vote

Reporting from Sacramento — Gov. Jerry Brown is still haunted by one thing he did as a young governor 40 years ago. And he hopes to finally undo it on election day.

In 1976, pressured from the left, he signed a bill that made California prison time more fixed and less dependent on the discretion of parole boards.

Flexible sentencing, based on a board’s assessment of a felon’s likelihood of going straight once released, “was criticized because it treated people differently,” Brown told me last week.

“Nobody thought, ‘Well, wait a minute! People are different.’”

The rap by liberals on parole boards was that black and Latino prisoners were being kept behind bars longer than white people who had committed the same crimes.

So the boards lost much of their power to release prisoners based on good behavior or to keep them locked up if they still seemed dangerous. Release times were pretty much set in stone by sentencing judges.

“What I didn’t think of,” Brown says, is that with fixed sentences “there would be no incentive. You’d be released no matter what you did. Some people need a powerful incentive.”

Incentives, he says, “to buck gangs — they can slit your throat — to avoid narcotics, to not break the rules and take programs that will help you turn your dysfunctional life around.

“The idea of just putting someone in a box and waiting for time to elapse is not smart.”

Brown has been talking this way for years. He finally got around to doing something last winter. He latched onto someone else’s juvenile justice ballot initiative and inserted his criminal sentencing overhaul. The state Supreme Court ruled that was OK.

Brown’s idea became Proposition 57.

The proposal is laden with the wonky words such as “determinate” and “indeterminate.” In everyday language, they mean fixed and flexible.

Proposition 57 would return sentencing part-way back to the old days.

“It worked a hell of a lot better then,” the governor says. “Better than what the Legislature created. It’s not a place of deep reflection.”

His proposal would affect only prisoners convicted of “nonviolent” crimes, Brown says.

Nonsense, say opponents, largely prosecutors. They argue that many felons who would be eligible for early release actually committed violent offenses.

Under the measure, a prisoner could apply for parole after he had served the full sentence for his nonviolent primary offense. But he wouldn’t need to have served time for any add-on sentencing “enhancements,” such as for using a gun or being a “three-strikes” repeater.

Opponents argue that prisoners would be eligible for early parole even if they had been convicted, for example, of raping an unconscious woman, participating in a drive-by shooting or taking a hostage.

“It literally unwinds three strikes,” says San Luis Obispo County Dist. Atty. Dan Dow, Central Coast chairman of the opposition campaign.

“It’s the worst thing to happen to public safety in California in 40 years.”

Updates from Sacramento »

The prosecutor adds: “There aren’t any nonviolent inmates in prison today. You can only go to prison if you’ve committed a very serious crime.”

Brown’s earlier “realignment” program required counties to jail lower-level felons rather than send them to state prison.

Because of a federal court order to reduce overcrowding in lockups, there are roughly 50,000 fewer inmates in state institutions today than when Brown returned as governor in 2011. Prosecutors say prisons are holding only the worst of the worst.

“This is the governor at his worst,” says Merced County Dist. Atty. Larry Morse, state co-chairman of the opposition campaign. “I’m a Democrat. I’ve supported him more than I’ve disagreed. But this is the hubris of being a second-term governor.”

Actually, it’s Brown’s fourth term.

Morse says he and other prosecutors are particularly incensed that the governor didn’t invite them into the planning for Proposition 57.

“He conceived this in the governor’s office without any collaboration with district attorneys, sheriffs or police chiefs,” Morse says. “It’s a seriously flawed product.”

Brown counters that the measure “allows flexibility. The case for it is irrefutable to anyone with an open mind.”

Under Proposition 57, prisoners would get credit for good behavior, rehabilitation and education achievements.

Much less controversial is a provision that would require judges, rather than prosecutors, to decide whether a juvenile should be tried as a minor or an adult.

Practically all the campaign money is on Brown’s side. He has a political kitty stashed with millions. The opposition has practically zilch.

This is not the kind of ballot measure that excites moneyed interests. It doesn’t affect the bottom lines of corporations or labor, so there’s no motivation to bankroll the opposition campaign. In fact, the opposite is true. No outfit involved politically in Sacramento wants to cross the governor.

Polls show Proposition 57 heavily favored by voters. And Brown retains a high job approval rating.

The proposition’s central question is: Should a felon’s sentence only reflect the evil he committed on a particular day? Or should he be given an opportunity for partial redemption by trying to turn his life around over several years of incarceration?

People usually act better when there are rewards for being good and punishment for misbehaving — that’s the concept of heaven and hell.

Opponents have good points. Brown should have conferred with more experts in planning. And he should have better defined “nonviolent.”

But the broad goal of motivating bad guys to become good guys is worth a “yes” vote.

[email protected]

Follow @LATimesSkelton on Twitter

ALSO

Why Gov. Jerry Brown is staking so much on overhauling prison parole

Sanchez redoubles her critique of Gov. Brown’s Proposition 57 — and Harris

Two-thirds of Californians favor Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan to revamp prison parole rules

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Monday prepared for a showdown over whether noncitizens held at the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have a right to question the legality of their imprisonment.

A measure passed by the chamber last week on a 49-42 vote would effectively overturn a Supreme Court decision granting detainees the right to challenge their detention in federal court. A final vote on adding that language to a defense spending bill was expected today.

But two proposed amendments would slightly ease that prohibition; one of them was proposed by the author of the original language, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

If adopted by the Senate, the detainee amendment would need to be accepted by the House of Representatives to be sent to President Bush.

Graham sponsored the amendment to ban foreign captives at Guantanamo — who number about 500 — from challenging their detention with a writ of habeas corpus, a provision that dates from English common law.

In an effort to soften the prohibition, Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) on Monday introduced a competing amendment that would permit prisoners to question the rationale for their incarceration but exclude petitions over other matters, including conditions of confinement.

“It is reasonable to insist that when the government deprives a person of his or her liberty, and in this case for an indefinite period of time, that the individual have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the legality of their detention,” Bingaman said on the Senate floor. “This is not a radical proposition that I’ve just enunciated. It is enshrined in our Constitution.”

But Graham, a military lawyer before he began his political career, argued that since the Supreme Court granted Guantanamo prisoners access to federal court in 2004, the system has been swamped with frivolous complaints.

“Does the United States Senate want [to give] enemy terrorists, Al Qaeda members being detained at Guantanamo Bay, unlimited access to our federal courts to sue our troops?” Graham asked. “Never in the midst of warfare has an [enemy] prisoner been allowed” such judicial rights.

In response to concerns raised by some senators, Graham was offering to amend his initial provision to give Guantanamo prisoners some legal rights to appeal findings by the military that they are enemy combatants. In addition, detainees sentenced to 10 years or more would receive an automatic appeal; those who received a lesser sentence could ask for a hearing.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said he hoped his colleagues would adopt Bingaman’s more permissive language. But if not, he added, he hoped the Senate would accept Graham’s revisions to his amendment as an improvement over the measure adopted last week.

“All of us really believe that we must operate according to our Constitution and our laws,” Levin said.

