by resharing posts defending the singer-songwriter in since-expired Instagram stories.

“I just think if we start dressing in a way that’s like, ‘Oh, I don’t want some f— freak to think that I am sexy like a baby’ or some crazy thing like that, I think it’s losing the plot a little bit,” she said. “I’m very protective of younger women and girls, and I don’t ever want them to be fed that rhetoric. You shouldn’t be responsible for some guy sexualizing you in a way that was never your intention.”

Rodrigo’s third studio album, “You Seem Pretty Sad for a Girl So in Love,” which features hit singles “Drop Dead” and “The Cure,” will be released June 12.

Source link

Ricky Martin safe after ‘tear gas’ stops show in Montenegro

Ricky Martin had to stop his concert Thursday in Montenegro after someone in the audience “discharged tear gas toward the stage,” causing an “abrupt” interruption to the show as fans retreated and got any needed medical attention, the singer’s publicist said in a statement posted on Instagram.

The show did go on.

“As a precautionary measure, Ricky Martin and his entire team exited the stage while security personnel and local authorities worked to contain the situation and ensure the safety of those in attendance,” the statement said.

“We didn’t understand what was happening,” one shaken Montenegran concertgoer said on Instagram during the outdoor show. “Suddenly, people started pushing each other, and we smelled pepper spray. Many people quickly covered their mouths and left the area. I don’t know if there’s still anyone in the area right now. I didn’t see what the police did. I can hear that the concert has started again, but I left the area. I hope everyone is OK.”

Whether the substance was tear gas — which, incidentally, is a powder, not a gas — or pepper spray is unclear. Both substances have similarly irritating effects, despite different ingredients. Tear gas is typically employed by law enforcement for crowd control while pepper spray is often used by individuals for self-defense, according to hazmat and crime-scene cleanup company Bio Recovery, which operates mainly in the American south. Both substances can disperse widely in the air.

Martin, 54, decided to resume the show once authorities said everything was back under control even though “members of the artist’s team advised against continuing the performance,” the publicist’s statement explained.

The headlining performance, which was part of festivities marking the 20th anniversary of Montenegro’s restored independence following the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, came as the “Livin’ la Vida Loca” singer gets ready to embark on a European tour with dates in Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Czechia, Poland, Hungary, Istanbul and more from June into August.

Also Friday, Martin announced he would join the U.K.’s Heritage Live Festivals with a show Aug. 22 at the Royal Sandringham Estate in Norfolk with Sugababes, Olly Alexander and Sophie Castillo. It will be his only U.K. show in 2026. Other artists appearing in Heritage Live shows in July and August include UB40, Lionel Richie and Eric Clapton.

“The rise of Latin music as a global force has been phenomenal, and we’re thrilled to welcome one of the true pioneers who helped bring it to a massive international audience,” Giles Cooper of Heritage Live Festivals told the BBC. “It’s set to be an incredible party.”

Martin, who hails from Puerto Rico, joined Bad Bunny’s all-Spanish halftime show at Super Bowl LX in February with a 30-second cameo in a scene invoking the cover of the latter singer’s album “Debí Tirar Más Fotos.” Clad in all white, Martin sat in a white chair and dove into “Lo Que Le Pasó a Hawaii,” a ballad that implores Puerto Ricans, should the opportunity arise, to resist compromises that Hawaiians made when those islands became a U.S. state in 1959.



Source link

Army of Young Leftist Activists, Loyal Elderly Tenants Make Up W. Hollywood’s Coalition for Economic Survival : Fringe Group Takes Over Center Stage

In the trunk of his battered 10-year-old Ford sedan, Larry Gross stores half a dozen scarred yellow folding chairs. The chairs, strewn among volleyballs, softball equipment and long-discarded papers, are essential equipment for a man who spends much of his life arranging and attending meetings.

Gross is a professional organizer, a man whose career is measured in meetings. He sets up his chairs everywhere in the tiny city of West Hollywood, in the dingy church office where he works, in the clean, well-lighted offices of City Hall, in cramped apartment common rooms and in sparsely furnished election headquarters.

What he accomplishes at those meetings often has immediate impact on the fortunes of the 16-month-old city. With the aid of a small band of young leftist activists and a loyal army of elderly Jewish tenants, Gross has built a potent grass-roots version of a political machine and become the city’s most commanding power broker.

Formidable Power Bloc

In the process, his Coalition for Economic Survival has transformed itself from a Los Angeles-based fringe pressure group with limited successes in rent control and street demonstrations into West Hollywood’s most formidable power bloc. No other organized group in the city wields as much influence or inflames as much controversy.

The coalition and its supporters have elected two of the city’s five council members–both of whom face reelection on April 8–and are priming for a third. Some of its volunteer members have wangled key appointments to the city’s commissions. Others have been hired in policy-making posts in the city’s fledgling bureaucracy.

“West Hollywood is (the coalition’s) oil gusher,” said Ron Stone, who led the city’s incorporation movement. “They’ve dug holes all over Los Angeles, but they never struck deep until they came to West Hollywood. They worked hard here and they deserve the rewards.”

The coalition’s primacy has alienated many of those who are accustomed to holding power. Landlords are roused to fury by the mere mention of Larry Gross’ name. Businessmen worry that the coalition’s continuing dominance will cost them profits. Rival politicians are jealous of the group’s clout. Even some council members seethe privately at the coalition’s refusal to compromise on minor political issues.

“CES is run by a very small group of people,” said Tony Melia, an insurance man who chairs a faction of moderate businessmen challenging the coalition for political supremacy in the April election. “They are a mystery to us all.”

Grist for Criticism

Nearly every move that the 34-year-old Gross makes as director of his coalition becomes instant grist for criticism: Passing folded notes to Mayor John Heilman and Councilwoman Helen Albert (both coalition members), Gross is accused of controlling their votes. Taping a flag over his office desk, he is branded a Communist (Gross described the flag, which has been taken down, as a United Farm Workers banner; his enemies say it was a hammer and sickle). Shaving his wispy beard and wearing suits instead of flannel shirts, he is said to be cleaning up his act for public consumption.

“People set me up as the enemy all the time,” Gross said. “They do it out of fear and envy. They really don’t have the foggiest notion of what CES is all about.”

Gross’ Hold on Coalition

Their obsession with Gross is hardly unwarranted. About 13 years after he founded the coalition with a group of peace activists and leftist leaders, Gross is the only original member left. Organizers and volunteers have come and gone, leaving because of “activist burnout,” because they needed a better-paying job or because of personal or philosophical conflicts. But Gross remains.

Although ostensibly a democratic organization, the coalition has remained securely in Gross’ control. His partisans say he is central to CES because of his natural leadership abilities; former members and enemies attribute his endurance to Machiavellian political cunning. But in the end, many who have watched Gross say he remains in control of the coalition because he simply is the coalition.

“Our success all trickles down from Larry,” said Jacqueline Balogh, the coalition’s membership director. “Without him, CES wouldn’t exist.”

Gross is a lean, fox-faced man who has a closet athlete’s fascination with competitive sports and a weakness for interrupting his organizing activities to attend Dodger and Laker home games.

He tries to keep his private life shielded from public scrutiny. “I don’t like the focus on me,” he said in a recent interview. “It’s the organization and what it has accomplished that’s important.”

