women

Los Angeles Queens help launch Women’s Pro Baseball League

The first day all the members of the Women’s Professional Baseball League were at the same field, it rained.

That didn’t dampen the smiles around Robin Roberts Field the day before the league opens play Saturday, marking the first professional women’s baseball games in 72 years.

“Getting to be together for six whole weeks or around two whole months with them [if we make the playoffs] is honestly going to be a game changer,” said third baseman Ashton Lansdell, who stars for the USA national team. “I think we’re going to build a really unique and exciting culture that is going to last a very long time, especially with the inaugural season at WPBL. Like we’re starting from the ground up, so we get to build all of these things from the very beginning.”

The Los Angeles Queens, managed by former Dodgers second baseman Eric Young, have arguably the most star-studded roster, behind Savannah Bananas third baseman Lansdell, former Little League star Mo’ne Davis and Japanese ace pitcher Ayami Sato.

Ayami Sato pitches during a Women's Pro Baseball League exhibition game in March 19 in Fort Myers, Fla.

The Los Angeles Queens’ Ayami Sato pitches during a Women’s Pro Baseball League exhibition game in March 19 in Fort Myers, Fla.

(Rebecca Blackwell/AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

“I pretty much have an idea who I want to lead off and who’s my starter,” Young said. “Those two things I do know. But the rest of the lineup, I’m looking forward to making it. The first one will be very special, just like everything else.”

Women’s baseball has been long fractured with few opportunities for the best to gather in one spot. The only consistent tournament has been the Women’s Baseball World Cup, with the U.S. going undefeated in group play this week in Rockford ahead of the WPBL’s quick week of preseason practices.

The WPBL will be the first women’s baseball league since the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League, which operated from 1943 until 1954 to offset the loss of male baseball players called into action during World War II. The league gained popularity and notoriety when it was dramatized in the 1992 film “A League of Their Own.”

While women’s baseball didn’t boom and girls were mostly limited to playing softball, some women sought a chance to play the sport they loved.

The WPBL, even with a limited six-week season at one location, is helping many players realize seemingly impossible dreams and honoring the first recorded women’s game with a paid crowd and the home of the single-season Springfield Sallies.

Games will span seven innings and the league will use aluminum bats featured in college baseball and softball, while outfield dimensions were altered to be closer to the Women’s World Cup field dimensions. Salaries range from $300-$500 per game for the 15-player rosters.

“It’s just what we’ve all dreamed of our whole lives,” Lansdell said. “The coolest thing out of all of it is that we’re starting this league this year, but in the next five to 10 years, even two years down the road, I’m so excited to see just the growth of women’s baseball and the amount of hope and inspiration that we have.”

Like many women’s baseball players, Lansdell had a history in softball, contributing to the Women’s College World Series season in 2025 at Ole Miss. More recently, she went 11-for-13 with two doubles and two home runs in five games during the U.S. World Cup group stage for a historic .846 batting average.

Players warm up before a game on the fourth day of tryouts for the Women's Professional Baseball League in August 2025.

Players warm up before a game on the fourth day of tryouts for the Women’s Professional Baseball League in August 2025 at Nationals Park in Washington.

(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)

She will be the core of the Queens’ lineup, surrounded by some of the biggest name in the sport. Brittany Apgar grew up playing in all-boys baseball tournaments before playing college softball at Greensboro College.

“I think this is really when the quote that baseball is 90% mental and 10% physical kicks in because that game’s going to be a lot,” Apgar said of the Saturday opener. “Like we have the honor of doing the first game. That will be a lot of pressure on everyone.”

The Queens flaunt one of the best right sides of the infield in the league with Lansdell at third and Curacan 19-year-old shortstop Thaima Maximiliana.

Australian shortstop Caitlin Eynon hit .375 in the World Cup and could contribute to the Queens’ lineup, too.

Davis highlights an outfield that includes Apgar and Japanese center fielder Suzu Narasaki. Amira Hondras, 18, played for the U.S. after spending time with MLB Develops and the Chicago White Sox youth league and is one of the best young women’s baseball prospects in the nation.

Sato leads a staff of pitchers from several backgrounds. Canadian 19-year-old right-hander Michelle Roche plays college baseball in British Columbia while 38-year-old veteran Meggie Meidlinger has been a bullpen stopper for the U.S.

“More than anything, I’m excited for the opportunity to play with talented players from around the world,” Sato said through her translator, Mayo Hiran. “That’s something that I’ve been working for for a long time.”

The Queens face the New York Heights to begin their season and will play 30 games through the start of September before a two-week playoff period.

By this time next year, they may get a chance to play home games in the Los Angeles area. The league hasn’t announced its plans for shifting games outside of Illinois other than to confirm they aspire to do so.

But for a few moments this weekend, in Springfield alone, dreams will come true and a sport will be reborn.

“It’s going to be a lot of people’s first time for a lot of things,” Apgar said. “Some of the people didn’t actually get to make it to tryouts, so there’s some people that are drafted that I haven’t even seen in person before. It’s all exciting.”

Source link

Tariff war with Canada is hurting California’s wine industry

It’s hard to hate on Canada. It’s like cursing a cotton ball, or raging about tapioca.

The friendliest of neighbors, the country has fought alongside the U.S. in conflicts going back to World War I, purchased many trillions of dollars worth of American goods and blessed this country with, among other gifts, ice hockey, Drake, Joni Mitchell and Alex Trebek.

While you can question the nation’s culinary sensibility — the unofficial dish, poutine, is an abomination consisting of French fries, cheese curds and hot gravy — Canada is basically a very large, very pretty country filled with a lot of very nice, extremely polite people.

But for reasons only he can fathom, President Trump has declared economic war on our amiable northern neighbor.

After more than a year of trading tit-for-tat tariffs, Trump recently escalated the conflict by slapping a new 50% tax on a variety of Canadian exports, including cement, furniture, dairy products and, most iconically, hockey sticks. The added levy, which will further burden inflation-weary U.S. consumers, is set to take effect in mid-August.

The move makes little sense from an economic or foreign policy standpoint. It’s best to regard Trump’s trade moves as a wind gauge charts a blustery storm; his on-again, off-again tariffs are not the result of some carefully thought-out policy but, rather, a measure of the president’s shifting moods and pique toward certain foreign leaders.

And they carry a not-inconsiderable price tag — California’s struggling wine industry being just one example.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and other analysts cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

For decades, the industry has been a vital and growing part of California’s agricultural economy. Recent years, however, have seen a number of setbacks.

Costs are rising. Sales are falling, as younger generations favor hard seltzers, canned cocktails or premium beers over crushed grapes. At the same time, climate change and the growing incidence of wildfire threaten the viability of some of California’s premier wine-growing regions.

A Canadian ban on alcohol imports

Then there’s the trade war with Canada, the industry’s largest export market and formerly a major customer of California wines. Until recently, the Canadian market accounted for more than a third of the state’s exports.

But last year, several provinces stopped purchasing U.S. alcohol in response to Trump’s tariffs and his threats — more slapstick than real — to annex the country and make Canada the 51st American state. While two provinces, Saskatchewan and Alberta, soon lifted their bans, the two most populous, Ontario and Quebec, have not.

As a result of this “geopolitical friction,” to use the words of University of California researchers, California wine exports to Canada fell by nearly 80% in 2025 compared with the year before. Unsurprisingly, Canadian sales of homegrown wines have soared.

Stick that in your terroir!

In response to the dramatic drop in exports, more than a dozen California members of Congress wrote last month to Quebec’s premier, Christine Fréchette, urging her to lift the retaliatory ban on U.S. wine and spirits.

“Reopening the market to American wine would restore consumer choice and signal a commitment to restoring fair and balanced trade for Québecois consumers and American wineries who have no connection to the underlying trade disputes,” the letter read.

Sen. Adam Schiff also wrote Fréchette asking her to resume the sale of California wine and U.S. spirits.

“The restriction on American wine has had damaging consequences for regional consumers, businesses, and producers who have no influence over national policies,” the California Democrat stated. “In fact, I have repeatedly voiced my opposition to and voted against the President’s harmful trade policies, including as they pertain to Canada.”

Fréchette’s response was, in a word: “Non!”

“In the context of the ongoing trade war, the premier continues to defend Quebec’s economic interests,” a spokesperson for Fréchette told CBC Radio. “This measure will remain in place as long as the United States maintains these unjustified tariffs. Our government will re-evaluate its position when the American administration reverses these measures.”

And that statement came before Trump upped the ante, along with the tariffs on Canada, which, presumably, doesn’t help matters.

Red or white?

Mike Thompson has seen the damage of Trump’s economic warfare firsthand. The St. Helena Democrat represents the heart of Wine Country and spearheaded, along with Democratic Rep. Jimmy Panetta of Carmel and Republican Rep. David Valadao of Hanford, the bipartisan overture to Quebec’s premier.

“I talked to a vintner today,” Thompson said during a drive this week through his sprawling Northern California district. “They went from an $11-million annual wine export to a $2-million annual wine export to Canada because of this.”

Thompson has introduced legislation, including a measure to reimburse wine producers for the money they’ve lost due to Trump’s tariffs, but the proposals have stalled in the House despite bipartisan support. His effort, Thompson dryly noted, “has not been warmly embraced by the administration.”

Meanwhile, the cross-border hostilities continue. Neither Trump nor Fréchette seems ready to budge, with California vintners still stuck in the middle.

So the question in Montreal and Toronto remains: What pairs best with poutine? Canadian white or red?

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump administration targeted California and other blue states for clean energy cuts
The deep dive: Justice Kennedy reflects on his time deciding the Constitution’s promise of liberty and equality
The L.A. Times Special: His nickname was ‘Satan.’ His political influence was immense
Until next time,
mzb

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

Source link

Jared Leto breaks silence on shock sexual criminal conduct claims from four women including one who was ‘raped by star’

2014 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Hosted By Graydon Carter - Arrivals

JARED Leto has broken his silence on allegations of criminal sexual conduct, calling them “categorically false”.

Four women including accused the Thirty Seconds to Mars frontman of criminal sexual conduct, with one alleging he raped her as a teenager.

2014 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Hosted By Graydon Carter - Arrivals
Jared Leto has denied allegations of criminal sexual conduct Credit: Getty – Contributor
Jared Leto on the red carpet at the "Spider-Man: No Way Home" Los Angeles premiere.
Four women accused Hollywood actor of criminal sexual misconduct Credit: Getty

He said: “I have never sexually assaulted anyone in my entire life. These claims are absolutely and categorically false.”

The allegations against the Oscar winner, 54, date from when the women were aged between 16 and 19.