Juan Orlando Hernandez, member of Trump-endorsed candidate Nasry Asfura’s party, serving US drug trafficking sentence.

Washington, DC – United States President Donald Trump says he will pardon the former leader of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernandez, just days before the Central American country’s closely contested presidential election.

The announcement on Friday came two days before Honduras’s vote, in which Trump has endorsed conservative National Party candidate Nasry “Tito” Asfura.

Hernandez was the party’s last successful presidential candidate and had served as president from 2014 to 2022. Last year, he was sentenced to 45 years in prison in the US after being extradited from Honduras on charges of drug trafficking.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump said that Hernandez has been “treated very harshly and unfairly”. He cited “many people that I greatly respect”.

Trump also again threw his support behind Asfura, who is facing four opponents in the scandal-plagued race. No clear frontrunner has yet emerged.

He added that a loss for Asfura would lead to a rupture in US support for the country of about 11 million, echoing a similar threat he made in support of Javier Milei before Argentina’s presidential election in October.

“If he doesn’t win, the United States will not be throwing good money after bad, because a wrong Leader can only bring catastrophic results to a country, no matter which country it is,” Trump wrote.

The US president and several right-wing figures have previously accused Rixi Moncada, the candidate for outgoing President Xiomara Castro’s left-leaning LIBRE party, as well as Salvador Nasralla, of the centre-right Liberal Party, of being in the pocket of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

Both candidates have rejected the claims, which come as Trump has increased pressure against Maduro. That has included surging US military assets to the region and floating possible land operations.

Drug trafficking conviction

Despite Trump’s statements, the decision to pardon Hernandez sits uncomfortably with his administration’s pledges to target drug cartels and narcotic smuggling into the US.

That has included designating several cartels as “foreign terrorist organisations” and launching strikes on alleged drug smugglers in international waters. Rights groups have said the attacks are tantamount to extrajudicial killings and likely violate both domestic and international law.

During his trial, prosecutors accused Hernandez of working with powerful cartels to smuggle more than 400 tonnes of cocaine en route to the US. That included ties to the Mexico-based Sinaloa cartel, one of the criminal groups designated by the Trump administration as “terrorists”.

Hernandez allegedly relied on millions of dollars in cartel bribes to fuel his political rise.

At the time of his sentencing, former US Attorney General Merrick Garland said Hernandez used his presidency “to operate the country as a narco-state where violent drug traffickers were allowed to operate with virtual impunity, and the people of Honduras and the United States were forced to suffer the consequences.”

Richard Rider would love to have Gov. Pete Wilson’s job. He dreams of hacking away at bureaucracy, crushing all new tax legislation under a huge rubber stamp that reads “VETO.” He’s even imagined the sound this would make: whoooomp!

Rider, the Libertarian candidate for governor, is a realist, however. The 49-year-old stockbroker from San Diego knows that a minor party candidate such as himself has no hope of being elected governor Nov. 8. Still, he thinks he can help defeat Wilson (whom Rider deems a “wimp” and a “Benedict Arnold” masquerading as a Republican), which is why, not long ago, he wrote Democrat Kathleen Brown a letter asking for $500,000.

“I’m the Libertarian Party gubernatorial candidate. Normally that might elicit nothing more from you than a yawn. But I can get you elected,” Rider wrote. “What you need is a third candidate to drain votes from Wilson. I can do that. . . . Dollar for dollar, there is no better use for your campaign funds than in my race for governor.”

Rider’s pitch must have sounded presumptuous coming from a man unknown to most Californians. Like the other minor party candidates for governor–Jerome McCready of the American Independent Party and Gloria La Riva of the Peace & Freedom Party–Rider was not invited to participate in the recent televised debate between Wilson and Brown. He lacks money, exposure and governmental experience.

But Rider has one very powerful thing going for him: a dissatisfied electorate. A recent Times poll shows that California voters are unhappy with Brown and Wilson and that three out of every five are planning to vote for the “lesser of two evils” for governor. If just a tiny fraction of those people vote for a so-called third party candidate, political analysts say, it could alter the race.

“In this state, where elections are won or lost by 1 or 2 points, third party candidates can decide elections,” said Bill Press, chairman of the California Democratic Party, who has followed Rider’s candidacy with interest. “If I had an extra $500,000, I would give it to Richard Rider and it would be money well spent. . . . Every vote he gets is one vote Pete Wilson doesn’t.”

Taken together, the four minor parties that have qualified to appear on the California ballot–American Independent, Green, Libertarian, and Peace & Freedom–represent 456,000 voters, or about 3% of the state’s electorate.

The American Independent and Libertarian parties, though they differ on many principles, are both committed to strictly limiting the power of government and to cutting taxes. Conventional wisdom says that to vote for one of these parties’ candidates is to take a vote away from a Republican candidate.

The Green and the Peace & Freedom parties, though also very different from one another, both seek social justice and equality. These parties are more likely to appeal to voters who might otherwise cast ballots for Democrats.

These minor parties’ candidates face an uphill battle. Virtually ignored by the press and by their more mainstream rivals, they have trouble raising the money needed for expensive broadcast advertising and direct mail flyers. As a result, minor party candidates can campaign tirelessly, making speeches and walking precincts, and still remain largely unknown.

La Riva, the Peace & Freedom candidate for governor, is a printer and labor organizer in San Francisco. McCready, the American Independent nominee, runs a shop that sells pre-hung doors and other construction materials in Castroville. Rider, who closed his financial planning business at the end of last year, is the only minor party candidate who has campaigned for governor full time.

Nevertheless, Press, the Democratic Party chairman, believes that politicians who ignore these alternative candidates do so at their own peril. This year, he has gone so far as to donate his own money to keep a Green Party gubernatorial candidate from competing with Brown.

Leading up to the June primary election, three candidates were vying for the Green gubernatorial nomination–despite widespread concern within the party that a Green nominee would siphon votes from Brown in the general election. Then, one Green leader launched a campaign urging Greens to vote for “None of the Above”–an option that allows Greens to choose no candidate.

Eager to safeguard Brown voters, Press sent a $500 donation to the none-of-the-above campaign, dubbed Friends of Nobody. Then he sent letters to his friends asking them to do the same.

“I raised $5,000 to $6,000 or more for their campaign,” Press said proudly, recalling that the effort to gain more votes for no one than for any of the candidates was successful. “Nobody won. Which I considered a victory.”

Third party candidates are familiar with this kind of circular reasoning. They see no shame in losing, as long as they have introduced new ideas into the race. And they believe that every vote cast for a minor party candidate puts a little more pressure on the major parties to shape up.

That is why a conservative such as Rider is working so hard to help a Democrat such as Brown. Rider is probably the only Brown supporter who wants to do away with state income taxes, abolish the workers’ compensation system and phase out all welfare payments. He wants to repeal the law that requires motorcyclists to wear helmets. He believes the Endangered Species Act will result in the nationalization of all property. And he supports the death penalty–which Brown opposes, though she pledges to enforce it as governor.