Friends and former acquaintances say Gross lives in a sparsely furnished rented duplex in Echo Park. Five years ago, he made barely $500 a month at his job. These days, he makes more, but declines to reveal a figure. He still drives his decade-old Ford despite its growing list of automotive maladies.

His voice bears traces of a Queens accent that becomes thicker when he excitedly addresses crowds. “The landlords are trying to say rent control is not an issue in dis campaign!” he roared to an enthusiastic hall filled with senior citizens early this month. “The reason is dey don’t stand for strong rent control!”

Odd Man Out

The accent is one of the few facets of Gross’ activist life style that he has not polished. His is a career that began at Forest Hills High School in New York, where Gross found himself odd man out among fellow students in the late 1960s. “I was the only radical on campus,” he said.

He is the son of divorced parents. His father, a trade school teacher, lives in Miami; his mother, a volunteer with the Simon Wiesenthal Center, lives in Los Angeles, not far from West Hollywood. Both were influences on his burgeoning activism, his father as an active union member, his mother as a Holocaust survivor.

“What she went through outraged me whenever I thought about it,” Gross said.

Often joining older college students in peace marches at Central Park and other anti-Vietnam War activities, Gross graduated from high school with few prospects. He took a job as a clothing store salesman, but in 1972, came to Los Angeles to visit his mother, who had moved here.

Extending his stay by taking political science classes at Los Angeles City College, he became active in local efforts to drum up support for the impeachment of President Richard Nixon. Drifting between activist groups, Gross in 1973 became involved in new union of peace and civil rights organizations which was protesting Nixon’s cuts in social service budgets.

The umbrella group became the Coalition for Economic Survival. “They had a little flat on Vermont Avenue with a small file cabinet in the back,” said Rosa Factor, an early coalition volunteer. “It was real small-scale. Larry was a lot different in those days. His hair was long and frizzy, hippie-style.”

Strong Points

The group’s forte was picket line protest and street theater. Demonstrating against high milk prices in 1974, coalition organizers toured inner-city shopping centers, urging a boycott. Gross and his fellow activists spoke from the back of a pickup truck, where they mounted a purple papier-mache cow named “C. Brunel Cow” after then-state Agriculture Secretary C. Brunel Christensen. At a later demonstration, protesting a Pico-Union expansion of a Pep Boys warehouse complex, Gross and his followers marched to the chant: “Manny, Moe and Jack! We want our buildings back!”

At first preoccupied with consumer issues such as rising bus fares and utility costs, the coalition managed to win favorable coverage in newspaper and television reports. They had little influence, however, on the commissions which made the decisions.

Skyrocketing rents that accompanied Los Angeles’ real estate speculation fever in the late 1970s gave the coalition a ready-made issue. “We cut our teeth on rent control,” said Norman Chramoff, a former coalition member who now works in West Hollywood’s rent control administration. “That’s when CES membership grew and grew.”

The new members were senior citizens, outraged that their rents were doubling and tripling, often in the span of a year. After learning to live on fixed incomes, many elderly tenants became afraid that they would be evicted from apartments where they had lived for years.

Remembering the horrors of the Depression, many seniors feared a return to poverty. “Anybody who lived through the Depression can’t imagine how scared we were,” said Martha Newman, a woman in her 60s who is an ardent coalition supporter. “CES saved us from that.”

Limited Victories

The coalition promised relief from the surging apartment rental rates. In a series of political confrontations with landlords, the coalition won limited victories. Although it did not get the strong rent protections it wanted, the coalition did help push a moderate rent control law (4% annual rent increase) through the Los Angeles City Council. In Los Angeles County, the coalition pressured supervisors, but was only able to help pass an even weaker rent law in 1979 (7% annual increase).

In November, 1983, a coalition-sponsored referendum failed to persuade county voters to adopt a tougher rent control law. Because of overwhelming support among senior renters, the referendum did well in West Hollywood–passing there by a 5-1 ratio–but it was not enough to keep rent control alive. That vote, which led to the expiration of county rent control in 1985, set the stage for West Hollywood’s incorporation battle.

By that time, the coalition had made deep inroads into the city’s elderly community (estimated at 40% of the area’s population). Those inroads proved crucial in the 1984 incorporation election.

Gross estimates that 2,000 of the coalition’s 5,000 members are in West Hollywood. Political observers of all stripes in West Hollywood agree that in an election year campaign, the coalition can command upwards of 2,000 votes–a significant block among West Hollywood’s 19,000 registered voters.

“West Hollywood is sort of our flagship,” Gross said. “We have a tremendous opportunity here.”

The city’s elderly tenants also provide the coalition with much of its financial support. At coalition meetings, organizers pass around empty fried chicken buckets, which are often returned brimming with cash and checks.

Several allegations of discrepancies in the coalition’s finances were reported to county officials last year. But Candace Beason, a prosecutor in the county district attorney’s investigative division, said her department has declined to investigate them. “They were relatively minor complaints,” she said last week. “The case is closed.”

Since its incorporation victory in November, 1984–in which two coalition members, Heilman and Albert, were elected to the council and the coalition aided the election victories of council members Alan Viterbi and Valerie Terrigno–the coalition has worked to consolidate its power.

New Headquarters

Late last year, the group moved its headquarters from a cluttered office on Pico Boulevard in Los Angeles to a cluttered office in the Crescent Heights Methodist Church in West Hollywood. Working at night, amid old metal desks and boxes sagging with files, coalition organizers quickly felt at home in the new city.

But, as with nearly everything they do, coalition organizers found themselves under attack, this time just for moving into West Hollywood. Landlords, Republicans and businessmen tried to pressure church leaders and city officials to evict them but the CES has stayed put.

The coalition–and Gross, in particular–are under constant fire. During the 1984 incorporation election, he was branded a Communist by Jewish Defense League activist Irv Rubin. Rubin claimed then–and maintains today–that he has “inside information” proving that Gross visited Cuba as a guest of Fidel Castro.

Gross labels the charges “the ravings of the far right.” Despite continued whisperings about “hidden agendas,” landlords and other political enemies of the coalition have never proved their claims.

But at least half a dozen former coalition members say they were invited by some coalition organizers to attend Marxist study meetings and similar functions. One former member, Mark Siegel, who is now chief deputy to Los Angeles Councilman Joel Wachs, said that he was asked several times to join a Marxist study group. He declined.

“The thing is, (CES) was such a loose group,” Siegel said. “There were all kinds of philosophies floating around there. We certainly weren’t being directed from Moscow.”

Both Gross and Heilman also admit that some members have been philosophical Marxists. “But we have Republicans among our steering committee people, too,” Gross said. “We even have one person who sells Amway products. Should we throw them out for that? I don’t think it really matters.”

‘I’m Scared’

“Of course it matters,” argues Tony Melia, who heads West Hollywood for Good Government, the group opposing the coalition in the April elections. “We want officials who choose for us, without any hidden agendas. If the rumors I hear are true, then I’m scared.”

Gross and his followers have also been portrayed as dogmatic and unwilling to take part in the compromises that are the basic components of small-town politics. “That is my one real gripe with them,” said Councilman Stephen Schulte. “There’s no middle ground to them.”

To that criticism, Heilman responds: “I don’t call that being dogmatic,” he said. “We stand for certain principles. Why should we deviate from them?”

Arguments over covert Marxism and political rigidity, however, mask the nature of the real power struggle in West Hollywood. Perceived as the most influential organization in the city, the coalition’s apparent clout is envied by groups that have had less sway with the City Council.