One accuser alleges she had sex with Leto when she was 17, which under Californian laws would be classed as statutory rape.

The Hollywood star, aged 34 at the time, invited the woman and a friend to his Californian home, the alleged accuser told the BBC.

She claims Leto told her friend to wait in a separate room as the alleged rape took place.

A second woman claims she was sexually assaulted in a “dingy” Las Vegas motel bathroom when she was 17.

Leto, who was in his early 30s at the time, allegedly invited the girl into the bathroom as he showered and made her touch him inappropriately.

A third claims the Dallas Buyers Club star threatened her with sexual assault when she was 19 after the pair were left alone in a hotel room.

The allegations came after a Thirty Seconds to Mars concert at London’s O2 Arena in 2013 when Leto would have been 41.

A fourth accused Leto of grooming her and alleges he once took advantage of his celebrity status by making repeated sexually explicit phone calls to her when she was 16.

He suggested they should have sex on at least one occasion, the alleged victim claims.

The accusations all come from a new BBC documentary titled Jared Leto: Hollywood‘s Dark Secret.

The BBC claims they have seen at least one non-disclosure agreement (NDA) sent to a woman aimed at preventing her from talking about her relationship with Leto.

Another woman also accuses the Morbius lead of ordering a security guard to take her backstage at a music festival when she was 14.

More to follow… For the latest news on this story keep checking back at The Sun Online

Thesun.co.uk is your go-to destination for the best celebrity news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.

Like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/thesun and follow us on TikTok @TheSun.



Source link

Jared Leto accused of sexual misconduct by four women who claim Thirty Seconds to Mars star assaulted them as teenagers

FOUR women have accused Hollywood actor Jared Leto of criminal sexual misconduct.

The allegations against the Oscar winner and Thirty Seconds to Mars frontman, 54, come from when the women were teenagers aged 16 to 19.

Jared Leto on the red carpet at the "Spider-Man: No Way Home" Los Angeles premiere.
Four women have accused Hollywood actor Jared Leto of criminal sexual misconduct Credit: Getty
2014 Vanity Fair Oscar Party Hosted By Graydon Carter - Arrivals
Leto won an Oscar for Dallas Buyers Club Credit: Getty – Contributor

One accuser alleges she was sexually assaulted in a motel bathroom when she was 17.

Another claims the Dallas Buyers Club star threatened her with sexual assault when she was 19 after the pair were left alone in a hotel room.

A third alleges she had sex with Leto when she was 17, which under California laws would be classed as statutory rape.

The fourth woman has accused Leto of grooming her and alleges he once took advantage of his celebrity status by making repeated sexually explicit phone calls to her when she was 16.

RAINBOW UNZIPPED

Dark truth behind Rainbow, how kids’ show was plagued by controversy


LOSIN’ IT

Tom Cruise’s daughter Suri DROPS his last name after 10 years of not seeing him

He suggested they should have sex on at least one occasion, the alleged victim claims.

Four other women also allege they received strange and often sexual phone calls from Leto when they were younger.

A ninth woman also accuses the Morbius lead of ordering a security guard to take her backstage at a music festival when she was 14.

The woman alleges he made a sexual comment about her chest during an autograph-signing before claiming her mother confronted him.

The allegations all come from between 2002 and 2016 when Leto was in his 30s and 40s.

Leto is yet to respond to the allegations.

He has previously denied historic sexual misconduct accusations by nine women, including some who said they were teenagers at the time.

The Sun has reached out to Leto’s team for comment.

The allegations all come from a new BBC documentary titled Jared Leto: Hollywood‘s Dark Secret.

One unnamed accuser said: “This was 25 years ago… he has gotten away with it.”

Leto starred as The Joker in Suicide Squad and won an Oscar and Golden Globe for Dallas Buyers Club

He is also the frontman to rock band Thirty Seconds To Mars

Source link

‘The dream I carried is gone’: Miscarriages rise amid trauma of Gaza’s war | Gaza News

Deir el-Balah, Gaza – For years, Nuha Abu Lebda dreamed of becoming a mother. But Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has turned that dream into loss, time and time again.

As she was forcibly displaced several times across the Gaza Strip since the war began in October 2023, Abu Lebda lost three pregnancies. She says the losses came after months of air strikes, hunger, fear and living without proper medical care.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“I miscarried because of the air strikes, the displacement, the difficult conditions, the lack of clean water and malnutrition,” she tells Al Jazeera.

After each miscarriage, she hoped she could still become a mother.

“When I lost my baby, I was exhausted. I woke up hoping my baby was still inside me. But the dream I carried for 10 years was gone.”

Abu Lebda sold her gold and almost everything she owned to pay for injections of heparin, a drug prescribed to some women to prevent blood clotting during pregnancy. She hoped the treatment would help her bring her pregnancies to term, but she lost the babies despite it.

“I cried so much because I lost the baby I dreamed of every single day,” she laments.

Even after the fighting slowed, her dream remained the same. “I dream of bringing a baby into this world. I want to be a mother and have children. Every time I see my husband playing with children, I start crying.”

Medical officials in Gaza say they are treating a surge in miscarriages, which they link directly to Israel’s genocidal war and blockade. The trend has worsened as Gaza’s health system has collapsed under bombardments and Israeli ground operations with malnutrition and psychological strain cited as key drivers.

Dr Yasser Saadeddine, the maternity director at al-Awda Hospital in Deir el-Balah in central Gaza, told Al Jazeera roughly 70 percent of pregnancy losses his team treats are linked to the war and blockade.

A displaced Palestinian mother has a meal with her children inside a tent in Deir el-Balah. The war has led to malnutrition and psychological strain, which has taken a particular toll on pregnant women
A displaced Palestinian mother has a meal with her children inside a tent in Deir el-Balah. The war has led to malnutrition and psychological strain, which has taken a particular toll on pregnant women [File: Ramadan Abed/Reuters]

‘I lost my daughter during childbirth’

Abu Lebda is one of many women in Gaza who say they have lost pregnancies during the war. They describe miscarriages, premature births and losing newborns while trying to survive bombardments, displacement, hunger and the collapsing healthcare system.

Mai Zaqout tells Al Jazeera she lost her daughter because she could not access the medical care she needed.

“I lost my daughter during childbirth. She had already died inside my womb for a month, but I could not deliver her because the medical resources and support I needed were not available,” she says.

Her loss came shortly after another tragedy. “All of this happened within a very short time after my husband was killed.”

For Sara al-Awad, she had a scare when she was eight months pregnant. She says powerful explosions in Tal al-Hawa, a neighbourhood in Gaza City, caused extreme fear and stress, leading to severe bleeding.

“Because of the fear, anxiety and the power of the explosions, I started bleeding. My placenta had separated.”

Al-Awad says no ambulance could reach her, and she waited for hours before her brother took her to al-Quds Hospital in a wheelchair. “The doctors decided I needed an emergency C-section immediately.”

Her baby, Muhammad, was born weighing only 1.1kg (2.4lb) and was placed in an incubator. But as fighting continued around the hospital, Sara and her family were separated from him.

“My brother had to leave for the south while Muhammad stayed alone in the incubator. We could only check on him through messages from the medical staff,” she says.

After more than a month, al-Awad was finally reunited with her baby. “Thank God, the ceasefire came. … Muhammad left the incubator after 37 days.”

‘I witnessed horrific situations’

Across Gaza, other women have similar stories.

For Iman Badah, the loss was of the child she had waited years for.

“I am a mother who lost my only son. I waited six years to have him. I gave birth prematurely while I was being displaced,” she tells Al Jazeera.

Nuha Salameh was carrying twins during the war. “Fear and trauma caused me to lose them.”

She says doctors told her that, before the war, her babies may have survived.

“The doctor told me that if the situation had been normal, we would have placed them in the incubator, and they would have lived.”

Nidaa Seyam says she experienced her second miscarriage during the war. “I lost a baby girl, and this is the second time I have miscarried.”

She says doctors told her the war conditions affected her pregnancy. “They told me it was because of the psychological stress we are living through and malnutrition.”

She also describes surviving intense bombardment.

“I witnessed horrific situations where I was trapped under air strikes. I inhaled a lot of toxic fumes.”

A medical staff is seen at Al-Awda Hospital which has announced that it has suspended medical services due to running out of fuel needed to operate its electric generators in the Nuseirat Refugee Camp, Deir al-Balah, Gaza
A medical staff member works in the dark at al-Awda Hospital during Israel’s war when the facility had to suspend medical services due to running out of fuel needed to operate its electric generators in December 2025 [File: Moiz Salhi/Anadolu Agency]

‘War, blockade, malnutrition, displacement’

Palestinian doctors say these stories are becoming more common.

They report more miscarriages and pregnancy complications linked to hunger, stress, displacement and the lack of medical care.

At al-Awda Hospital, doctors say they have seen a major increase in pregnancy losses.

“During the war, there was a significant increase in miscarriage cases we received,” Saadeddine says.

He says the causes include “the war and the blockade, including malnutrition, poor hygiene, environmental contamination and continuous displacement”.

Doctors say miscarriages are only one part of the crisis. They are also seeing more babies dying in the womb, more premature deliveries and more dangerous pregnancy complications.

Many women lost their homes, medical records and access to regular check-ups during repeated displacements. Hospitals are also struggling with shortages of medicines, equipment and medical staff.

For many mothers, the war has left wounds that continue to hurt even after most of the fighting has stopped. For women in Gaza, the war has not ended with October’s “ceasefire”. It continues with every pregnancy lost, and every dream of motherhood left unfulfilled.

Source link

California kids still struggle in our schools. Will this change help?

Last week, news broke that an artificial intelligence thingamajig broke free from the constraints of its maker, OpenAI, and committed what could be considered a string of white-collar felonies if it were human.

Because the AI thingamajig is in fact not human, the incident raised a big kerfuffle but is largely being treated as a giant oopsie we can learn from, without needing the pesky intervention of new rules or laws to stop it from happening again.

Such is the state of AI regulation in America right now.

California Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake) would like to change that. Last week, he introduced the bipartisan Frontier Act with Rep. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.). While the bill might not make either safety advocates or big tech companies entirely happy, it offers up the most comprehensive and strongest regulations of this dangerous industry that we’ve yet seen at the federal level.

Roman Yampolskiy, an AI expert and professor at University of Louisville, called the Frontier Act a “positive step because it acknowledges that frontier AI presents risks requiring dedicated oversight.”

Now, the challenge becomes passing it, and passing it in a meaningful, not-watered-down form — no easy task in a dysfunctional Congress driven by money and Donald Trump, and paralyzed by its own sycophancy to both.