“Obviously, I’m no fan of the Democrats’ pipe dream of a socialist utopia. . . . Kathleen Brown would make a terrible governor,” Rider said.

But Brown would do less damage than Wilson, Rider added, and a Brown victory would send a clear signal to the GOP. If he could do that, Rider said, he would feel like a winner no matter how badly he lost.

And, he said, Wilson is not a true Republican.

“Brown is a very ineffective Democrat. Wilson is a very effective Democrat. It’s time the Republican Party stopped running stealth Democrats for governor,” Rider said. “If I pull enough conservative votes to cause Wilson to lose, then Republicans will have to start running real limited-government candidates such as Ron Unz.”

Rider is a big fan of Unz, the 32-year-old Silicon Valley entrepreneur who challenged Wilson for the Republican gubernatorial nomination last spring. Before the primary, Rider endorsed Unz, knowing full well it might cost him some votes. Then after Unz lost, while winning 34% of the Republican vote, Rider began presenting himself as the next best thing.

Unz recently wrote letters that were published in the state’s major newspapers urging his supporters not to launch an Unz write-in campaign Nov. 8. Although he stopped short of endorsing Rider, Unz asked the 700,000 people who voted for him to support “candidates up and down the ticket who are true to the core values of the Republican Party–smaller government, lower taxes and fewer regulations.”

Rider said that is as good as an Unz endorsement. After all, Rider proposes cutting 90% of all state regulations. And he so abhors taxes that he closed his financial planning office in large part to avoid paying them.

“I was working until July 19 for the government,” he said. “For a Libertarian, that’s unacceptable.”

Rider has made sacrifices to run for governor. To enable him to afford campaigning full time, Rider and his wife pulled their two sons out of private school. (“May God forgive me for that,” he said.) The campaign, headquartered in one of his spare bedrooms with a “Rider for Governor” bumper sticker taped to the door, is truly no-frills.

His phones are answered by two volunteers–retirees who refer to Rider as “Guv.” When Rider is on the road, he often sleeps on supporters’ couches. Recently, when he heard about a promotion for a time-share condominium, he and his wife went and sat through the pitch. The reason: In exchange for their time, they received free plane tickets to San Francisco, a city where Rider wanted to campaign.

Most of the $40,000 Rider has been able to raise has gone to buy cable television time for his lone commercial, which features the candidate in a butcher’s smock, whacking a sausage with a meat cleaver and exclaiming, “Wilson won’t cut taxes, but I will!” By Nov. 8 this spot will have aired in the state’s five major media markets, and Rider hopes that combined with his frequent talk-radio appearances, it will get people’s attention.

Wilson campaign officials do not appear worried. With the latest Times poll showing the incumbent 9 points ahead of Brown among likely voters, Rider is barely a blip on the radar screen.

But against all odds, Rider perseveres. He knows that some people see voting for him as a waste.

“We’ve been taught since childhood that third parties are dangerous or crazy or both,” he said, recalling that when he first heard about the Libertarian Party in the 1970s he thought it was a “left-wing, commie group.”

“And yeah, sure, we’re not going to win,” he said. “But the success of a third party is in changing the direction of the country. . . . You vote to send a message to whoever’s in power that this is the direction you want to go.”

Meanwhile, the fund-raising message Rider sent Brown has yet to yield a single penny. Brown campaign spokesman John Whitehurst said he was unaware of the letter asking for $500,000.

Rider is not bitter. If Brown is not farsighted enough to see that a hefty donation to Rider for Governor could result in her own election, he said, it is her loss.

“I keep checking the mail,” he said. “Without my effort, they’re dead meat.”

The Gambia hosts Issa Tchiroma Bakary after Paul Biya, Cameroon’s leader for 43 years, wins yet another election.

Cameroon’s opposition leader Issa Tchiroma Bakary has fled to The Gambia “for the purpose of ensuring his safety” in the wake of the recent presidential election that returned longtime ruler Paul Biya to power amid deadly protests.

The Gambian government confirmed in a statement on Sunday that it was hosting Tchiroma “temporarily” in the country on “humanitarian grounds” while pursuing a “peaceful and diplomatic resolution” to post-electoral tensions in Cameroon.

The statement, posted on the Facebook page of the office of Gambian President Adama Barrow, said The Gambia was working with regional partners like Nigeria to “support a peaceful and negotiated outcome” following October’s disputed election.

Official election results showed 92-year-old Biya, the world’s oldest head of state, secured his eighth term in office with 53.7 percent of the vote, against 35.2 percent for Tchiroma, a former government minister leading the Cameroon National Salvation Front.

But Tchiroma, who claimed vote tampering, stated he was the election’s real winner. “This is not democracy, it is electoral theft, a constitutional coup as blatant as it is shameful,” he said at the time.

The opposition leader repeatedly urged supporters to protest against the official election outcome, urging them to stage “dead city” operations by closing shops and halting other public activities.

The Cameroonian government has confirmed that at least five people were killed during the protests, although the opposition and civil society groups claim the figures are much higher.

The government has said it plans to initiate legal proceedings against Tchiroma for his “repeated calls for insurrection.”

Biya came to power in 1982 following the resignation of Cameroon’s first president and has ruled since, following a 2008 constitutional amendment that abolished term limits.

He has ruled the country with an iron fist, repressing all political opposition.

“Suffs,” Shaina Taub’s musical about how women finally secured the right to vote in America, won Tony Awards for its book and score. It lost the best musical race to “The Outsiders,” but the respect it earned when it opened last spring on Broadway made it an unequivocal winner.

The show is having its Los Angeles premiere at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre in a touring production that is smooth and smart. Taub’s work deserves nothing less than an A. The cast is excellent, the staging is graceful and the political message could not be more timely.

The show might not have the crackling vitality of “Hamilton” or the bluesy poignancy of “The Scottsboro Boys.” It’s a good deal more earnest than either of these history-laden musicals. There’s an educational imperative at the heart of “Suffs,” which deals with a subject that has been marginalized in schools and in the collective consciousness.

The 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote, was ratified in 1920, a little more than a century ago. The history isn’t so distant yet I’m sure I wasn’t the only one at Wednesday’s opening who was learning about the forceful tactics that helped Alice Paul and her fellow suffragists push their movement over the finish line.

“Suffs,” a musical for the public square, is as informative as it is uplifting. It is above all a moving testament to the power of sisterhood. The struggle for equality continues to face crushing setbacks today, but Taub wants us to remember what can happen when people stand united for a just cause.

Alice (a winning Maya Keleher) doesn’t seem like a rabble-rouser. A bright, well-educated woman with a polite demeanor, she looks like a future teacher of the year more than a radical organizer. But she has an activist’s most essential quality: She won’t take no for an answer. (Keleher lends alluring warmth to the role Taub made her Broadway debut in.)

Marya Grandy and the company of the national tour of “Suffs.”