“At least until this election is over, they (the coalition) have the appearance of the most-organized political entity in town,” Schulte said. “One doesn’t confront them lightly.”

Those who do can expect to become enemies. When Melia unveiled his Good Government group earlier this year, he portrayed it as a rival of the coalition for political clout in West Hollywood. Gross immediately branded the group as a “front for the landlords.”

While it is indeed probable that the landlords would prefer victories by Good Government candidates in the April election, Gross immediately set into motion “an us-versus-them situation,” according to community activist Bob Conrich.

Black and White

“They have no gray areas,” Conrich said. “Larry’s convincing his elderly constituency that the landlords are waiting behind every corner to gouge them. It’s an effective political tactic, but it’s dishonest and it sets this city up for the same situation in every election. Larry will set someone up as a tool of the landlords and then try to knock them down.”

Such was the case earlier this month, when coalition organizers filled a hall at Plummer Park with senior citizens and raised the threat that the city’s rent control ordinance was in danger. “This election is going to be a big battle,” Gross said. “They have the money. They had it last time. But we have the people.”

It has been harder for the coalition to bring out their people when the heat of an election has cooled. During last year’s rent control battle, landlords far outnumbered tenants at public hearings on the proposed law.

Still, in rent control votes and in pressing for an affordable housing policy with the city’s interim growth ordinance, the coalition lived up to its reputation. On other votes, though, without obvious backing of its elderly constituents, the coalition has found itself sometimes limited in its influence over council decisions.

That became embarrassingly obvious to coalition organizers when the council refused to exact concessions from the Pacific Design Center in return for a planned major expansion. Heilman and Albert, backed by coalition lobbyists, pushed for fees that would have paid for a day-care center and provided seed money for a community development corporation. But in the end, the two council members gave up their fight.

Close Votes

The coalition has even had trouble getting some of its members appointed to city commissions. In close votes in recent months, the coalition’s candidates for posts on the city’s Transportation and Human Services commissions were defeated and the coalition even was unable to prevent landlord leader Grafton Tanquary from winning a spot on the Affordable Housing Task Force.

Schulte, Melia and a number of other political observers say such defeats indicate a lessening of the coalition’s clout. “I don’t think they loom as high on the horizon as they did six months ago,” Schulte said. “They haven’t kept up the pressure.”

But Gross and other coalition members say those defeats were minor ones, offset by gains achieved in a less obvious area–political organizing among the city’s 89% tenant population. The coalition is trying to win more allies among the apartment dwellers for future elections.

In recent months, Gross and his fellow organizers have shown up weekly at apartment buildings scattered throughout West Hollywood for “house meetings,” small receptions where they explain the new rent control law to tenants and answer questions about other concerns.

Last month, Gross showed up at one building to explain the details of the city’s new rent law to six tenants. As a radio faintly played “The Poet and Peasant Overture,” Gross set up his folding chairs and waited for his small audience to arrive.

The meeting lasted just over an hour. The conversation did not get beyond the level of after-dinner chat. But in the eyes of many West Hollywood political observers, the coalition’s dependence on such seemingly insignificant meetings may provide the key to its future influence.

“They do the groundwork that no one else in West Hollywood is willing to do,” said Councilman Viterbi. “They’re out there all the time, making new contacts, renewing old ones. No one else in this city has the patience or the manpower to do that. As long as they keep it up, they’ll be a force to reckon with.”

Comments on the Coalition

Incorporation leader Ron Stone: “West Hollywood is (CES’) oil gusher.”

Rival coalition leader Tony Melia: “CES is run by a very small group of people. They are a mystery to us all.”

Councilman Stephen Schulte: “At least until this election is over, they (CES) have the appearance of the most-organized political entity in town. One doesn’t confront them lightly.”

Councilman Alan Viterbi: “They do the groundwork that no one else in West Hollywood is willing to do.”

Source link

Proud girlfriend Zara McDermott watches side of stage as Louis Tomlinson performs at BBC Radio One’s Big Weekend

ZARA McDermott looked proud as punch as she watched boyfriend Louis Tomlinson perform from the side of the stage.

The reality star stood in pride of place throughout his set at BBC Radio 1’s Big Weekend in Sunderland.

Zara supported Louis during his Big Weekend performance Credit: Getty
The former Love Island star appeared in high spirits as she watched on Credit: Getty

Zara, 28, kept it casual for the festival outing in a black cropped T-shirt teamed with low-rise green trousers.

The former Love Island star accessorised with a beige Miu Miu baseball cap while wearing her brunette hair loose over her shoulders.

Holding a can of Diet Coke, Zara appeared animated as she chatted and clapped from the VIP viewing area while watching Louis, 33, perform.

Their relationship was recently rocked by rumours Zara was more than just good friends with Joey Essex.

hot water

Zara McDermott’s fury over online storm after ‘innocent’ pics with Joey Essex


proud partner

Zara McDermott pays rare tribute to Louis Tomlinson after his tour troubles

The TV star watched on as Louis took to the stage Credit: Getty
Louis took to the stage at BBC Radio 1’s Big Weekend Credit: Alamy

The pair formed a tight-knit bond after meeting while starring together on ITV’s Cooking With The Stars.

In pictures taken after filming wrapped on the reality show, Zara and Joey were seen together, with him leaning in to kiss her on the cheek.

Zara was met with furious trolling despite multiple reports insisting the snaps were completely innocent.

Zara and Louis were first linked in March 2025 after fans noticed they had followed each other on Instagram, with many believing the pair were introduced through the singer’s sisters.

The pair were first linked back in March 2025 Credit: Instagram
Louis wowed the crowd with his Big Weekend performance Credit: Alamy

The couple have proved an unlikely match given the singer’s past views on Love Island, the ITV2 dating show that made her famous in 2018.

When Zara’s series came to an end, Louis publicly celebrated online, tweeting: “Can I just say, thank f**k Love Island is over!”

He later doubled down on his criticism of the programme, claiming the hit reality series was “not a good message for the younger people watching”.

Source link

Award-winning TV & stage actress whose career spanned more than 60 years left nearly £3m to her kids after death aged 95

DAME Joan Plowright left nearly £3million to her children after she died last year.

The award-winning actress, who was married to Lord Laurence Olivier, left the sum to her three children.

Dame Joan Plowright was married to Lord Laurence Olivier Credit: Alamy
Dame Joan won Golden Globes for her role in the TV biopic Stalin Credit: Getty

She was known for her Golden Globe award-winning performances in TV biopic Stalin and Enchanted April, for which she was also nominated for an Academy Award.

The British actress died in January last year surrounded by her family at Denville Hall in Northwood.

Documents have now revealed that she had £2,814,901 in her estate at the time of her death – £2,711,847 after expenses.

Dame Joan’s fortune is to be divided between her three children Julie, Richard and Tamsin.

POWERS OF FLOWERS

From celebs to ‘Aphrodite’s Garden’ – why Chelsea Flower Show was filthy


REGAL GLAMOUR

George Clooney and Rita Ora light up red carpet at glitzy King’s Trust event

Joan Plowright Pictured in her London HomeCredit: Not known
Joan Plowright with Judi Dench in Tea with Mussolini Credit: Alamy

Some of her personal items have been left to her friends, including singer Tracey Ullman.