If anyone has a shot, though, it’s Obernolte, who is that rarest of birds, a legislator who understands science, and his colleagues.

Obernolte represents Inland Empire areas around San Bernardino, but grew up in Fresno back in the era when the movie “War Games” was just hitting theaters.

Those of a certain age will remember how far-fetched it seemed when Matthew Broderick’s high school genius character accidentally breaks into a military AI system to play chess, but “Joshua,” the computer, takes it too far and tries to blow up the world. Now, of course, that just sounds like a regular Tuesday.

By the time he was in high school himself, Obernolte was giving that Broderick character a run for his money. An apparent computer savant, Obernolte was competing in artificial intelligence contests as a teenager, back when most of us were still playing Pong on Atari. Then he headed off to Caltech and then UCLA for advanced AI degrees. He said AI was his “first calling,” sparked when his father bought him an Apple II computer when he was 8.

He ended up dropping out of UCLA after getting his master’s because his side hustle making video games, including “NFL ’95,” turned out to be more lucrative than being a starving student. He ended up founding his own video game company, FarSight Studios, and building up a personal net worth close to $100 million.

Not bad for a kid from Fresno. In Congress, he has stuck close to the MAGA power base and was one of seven California legislators to vote against certifying the 2020 election results, a vote he took in his first days in office. He has been endorsed by Trump multiple times, and now sits on a bunch of committees and subcommittees of relevance.

For the past few years, he has pushed hard, if unsuccessfully, to create a framework for regulating AI, combining his deep understanding of the technology with his equal understanding of MAGA distaste for intervening in business.

Now, though, we’re in a moment, thanks to more than one big oopsie by technology companies. Just a few months ago, Anthropic and the Pentagon had their own tense encounter after Anthropic questioned how its AI was being used by the military. Huffy Pete Hegseth is still huffing over that one.

The public is increasingly skeptical of allowing the AI industry to govern itself, which is pushing legislators to rethink their hands-off approach, even as AI money pours like Niagara Falls into elections. Even Trump seems more inclined to consider it, signing an executive order recently that largely called for voluntary restraints on AI companies.

The introduction of the Frontier Act “shows how far the Overton window has shifted just in the past few months,” wrote Charlie Bullock, a senior research fellow with the nonpartisan Institute for Law & AI. “Not too long ago, a bipartisan bill this good and serious would have been a pipe dream. But things change quickly.”

Obernolte said the bill has been “a long time in the making,” but he hopes to package it with other legislation and is “cautiously optimistic” he can get something passed and signed by the end of the year.

As written now, the bill would allow the federal government to set minimum safety requirements and set up a framework for licensed, independent auditors to monitor compliance. That third party verification has been a key push by safety experts.

The bill would also give the government emergency powers to pause an AI model if it has a “present or impending catastrophic risk.”

It also borrows from state laws including California’s Proposition 53 that require some (not enough) transparency on the part of AI companies when things do go wrong.

To the consternation of some, the bill still contains curbs on what states can regulate on their own — basically carving out AI regulation as federal turf. This has been a huge sticking point in the fight over AI regulation because AI companies hate state laws and want them squashed. Their argument is that a patchwork of rules across states is too complicated.

“You don’t want to have 50 different state requirements for every single product that gets sold on a market, and that is particularly true of AI,” Obernolte told me.

To some extent that’s reasonable — but the problem so far has been that states such as California and New York have been the only level of government willing to try at regulation. California in particular has created some of the most comprehensive AI regulations to date and has about 30 pending bills on this issue this legislative season. The Frontier Act threads the needle on this by creating lanes where states can still pass their own laws — such as around consumer safety that would protect children or stop pornography.

But preventing catastrophic risk would largely be dependent on the federal oversight, which is great when the federal government is up to the task. Currently, we can’t even keep measles in check. So that’s a bit worrisome.

And Obernolte’s bill isn’t the only one vying for attention. Another Californian, Rep. Ted Lieu, introduced a bipartisan measure of his own with Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas). Dubbed the AI Kill Switch Act, it would give the Department of Homeland Security the authority to shut down problematic models.

Yampolskiy, the Louisville professor, said that bill had promise as well, because it’s important for companies to have a way to “rapidly disable or contain systems that exhibit dangerous or unexpected behavior.”

But, he warns, that’s just one part of the “complete solution” we need. Regulation is going to require more than one law.

For Obernolte’s part, he’s shown a willingness to work on a practical solution, not just a political one. That alone is worthy of notice. The Frontier Act is a genuine attempt to govern a nascent industry that is too powerful and unpredictable to be left to its own devices.

“I’m hoping that this is we’ve landed somewhere that everyone can understand and be happy with,” Obernolte said. “AI is not something that needs to be a partisan issue, and I don’t think it should be.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: How Jimothy the raccoon became the internet’s latest animal obsession
The California angle: Trump Administration Admits Canceling Grants to States That Did Not Vote for Him
The L.A. Times Special: Mayor’s press team uses disappearing WhatsApp messages, avoiding scrutiny
Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria


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

Source link

Fifty women come forward saying they were pressured into swinging

This is concerning, Jess Phillips told us: “Not even training your moderators on your website. They should be ashamed of themselves.”

Unlike some other swinging sites, FabSwingers does not require identity verification, which can make it harder for police to identify suspects when allegations are reported. It also means a banned user can create a new account – although FabSwingers says it can detect this, without explaining how it does so.

FabSwingers told the BBC its moderation processes involve up to five site administrators, who moderators report to, alongside AI and “automated controls”.

Since 2023, the website has been mentioned in at least 329 police reports across the UK – according to Freedom of Information requests submitted by the BBC – including in allegations of rape, sexual offences, coercive control, harassment, blackmail, stalking, assault and possession of extreme pornography. Although, it does not mean FabSwingers was responsible for what was alleged in the reports.

Jess Phillips said she believes the site “falls foul” of the Online Safety Act, adding she would encourage the regulator Ofcom “to look into it very, very seriously right now and shut it down”.

Ofcom says it is “extremely concerned” to hear of the BBC’s findings and is speaking to the site’s provider, but it has not so far launched an investigation.

The vast majority of those contacting the BBC were women who wanted to thank Ruth O’Grady, the subject of the Swingers podcast, for sharing her story.

“I’m still not in a place where I want anyone I love to know some of these things about my past,” one woman told us. “But I feel a little less alone now.”

If you would like to contact BBC Journalist Catrin Nye and the Swingers investigation team about this story you can email on swingersinvestigation@bbc.co.uk, external

Additional research by Emily Parsons

Source link

Schiff calls out Trump’s corruption, warns against complacency

There are certain truths that are self-evident to all but the willfully blind or stubbornly obtuse.

Heat is hot.

Rain is wet.

Donald Trump is the most brazenly corrupt president in the history of the United States.

The money-grubbing chief executive has raked in at least $2.2 billion during his first year back in office. He’s funneled millions of taxpayer dollars and foreign payments to his businesses. The grift, er, gift of a tricked-out Air Force One from the Qatari government — which Trump plans to keep in retirement — is only the most high-flying example of his avarice.

There’s so much more.

The notorious tax dodger filed suit against himself, allowing his complicit Department of “Justice” to engineer a flimflam settlement amounting to a get-out-of-jail free card that shields Trump and his sticky-fingered family from Internal Revenue Service oversight. He’s used his pardon power to draw contributions.

It’s so blatant and so consistent with Trump’s dodgy corporate background — a career checkered with six bankruptcies — that it’s easy to shrug off his presidential swindling as just more of the same. That’s been Trump’s political superpower: normalizing the outrageous and anesthetizing many Americans to all but the most extreme affronts. Even those have limited shock value these days.

On Thursday, California’s junior U.S. senator, Democrat Adam Schiff, will take to the floor of the chamber to assay the president’s many conflicts of interest, warn against complacency of the seen-it-all variety and offer his prescription for a cleansing once Trump slinks out of the gold-slathered Oval Office.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and other analysts cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

“The scope of the corruption we’ve seen in this administration is beyond anything we have imagined in prior years or prior administrations, “ Schiff said in a preview of his speech. “It’s really novel and breathtaking.”

Schiff is, of course, one of the president’s long-standing nemeses. As a House member, he led Trump’s first impeachment trial. His frequent criticism of the president, on the cable TV circuit and beyond, earned Schiff a slug of juvenile nicknames and other Trumpian put-downs, as well as a federal investigation — which now appears dormant — into supposed mortgage fraud.

Kitchen-table talk

Trump defenders will be quick to dismiss Schiff’s floor speech as just more overripe agitation.

Birds fly. Fish swim. Schiff attacks Trump.

But the purpose of his remarks, Schiff said, goes beyond simply enumerating the abundant examples of presidential profiteering. (It was a struggle, he said, keeping the list to a top 10.) His intent, he said, is “to bring home … the real cost to ordinary people” of Trump’s egregious self-dealing. Explaining why — in a practical, feel-it-in-your-wallet sense — people should care.

“If a president approves a merger not because it’s good for consumers, not because it’s good for the economy, but because participants in the merger paid him millions, what’s the cost to them?” Schiff said, referring to the proposed marriage of Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery and the money CBS shelled out for a flimsy lawsuit against “60 Minutes.” The settlement was widely seen as a way to smooth Paramount’s merger with Skydance Media, which is now bidding to swallow Warner Bros.

“The cost is they’re paying more for their streaming services,” Schiff said. “They’re getting laid off if they work in the industry. “

In 2024, Democrats lost the White House at least in part because they spent so much time talking about noble but abstract concepts like defending democracy and the rule of law, rather than highlighting ways they’d work to bring down the price of bacon and eggs.

Times change. Now it’s the cost of beef and gas that’s plundering paychecks.

Looking to November and beyond

Schiff insists it’s not an either/or choice. To prevail in November’s midterm elections, which means winning at least one chamber of Congress, Schiff said Democrats should discuss both affordability and Trump’s venality. He sees the two as being irrevocably entwined.

“The positive message is we are singularly focused on your cost of living,” Schiff said from his office on Capitol Hill. “We want to build more housing and bring down the cost of housing. We want to attack anti-competitive mergers of grocery stores and food companies to bring down the cost of food. We have a whole agenda that is designed to make your life more affordable.

“Why isn’t the administration doing this?” he said. “And the answer is, they’re corrupt. They’re focused on their own economic well-being. They’re doing great for themselves. They could care less about you.”