(Joan Marcus)

She’s rebuffed by Carrie Chapman Catt (Marya Grandy), the president of the National American Woman Suffrage Assn., whose motto (“Let your all-American mother vote”) is the basis for the show’s opening number, “Let Mother Vote” — a distillation of the old-guard approach that has yet to yield women the vote.

Alice wants to organize a march in Washington, D.C., to force the president’s reluctant hand, but Carrie prefers a more genteel strategy. “Miss Paul, if my late great mentor Susan B. Anthony taught me anything, it’s that men are only willing to consider our cause if we present it in a lady-like fashion.

“State by state, slow and steady, until the country’s ready” is, after all, NAWSA’s fundamental creed. But Alice points out that if they continue at this glacial pace they’ll be dead before they can ever cast a vote.

Swinging into action, Alice teams up with her friend Lucy Burns (Gwynne Wood), who worries that they haven’t the experience to take on such a momentous mission. “We’ve never planned a national action before,” she objects at the start of their duet “Find a Way.” But undaunted Alice has the bold idea of recruiting Inez Milholland (played at the opening night performance by Amanda K. Lopez), and a way forward miraculously materializes.

Inez has just the right glamorous public image that Alice thinks will give their march the publicity boost it needs. Studying for the bar exam, Inez is initially reluctant but agrees if she can lead the march on horseback.

This image of Inez on a steed becomes central both to the movement and to director Leigh Silverman’s production, which finds simple yet striking ways of bringing revolutionary change to life. A chorus line of activists wearing suffragist white (kudos to the luminous tact of costume designer Paul Tazewell) eloquently communicates what solidarity can pull off.

Brandi Porter, left, and Jenny Ashman as President Woodrow Wilson in “Suffs.”

(Joan Marcus)

An all-female and nonbinary cast dramatizes this inspiring American story. Taub takes some fictional license with the characters but largely sticks to the record.

Notable allies in Alice’s organization include Ruza Wenclawska (Joyce Meimei Zheng) a Polish-born trade union organizer with a no-nonsense grassroots style, and Doris Stevens (Livvy Marcus), a shy yet undeterred student from Nebraska who becomes the group’s secret weapon secretary.

Ida B. Wells (Danyel Fulton), an early leader in the civil rights movement, takes part in the march but resists being used as a prop in what she calls NAWSA’s “white women convention.” Mary Church Terrell (Trisha Jeffrey), a fellow Black activist, by contrast believes that it’s only through participation that representation can move forward.

President Woodrow Wilson (Jenny Ashman), who makes promises to the suffragists he is hesitant to keep, is a crucial target of Alice’s pressure campaign. Her group’s access to him is aided by Dudley Malone (Brandi Porter), Wilson’s right-hand man, who becomes smitten with Doris.

The score marches ahead in a manner that makes progress seem, if not inevitable, relentless in its pursuit of justice. The songs combine the patriotic exuberance of John Philip Sousa and the American breadth of Broadway composer Stephen Flaherty (“Ragtime”). The note of pop accessibility in Taub’s music and the satiric humor of her lyrics add to the buoyancy. You won’t leave humming a tune, but the overall effect (while ephemeral) is pleasing in the theater.

With the history already determined, the book can’t help resembling at times a civics exhibition. Dramatic tension is hard to come by. Alice and her cohorts suffer grave disappointments and indignities (including a harrowing stint in prison), but the eventual outcome of their struggles is known.

“Suffs” sometimes feels like a history lesson neatly compartmentalized into Important Episodes. There’s a whiff of PBS to the way the musical unfolds. This is cultural programming that’s good for you.

But the teamwork of the performers honors the messy yet undeniably effective cooperation of Alice and her freedom fighters — women who changed the world by not staying silent in their prescribed place.

WASHINGTON — The House is poised to vote overwhelmingly on Tuesday to demand the Justice Department release all documents tied to its investigation of the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

President Trump, who initially worked to thwart the vote before reversing course on Sunday night, has said he will sign the measure if it reaches his desk. For that to happen, the bill will also need to pass the Senate, which could consider the measure as soon as Tuesday night.

Republicans for months pushed back on the release of the Epstein files, joining Trump in claiming the Epstein issue was being brought up by Democrats as a way to distract from Republicans’ legislative successes.

But that all seismically shifted Sunday when Trump had a drastic reversal and urged Republicans to vote to release the documents, saying there was “nothing to hide.”

“It’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The reversal came days after 20,000 documents from Epstein’s private estate were released by lawmakers in the House Oversight Committee. The files referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

In private emails, Epstein wrote that Trump had “spent hours” at his house and “knew about the girls,” a revelation that reignited the push in Congress for further disclosures.

Trump has continued to deny wrongdoing in the Epstein saga despite opposing the release of files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker. He died by suicide while in federal custody in 2019.

Many members of Trump’s MAGA base have demanded the files be released, convinced they contain revelations about powerful people involved in Epstein’s abuse of what is believed to be more than 200 women and girls. Tension among his base spiked when Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in July that an “Epstein client list” did not exist, after saying in February that the list was sitting on her desk awaiting review. She later said she was referring to the Epstein files more generally.

Trump’s call to release the files now highlights how he is trying to prevent an embarrassing defeat as a growing number of Republicans in the House have joined Democrats to vote for the legislation in recent days.

The Epstein files have been a hugely divisive congressional fight in recent months, with Democrats pushing the release, but Republican congressional leaders largely refusing to take the votes. The issue even led to a rift within the MAGA movement, and Trump to cut ties with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia who had long been an ardent support of the president.

“Watching this actually turn into a fight has ripped MAGA apart,” Greene said at a news conference Tuesday in reference to the resistance to release the files.

Democrats have accused Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of delaying the swearing-in of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, because she promised to cast the final vote needed to move a so-called discharge petition, which would force a vote on the floor. Johnson has denied those claims.

If the House and Senate do vote to release the files, all eyes will turn to the Department of Justice, and what exactly it will choose to publicly release.

“The fight, the real fight, will happen after that,” Greene said. “The real test will be: Will the Department of Justice release the files? Or will it all remain tied up in an investigation?”

Several Epstein survivors joined lawmakers at the news conference to talk about how important the vote was for them.

Haley Robson, one of the survivors, questioned Trump’s resistance to the vote even now as he supports it.

“While I do understand that your position has changed on the Epstein files, and I’m grateful that you have pledged to sign this bill, I can’t help to be skeptical of what the agenda is,” Robson said.

If signed into law by Trump, the bill would prohibit the attorney general, Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

But caveats in the bill could provide Trump and Bondi with loopholes to keep records related to the president concealed.

In the spring, FBI Director Kash Patel directed a Freedom of Information Act team to comb through the entire trove of files from the investigation, and ordered it to redact references to Trump, citing his status as a private citizen with privacy protections when the probe first launched in 2006, Bloomberg reported at the time.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said the Trump administration will be forced to release the files with an act of Congress.

“They will be breaking the law if they do not release these files,” he said.

US Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse sharply criticised President Donald Trump for previously attempting to block a House vote on the release of files related to Epstein. Trump on Sunday dropped his opposition and the measure now is expected to overwhelmingly pass.