Other gifts were left for fellow actress Dame Maggie Smith, who died four months prior, and Norma Heyman.

 Gawn Grainger, Anne Bell and Nicholas Grace were also recipients.

The star left £5,000 each to Clive McColl, Jean Wilson, Janet Macklam and Helen Johnson.

She requested that a sword used by Edmund Kean in Shakespeare’s Richard III which was given to her husband by Sir John Gielgud should be lent to the British Library or another appropriate British charity.

Dame Joan added that this was unless her children found it could be “properly be permanently preserved for exhibition or inherited by an actor generally thought to be as great as its previous owners”.

The actress had a 60-year career on stage and screen. She starred in the 2018 British documentary film Nothing Like a Dame alongside Maggie Smith and Judi Dench, as well as 101 Dalmatians with Glenn Close in the ’90s.

Dame Joan was also know for her role in Love You To Death with River Phoenix, and was a star of the West End and Broadway before her international movie success.

Joan Plowright at the 1999 Evening Standard Theatre Awards Credit: PA
Laurence Olivier and Joan Plowright attend the Christening of their daughter Tamsin Credit: Alamy

A family statement said: “It is with great sadness that the family of Dame Joan Plowright, the Lady Olivier, inform you that she passed away peacefully on January 16 2025 surrounded by her family at Denville Hall aged 95.

She enjoyed a long and illustrious career across theatrefilm and TV over seven decades until blindness made her retire.

“She cherished her last 10 years in Sussex with constant visits from friends and family, filled with much laughter and fond memories.

“The family are deeply grateful to Jean Wilson and all those involved in her personal care over many years.

Lauren Bacall with Laurence Olivier and Joan Plowright in New York City Credit: Getty
The Queen greeting actress Dame Joan Plowright Credit: Times Newspapers Ltd

“Joan is survived by her loving family: Tamsin and Wilf, Julie-Kate and Dan, Richard, Shelley, Troy, Ali, Jeremy, step-granddaughter and great granddaughter Kaya and Sophia, and great grand-daughter soon to arrive.

“The family ask you to please respect their request for privacy at this time.

“We are so proud of all Joan did and who she was as a loving and deeply inclusive human being.

“She survived her many challenges with Plowright grit and courageous determination to make the best of them, and that she certainly did.

“Rest in peace, Joan…”

Dame Joan’s wedding to Lord Olivier in 1961 was the sensation of the year.

Their marriage was an enduring one until the theatre great’s death in 2007 at the age of 86. She became his carer through a series of chronic illnesses, including cancer.

From the 1950s to the 1980s, Plowright racked up dozens of stage roles in everything from Chekhov’s The Seagull to Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice.

Dame Joan stunned in Eugene Ionesco’s The Chairs and George Bernard Shaw’s totemic two female roles Major Barbara and Saint Joan.

“I’ve been very privileged to have such a life,” Plowright said in a 2010 interview with The Actors Work.

“I mean it’s magic and I still feel, when a curtain goes up or the lights come on if there’s no curtain, the magic of a beginning of what is going to unfold in front of me.”

She was awarded the title of dame by Queen Elizabeth II in 2004.

Source link

Explosions heard as mining groups stage antigovernment protest in Bolivia | Protests News

Protesters have demanded the resignation of President Rodrigo Paz, who was elected on a platform of economic reform.

Demonstrators, led by mining groups and rural unions, have clashed with law enforcement in Bolivia as tensions simmer over the country’s economic crisis, the worst in decades.

On Thursday, small explosions were heard in the midst of the protest in La Paz, credited to miners setting off small sticks of dynamite. Some protesters were reported as attempting to breach the presidential palace.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The unrest follows weeks of road blockades, as miners, farmers, teachers and rural workers express frustration over the country’s ongoing economic turmoil.

Bolivia used to be a major exporter of natural gas, but in recent years, its reserves began to shrivel, and its production has plummeted. Now, rather than being a fuel exporter, it has become a net importer, reliant on oil and natural gas from abroad.

The collapse of the natural gas industry has been coupled with dwindling supplies of foreign currency in the country. The result has been soaring inflation, supply shortages and higher prices.

Bolivians have experienced long lines for fuel, and hospitals have reported a lack of basic supplies like oxygen and medication.

Demonstrators from mining unions take part in a protest against President Rodrigo Paz's government amid an ongoing economic and fuel crisis, in La Paz, Bolivia, May 14, 2026. REUTERS/Claudia Morales
Demonstrators from mining unions take part in a protest against President Rodrigo Paz’s government in La Paz, Bolivia, on May 14 [Claudia Morales/Reuters]

Centre-right leader Rodrigo Paz was elected in October last year in part on a promise to address the economic tailspin.

His victory marked a political sea change in Bolivia. For much of the past two decades, except for a brief period in 2019, the country has been governed by the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS).

The decline of MAS has been credited, in part, to the uproar over the economy.

But on Thursday, Paz likewise faced calls from protesters for his resignation, just as his MAS predecessor, Luis Arce, had.

Earlier in the day, a group of 20 miners were invited to the presidential palace to meet with Paz and discuss their demands, according to the Reuters news agency.

Ahead of the meeting, Economy Minister Jose Gabriel Espinoza said his government was “open to dialogue”.

Among the issues reportedly discussed were fuel subsidies, welfare benefits and changes to an agrarian reform measure, Law 1720, that was repealed on Wednesday after outcry.

Still, officials have refused demands that Paz step down. “The president is not going to resign,” Mauricio Zamora, the minister of public works, services and housing, said earlier this month.

Some of Paz’s allies have blamed the unrest on former President Evo Morales, a former trade union leader who continues to draw popular support in Bolivia’s rural areas.

Morales, who led Bolivia from 2006 to 2019, previously supported protests against Paz’s predecessor Arce, after splitting from MAS.

He is also the subject of an arrest warrant: Morales has been accused of statutory rape and was held in contempt of court for failing to show up to a hearing last week.

A prolific social media user, Morales posted multiple times on Thursday about the protests, accusing the government of using him as a scapegoat. He also echoed calls for officials to address the shortages of food, fuel and other basic supplies.

“They believe that the thousands of Bolivians currently protesting — in the streets and on the roads — are merely obeying a single individual,” Morales wrote in one post.

“The outraged are driven by their social conscience and their fury against a government that, from day one, betrayed its constituents and the nation.”

Source link

Two winners, one loser in tonight’s L.A. mayor’s debate

Karen Bass, Spencer Pratt and Nithya Raman each came into tonight’s mayoral debate with goals for what may be their only time together on stage.

As the incumbent mayor, Bass had to weather blows from her challengers while trying to sell voters on her fitness for another term, despite a disastrous 2025.

As a reality TV star with no political experience, Pratt needed to show that he could offer substance instead of just AI fanboy videos and the name-calling — “Karen Basura” — he has indulged in on social media.

Raman’s task was perhaps the hardest. As a city councilmember whose two previous campaigns were backed by the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter, she needed to convince Pratt-curious voters that she’s more conservative than Bass. Yet for others, she needed to appear liberal enough to peel away support from the mayor and come out as a progressive lioness to excite Democrats in a year where GOP candidates like Pratt have to answer for the disaster that is President Trump’s second term.

Only one of the three failed.