Schiff plans to introduce a number of proposed remedies. They include legislation to ban corporate executives from serving in the executive branch if they’ve been convicted of corruption or financial crimes, and a requirement that government employees recuse themselves from matters affecting the financial interests of any employer they’d worked for within the previous four years.

Although the measures stand no chance of passing in the current Congress, Schiff said “it’s important to show the American people, ‘Hey, this is what we intend to do if you give us the majority.’”

He acknowledged that the depth of presidential dishonesty, its constancy and deep weave in the fabric of this administration, can have a deadening effect: “When the guy working the teleprompter at the White House, betting on how many times the president will use a certain word in his speech, is a blip in the corruption…”

But Schiff said it’s important not to turn away or shrink from the malodor rising from Trump’s swampy Washington.

“You just have to take the time to break it down for people,” Schiff said. “I think putting things in context, trying to snap people out of the norm-shattering numbness of this administration, is a daily challenge. But it’s one that we have to undertake.”

There’s no certainly no harm in stating the truth. It’s worth trying, over and over.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump, long a critic of ‘forever wars,’ may be stumbling into one with Iran
The deep dive: Unhappy with Kaiser’s medical dispute process, some patients push for state reform
The L.A. Times Special: Chabria: Newsom pushes California to crack down on sex trafficking — fast

Until next time,
mzb

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

Source link

Column: Californians sour on Newsom’s push to ban gas-powered cars

Gov. Gavin Newsom will soon leave office without gaining the support of fellow Californians for his most ambitious climate project: the banning of new gas-burning car sales by 2035.

Newsom issued an executive order in 2020 taking new fossil-fueled passenger vehicles off the California market nine years from now.

But roughly two-thirds of Californians think that’s a lousy idea, according to a poll released last week by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.

Among likely voters, 65% oppose the termed-out governor’s edict and just 34% support it. The opposition among infrequent or nonvoters is even stronger.

Negative attitudes are especially stiff in inland California — particularly the Central Valley — and among middle-class people with incomes between $40,000 and $100,000, those over age 55 and Republicans.

Opposition to being denied new gas vehicles has grown substantially since 2021, when Californians were evenly divided over the issue.

But the state’s anticipated next governor, moderate Democrat Xavier Becerra, is more in line with Californians’ thinking on gas cars than is Newsom.

Becerra told me during his primary election campaign that Newsom’s 2035 goal is not realistic.

“We can’t make it by ‘35,” he said. “But we can make it.” Sometime in the future.

The fact is lots of people can’t afford electric vehicles because they tend to cost more than cars fueled by gas.

Besides, there’s an inconvenience of having to pull off the road for a 40-minute recharging stop on a long trip — if you can find a vacant recharger.

And “electricity is not cheap. It often depends on the time of day,” notes PPIC Polling Director Mark Baldassare, who owns an electric vehicle and says he likes it.

Newsom has been hawking electric vehicles since he came into office, like some slick TV pitchman — his goal being to greatly reduce climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions.

The governor and the Legislature recently appropriated $135 million to motivate Californians to buy new or used electric vehicles.

First-time EV buyers will receive $3,500 rebates on vehicles with manufacturer’s suggested retail prices of $50,000 or less. Used car buyers will get $1,750 off if the sale price is $25,000 or less.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

Automakers will pay for half the incentive costs — obstensibly, at least, if they don’t just secretly add their tab to the vehicle price.

This smacks of a huge taxpayer giveaway to manufacturers if the state isn’t careful. Is it really the state’s job to sell cars? Shouldn’t it be the automakers’ responsibility to offer competitive prices? Whatever.

Newsom’s plan partially replaces a $7,500 federal tax incentive for new EVs that President Trump and the Republican-led Congress allowed to expire last year.

California already leads the nation in EV ownership, with around 1.3 million vehicles registered. That’s more than five times the No. 2 state, Florida. And it’s not just because California’s population is much larger. We also lead in per capita ownership.

There’s plenty of contradiction and hypocrisy in the divided minds of Californians, as highlighted in the lengthy PPIC survey into their views on environmental policies.

People strongly favor fighting climate change — at least in concept — until it adversely affects them directly. That’s just human nature.

Asked what they consider the most important environmental issue facing California, those surveyed placed wildfires first, followed closely by global warming.

Baldassare says what struck him in the poll was “the disconnect between what people support in policies and what they’re prepared to do.”

“Two things are going on in California now,” the pollster continues. “People have their long-standing concerns about the environment. But they also have immediate concerns about affordability.

“When it comes to what people are willing to do, they’re worried about living costs and particularly the cost of energy. It’s something we’ve noticed even more this year. It affects the political and economic landscape.”

Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed support Newsom’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to zero “as soon as possible, but no later than 2045.”

And there’s overwhelming support for taxing corporations based on the amount of carbon emissions they produce.

Roughly 60% favor requiring all electricity to be generated with renewable energy — such as wind and solar — by 2045, although support for that state edict has dropped by 15 percentage points in the last six years.

Paradoxically, people aren’t willing to pay more for electricity produced by renewable sources. Roughly 60% reject that idea. Ten years ago, almost that many told PPIC pollsters they were willing to pay extra.

And today they’re not nearly ready to surrender their option of buying a new gas-fueled automobile.

For one thing, they’re not convinced there’ll be enough charging stations to handle a lot more EVs. Twice as many people are not confident of that as are confident, the poll found.

The California Energy Commission reported in January that there were more than 200,000 public and private EV charging stations in the state, plus 800,000 chargers in homes. The state is helping to add more along highways.

Becerra has pledged to take a fresh look at several controversial Newsom projects, including the pokey bullet train. There’s much uncertainty about the pending new governor.

But there’s one pretty good bet: In 2035, sales of new gas cars will still be getting a green light.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump escalates election attacks, threatens California over voter data
Bringing back competition: Too many congressional races are over before they start. Here’s a remedy
The L.A. Times Special: Trump’s voter fraud speech was bait. Stop biting

Until next week,
George Skelton


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

Source link

In the U.S. global battle against abortion, women in Africa are dying

As U.S. antiabortion groups’ campaign to restrict abortion access at home and abroad has gained strength since President Trump returned to office, his administration is delivering new global momentum to the movement by exporting its view of “family values” to nations overseas.

At the annual March for Life demonstration in January in Washington, Vice President JD Vance announced sweeping new restrictions on U.S. funding for nongovernmental organizations, foreign governments and U.N. agencies that promote access to abortion, gender-affirming care and diversity initiatives overseas. “We’re going to start blocking every international NGO that performs or promotes abortion abroad from receiving a dollar of U.S. money,” he told the crowd.

That effort has been particularly active in Africa, where doctors and advocates now describe an environment of rising harassment, arbitrary detentions and deadly backstreet abortions, with often deadly results for women across the continent.

The expanded restrictions build on the antiabortion advocacy work carried out by conservative U.S. nonprofits abroad — especially in Africa, where healthcare is highly dependent on foreign aid. The region has the world’s highest estimated proportion of unsafe abortions and highest maternal mortality rates — including the highest number of maternal deaths per 100,000 abortions.

The new rules represent a radical expansion of earlier U.S. policy that cut assistance to overseas groups providing abortion-related services. Experts say at least $30 billion in U.S. aid could be affected, reshaping health policies worldwide.

“We’re seeing opportunity here to have a consistently pro-life ethic,” Nicole Hunt of Colorado-based Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian evangelical group, told the Associated Press. “We’ve been influencing health policies for a long time with our foreign aid. This is just a new direction.”

In the crosshairs is an international convention signed by African countries two decades ago declaring safe abortion a human right. Known as the Maputo Protocol, it obliges signatory nations to legalize abortion in cases of rape, incest, fetal malformation or risk to a woman’s health.

But implementation has been spotty, forcing women to seek illicit procedures. Every year, sub-Saharan Africa records over 6 million unsafe abortions, according to the African Institute for Development Policy.

Emboldened by Trump’s policies, U.S. antiabortion groups now aim to overturn even this limited access to safe abortion.

In Nairobi, Nardos Hagos of the International Planned Parenthood Federation said she is deeply worried for the future.

“We’ve now moved into a new era where we are the ones who are in opposition because the most powerful and influential supporters of reproductive health — the U.S. and a lot of Europe — are now more aligned with anti-rights groups,” she said.

“We’re gonna see more women dying from unsafe abortions.”

Africa is the focus

It’s difficult to track the full scope of the funding U.S. antiabortion charitable groups send to Africa.

Publicly available information from nonprofit tax filings of 17 such groups show money sent to Africa jumped 50% between 2019 and 2022, to over $16 million, according to an analysis by the Institute for Journalism and Social Change, a research group.

And the funding kept growing: The organizations spent almost $9.4 million in Africa during 2023 and 2024, previously unreported data analyzed by the institute show.

That’s “just the tip of the iceberg,” said the institute’s Claire Provost.

“What we’re seeing here is just a fraction of what the real investment on the continent is,” Provost said, noting that unlike other tax-exempt charitable organizations, U.S.-based churches and some religious groups are not required to complete annual financial disclosures detailing revenue, contributions and expenses.

It’s not possible to see “even limited information” about how much money the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, among others, funnel to Africa, she said.

Widely known as the Mormon church, the Salt Lake City-based church is ”increasingly active on the continent, including opposing sexual and reproductive rights issues,” Provost said. With over 1 million followers in Africa, it has held “Strengthening Families” conferences across Africa over the last eight years.

Sean E.R. Donnelly, the church’s communications manager for Africa, said in an AP interview that about a quarter of the $1.5 billion the church spent overseas last year was in Africa, for development projects “with the goal of helping people, especially families,” including in healthcare, education and emergency relief.

Asked about women’s reproductive rights and abortion, he said the church was “not really active” in those areas, but noted the issues may be discussed by its African partners during church-sponsored conferences.

“We have the deputy prime minister, we have the ministries of gender, we have all the ministers who are relevant to family, and we’re helping them … as they craft policy and strategy to make sure that we protect the family,” Donnelly said of the conferences.

Asked about the church’s position on abortion, he sent a statement outlining that it generally opposes elective abortion in most cases but allows exceptions for rape, incest or danger to a woman’s health in counseling its members. He said via email that the church conducts no activities related to abortion and reproductive rights.

Last year’s church-sponsored conference took place in Sierra Leone at a time when the country was close to decriminalizing abortion. But pressure from local religious lobbies stalled the process, local rights groups said.

Activists and rights groups have raised the alarm over the influence of local religious groups, whose strategies mirror those of some conservative U.S. Christian groups. In response to AP’s questions about the conference and any pressures around abortion and other reproductive rights issues, Donnelly said, “This is not how the church operates in Africa or globally.”