Vote on release of Justice Department files on late sex offender is expected to pass in the Republican-controlled House.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Adam Gray was one of only six House Democrats — and the only one from California — who voted with Republicans in favor of a deal to end the government shutdown, and there was a calculated reason behind that decision.

Gray, a first-term Democrat from the Central Valley, is running for reelection in a majority Latino district that national Republicans are expected to heavily target as they defend their narrow House majority in next fall’s midterm elections. Last year, Gray won his seat by 187 votes, and although redistricting has since made the 13th District more favorable to Democrats, it remains highly competitive.

The Merced Democrat’s vote reflects the political reality of representing one of the nation’s few battleground districts. Gray is positioning himself as an independent-minded Democrat willing to buck leadership on politically divisive issues. The shutdown deal gave him a rare opportunity to put that in practice, even at the risk of frustrating members of his own party.

“I know it is not comfortable, and I know there’s people that are going to be mad at me,” Gray told The Times. “But I am not here to win an argument. I am here to actually help fix problems with people in my community, and I know I did the right thing.”

Democratic representatives and senators for weeks were steadfast in opposing a shutdown deal that did not include language to extend Obamacare tax credits that are set to expire at the end of the year, and as a result, leave millions of Americans with higher healthcare costs.

In Gray’s district, more than half of residents rely on Medi-Cal or have coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace, making them vulnerable to rising healthcare costs — a pocketbook issue that is likely to factor into an already competitive congressional race.

Beyond healthcare, nearly 48,000 families in his largely rural district rely on food benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, according to the latest data provided by the Department of Agriculture. Those benefits were put at risk during the shutdown as funding for the federal program commonly called food stamps was caught up in legal disputes.

As the shutdown dragged on without meaningful negotiations on healthcare, Gray said, he grew concerned that Republicans were too comfortable “using vulnerable Americans as political leverage.”

Ultimately, Gray was among just 13 Democrats — six in the House, seven in the Senate — who went against their party to end the shutdown that had dragged on an historic 43 days.

“The government is reopening because Democrats were willing to compromise,” Gray said.

The deal, which was signed by President Trump last week, will fund the government through January 2026 and reinstate federal workers who were laid off during the shutdown. It will also fund SNAP through September 2026, a provision that Gray says he wanted to secure because he worries that partisanship could lead to another shutdown in January.

Republicans attack his position

Although Gray voted with Republicans over the shutdown, national Republican operatives still see his seat as a main target ahead of next year’s election — and there is good reason for that.

The seat has a history of party flipping.

In 2024, Gray won his seat by 187 votes, the slimmest margin of any race in the country. His opponent, Republican John Duarte, who cast himself a centrist in the race, had only held the seat for one term before being beat. (And he defeated Gray two years earlier by just 564 votes.)

President Trump carried the 13th last year by five points, underscoring the competitiveness of the Central Valley district which backed Joe Biden in the first Biden-Trump matchup of 2020.

The passage of Proposition 50 has made the district safer for Democrats as the new congressional map shifts parts of Stockton, Modesto and northern Stanislaus County into the district, while removing more conservative, rural territory west of Fresno. Still, it remains a highly competitive district.

Like Duarte, Gray has positioned himself as a centrist, but that hasn’t stopped Republicans from portraying him as being from the party’s far-left flank.

Christian Martinez, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, is now focusing on Gray’s voting history on the shutdown as a reason to criticize the incumbent. Specifically, how Gray in September abstained from voting on a bill that would have prevented the shutdown.

“Instead of delivering results for Californians, out-of-touch Democrat Adam Gray is too busy appeasing his radical socialist base, and now he’s fully responsible for holding Americans hostage with the longest government shutdown in history,” Martinez said.

Martinez added that “hardworking Californians paid the price for his refusal to vote to keep the government open, and next November, they’ll send him packing.”

Gray is now facing a Republican challenge from former Stockton Mayor Kevin Lincoln. When Lincoln announced his bid on Nov. 6, before the shutdown deal vote, he criticized Gray for not doing enough to prevent the shutdown in the first place.

“Washington politicians like Adam Gray have fallen in line with a failed liberal agenda that’s made life less affordable and less safe,” Lincoln said in a statement.

Moving forward, Gray sees the vote as an opportunity to reset negotiations and find a bipartisan solution before funding runs out again on Jan. 30, 2026.

“I think we’re moving in the right direction,” Gray said. “I hope my colleagues have the courage to do the right thing over the next days.”

Back in his district, Democrats have had a mixed reaction to his vote. As for his congressional colleagues, they have not offered up much criticism, choosing to let Gray explain his vote to the ever-changeable 13th District.

A handful of opposition abstentions allowed Carney and minority Liberals to advance a deficit-boosting budget aimed at countering US tariffs.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s minority government narrowly survived a confidence vote on Monday as Canadian lawmakers endorsed a motion to begin debating his first federal budget – a result that avoids the prospect of a second election in less than a year.

The House of Commons voted 170-168 to advance study of the fiscal plan. While further votes are expected in the coming months, the slim victory signals that the budget is likely to be approved eventually.

Tonight, the House of Commons has voted to pass Budget 2025.

It’s time to work together to deliver on this plan — to protect our communities, empower Canadians with new opportunities, and build Canada strong.

— Mark Carney (@MarkJCarney) November 18, 2025

“It’s time to work together to deliver on this plan – to protect our communities, empower Canadians with new opportunities, and build Canada strong,” Carney said on X, arguing that his spending blueprint would help fortify the economy against escalating United States tariffs.

Carney has repeatedly cast the budget as a “generational” chance to reinforce Canada’s economic resilience and to reduce reliance on trade with the US.

The proposal includes a near doubling of Canada’s deficit to 78.3 billion Canadian dollars ($55.5bn) with major outlays aimed at countering US trade measures and supporting defence and housing initiatives. The prime minister has insisted that higher deficit spending is essential to cushion the impact of US President Donald Trump’s tariffs. While most bilateral trade remains tariff-free under an existing North American trade agreement, US levies on automobiles, steel and aluminium have struck significant sectors of the Canadian economy.

According to Carney, a former central banker, internal forecasts show that “US tariffs and the associated uncertainty will cost Canadians around 1.8 percent of our GDP [gross domestic product]”.

The Liberals, a few seats short of a majority in the 343-seat House of Commons, relied on abstentions from several opposition members who were reluctant to trigger early elections. Recent polling suggested Carney’s Liberals would remain in power if Canadians were sent back to the polls.

Carney was elected to a full term in April after campaigning on a promise to challenge Washington’s protectionist turn. Meanwhile, the Conservative Party, the official opposition, has been wrestling with internal divisions since its defeat, and leader Pierre Poilievre faces a formal review of his performance early next year.

Poilievre has sharply criticised the government’s spending plans, branding the fiscal package a “credit card budget”.