At times, Raman was tongue-tied trying to answer simple questions. Moderators kept telling her she was going over her time. Answering a yes/no question about whether noncitizens should be allowed to vote in city elections, the councilmember went on and on, until the moderator cut her off.

While Raman offered some policy plans, she also played a card straight out of Trump’s arsenal. She claimed that Pratt and Bass were teaming up against her — an unlikely scenario that drew laughs from the audience. She got more and more frustrated, to the point that when Bass was allowed time for a rebuttal, she dejectedly proclaimed, “I haven’t been offered that in a lot of this debate.”

Raman, who had endorsed Bass’ reelection before throwing her hat in at the last minute, came off as inexperienced, touchy and unprepared.

The line of the night was Pratt dismissing Raman as a “random councilmember” — which is how the L.A. political world responded to her entry into the race. She was so upset about Pratt’s remark that she continued to whine about it to a KNBC reporter after the debate.

What’s shocking about Raman’s flop is that she should know how important it is to project well to a television audience, given that her husband is a screenwriter. Her tone was flat, when she needed to be passionate.

No one had to remind Pratt of that. He was parrying tough questions on a big stage for the first time, facing an audience who knew him only as the Angry L.A. White Guy he has reveled in playing.

He mostly succeeded.

At his best, Pratt came off as a boisterous bro with enough charm to call himself “humble” without coming off as obnoxious. He dominated the flow of conversation without coming off as commandeering, even interrupting Raman at times to let Bass speak. At one point, he even said “Sorry” when he had taken up too much time and the moderators cut him off.

He was light on specifics, other than saying he was going to do better than the others and that he would prioritize public safety above all. Instead, he was the one person on stage who used anecdotes to sell himself, citing conversations about abused animals, downtown workers too afraid to eat outside and film producers hiring local gang members to keep their shoots safe.

As a TV personality-turned-influencer, Pratt knows that storytelling is far more effective than drowning the audience in statistics, as Bass and Raman did.

But the bad Pratt flared up at times. He earned a reprimand from KNBC anchor and debate co-moderator Colleen Williams when he called the mayor an “incredible liar.” Affecting high-pitched voices to mock Bass and Raman came off as juvenile and possibly sexist. And when it came to last summer’s federal immigration raids that terrorized Southern California, Pratt appeared flummoxed when Bass pointed out that 70% of those arrested didn’t have criminal records — a use of stats that hit.

Bass was also who she had to be — measured, forceful and raring to defend her record, without coming off as defensive. She wasn’t exactly inspirational, but she didn’t have to be. The city’s powerful labor unions have backed her, along with much of the Democratic establishment.

Raman and Pratt are right in deeming Bass the old guard of a beat-up city — but the old guard didn’t get there without knowing how to win.

Source link

US Imperialism Enters a New Stage: The Left Needs to Take a Close Look at It

The US empire has opened multiple fronts in recent months. (Edgar Serrano)

Donald Trump’s rhetoric and actions against Iran, Venezuela and Cuba over the last year have few parallels in modern history. They have to be seen as marking a new stage. As such they call for a reevaluation of analysis and strategy on the part of the Left.

Trump’s repeated threat to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages where they belong” is unmatched by the rhetoric of even the most notorious and brutal heads of state over the recent past. Decapitating the entire leadership of a country to compel total submission, as Washington and Tel Aviv have done in Iran, is also a novelty in war strategy. The kidnapping of Venezuela’s president and First Lady as a first step in attempting to establish a colonial relationship by taking complete control of the country’s principal source of revenue, namely petroleum, represents a throwback to practices associated with centuries-old imperial rule

These are examples of “hyper-imperialism,” a concept theorized by Samir Amin to describe the United States “as the sole capitalist superpower.” More recently, the Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research has observed that U.S. hyper-imperialism persists despite a marked erosion of its economic and, though to a lesser extent, financial power. Its military supremacy is not only unrivaled, but is complemented by hybrid warfare, most notably “hyper-sanctions” and the use of lawfare.

What needs to be added to the concept of hyper-imperialism, particularly Trump’s version of it, is its sui generis nature. To find a parallel for the kind of hegemony the United States now exercises – highlighted by the continuous indiscriminate use of force and the threat of it – one would have to look back to the Roman empire or even earlier. One of Trump’s innovations is his deployment of the military to reinforce the system of economic sanctions, examples being the interdiction of oil tankers, the quarantine of Cuban oil, and full-scale war against Iran.

Trump II’s foreign policy hardly represents a complete break from the past. The groundwork was laid by past Democratic and Republican administrations. However, his actions force the Left not only to reformulate strategies, but to reconsider past evaluations and analyses of nations of the Global South subjected to extreme forms of imperialist aggression. The resistance to U.S. aggression must be given greater weight when evaluating governments. In addition, the popular desperation and exhaustion that erode revolutionary fervor and distance people from those same governments should be understood in light of the daily trauma people endure as a direct result of imperialist actions.

What Trump’s hyper-imperialism tells us

The starting point is to recognize that since Trump’s return to the White House, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba have been in a de facto state of war, which is an escalation of the multiple forms of hostility and aggression of past years. This is key to how all three nations should be judged. While the Left’s commitment to democracy needs to remain unquestionable and unwavering, in these cases primary responsibility for democracy’s somewhat uncertain prospects lies with the siege imposed by imperialist powers. No one other than James Madison said “Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded.”

The encirclement imposed by hyper-imperialism on Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela illuminates salient features of imperialism going back in time: first, Washington has honed the sanctions regime into a powerful tool, sometimes inflicting damage comparable to armed intervention; second, imperialism is the principal driver of the pressing economic problems facing the three nations; third, the justification for the actions taken against the three nations does not hold up under scrutiny; and fourth the brutality of the sanctions system underscores the need for its complete elimination. The discussion below looks at these points.

Tehran’s response to Operation Epic Fury underscores the crushing impact of sanctions. The nation’s leaders have made clear that the lifting of sanctions – as well as “international guarantees of U.S. non-interference” in the nation’s internal affairs – is a non-negotiable condition for ending the current conflict. That is to say, the Iranian leaders place the destruction caused by the sanctions on a similar footing as the bombs.

In the case of Venezuela, the events leading up to the abduction of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores on January 3, 2026 reveal the far-reaching and highly coordinated machinery underpinning the sanctions regime. The second Trump administration’s tracking of the “ghost fleet” carrying Venezuela’s sanctioned oil—and its interdiction of several of those vessels— underscores how far Washington has gone in perfecting sanctions enforcement since the early years of the Cuban Revolution.

The first Trump administration pioneered in promoting “overcompliance” in which Washington’s well-publicized monitoring was designed to assure that companies and financial institutions world-wide would shun all transactions with Venezuela, even ones not specifically targeted by the sanctions. The aim was to impose a veritable blockade. Mike Pompeyo and Elliot Abrams spearheaded a campaign – drawing on the FBI, the Treasury, U.S. embassies, and the intelligence community – to scrutinize the dealings of companies worldwide with Venezuela, in what amounted to a warning shot to companies throughout the world. Even firms that engaged in oil-for-food swaps, which were not proscribed by the sanction regime, were warned that they ran risks. Companies under investigation were likewise told that penalties could be suspended if they halted all dealings with Venezuela.