He also referred AP to the church’s Caring Report, which outlines its humanitarian work globally and does not mention the conference.

It’s tricky to determine how the U.S. money is spent once it reaches Africa because of loose requirements on disclosing financial data in African countries.

Focus on the Family spent $370,000 in Africa between 2019 and 2023, according to the Institute for Journalism and Social Change, which says that probably does not fully capture the scope of the group’s influence or work. Focus on the Family’s Hunt said its mission is “to change hearts and minds on abortion” globally, but she declined to provide details of activities in Africa.

Harassment of reproductive rights groups

Hannah Ruguru vowed to help women get abortions safely after losing her sister to a backstreet procedure. But her work at a reproductive health clinic in Kisumu in rural western Kenya has proved increasingly hazardous.

She’s been screamed at by protesters and encountered so much abuse on Facebook that she deleted her account, she said.

“Sometimes you can get scared,” Ruguru said. But “at the end of the day, I’m helping women.”

Marie Stopes International, which runs the clinic where Ruguru works, said in a 2024 report that staff in several African countries described online and legal attacks from U.S.-based groups and U.S.-funded local organizations. In Congo, it said, health workers have been detained for days for providing legally permissible services before being released without charge.

“The extent of the opposition has made abortion providers fearful of coming into work,” the report said.

In Ethiopia, the group said, the head of the local office of U.S.-based Family Watch International has “targeted and trolled members of our senior leadership team on social media,” and released YouTube videos promoting antiabortion misinformation.

In Kenya, the names and addresses of staff at reproductive rights organizations have been published online, accusing them of murder.

The owner of a private abortion clinic in Nairobi said staff members have been harassed by police and detained. Officials demand bribes, threatening charges if they don’t pay up, the owner said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of repercussions.

Musoba Kitui, regional director of Ipas Africa Alliance, which promotes reproductive rights and access to safe abortion care, said the changes in U.S. foreign aid policy combined with “this advancing American interest in ideology in Africa is really concerning.”

“We think the consequences are going to be dire,” Kitui said, especially for women and marginalized communities such as LGBTQ+ people.

‘It’s a culture war’

Last year, antiabortion Christian groups from the U.S., Europe and Africa and high-ranking Kenyan officials gathered in Nairobi for a conference on “Promoting and Protecting Family Values in Challenging Times.” Poland-based antiabortion group Ordo Iuris handed out a guide in four languages, including Swahili, with tips on lobbying international organizations, including the United Nations, European Union and African Union.

Travis Weber, vice president of the Family Research Council, a Washington-based evangelical group active in antiabortion advocacy, said he traveled to Nairobi to “defend the family as God designed it.”

Charles Kanjama, vice chairman of African Christian Professionals Forum, the conference organizer, said that, previously, international aid often supported reproductive rights — but times have changed.

“We are hoping that … we can start attracting money from people who think like us,” said Kanjama, among Africa’s most prominent antiabortion figures. “It’s a culture war, really.”

Indeed, the antiabortion agenda is gaining momentum. In June, representatives of 20 African countries finalized a draft charter at a conference in Ghana that calls for rejecting sexual and reproductive health rights. It will be voted on by the African Union next year. Family Watch International’s co-founder, Sharon Slater, was among those fundraising for the charter’s passage at the European Parliament in Brussels this year.

In Kenya, one of Africa’s richest countries, seven women die every day on average from complications of unsafe abortions, according to the African Population and Health Research Center.

The 2010 Kenyan Constitution permits abortion when a woman’s health or life is threatened. Subsequent court decisions have also allowed abortions in cases of rape, incest or serious threat to a woman’s mental health.

But there’s a major legal gray area. Kenya’s penal code, which dates to the colonial era, continues to criminalize abortion providers and women seeking the procedure, who can face up to 14 years in prison.

Most public hospitals don’t perform abortions, leaving women the option of pricey private clinic procedures or risky illicit methods, healthcare officials said.

In May, an appeals court in Kenya overturned a ruling that affirmed access to abortion as a fundamental right — a case led by Kanjama, who said the decision “restored constitutional balance.”

The Kenyan Health Ministry, Justice Ministry and the government spokesperson’s office did not reply to repeated AP requests for comment, including detailed questions sent via email.

The U.S. State Department, in response to an AP request for comment on the Trump administration’s new rules governing American aid overseas, said: “The American people expect their tax dollars to support programs that save lives … and reflect American values, not fund abortion-related activities, left-wing social agendas, or wasteful overseas bureaucracies.”

“U.S. assistance continues to support a wide range of maternal and child health services as part of the America First Global Health Strategy,” it said in a statement.

The toll of unsafe abortions

In Kenya, doctors are obligated to treat women suffering from post-abortion complications, often from underground procedures, including bleeding, infections and the loss of their wombs — and it’s those cases that often end up in public hospitals.

“By the time the women come, we are often dealing with a life-threatening situation,” said Dominic Omollo, the reproductive health coordinator in Bondo, western Kenya.

Even as the stated aim of U.S., international and Africa-based antiabortion groups is to protect life, activists and healthcare providers say that, in reality, the result is more unsafe abortions and more women dying.

In Karabok, a village in rural Kenya, two trees were planted at the site where Mary Olouch is buried, just feet from where the 25-year-old bled to death after an illicit abortion.

“She did not open up to anyone,” said Loice Ochieng, a community health volunteer in charge of family planning in the village.

Olouch already had a young child when she realized she was pregnant. She didn’t tell her husband. When he came home one evening, he found her bleeding and rushed her to the hospital, but it was too late.

Olouch did not qualify for an abortion in a public hospital and couldn’t afford a private clinic on her meager income selling fish. Abortion carries enormous stigma in rural communities, and husbands often don’t allow women to use contraceptives, Ochieng said.

After Olouch’s death, women started to talk more openly about abortion in Karabok, where, for many, even uttering the word had been taboo, Ochieng said.

Now, she said, if women “have a problem, they come to me, they ask. Because they have seen that this thing can cause death.”

Pronczuk and Beaty write for the Associated Press and reported from Kisumu and New York, respectively. AP writers Evelyne Musambi in Nairobi and Caitlin Kelly in Freetown, Sierra Leone, contributed to this report.

Source link

Loose Women axed from ITV schedules for weeks in major shake-up

Loose Women presenter Kaye Adams confirmed the ITV daytime show will be off air for several weeks.

ITV is undergoing a scheduling shake-up as Loose Women is set to be off air for several weeks.

During the programme on Friday, July 17, presenter Kaye Adams made an announcement and confirmed when the show would return.

The Scottish presenter was back on Loose Women alongside GK Barry, Oti Mabuse and Kelle Bryan, as they marked the end of the week, and the end of the programme for a short break.

Kate shared: “we’re done for the summer. We will not be gone for long though, we’ll be back in September. For now, have a fabulous weekend, a fabulous summer and we’ll see you very soon!”

The scheduling change follows a wave of budget cuts which impacted Good Morning Britain and Lorraine, alongside Loose Women.

It was revealed months ago that Loose Women would now only broadcast for 30 weeks rather than its customary 52, reports the Express.

During the shake-up, Lorraine Kelly’s show has been reduced to 30 minutes, and also operates on a seasonal schedule only.

The biggest change that faced Loose Women was the fact live audiences were scrapped, as well as several behind-the-scenes job.

Presenter Nadia Sawalha previously shared her devastation that warm-up performer Lee Peat was dropped, saying: “I am totally devastated by this fact, I can’t get over it at all. Not only because the audience is so important for the show, but also my dear friend Lee who I work with every day.”

Coleen Nolan also shared her concerns for the cast and crew, calling those redundancies “heartbreaking” and “devastating”.

Loose Women also relocated in January to a basement studio of a former private members’ club in Covent Garden, sharing the venue with This Morning and Lorraine.

Announcing the changes last year, Kevin Lygo, Managing Director of ITV’s Media and Entertainment Division, previously said: “Daytime is a really important part of what we do, and these scheduling and production changes will enable us to continue to deliver a schedule providing viewers with the news, debate and discussion they love from the presenters they know and trust as well generating savings which will allow us to reinvest across the programme budget in other genres.

“These changes also allow us to consolidate our news operations and expand our national, international and regional news output and to build upon our proud history of trusted journalism at a time when our viewers need accurate, unbiased news coverage more than ever.”

Loose Women can be streamed on ITVX

Source link

UCLA women embracing tougher standards in title-repeat bid

The UCLA women’s basketball team won its first NCAA championship in April. Now, it’s vying to stay there.

Based on Thursday’s practice, after which UCLA spoke with the media for the first time since its dominant title run, it’s clear that the Bruins intend to remain on top, even with a target on their back and a revamped roster.

Success leaves clues

One would think a defending champion pursuing a repeat would, well, just try to run it back.

But not Cori Close’s bunch.

Entering her 16th season as UCLA coach, Close is emphatic about the importance of process over outcome — or journey over destination — and leaning into the beauty of the grind.

“We get to walk out and live out what we learn from the championship run,” Close said. “But we’re also not trying to repeat a championship outcome. We’re trying to repeat a championship process. And success leaves clues. There are things that we want to make sure we carry over from what we learn.

“But this is a new art project. This is a new identity. This is a new chance. The standards don’t change, but the way we go about it is going to be unique to this team, and that’s really fun to explore.”

The 98%

UCLA coach Cori Close speaks during a news conference on April 4.

UCLA coach Cori Close speaks during a news conference on April 4.

(Ronaldo Bolanos / Los Angeles Times)

Part of the “championship process” Bruins fans can expect to hear about is the “98%.”

Close repeated it. Players repeated it. It’s a mentality Close wants the Bruins to keep in mind throughout the season.

“What I mean by that is 98% of the game is played without the ball,” Close explained. “Can you become a better screener? Can you learn someone else’s tendencies? Can you talk more on defense? Can you become a better rebounder? How many ways can we learn from each other and be better ‘98%’ players? And if we do that, we’ll be on our way.”

Possessing the ball — the two percent — does matter. But players who can thrive without the ball will establish a team that, in Close’s eyes, is one that can be difficult to beat.

Sienna Betts’ role

UCLA forward Sienna Betts, left, speaks to her older sister, UCLA center Lauren Betts before a game in December.

UCLA forward Sienna Betts, left, speaks to her older sister, UCLA center Lauren Betts before a game in December.

(Caroline Brehman / Associated Press)

Sienna Betts, the younger sister of UCLA icon and Washington Mystics rookie Lauren Betts, is set to have a key role this season, especially as a returning sophomore on a team with many new players.