The left-leaning New Democratic Party (NDP) has also expressed concerns, arguing that the proposal fails to adequately address unemployment, the housing crisis and the cost-of-living pressures faced by many Canadian families.

NDP interim leader Don Davies said the party accepted that blocking the budget would push the country back into an unwanted election cycle, explaining why two of its MPs ultimately abstained.

It was “clear that Canadians do not want an election right now … while we still face an existential threat from the Trump administration”, he said.

“Parliamentarians decided to put Canada first”, Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne said.

Polling before Monday’s vote suggested Canadians broadly shared this view. A November survey by the analytics firm Leger found that one in five respondents supported immediate elections while half said they were satisfied with Carney’s leadership.

SANTIAGO, Chile — A hard-right former lawmaker and admirer of President Trump held the upper hand as Chile headed to a polarizing presidential runoff against a member of Chile’s Communist Party representing the incumbent government.

José Antonio Kast, an ultraconservative lawyer opposed to abortion and same-sex marriage, appears to be in pole position after nearly 70% of votes went to right-wing candidates in Sunday’s first round. Many Chileans worry about organized crime, illegal immigration and unemployment in one of Latin America’s safest and most prosperous nations.

The father of nine, who pushed his traditional Catholic beliefs and nostalgia for aspects of Chile’s brutal dictatorship into the political mainstream after founding his own Republican Party in 2019, came in second with nearly 24% of the vote. He campaigned on plans to crack down on gang violence, build a giant border wall and deport tens of thousands of immigrants.

Jeannette Jara, a former labor minister in President Gabriel Boric’s left-wing government, eked out a narrower-than-expected lead with 27% of the vote. She wants to expand Chile’s social safety net and tackle money laundering and drug trafficking to stem organized crime.

Neither contender received more than 50% of the overall vote count, sending the poll to a second round of voting on Dec. 14.

‘Voters are upset’

The mood was ebullient at Kast’s campaign headquarters early Monday, where young Chileans wrapped in national flags drank beer and rolled cigarettes as workers took down the stage where Kast had pledged a radical transformation in the country’s security.

“We needed a safe candidate, someone with a firm hand to bring economic growth, attract investment, create jobs, strengthen the police and give them support,” said Ignacio Rojas, 20. “Chile isn’t safe anymore, and he’ll change that.”

The results seemed set to extend a growing regional shift across Latin America, as popular discontent with the economy simmers and right-wing challengers take over from leftist politicians who shot to power in the wake of the pandemic but largely failed to deliver on their lofty promises of social change and more equitable distribution of wealth.

“Economies are not growing, there are no new jobs, and people remember that 10 years ago they used to pay lower prices for almost everything,” said Patricio Navia, a Chilean analyst and professor at New York University.

“Voters are upset with governments all over the region,” he added.

Conservatives led the pack in Chile’s eight-candidate field, with populist businessman and celebrity economist Franco Parisi surprising pundits by securing 20% of the votes and third place, reflecting the power of his anti-establishment message.

He also ran a tough law and order campaign, vowing to plant land mines along Chile’s porous northern border to prevent people from crossing.

Another 14% of the votes went to Johannes Kaiser, a libertarian congressman and a former YouTube provocateur who campaigned as an even more radical alternative to Kast.

Chile’s traditional center-right coalition landed in fifth place, with establishment candidate Evelyn Matthei winning 12.5% of the vote.

Conservative runners-up endorse Kast

Not all of the divided right is guaranteed to go to Kast, whose conservative moral values have previously alienated voters concerned about the rollback of hard-won rights for women and LGBTQ+ community. His promise to cut up to $6 billion in public spending within his first 18 months has also been criticized by traditional conservative politicians as unrealistic. He has lost two presidential races before.

But it’s also unlikely that many voters who supported Kaiser’s plans to deport migrants who entered the country illegally to prison in El Salvador, or Matthei’s plans to consider bringing back the death penalty, would vote for a lifelong member of Chile’s hard-line Communist Party, which supports autocratic governments in Venezuela and Cuba.

There were no other left-wing front-runners, as all six parties in Chile’s governing coalition threw their weight behind Jara.

After learning of the election results late Sunday, Matthei rushed to Kast’s party headquarters to profess her support for her right-wing rival. “Chile needs a sharp change of direction,” she said.

Kaiser also promised to back Kast, saying his libertarian party would “ensure that a sound doctrine and defense of freedom are not abandoned.”

Parisi was coy after the results came out, saying, “We don’t give anyone a blank check.”

“The burden of proof lies with both candidates,” said the political outsider, whose voters eschew elites on the left and right. “They have to win people over.”

The region is trending right

Economic travails and fervent anti-incumbent sentiment appear to have fueled a gradual pendulum swing away from the left-wing leaders who were ascendant across the region just a few years ago.

In Argentina, radical libertarian President Javier Milei, elected in late 2023 on a vow to break with years of left-leaning populism, has doubled down on his close bond with Trump and reshaped Argentina’s foreign policy in line with the U.S.

Elections during the last year in Ecuador, El Salvador and Panama have kept right-wing leaders in office, while in Bolivia, restive voters outraged over a currency crisis punished the Movement Toward Socialism party and elected a conservative opposition candidate for the first time in nearly 20 years last month.

Gains for the right could buoy the U.S. as it competes for regional influence with China, some analysts say, with a new crop of leaders keen for American investment. Chile is the world’s largest copper producer and home to vast reserves of other minerals key to the global energy transition.

Like many hopeful leftists four years ago, Boric, a young former student activist elected on the heels of Chile’s 2019 mass protests over widening inequality, saw his ambitions to raise taxes on the rich and adopt one of the world’s most progressive constitutions run into major legislative opposition.

Analysts warned that Kast could face the same fate if he caved to his most radical allies or pushed morally conservative measures. Although early legislative election results indicated that right-wing parties would hold a majority in the 155-member lower house of Congress, left-wing parties appeared to hold a slight edge in the Senate on Monday.

“There is a path forward for Kast,” Navia said. But “if he tries to govern as a radical right-winger, he will hit a wall, just like outgoing President Gabriel Boric did.”

Debre writes for the Associated Press.

The Security Council is set to vote on a US resolution detailing the long-awaited Gaza stabilisation force.

Nov. 17 (UPI) — The U.N. Security Council is scheduled to vote Monday on a draft resolution supporting U.S. President Donald Trump‘s 20-point peace plan for Gaza, which would include the establishment of an international security force and a transitional government.

The plan, if approved, would see a Board of Peace put in place for two years in Gaza that would work to disarm Hamas and other militants, according to the draft resolution viewed by CNN. This body would be overseen by Trump and would control redevelopment of Gaza.

In addition to an international security force, a Palestinian police force would be created and trained by Egypt. Previous police forces in Gaza were operated by Hamas.

Hamas issued a statement overnight calling the draft resolution under consideration “dangerous” and an “attempt to subject the Gaza Strip to international authority,” according to the BBC. The group rejected disarmament efforts.

The Trump administration put forth the 20-point peace plan in September, the basis for a suspension of most fighting and a hostage and prisoner exchange between Israel and Hamas.