A retrospective look at the first Trump administration’s sweeping enforcement measures and their devastating impact reinforces the argument that the sanctions have been so harmful that they need to be dismantled unconditionally and entirely. This position contrasts with that of liberals such as the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), which criticized the sanctions against Venezuela yet called for using “negotiations to flexibilize financial and oil sanctions” as leverage to secure concessions. Indeed, power brokers in Washington also favored sanctions relief as a bargaining tool to push the Maduro government to enact market-oriented reforms to the benefit of U.S. capital.

A full grasp of the scale and severity of Washington’s “war” on Venezuela undercuts the notion upheld by some on the left who argue that the sanctions were no more to blame for the nation’s pressing problems than government mismanagement. An even harsher position on the left affirms that the sanctions “do not explain the root causes of the societal collapse we have lived through.” 

Likewise, the forcible removal of Maduro and Flores demonstrates that Washington was intent on dismantling a government whose example and policies ran counter to U.S. interests. Prior to the January 3 kidnapping, some on the left in Venezuela and elsewhere denied that Washington sought to remove Maduro from power because they were convinced that he had effectively sold out. But they were wrong insofar as Washington clearly wanted Maduro out. Pedro Eusse, a leading member of the Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV), which broke with the Maduro government in 2020, wrote in July 2025, “Everything indicates that the true intention of the US and its allies’ policy of aggression toward the Venezuelan government has not been its overthrow, but its subordination.”

In the case of Cuba, the extreme measures of the Trump II administration against the nation also shine light on the cruelty and effectiveness of the system of sanctions per se. Trump’s navy-enforced quarantine on oil shipments is a first for the nation since the October 1962 missile crisis. The result has been recurring 16-hour blackouts that have disrupted water delivery, hospital operations, food production, and garbage collection.

The quarantine spotlights Cuba’s near total dependence on oil, in contrast to nearby Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, which generate a significant share of their electricity from coal and natural gas. The dependence stems precisely from the sanctions, which impeded imports and pushed Cuba into relying almost entirely on Venezuelan oil—only for Trump to cut off that supply too.

Indeed, the quarantine underscores Cuba’s reliance on Venezuelan oil and the reciprocal solidarity that saw fuel exchanged for Cuban medical personnel. That’s a plus for Maduro. The program undercuts the claim of some on the left that Maduro’s foreign policy, in the words of the PCV, never moved beyond an “anti-imperialist rhetoric” without substance.

The Washington-crafted narrative on Cuba and the reaction to it by the mainstream media and the Left are curious. In contrast to the demonization directed at Venezuela and Iran, Washington’s condemnation of Cuba has been relatively hollow and has gained little traction in mainstream outlets or left-leaning circles. The anti-Cuba vilification—driven by hardline anti-Communism—remains largely confined to the far right, epicentered in Miami. The official rhetoric is a departure from the wording in 1982 when the State Department designated Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism due to “its long history of providing advice, safe haven, communications, training, and financial support to guerrilla groups and individual terrorists.” Now the Trump administration’s justification for the same designation is that the Cuban government grants “safe harbor to terrorists” and refuses to extradite them.

As false as the narco-terrorism case against Maduro is, it nonetheless offered a rationale that undoubtedly resonated with at least a slice of public opinion. Compare that to Marco Rubio’s line on Cuba which flatly denies the catastrophic effects of the oil quarantine. Rubio claims “we’ve done nothing punitive against the Cuban regime” and adds, the blackouts “have nothing to do with us.” Instead Rubio faults the Cuban leadership on grounds that “they want to control everything.” A classic case of victim-blaming, but with few buying into it. A YouGov survey in March found that only 28 percent of U.S. adults support the U.S.’s blocking of oil shipments to Cuba, as opposed to 46 percent opposed.

In addition, Rubio’s assertion that the only novelty is that Cuba is “not getting free Venezuelan oil anymore” is blatantly fallacious. Rubio is well aware of Venezuela’s swap with Cuba involving the latter’s International Medical Brigades, which maintain a sizeable presence in Venezuela and elsewhere. This is precisely why Rubio has vigorously attempted to sabotage the program throughout the region, unfortunately with a degree of success.

If the oil quarantine demonstrates anything it’s that the hardships facing the Cuban people are rooted in Washington’s war on Cuba, now going on 65 years. Criticism of Cuban government policies, or of socialism itself, comes in a distant second place.

The Trump II disaster should be an eye opener

Trump’s bullying offensive abroad has fueled mounting opposition to interventionism and has even fostered anti-imperialist sentiment in the United States. Just one week into the 2026 Iranian bombings, 53 percent of the U.S. population opposed the strikes, in sharp contrast to U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, the Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq, which enjoyed large majority support at the outset. That the former editor of The New Republic called the U.S. war on Iran imperialistic is telling. In a New York Times op-ed, Peter Beinart wrote “Donald Trump’s foreign policy vision is imperialism.”

One lesson of recent events is particularly relevant for the Left: the demonization of heads of state is a sine qua non for military intervention. In the case of Iran and Venezuela, the discrediting combines some fact with a large dosage of fake news. In the case of Maduro, the demonization which dates back to shortly after he assumed office in 2013, was taken to higher levels as a result of the controversial presidential election of July 28, 2024, which the opposition claimed was fraudulent. Subsequently the corporate media consistently tagged the word “autocrat” and “dictator” onto Maduro’s name. Six months later, Trump was in office and the vilification escalated to a new pitch. Indeed, the branding of Maduro as a narco-terrorist was an indispensable prelude to the bombing of boats in the Caribbean and the subsequent kidnappings – notwithstanding the doubts raised by some media outlets regarding the veracity of the claim.

The takeaway is that the Left needs to distinguish between criticism and demonization and take cognizance of the possible dire consequences of the latter.

The demonization of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his inner circle also set the stage for imperialist actions, but, of course, his government could not be placed in the same category as those of Cuba and Venezuela.

Furthermore, as in Venezuela and Cuba, harsh sanctions have been conducive to shadow economies, clientelistic networks, and fraudulent dealings, patterns well documented in numerous studies on sanctions throughout the world.

Eskandar Sadeghi-Boroujerdi, a prolific scholar on Iran who is highly critical of the government, told JacobinWhile the Islamic Republic is paranoid, it is also very much under siege from all sides.” He also notes the intrinsic relationship between the sanctions and the nation’s pressing problems: “Sanctions and structural weaknesses of the Iranian economy feed off one another — there’s a symbiotic relationship between them.”

In short, any serious reading of Iran must foreground the role of sanctions—an approach that inevitably tempers the tendency to cast its leadership in purely demonizing terms.

The lessons of July 28, 2024

The issue of the accurateness of the July 28, 2024 election tallies in Venezuela needs to be reframed. Those elections could not have been democratic, regardless of the announced results, because Venezuelan voters had a gun pointed at their heads: reelect Maduro and the sanctions continue; elect an opposition candidate and the sanctions will be lifted.

The overwhelming majority of Venezuelans knew full well what was at stake. Luis Vicente León – the nation’s leading pollster, himself a member of the opposition – reported that 92 percent of the population believed that the sanctions negatively impacted the economy, and most characterized the effect as “very negative.” (The poll puts the lie to the State Department’s repeated claim that the sanctions only harm government officials.)