“It’s going to be different,” Sienna said, referencing the Bruins losing six players to the WNBA. “But I mean, I’m excited. And it’s not the first time I’ve been in a position like this; I mean, not at this level, obviously. So, I’m just excited to be in this new role. And I have coaches who are here to help me.

“I’m just planning on doing whatever coach Cori needs from me, whatever the team needs, and, you know, game to game.”

The 6-foot-4 forward is primed to be the Bruins’ anchor in the paint. She demonstrated her leadership during Thursday’s practice as well as some bully ball inside.

Betts, who is left-handed, mentioned her focus on right-handed shooting this offseason, in addition to preparing for increased touches. She averaged six points and four rebounds over 28 games as a freshman. Close said she is improving quickly.

“The younger players have grown into new roles,” Close said. “I think you could see glimpses of that [with] how Sienna’s already started to do that, even maybe ahead of where I thought she’d be at this point.”

Aarnisalo’s return

UCLA guard Elina Aarnisalo controls the ball against Mississippi in the Sweet 16 of the 2025 NCAA tournament.

UCLA guard Elina Aarnisalo controls the ball against Mississippi in the Sweet 16 of the 2025 NCAA tournament.

(Young Kwak / Associated Press)

Elina Aarnisalo, who played for UCLA as a freshman in 2024-25, is back in Westwood after spending her sophomore season with North Carolina.

The 5-foot-10 guard averaged 5.1 points, 3.4 assists and 2.2 rebounds as a freshman, but saw her scoring double (10.2) in Chapel Hill. Aarnisalo, a native of Finland, said she is more confident, not only as a player but also as a communicator.

“Obviously, there’s going to be a lot of spots on the team open now after a big draft class,” Aarnisalo said. “And a lot of seniors leaving, that obviously interested me too. Talking with Cori [about] what my role could be on this team and what we could accomplish this year … just knowing the standards at UCLA, how we practice, how they focus on individual work; I’ve seen it, and I’ve seen my old teammates [and] how they’ve succeeded in this environment, which is why I wanted to come back.”

Aarnisalo averaged 21 minutes per game as a freshman and 27 as a sophomore. She stands a good chance of seeing her playing time increase this season.

New faces, same goal

Former Texas Christian guard Donovyn Hunter is among the new players on the UCLA roster.

Former Texas Christian guard Donovyn Hunter is among the new players on the UCLA roster.

(Tony Gutierrez / Associated Press)

The Bruins will look starkly different next season after essentially exchanging six WNBA-ready players for five enticing transfers.

Those newcomers are Texas Christian guard Donovyn Hunter, Iowa State forward Addy Brown, Arkansas guard Bonnie Deas, Notre Dame guard KK Bransford and Aarnisalo.

“These girls are obviously really talented, come from really different programs,” Betts said. “It takes a second to adjust to coach Cori’s rhythm, and her offense, and just how she runs practice and games. But I think they’re doing a great job integrating in, and they’re all just great human beings off the court and on the court. So, I’m really excited for this group.”

Close admitted she has been very busy following the Bruins’ title win. She had to retool the roster while simultaneously celebrating the previous one.

“Of course, I’m not complaining, but it has been a great challenge and an incredible, intense thing,” Close said. “I mean, literally, the minute after the UCLA women embracing tougher standards in title-repeat bid game, we are on the phone with recruits from the locker room, and the next day, the transfer portal opens. So, I mean, this has been nonstop.”

UCLA’s first test is north of the border

The Bruins will face Canada’s women’s national team in an exhibition on July 22 in Victoria, British Columbia.

While UCLA is far from a polished product, facing Canada’s best is, if anything, a great opportunity to gain even more exposure and improve team chemistry.

“We’re trying to get better. We’re trying to get more physical,” Aarnisalo said. “So we’re going to be in better shape when the actual game starts and the season starts. So it’s an everyday process.”

Bruins forward Timea Gardiner is expected to play in Canada after missing last season as a medical redshirt with a knee injury.

Gardiner, who transferred to UCLA in 2024 after spending two years at Oregon State, averaged 7.6 points, 3.4 rebounds and 18 minutes per game with the Bruins.

Source link

Nationwide redistricting war fuels congressional reform effort

Imagine if Sunday’s World Cup final were played under rules that blatantly favored one side over the other. Let’s say Argentina was spotted four goals against Spain.

Spain could, conceivably, overcome that 4-0 deficit. But it would be awfully hard and something of a miracle if the Spanish team prevailed.

Fans the world over would be rightly outraged. Why bother holding the tournament? What’s the point if one team is saddled with near-insurmountable odds?

Increasingly, that’s what elections for the House of Representatives look like.

As recently as the late 1990s, around 4 in 10 congressional districts were considered competitive, meaning Democratic and Republican candidates each had a plausible shot at winning. Today, per the nonpartisan handicappers at the Cook Political Report, only 18 of 435 House districts are considered toss-ups.

Another 20 districts are rated as either leaning Democratic or Republican, meaning candidates from one party or the other enjoy a noteworthy advantage, but aren’t necessarily a lock to win in November.

In sum, that means fewer than a tenth of all House seats are even somewhat competitive.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and other analysts cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

That’s hardly an accident, as lawmakers have increasingly manipulated the election process to suit themselves, rejiggering congressional districts to sideline voters and boost their political parties.

It’s undemocratic, and it stinks.

Stifling competition, rewarding extremes

“Every voter has a stake in making sure that these elections are fair and that the process is transparent,” said Rep. Jeff Hurd, a Republican who represents a large, mostly rural swath of western and southern Colorado. “Gerrymandering undermines representative democracy … by preventing voters and communities from having cohesive representation.

“It unfortunately rewards political extremes,” he went on. “It reduces competition and contributes to the polarization and dysfunction that prevents Congress from effectively addressing the issues that our constituents care about.”

Hurd is a member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, a bipartisan group of 44 House members dedicated to working through their ideological and political differences to — lordy! — try to get stuff done.

Recently, to mark Independence Day, the caucus announced a framework for legislation aimed at bringing competition back to many congressional races, in part by limiting the redrawing of political maps to once every 10 years, following the census. Among other reforms, the bipartisan group also called for establishing a uniform, national standard requiring that congressional districts be drawn “using clear, objective criteria while rejecting partisan advantage and incumbent protection as legitimate goals.”

The effort is, of course, too late for this election. The hope is Congress will enact the changes in time for the next scheduled round of redistricting, which is due to take place after the 2030 census. The rules would be in place starting in 2032.

The chances of passage are not strong. As Hurd noted: “Any reform that asks politicians to give up political leverage is going to be challenging.” But if ever there was a time for a badly needed systemic fix, it’s now.

A race to the bottom

Gerrymandering has been around for more than 200 years. The term derives from the efforts of Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry to skew state Senate races in the election of 1812. The portmanteau, which appeared in the Boston Gazette, described one politically engineered, misshapen district that resembled a salamander.

The practice reached new heights of creativity (or deviousness, depending on your perspective) in the modern age, when ever-more sophisticated computers allowed for ever-finer slicing and dicing of the electorate.

In 2019, the Supreme Court effectively greenlighted the practice in a 5-4 decision by the conservative majority, decreeing that partisan gerrymandering was beyond the purview of federal courts. In other words, have at it! And lawmakers did.

But this last year, in particular, has broken new, insidious ground.

Pressured by President Trump — who fears losing the GOP’s whisper-thin House majoritylawmakers in Texas tore up their political map mid-decade and redrew the state’s congressional districts in hopes of nabbing five additional seats this November. California responded in kind, with passage of Proposition 50, a measure that shelved the work of a nonpartisan redistricting commission in favor of a map aimed at handing Democrats five additional seats.

More than half a dozen other states — most of them Republican-run — have jumped into the fight, gerrymandering their congressional districts to gain a partisan edge. Lawmakers in several Democratic-run states are now looking at the prospect of retaliatory gerrymandering ahead of the 2028 election.

There’s not much upside to all this self-dealing — if, that is, you care about political competition and allowing the electorate a genuine say. But all that manipulation and maneuvering has, at least, made voters much more aware of the once-obscure practice of congressional line drawing. And that offers reformers a flicker of hope.

One ally, improbable though it may seem, is Paul Mitchell. He’s the Sacramento political guru who drew the gerrymandered map that California voters approved with passage of Proposition 50. (California, he said, was left no choice but to respond after Texas made its move.)

Mitchell said he has long favored a national redistricting standard that would apply to all 50 states and put the much-abused process on an even footing. “I really believe that redistricting should … serve the public, not serve the politicians,” Mitchell said.

Still looking on that bright side, he suggested perhaps the current redistricting war will prove so odious and have “done so much harm” that combatants will reach a point where they “put down [their] arms and embrace a kind of nonpartisan, non-politicized, public-oriented redistricting.”

It seems far-fetched. But miracles do happen.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Californians rallied to save the coast 50 years ago. Trump is spoiling the celebration
The deep dive: On birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court originalists split on history and Trump
The L.A. Times Special: Inside the states’ case to block the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger: ‘Each side is taking risks’

Until next time,
mzb

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

Source link

Loose Women star pays tribute to colleague after ‘sudden’ death

Loose Women star Judi Love was visibly emotional as she paid tribute to chef Dom Taylor.

Loose Women star Judi Love paid tribute to a colleague minutes into the ITV programme.

The comedian struggled to hold back tears as she was consoled by her co-stars.

Judi had returned to Loose Women following a brief absence, with fellow presenters Christine Lampard, Kelly Brook and Janet Street-Porter giving her a warm welcome back.

But she had some heartbreaking news to share with viewers. Judi began: “Life, highs and lows.”

She spoke about her recent tour, having sold out Hammersmith Apollo, saying: “That was amazing, it was such a beautiful night. As a comedian, that’s something that you dream of doing so actually doing it and selling out as a solo artist was phenomenal.”

She continued: “But life has its highs and it has its lows, and one of the lows that’s just only happened over the weekend is I lost a dear friend and a colleague, Dominic Taylor.”

Judi paid tribute to the “phenomenal” chef, who worked on her show, Our Table.

She said: “I remember first meeting him and tasting his food and it was amazing, it was a dream to work with him so when he said yes, that he would do my show, I was beyond happy,” reports the Express.

She added: “I just want to send my love to all of his close friends and his family, we’re here for you. We’ll never forget you, Dominic.”

Judi went on: “It reminds you to spend time with the ones you love and appreciate the small things so, it’s a beauty in the midst of all of that I’m back here with you.”