Though Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu originally agreed to the plan, some members of the Israeli government have opposed it, CNN reported. The plan could be vetoed by China or Russia, the latter of which has proposed its own plan.

The plan also proposes a possible separate Palestinian state, added later under pressure from Arab States. Netanyahu, though, pushed back against the idea.

The UN Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution backing Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza.

The text, submitted by the US, would give a mandate for the deployment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) and to set up transitional governance there.

The US says multiple unnamed countries have offered to contribute to the ISF, though it is unclear whether it would be required to ensure Hamas disarms or function as a peacekeeping force.

Its formation is a central plank of Trump’s 20-point plan which last month brought a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in their two-year war.

The draft also raises the possibility of a Palestinian state – something Israel strongly opposes.

There have been intense negotiations over the draft text of the resolution, with Washington warning that any vote against it could lead to a return to fighting with Israel.

As well as authorising an ISF, which it says would work with Israel and Egypt – Gaza’s southern neighbour – the draft also calls for creation of a newly trained Palestinian police in Gaza. Until now, the police there have operated under the authority of Hamas.

According to reports on the latest draft, part of the ISF’s role would be to work on the “permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups” – including Hamas – as well as protecting civilians and humanitarian aid routes.

This would require Hamas to hand over its weapons – something it is meant to do under Trump’s peace plan.

But in a statement published overnight, Hamas called the draft resolution “dangerous” and an “attempt to subject the Gaza Strip to international authority”.

It said Palestinian factions rejected any clause relating to the disarmament of Gaza or harming “the Palestinian people’s right to resistance”.

The statement also rejected any foreign military presence inside the Gaza Strip, saying it would constitute a violation of Palestinian sovereignty.

The draft goes on to endorse the formation of a Board of Peace, expected to be headed by President Trump, to oversee a body of Palestinian technocrats that will temporarily administer Gaza and take charge of its redevelopment.

Following pressure from key Arab states, the latest text mentions a possible future Palestinian state, though without calling for one as the goal.

Even so, the inclusion of such a reference drew sharp reaction from Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after allies in his governing coalition criticised the draft, including threatening to leave the government if Netanyahu did not push back.

“Regarding a Palestinian state,” he said on Sunday, “our opposition to a Palestinian state in any territory west of the Jordan [River], this opposition is existing, valid, and has not changed one bit.”

Trump’s peace plan in effect suspended the fighting between Israel and Hamas which had raged since Hamas-led gunmen attacked Israel on 7 October 2023. About 1,200 people were killed and 251 taken hostage in that attack.

More than 69,483 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli military action in Gaza since then, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Nov. 16 (UPI) — Rep. Thomas Massie said as many as 100 Republicans may vote to release files related to convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein, amid a last-ditch effort by the White House to stall their release.

Massie, R-Ky., said Sunday on ABC News’ This Week that at least 100 Republicans will join Democrats in the House and vote this week for the rest of the Epstein documents to be released.

President Donald Trump this week also ordered the Department of Justice to investigate Democrats and their supporters whose names appear in the files after more than 20,000 documents related to Epstein were released by Congress.

With newly sworn in Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., there were enough members of the House to sign a discharge petition forcing a vote on whether to force the Department of Justice to release all of the files it has on Epstein — over the objections of Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and other Republicans in Congress.

Massie cautioned that while there are ways to push the Senate to vote on the bill, the chamber does not have a discharge petition-like method to force a vote over the objection of the majority leader. If the bill passes both houses of Congress, Trump still would have to sign it.

But Massie also noted that Trump’s order to the Department of Justice could potentially delay some part of the documents from being released, regardless of what Congress does.

“If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can’t be released,” he said. “So, this might be a big smokescreen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them to, as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files.”

Trump has fought the release of the files, at least partially because of widespread speculation that he figures prominently in them over of his years-long friendship with Epstein.

Despite the president’s claims that “Jeffery Epstein and I had a very bad relationship for many years,” they were close for more than a decade before the friendship went south.

“This is a hoax put out by the Democrats and a couple, a few Republicans have gone along with it because they’re weak and ineffective,” Trump said about the Democrats push for the release of the files.

Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi and the FBI to investigate alleged Epstein ties to former President Bill Clinton and other Democrats whose names appear in the files.

Bondi said last week that she would pursue the investigation with “urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people.”

Bondi announced that Manhattan U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton will lead the investigation just days after the House Oversight Committee released tens of thousands of emails released by Epstein’s estate, which documented his ties to friends and associates over a decade.

The emails made several direct references to Trump, Clinton and prominent media figures, Hollywood personalities and high-ranking politicians.

Comedian Ruby Wax and social media star Morgan Burtwistle, known as Angryginge, will be the first celebrities to face an eating challenge on this year’s I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here!

I’m A Celebrity fans have been left furious after they encountered issues with voting on the app during last night’s show.

The ITV1 show, filmed in Australia, began with five of the celebrities flying over a beach in a helicopter, which they were told they would be jumping out of. Spandau Ballet’s Martin Kemp, model Kelly Brook, rapper Aitch, comedian Eddie Kadi and former EastEnders star Shona McGarty were all seen skydiving in the programme.

The five celebrities were then made to enter a wooden structure and wade through offal and slime to find a key fob that would gain them access to a getaway car taking them to camp. Aitch, real name Harrison Armstrong, and Kadi won the challenge and got in the car where they were met with cocktails.

READ MORE: Dad whose son left school due to bullies has now been threatened with fines

READ MORE: Hero ex-boyband star saves man from taking his own life with selfless act

The three other celebrities entered the Cockie van which had a giant beetle structure on top of it.

The five other campmates – Wax, Burtwistle, soap star Lisa Riley, TV presenter Jack Osbourne and sports broadcaster Alex Scott – missed out on skydiving and arrived at a luxury villa before battling it out for a seat in the getaway car.

The celebrities had their heads placed inside boxes filled with snakes and were asked to put their hand in a box of green ants to unscrew bolts and release the fob for the car. Osbourne and Burtwistle won the challenge, while Brook, Kemp, McGarty, Riley, Wax and Scott were left riding in the Cockie van, alongside Kiosk Kev.

After arriving at camp, Jack cooked a steak dinner with mushrooms and avocado for Eddie, Aitch and Angryginge while the others were given emu neck to eat.

Fans were then able to vote for the first Bushtucker trial of the series but some viewers have branded the show a fix and claimed the app wasn’t working.

Taking to X one person moaned: “ I’m a celebrity is a fix. Can’t vote cos the app doesn’t work.” A second said: “Would be nice if they sorted this app out, it didn’t work for a lot of people and we weren’t able to vote.” While a third asked: “Is anyone having issues with the voting app? Why isn’t it letting me vote??”

Comedian Ruby Wax and social media star Morgan Burtwistle, known as Angryginge, will be the first celebrities to face an eating challenge on this year’s I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here!