A similar scenario played out in the Nicaraguan presidential elections of 1990 when opposition candidate Violeta Chamorro upset the Sandinistas in the midst of a devastating, U.S.-promoted civil war. But there was a fundamental difference. Far from demonizing the Sandinistas, Chamorro accepted a power-sharing transition agreement with them. In contrast, for over a decade prior to the July 28 elections the opposition’s main leader, María Corina Machado, had ruled out negotiations with those who had allegedly violated human rights. She never tired of voicing the slogans “no immunity,” ”no to amnesty,” “no agreements with criminals,” often with specific reference to the Chavistas and to Maduro himself. Maduro and his followers had every reason to fear the type of repression that the opposition initiated during the two-day abortive coup it staged in April 2002 against the Chavista government. Even opposition pollster León admitted that the fear was well-founded.

Marta Harnecker, the renowned leftist theoretician, wrote that the Sandinistas erred in holding the 1990 elections amid U.S. promoted violence and sabotage. Harnecker labeled the decision to organize elections “on terrain shaped by the counterrevolution” a “strategic error.”

A reevaluation and reinterpretation of the July 28 elections is instructive. The hard-core Chavistas accept the official results which showed Maduro winning with nearly 52 percent of the vote. The opposition refutes that claim. A third position is defended by supporters of Maduro who nevertheless express skepticism and point out that because of a massive hacking attack from outside the country, it may be impossible to ever know the true count.

The debate about the accuracy of the official results of July 28 sidesteps the overriding issue of whether the elections should have been held in the first place. Indeed, the idea of conditioning elections on the lifting of sanctions was not far-fetched. A year before the elections, Maduro, in a reference to the United States, declared: “If they want free elections, we want elections free of sanctions.” Subsequently, Elvis Amoroso, the Chavista head of the nation’s electoral council, tied the participation of European Union electoral observers to its lifting of sanctions. At the same time, the Biden administration indicated its willingness to bargain with the Venezuelan government along those lines.

Carlos Ron, a former vice-minister and currently an analyst for Tricontinental, told me that the Chavista leadership ruled out delaying the elections in order to demonstrate its democratic credentials in the face of the international smear campaign. Ron said “At that moment, greater importance was placed on the need to defend the democratic character of the Bolivarian political process and its continuity, and abide by the Constitution, in the face of imperialist pressures.”

Maduro’s intentions may have been commendable. But the decision overlooked one compelling reason to suspend the electoral process. Tying the holding of elections to the removal of the sanctions would have placed the entire blame for setbacks to democracy where it belonged: U.S. intervention in Venezuela’s internal affairs.

In defense of democracy

As a rule, the Left has always championed the defense of democracy. In this sense, the Left’s vision compares favorably with U.S.-style “liberal democracy,” shaped by the influence of big money and other inherently undemocratic practices such as gerrymandering, the Electoral College and voter suppression.

Historically, however, the Left has faced formidable obstacles on this front. For instance, it has come to power in countries like Russia, China and Cuba that were lacking in democratic tradition. That, however, was the least of the problem. Its main problem has been, and continues to be, imperialist hostility which limits options.

Precisely for that reason, the Left needs to tread cautiously in the way it frames the issue of democracy in nations that are in the crosshairs of imperialism. In the three countries discussed in this article, the Left can’t deny that democracy has been infringed upon. The Maduro government, for instance, stripped the PCV – the country’s oldest political party, forged in a history of militant struggle including two periods of clandestine resistance armed struggle in the 1950s and 1960s – of its legal status, transferring recognition to a marginal breakaway faction that appropriated its name and symbols.

Nor can it deny that discontent is currently widespread in the three nations, which became most evident in the Iranian “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests and those of the first days of this year. In Cuba and Venezuela, protests reflect widespread disillusionment, even while the mobilizations have been manipulated and financed from abroad.

One troubling sign in Venezuela is that the disturbances have spread out from upper-middle class neighborhoods where they were confined during the 4-month protests (the “guarimba”) of 2014 and, albeit less so, during those of 2017. The two days following the July 28, 2024 elections, for instance, protests were registered in Caracas barrios such as Petare, the city’s largest. Reflecting on the protests, long-standing Caracas resident and international commentator Phil Gunson reported “Petare is a traditionally Chavista zone, but ever since a few years ago, people have been distancing themselves from the government.”

The Left can’t turn its back on this reality. But nor can it join mainstream voices that channel dissatisfaction into blanket vilification of governments under imperial siege. Rather its line has to be basically: “What do you expect!” In the face of hyper-imperialist aggression these countries are at war, figuratively and in some cases literally speaking. Criticism needs to be framed within this context.

Lenin’s concept of democratic centralism – the principle designed to guide the internal workings of his political party – is instructive. In his writing throughout his political career, party democracy remained a constant, but the degree of centralism depended on the political climate in the nation. Along similar lines, the Left’s adherence to democracy can never be minimized. However, valid criticism of undemocratic practices in countries like Venezuela and Cuba in which the Left is in power needs to consider those actions as overreactions to imperialist aggression.

In this era of intensified hyper-imperialism, the Left is compelled to stand behind nations like Cuba and Venezuela, and recognize that the real blame for backsliding including violation of democratic norms lies with imperialism. The barbaric actions of Trump II are making this imperative clearer than ever.

Steve Ellner is a retired professor of the Universidad de Oriente in Venezuela where he lived for over 40 years and is currently Associate Managing Editor of Latin American Perspectives. He is the author and editor of over a dozen books on Latin American politics and history. In 2018 he spoke in over twenty cities in the U.S. and Canada as part of a Venezuelan solidarity tour.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

This article was originally posted in CounterPunch.

Source link

Fifa set to add yellow card amnesty to World Cup group stage

Fifa is poised to change the rules around suspensions for accumulated yellow cards at this summer’s World Cup.

BBC Sport understands world football’s governing body is planning to add a second amnesty stage, wiping all yellow cards at the end of the group stage as well as after the quarter-finals.

Under current rules a team would play five matches to reach the quarter-finals, and any two bookings in those games would lead to a suspension.

The revamped World Cup, with 48 teams instead of 32, includes an extra round and it is felt the jeopardy for a ban is too high.

Without a change to the regulations, Fifa fears that many more players would be walking a suspension tightrope by playing six fixtures through to the last eight – and potentially miss a semi-final.

The topic is on the agenda for discussion when the Fifa Council meets in Vancouver, Canada on Tuesday.

Two bookings will remain the suspension threshold, but the rule change will mean there are only two small pockets of games for players to pick up a ban.

It would require cautions in two of the three group games, or in two of the last 32, last 16 and the quarter-finals, to miss a match.

Source link

Trump rushed off stage at White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner; reports of gunshots

President Trump was evacuated from the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner on Saturday evening after an incident led to a security response and reports that gunshots were fired.

A Times reporter attending the dinner was forced to shelter in a restroom. He said he heard about four to five gunshots around 8:30 p.m. Eastern time. He said security told him that the person may have had a firearm. It was unclear whether the person was dead or wounded.

Guests mingle in a room

Guests at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner mingle while awaiting updates about a shooting during the event at the Washington Hilton Hotel on Saturday.

(Andrea Castillo / Los Angeles Times)

A presidential motorcade was spotted outside the Washington Hilton hotel at about 8:45 p.m., though Trump’s location is yet unknown.

At about the same time, an ambulance arrived on scene as about 100 event attendees were escorted out of the secured event. The bulk of the attendees are still inside the hotel.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Source link

Gemma Collins and Sinitta STORM OFF I’m a Celeb stage in explosive final

Gemma Collins and Sinitta reacted angrily to Jimmy Bullard’s claims of what led to his own bitter row with Adam Thomas during this I’m a Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here series

Gemma Collins and Sinitta both stormed off stage during the I’m a Celeb finale.