Tributes have been paid to TV chef Dom Taylor, who won Channel 4’s Five Star Kitchen: Britain’s Next Great Chef in 2023, after he passed away “suddenly”, according to a statement released by his team.

Their statement added: “Dom was a visionary whose bold, joyful approach to celebrating the Caribbean cuisine of his childhood brought a fresh and exciting voice to London’s restaurant scene.

“His passion, talent and generosity touched so many people, and his legacy will continue to inspire those who had the privilege of knowing him and experiencing his food.

“His passion, talent and generosity touched so many people, and his legacy will continue to inspire those who had the privilege of knowing him and experiencing his food.”

Among those paying tribute in the comments, Fred Sirieix shared: “So sad.”

One fan wrote: “I didn’t know Chef Dom Taylor personally, but the meal I had at The Good Front Room at the Langham’s Palm Court for my birthday was unforgettable. Hearing this news has truly shocked me. My condolences to his family, friends, colleagues and all the patrons who loved his work. May he rest in eternal peace.”

Another added: “Dom gave me my first ever job/job in the cheffing world and taught me so much. So sad to hear this news and sending lots of love to family, friends, and staff during this heartbreaking time.”

Loose Women airs weekdays from 12.30pm on ITV1 and ITVX.

Source link

California kids still struggle in our schools. Will this change help?

Recent news about literacy, education and general smarts in California and across the country has been somewhat distressing.

Along with claims that Americans are becoming illiterate, here in the Golden State there are worries that even the highest-achieving students aren’t prepared for our universities, and a study shows backsliding in civil rights protections in the vacuum created by federal changes under the Trump administration.

Despite being close to terming out of office, and also otherwise occupied with his ever-emerging presidential run, Gov. Gavin Newsom last week found time to announce a consequential, if controversial, move that has the potential to vastly improve educational outcomes for California kids: switching out an independent, voter-chosen leader for a hired gun.

In legislation signed last week, Newsom basically eviscerated the role of the elected superintendent of public instruction and instead shifted oversight of our K-12 schools to a newly created education commissioner — to be appointed by the governor.

The change, set to happen early next year, has been described as a “power grab” by some, and on its surface could be seen that way. The conservative candidate for state superintendent — Sonja Shaw, who says she is running to stop “political ideologies being shoved down everybody’s throats” — quickly claimed Newsom’s move was all about stopping her.

In reality, power grab or not, it’s the kind of reform we should all support — a long-overdue push to create accountability in a hot-mess system where there are too many people almost-sorta in charge of too many conflicting priorities.

‘A’ for accountability

It’s to Newsom’s credit that he’s setting up his successor to helm a system that at least has a chance at coherence, even if it raises the stakes for the next governor to deliver.

For years — decades, really — streamlining the governing structure of schools “has been proposed by Republicans and Democrats and bipartisan and nonpartisan commissions,” Linda Darling-Hammond told me. She’s a professor emeritus at Stanford University, an advisor to the governor and, by any measure, one of the preeminent education policy experts in the country.

“It’s not at all political. It is really about making the system run well,” she said. “The world is changing, the economy is changing. There’s just a need to be very efficient and effective in making policy and then implementing that policy.”

“Run well” is the key there. California operates the biggest and most diverse school system in the country. We’ve got roughly 10,000 regular schools (depending on how you count), including about 1,200 charter schools, around 1,00 school districts and 58 counties, each with their own slice of local control over those schools, according to the Department of Education.

That’s about 5.7 million students, nearly 300,000 teachers and $150 billion in costs (counting the new funding in the next budget).

To be kind, this system does not always run well. That’s in no small part because oversight and control are fragmented, overlapping and confusing. Currently, the State Board of Education sets policies, but the elected superintendent implements them through the Department of Education. Then control runs downhill to individual school districts, filtering through local school boards and even principals.

The board can’t control how the superintendent does their job, and vice versa. In fact, they don’t always agree, despite (or because of) the shotgun wedding nature of their relationship. At times, it can feel like they are working against each other. Never mind the complexities of local control.

This has been especially true in recent years as Newsom and the Legislature have pushed through big changes, such as the new prekindergarten grade, that have required massive coordination and effort. At the local level, administrators often complain there is little clarity on what is expected of them and, too often, outright conflict.

“The idea of having policy in one place and implementation in the other is really crazy,” Michael Kirst told me. He’s professor emeritus of education at Stanford and the longest-serving president of California’s State Board of Education, serving under both of Jerry Brown’s gubernatorial stints.

Newsom’s proposed system promises “much clearer, cleaner accountability,” Kirst said.

Expertise counts

It also has the benefit of putting an actual education expert in charge of schools. Because the superintendent role is elected, it has too often been coveted by career politicians looking for a landing spot. Its incumbent, Tony Thurmond, had a background in social work before running for various offices, but that kind of experience isn’t always the case. Neither is experience running a major organization with thousands of employees.

While Newsom’s plan leaves many, if not most, of the details to be ironed out later (a frustrating strategy he’s used more than once to keep the ball rolling on policy without having the drag of actual detail), it does promise to put in someone with the kind of high-level educational policy experience that should be required when managing this vast and important endeavor.

Kirst points out that this will be a “powerful position” charged with making sure our schools are indeed run well, and at the end of the day, it gives us one person to blame if they don’t: the governor.

So if schools don’t improve and our kids don’t learn, voters will know exactly who failed.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump ousts members of bipartisan election commission ahead of midterms
The California edge: The Work of Helping A.I. Destroy Work
The L.A. Times Special: In bed 23 at Adelanto ICE detention center, a terrified teenager missed his mom

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria


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

Source link

‘Entitled women stole my plane seat then hit me with blunt 5-word response’

A plane passenger has sparked outrage after refusing to move from another traveller’s assigned seat – before hitting them with a blunt five-word response that left people stunned

A plane passenger has been slammed for stealing a stranger’s seat and – before defending her actions with a blunt five-word response. The traveller had specifically booked a window seat for the flight, but was stunned to find another passenger already sitting in it when they boarded.

Taking to Reddit, the passenger explained how they politely pointed out the mistake, only to be wrongly told they had the aisle seat instead. They said: “I booked a window seat (27A) on my flight. When I got there, two women were already sitting in my row. I politely told them I had 27A, and one of them goes, ‘No, this is 27C, the window seat. 27A is the aisle’.”

Unsure who was correct, the passenger briefly sat in the aisle seat before asking a flight attendant to confirm the seating plan.

They added: “I was a bit confused, so I double-checked after sitting down briefly in the aisle seat and asked a flight attendant. She confirmed that 27A was, in fact, the window seat.”

After returning to the row and politely explaining the mix-up, the passenger was met with an unexpected response.

They said: “Her response was, ‘For f***’s sake, what are you so desperate to sit by the window for?’

“I told her calmly that I’d paid for that seat.”

Rather than apologising or moving, the woman hit back with a five-word defence.

“She snaps back, ‘We all paid for it,’ and still refuses to move,” the passenger said.

Fortunately, the flight attendant had witnessed the exchange and quickly stepped in.

They recalled: “The flight attendant is right there witnessing everything and says, ‘It’s her seat. If she wants to sit there, she will’.

“Only then did the woman finally move, but the attitude the whole time was unbelievable. No apology, no basic respect – just pure entitlement.”

Frustrated by the encounter, the passenger added: “Honestly, I don’t get how people can act like that over something so straightforward. If it’s not your seat, just move. It’s not that deep.”

Commenting on the post, one user said: “I remember when they said people had to sit in their assigned seat so they could be identified in an accident.”

Another user added: “My preference is short flight give me window, long flight give me aisle. I have a small bladder. But if that all goes out the window if someone is in the seat I paid for.

“Ask to switch and maybe I’ll be willing to sit in my seat and refuse to move or expect me to switch? Nah I’m standing on business. Sit in the seat you paid for.”

A third user said: “I like the aisle and window but I would have definitely made her move with that disposition!”

One more user added: “It’s rude and it is not allowed. You sit in the correct seat period. They just wanted to take your seat. That’s where the flight attendants come in and say move it.”

Source link

Jared Huffman is one of few nonreligious members of Congress

Jared Huffman was unstinting and unbowed as he raised an arm heavenward. Not for fear of a thunderbolt hurtling through the blue sky and, punitively, creasing his skull. Rather, he was illustrating a point.

“I believe in a lot of things,” he said over a tuna melt at a small Marin County cafe. “I just don’t believe in magic and a sky god that looks like an old bearded man sitting just beyond the clouds.”

Huffman is the rare American — one of only about 10% or so — who flatly state they do not believe in God, or any higher power for that matter. What makes him rarer still is his place in Congress. Huffman, who represents a sprawling slice of Northern California, reaching from the Bay Area to the Oregon border, is one of just four members (out of more than 500) who are openly agnostic or religiously unaffiliated.

He is, by far, the most outspoken.

Huffman, who publicly revealed his nonreligious status in 2017, helped form the Congressional Freethought Caucus, which consists of about three dozen members of various religious stripe, each dedicated to the proposition that church and state should be distinct. He’s written a book, due out next month, raising an alarm and summoning Americans to fight the rising tide of Christian nationalism roiling our divided land.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and other analysts cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

An overwhelming favorite to win an eighth congressional term in November, Huffman, a Democrat, calls himself a humanist and described it this way:

“To me, it means good without God. It means you don’t need the inducement or fear of an afterlife to have a moral framework and to know your place in the universe. You’re sort of at peace with the reality that, as far as we know, this is it. You get one time around.

Rep. Jared Huffman, right, shaking hands with Marin County Executive Derek Johnson.

Rep. Jared Huffman, right, greets Marin County Executive Derek Johnson during the opening of a housing community in Point Reyes Station, Calif., on Wednesday.

(Godofredo A. Vasquez / For The Times)

“There are people of faith who sometimes think, well, that must be sad, that must be incomplete,” Huffman went on. “I find it’s just the opposite. It makes this world and our opportunity to be part of it more sacred.”

Growing up in the Mormon faith

Huffman, 62, grew up in a religious household in Independence, Mo. His family practiced an offshoot of the Mormon faith; as a youth, Huffman served in the priesthood.

He began to question the church and its teachings when his father died of lung cancer at age 56. Huffman was 19 and enrolled at UC Santa Barbara on a full-ride volleyball scholarship. (A lean 6-foot-3, Huffman was a three-time NCAA All-American and is a member of the school’s athletic hall of fame.)

“I think in hindsight ignorant faith kept me from coming to terms with the fact that he was dying, and it made it way more traumatic than it should have been,” Huffman said of his father’s passing. “I didn’t really own up to the reality of what was happening, because I was this person of faith who thought rotten things would never happen to me and my father.”