Anthony McPartlin and Declan Donnelly told campmates the bushtucker trial will take place at “revolting restaurant” The Divey, during Sunday’s debut episode.

I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here! airs daily at 9pm on ITV1.

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

US President Donald Trump has called on House Republicans to vote to release the Epstein files, in a reversal from his previous position.

“House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday night.

The major shift in Trump’s stance comes as potentially dozens of Republicans signalled they were willing to break ranks, and vote for the release of the documents.

The House is expected to vote this week on legislation that would compel the justice department to publicly release the files. Supporters of the bill appear to have enough votes for it to pass the House, though it is unclear whether it would pass the Senate.

Trump would also have to sign off on the release of the documents if it passes both chambers.

Both Democrats and some Republicans have been backing the legislation. Republican Representative Thomas Massie, a co-sponsor of the bill, said in an interview with ABC News on Sunday that as many as 100 Republicans could vote in favour.

Known as the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the aim of the bill is to make the justice department release all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials linked to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump posted the statement shortly after landing at Joint Base Andrews following a weekend in Florida.

“The Department of Justice has already turned over tens of thousands of pages to the Public on “Epstein,” are looking at various Democrat operatives (Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman, Larry Summers, etc.) and their relationship to Epstein, and the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE!,” Trump wrote, adding that he wanted Republicans to get “BACK ON POINT”.

Trump’s reference to Clinton comes after the US justice department confirmed it will investigate Epstein’s alleged links to major banks and several prominent Democrats, including former US President Bill Clinton.

Trump said he would ask Attorney General Pam Bondi and the FBI to look into Epstein’s “involvement and relationship” with Clinton and others.

Clinton has strongly denied he had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

Trump’s reversal comes after Democrats on the House Oversight Committee last week published three email exchanges, including correspondence between Epstein, who died in 2019 in prison, and his long-time associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.

Some of those exchanges make references to Trump. In one email, sent in 2011, Epstein writes to Maxwell: “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is Trump.. [VICTIM] spent hours at my house with him.”

Hours after the release of those exchanges, House Republicans released a far larger tranche of 20,000 files to counter what they said was a Democratic effort to “cherry-pick” documents. They also said it was an attempt to “create a fake narrative to slander President Trump”.

The House of Representatives then announced there would be a vote next week on a much wider release of Epstein material.

In his comments on Sunday night, Trump repeated White House dismissals of the Epstein files as a Democrat-led “hoax”. His post came after House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested in comments to Fox News that a vote on releasing the documents would put to rest allegations that Trump had any connection to Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of teenage children.

Trump and Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, traditionally one of his fiercest defenders, have been feuding publicly over the files.

On Friday, Trump called Greene “wacky” in social media posts and said she should be unseated in next year’s elections. On Saturday, he called her a “traitor”.

Greene in turn questioned whether Trump was still putting “America First” and criticised his handling of the Epstein files.

In a letter addressed to Congress, Epstein survivors and the family of Virginia Giuffre – a prominent Epstein accuser – called for US lawmakers to vote in favour of releasing the files.

“Remember that your primary duty is to your constituents. Look into the eyes of your children, your sisters, your mothers, and your aunts,” the letter reads.

“Imagine if they had been preyed upon. Imagine if you yourself were a survivor. What would you want for them? What would you want for yourself? When you vote, we will remember your decision at the ballot box.”

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers seeking to force the release of files related to the sex trafficking investigation into Jeffrey Epstein are predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for their bill and bucking the GOP leadership and President Trump, who for months have disparaged their effort.

The bill would force the Justice Department to release all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or ongoing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted.

“There could be 100 or more” votes from Republicans, said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), among the lawmakers discussing the legislation on Sunday news show appearances. “I’m hoping to get a veto-proof majority on this legislation when it comes up for a vote.”

Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) introduced a discharge petition in July to force a vote on their bill. That is a rarely successful tool that allows a majority of members to bypass House leadership and force a floor vote.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had panned the discharge petition effort and sent members home early for their August recess when the GOP’s legislative agenda was upended by the clamoring for an Epstein vote.

Democrats also contend that the seating of Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.) was stalled to delay her becoming the 218th member to sign the petition and gain the threshold needed to force a vote. She became the 218th signature moments after taking the oath of office last week.

Massie said Johnson, Trump and others who have been critical of his efforts would be “taking a big loss this week.”

“I’m not tired of winning yet, but we are winning,” Massie said.

The view from GOP leadership

Johnson seems to expect the House will decisively back the Epstein bill.

“We’ll just get this done and move it on. There’s nothing to hide,” the speaker said. He continued to deride the Massie-Khanna effort, however, asserting that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been releasing “far more information than the discharge petition, their little gambit.”

The vote comes at a time when new documents are raising fresh questions about Epstein and his associates, including a 2019 email that Epstein wrote to a journalist that said Trump “knew about the girls.” The White House has accused Democrats of selectively leaking the emails to smear the Republican president, though lawmakers from both parties released emails last week.

Johnson said Trump “has nothing to hide from this.”

“They’re doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not,” Johnson said.

Trump’s former friendship and association with Epstein is well-established, and the president’s name was included in records that his Justice Department released in February as part of an effort to satisfy public interest in information from the sex-trafficking investigation.

Trump has never been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and the mere inclusion of someone’s name in files from the investigation does not imply otherwise. Epstein, who killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial, also had many prominent acquaintances in political and celebrity circles besides Trump.

Khanna voiced more modest expectations on the vote count than Massie. Still, Khanna said he was hoping for 40 or more Republicans to join the effort.

“I don’t even know how involved Trump was,” Khanna said. “There are a lot of other people involved who have to be held accountable.”

Khanna also asked Trump to meet with some of Epstein’s victims. Some will be at the Capitol on Tuesday for a news conference, he said.

Massie said Republican lawmakers who fear losing Trump’s endorsement because of how they vote will have a mark on their record if they vote “no,” which could hurt their political prospects in the long term.

“The record of this vote will last longer than Donald Trump’s presidency,” Massie said.

A MAGA split

On the Republican side, three Republicans joined with Massie in signing the discharge petition: Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Lauren Boebert of Colorado.

Trump publicly broke with Greene last week and said he would endorse a challenger against her in 2026 “if the right person runs.”

Greene, a MAGA stalwart throughout her time in Congress, attributed her fallout with Trump to the Epstein debate. “Unfortunately, it has all come down to the Epstein files,” she said, adding that the country deserves transparency on the issue and that Trump’s criticism of her is confusing because the women she has talked to say he did nothing wrong.

“I have no idea what’s in the files. I can’t even guess. But that is the question everyone is asking: … ‘Why fight this so hard?’” Greene said.

Even if the bill passes the House, there is no guarantee that Senate Republicans will go along. Massie said he just hopes Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) “will do the right thing.”

“The pressure is going to be there if we get a big vote in the House,” said Massie, who thinks “we could have a deluge of Republicans.”

Massie appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” Johnson was on “Fox News Sunday,” Khanna spoke on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and Greene was interviewed on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Freking writes for the Associated Press.