Drama unfolded moments before actor Adam Thomas was crowned the winner of the show, beating Mo Farah to the title. Singer and actress Sinitta, 62, appeared to take issue at something Jimmy Bullard had said about his own spat with Thomas which happened earlier in the series.

Addressing the audience, Sinitta said: “You guys weren’t there, you don’t know what happened.” She then stormed off stage, and was soon followed by TV personality Gemma.

Jimmy, the former professional footballer, had accused Thomas of being “abusive, aggressive and intimidating”. Adam came face to face with Jimmy and David Haye again for the first time since their bitter camp fallouts in South Africa.

READ MORE: Who won I’m A Celebrity 2026? Adam Thomas triumphs to be Legend despite ‘unbroadcastable’ rowREAD MORE: Dan Walker breaks silence and insists ‘I did NOT settle’ after claims withdrawn

And it was ex boxer David that made the first move, calling out the star when he was chatting to Ant and Dec. This season has been full of twists, trials, tension and tears and now I’m A Celebrity South Africa has reached its end.

When he was announced the winner, Adam said: “Thank you guys, thank you so much. I love ya.” Before he did his final trial in South Africa, Adam, 37, admitted there had been “a lot of drama” in camp. And there was a lot of drama in the final too, as hosts Ant and Dec struggled to stay on top of things.

Adam reflected on it and said he had apologised to Jimmy several times. Looking serious he said: “Listen I take full responsibility for my actions. Yes emotions were definitely running high in that moment. But, you know, I have got nothing but love for Jimmy.”

When David Haye tried to interrupt him Adam also said “will you just let the finalists speak”. Adam then said: “I take everything he said into account. That is not how I want to show myself off and I have never showed myself off in that light before that or after that. And I am sorry Jimmy.”

Adam was given a final eating trial in South Africa called Swallow the Odds, and looking ahead to the prospect of winning said: “I am gonna be a legend baby” He then proceeded to smash the trial, eating five courses with the likes of five pig teats, two century fermented eggs, tarantula and fermented tofu.

He even cheered himself on, saying “come on Adam, ” in between mouthfuls. After watching Gemma said: “You done so well, you amazing.”

But he also had to cope with a backlash from other contestants, as David Haye interrupted the show at this point and said: “Do you think you deserve to win it after calling Jimmy the C-word a couple of times?”

Source link

Justin Bieber superfan Billie Eilish drops to the floor on stage in ‘overwhelming’ moment at Coachella

JUSTIN Bieber superfan Billie Eilish dramatically dropped to the floor on at Coachella when he brought her out on stage.

At weekend 2 of the desert festival, Billie could be seen crawling up the stage before sitting on a chair in front of her idol, Justin, who she has long been a fan of.

Billie Eilish was taken on stage as Justin Bieber performed One Less Lonely Girl Credit: Youtube/Coachella
Billie has long been a superfan of Justin and was visibly overwhelmed on stage Credit: Youtube/Coachella
She looked so shocked as Justin sang to her Credit: Youtube/Coachella
Justin hugged her at one point Credit: Youtube/Coachella

Justin then sang the song One Less Lonely Girl to her midway through his Coachella set.

Billie, who has long been a fan of the Baby singer, looked so emotional as she was serenaded by the star.

On X, fans have reacted to the moment.

One person penned: “THE FACT that it wasn’t planned, literally it was Hailey Bieber herself who pushed Billie Eilish to get on stage and be the OLLG.”

Read More about Coachella

COAC-HELL-A

The dark side of Coachella – from ‘nightmare’ influencers to shock price tag


material girls

Madonna strips down to lingerie for duo with Sabrina Carpenter at Coachella

A second wrote: “No way that Billie Eilish became one less lonely girl in 2026.”

“This is so cute I love how Billie still stays in her fangirl zone around Justin,” said a third.

“Will go down as one of the most iconic Coachella performances ever,” added a fourth.

“She’s such a fan lmao,” penned a fifth.

While a sixth said: “Justin pulling Billie on stage for ‘One Less Lonely Girl’ and holding her like that?? Coachella 2026 just healed my 2015 heart. This is the collab we NEVER knew we needed.”

Billie has long credited Justin as an inspiration, and even grew up as a Belieber.

“He’s amazing. He’s so sweet and, like, I feel – just, honestly, I feel for him, man. He’s been through a lot, dude,” Billie told Ellen DeGeneres previously.

The pair met at Coachella in 2019 and went on to collaborate on the remix to her song Bad Guy.

When the remix came out, Billie shared a photo of her as a teen in her bedroom which had posters of Justin plastered all of the walls.

Alongside the snap, she penned: “BAD GUY FEAT. JUSTIN BIEBER OUT NOWWW OMGFFFFGGG ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE MAN.”

This weekend’s set from Justin marked his second weekend headlining at Coachella this year.

Following his headline set last weekend, the star hosted a blowout bash with wife Hailey and A-list friends.

A source told The U.S. Sun that the party was ultra-exclusive and hosted by Justin’s new fashion brand, Skylrk, which also had a pop-up at the festival.

“Many people were turned down who had previously been invited,” they claimed.

“Promoters also had a lot of girls on their guest lists and I heard Hailey was turning them away.”

Influencer Zach Clayton echoed this by sharing a video on his TikTok showing a guy complaining, “They cut all my guest list off.”

He explained he invited 20 girls and they were all denied, joking that Hailey is a “boss,” and she was likely the reason they were not given access to the private event.

Justin headlined Coachella this year Credit: YouTube

Source link

Coachella 2026: Sabrina Carpenter brings out Madonna to perform new song ‘I Feel Free’

Anyone who thinks Coachella’s biggest surprises are reserved for Weekend 1 was proven wrong Friday night as Sabrina Carpenter welcomed Madonna on stage during her Weekend 2 headlining set. The crowd exploded with waves of cheers as the iconic pop star came on stage.

Madge joined Carpenter as a surprise guest during “Juno,” in which Carpenter reemerged in a gown that was a nod to Botticelli’s “The Birth of Venus” for a torch-passing duet of Madonna’s 1990 pop-house gauntlet “Vogue.”

The classic was followed by the debut of the gloriously upbeat “I Feel Free,” the first track from the pop icon’s forthcoming new album “Confessions II,” due out July 3.

The singer announced the record, a sequel to 2005’s “Confessions On A Dancefloor,” on April 15, alongside a 60-second teaser video for “I Feel Free.”

The Coachella performance, however, marks the first time the song has been heard in full — a fitting full circle moment 20 after Madonna played the Sahara Tent in 2006, complete with the same boots and costuming from that gig. “Confessions II” will be Madonna’s first full-length album since 2019’s “Madame X.”

  • Share via

“Let’s try to be together. Let’s try to avoid disagreements,” Madonna said as she spoke about the moon and planets aligning.

Before the pair ended with “Like a Prayer,” accompanied by a choir, Madonna had another reason to be grateful.

“This is probably the first time I’ve ever performed with someone shorter than me,” Madonna said to Carpenter as the crowd laughed. “Thank you for giving me that experience.”

Senior Audience Editor Vanessa Franko contributed to this report.

Source link