  • Share via

Shaken, Huffman spent years in a period of reflection and deep study — of various religions, spirituality, the Bible, which he can cite chapter and verse — before landing in his place of humanism and nonconformity.

After earning a law degree at Boston College, Huffman moved to the Bay Area and served as a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, the environmental group. His political career began in 1994 with his election to the Marin Municipal Water District. Huffman served for 12 years, until his election to the state Assembly. He won his congressional seat in 2012.

Huffman’s secularism never came up, he said, until his arrival in Washington, where religiosity, God-fearing and worship of a higher power are taken as articles of faith.

“All of a sudden, religion is all around you and everyone wants to know your religion,” Huffman said. “I knew that I was a nonbeliever. I knew that I was a humanist. But that was a very private thing and I had kind of intended to keep it that way.”

Losing his religion

Two things changed.

First, Huffman’s mother died at age 87. She was fervently religious, Huffman said, and “I didn’t really want to break her heart and tell her how deep my nonbelief actually was.” (In his book, Huffman recounts an awkward scene where he takes the congressional oath of office for the first time on a hastily borrowed Bible, to please his proud mom.)

The second factor was the ascent of Trump, riding a wave of ardent evangelical support.

Huffman was put off by the hypocrisy of such a blasphemous president surrounding himself with extremists using the language and symbols of religious faith to enact what he perceived, and perceives, as a distinctly antidemocratic, un-American agenda.

“I was always uncomfortable with the way I saw religion encroaching into government in Washington,” Huffman said. “My previous concerns were heightened by an order of magnitude because of what he did.”

Ignoring the counsel of family, friends and political advisors who, to a person, warned against it, Huffman revealed his religious disbelief in a series of statements and interviews in November 2017. At the time, the only member of Congress to ever publicly come out as an atheist was Rep. Pete Stark, who announced his sentiments in 2007; though the Fremont Democrat was reelected twice, he was eventually defeated by a Democratic rival who turned his lack of faith against him.

That rival was Eric Swalwell; make of it what you will.

Huffman braced for political blowback. There was none, though he’s gotten death threats and plenty of admonishments he’s bound for Hell.

(Meantime, the congressional ranks of the religiously unaffiliated have grown to include Democratic Reps. Yassamin Ansari of Arizona and Emily Randall of Washington and Republican Rep. Abraham Hamadeh of Arizona.)

In the first election after his announcement, Huffman was returned to Washington with 77% of the vote. He’s won reelection three times since, with never less than 72% support. “It turns out [constituents] don’t much care what my religion is if I’m doing good work,” Huffman said, “and that’s pretty great in my opinion.”

He underscored the sentiment with a hearty bite of his tuna melt.

The book Huffman has coming out next month — with chapters that include “Breaking Faith,” “Christian Privilege” and “Christian Zionism” — is a work that explains his personal evolution and expresses a dire fear the country is headed, if unchecked, toward a system of authoritarian theocracy.

He describes the Christian nationalism that informed the attempted coup on Jan. 6, 2021, and explains the biblical prophecies behind the messianic support among some Trumpian true-believers.

“The book is not so much about humanism,” Huffman said. “It is about the fight to protect our secular democracy, which, I think, is the bedrock of America as we know it.”

The dedication reads, “For everyone who refuses to bow.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: 14 propositions that could remake California taxes, housing, healthcare and elections
The deep dive: Even without birthright citizenship, Supreme Court co-signs much of Trump’s immigration agenda
The L.A. Times Special: The right and left need to control the radicals in their own parties

Until next time,
mzb

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

Source link

Vogue Williams admits ‘one of the worst’ parenting decisions live on Loose Women

Vogue Williams appeared as a guest panellist on Loose Women on Monday, where she made a candid admission

Vogue Williams made a candid confession during the latest instalment of Loose Women.

The 40-year-old Irish TV personality appeared as a guest panellist on the ITV daytime show on Monday (July 6), joining Charlene White, Coleen Nolan, and Jane Moore.

The panel swiftly turned their focus to England’s FIFA World Cup victory over Mexico in the early hours of the morning. Jude Bellingham scored twice in 98 seconds to put England ahead, before Julian Quinones pulled one back for Mexico just three minutes before the break.

The drama continued, as Jarell Quansah was shown a red card after 54 minutes for a high challenge on Jesus Gallardo, with both sides subsequently converting a penalty each.

While chatting about the match, Vogue confessed that she and her husband, Spencer Matthews, had made “one of the worst” parenting decisions that morning, reports the Irish Mirror.

She said: “I did not stay up but my husband decided to watch it with the kids this morning and it was not as harmonious as your house [talking to Charlene].

“One of the worst decisions we’ve ever made, because we have such small ones and they all get a turn. So, my son was throwing a wobbly that he hadn’t had his turn on the TV while they’re trying to watch it. So, it wasn’t great this morning actually.”

While Vogue found watching the match with her young children, Theodore, Gigi and Otto, rather testing, Charlene had quite a contrasting experience with her eight-year-old son, Alfie.

“We were all very excited about it so Alfie wanted to stay up and [I was like], ‘Absolutely not, you’re eight years old,'” she explained.

“But what we did is he woke up at six so he could watch the whole thing, [and] if there was loads of extra time and penalties, he would have time to watch that before going to school. So, all phones were off. The TV was definitely on iPlayer to make sure they definitely didn’t suddenly see the result, and he was really excited on the sofa at 6am.”

Meanwhile, Coleen revealed that she had attempted to stay up until 1am, but drifted back off to sleep upon discovering the match had been pushed back by an hour.

“I thought, ‘I can’t do it,’ so I kind of fell back to sleep,” she said, before disclosing that she had watched the entire second half.

“They were just unbelievable… It was so exciting, what a match,” she added.

Elsewhere in the episode, the stars opened up about the difficulties they’ve encountered after their children flew the nest for the first time, with Vogue expressing her anxiety about the prospect of her own kids eventually being old enough to move out.

“Even the thought of them going is just heartbreaking to me. I want to be the mum with the house that everyone wants to come to and they all want to spend time with us,” she said.

Loose Women airs weekdays on ITV1 and ITVX at 12.30pm

Source link

Column: The Founding Fathers pledged their fortunes to the cause of liberty. Trump enriches himself

Could the Declaration of Independence be signed today by this crop of political leaders, particularly the one who occupies and defaces the White House?

Not just sign, but sincerely mean it.

Especially the guy who bangs a wrecking ball against the historic East Wing to make room for an incongruous ballroom monstrosity, who mars the sacred Oval Office with gold glitter and paves over the lovely Rose Garden.

But never mind these displays of egotism and tackiness that currently blemish landmarks throughout the nation’s capital, including the National Mall, traditional site of the annual July Fourth fireworks.

Back to my central question: Would there be enough patriots today to affix their John Hancocks to a rebellious document that bravely concludes:

“For the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Political leaders would very likely sign the more famous preamble that includes this passage, widely regarded as the most important sentence in American history:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Those words probably would poll well and make salable talking points in local town halls. Even if the notion that all people are created equal would be recognized, as it was 250 years ago, as merely a lofty, hypocritical pie-in-the-sky goal. After all, the eloquent document’s principal author, Thomas Jefferson, owned 600 slaves.

You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter

George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.

We’ve made a world of progress since then on equality. But clearly President Trump and much of America today don’t agree that all people are created equal and guaranteed the same right, for example, of due process in court. People such as undocumented immigrants — the tired, the poor and the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

But that’s a heated and politicized 250-year-old debate that will continue indefinitely.

For me, the most striking and sincere sentence in the Declaration of Independence is the last one, in which 56 delegates to the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia on July 4, 1776, unanimously pledged “our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor.”

“It was not a throwaway line,” notes UC Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar. “It was an acknowledgment that they were committing treason. It showed how deeply committed they were.”

The nation’s founders understood that in British King George III’s view, they were traitors. And if their rebellion failed, they’d be targets for execution.

“We must indeed all hang together or most assuredly we shall all hang separately,” Benjamin Franklin supposedly told delegates.

In fact, nine of the signers died during the Revolutionary War from disease, prison hardships or combat wounds.

An estimated 6,800 U.S. soldiers died in combat and more than 8,500 were wounded. An additional 17,000 Americans perished.

Several signers sacrificed their fortunes, some to help pay for the war.

Gen. George Washington — an immensely rich Virginia planter — refused to accept a salary as commander in chief of the Continental Army. He bought much of the ammunition and fighting gear himself, then was reimbursed after the war.

Sacred honor? That meant what it said back then. The revolutionary leaders proved their character with sacrifice and bravery.

The nation’s first president, Washington, could not tell a lie, according to myth. Of course, he routinely lied during the war to deceive the British. But our 47th president, Donald Trump, is a pathological liar who seems to prevaricate daily.

Would Trump pledge his fortune to the cause of liberty?

That’s hard to imagine of a president who uses the office to promote and prosper from his own brand name. And whose income ballooned to $2.2 billion in 2025, his first year back in the White House after being booted by voters in 2020, a humiliation he still doesn’t have the integrity to acknowledge.

“President Trump is using the office to enrich himself and his family in ways we’ve never seen before,” Chemerinsky asserts.

Pledge his life? Please!

This is a man who once faked bone spurs to avoid the military draft. OK, he wasn’t the only young fellow who dodged combat in the unnecessary Vietnam War, which claimed the lives of 58,000 Americans.

But Trump has called America’s war dead “suckers” and “losers,” according to former aides. He denies it.

There’s no question he expressed contempt for the late Sen. John McCain, who spent more than five years as a North Vietnamese prisoner. “He’s not a war hero,” Trump said. “I like people who weren’t captured.”

The Declaration of Independence was about severing the chains of a British monarchy and creating a government powered by the people with checks and balances.

Trump has attempted — often successfully — to govern as a monarch, ignoring the checks and balances of Congress and the judiciary. He has gotten away with it because bullied Republican congressional leaders have mostly rolled over like lapdogs.

But we may be seeing the early signs of a mild revolt against the king as Trump sinks further in the polls and we draw closer to the November elections.

That’s sort of what the founders had in mind: a government deriving its power “from the consent of the governed.” And when citizens are subjected to “absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”

So could the Declaration be signed today? Hard to say. There’s no King George hovering over us. Only a wannabe king.

But, yes, I suspect there’d be a signing. Independence is a dominant gene in America’s DNA.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: What you should know about the $351.7-billion state budget Newsom just signed
Go your own way: Facing setbacks and resistance, Trump presses bid to reshape elections on multiple fronts
The L.A. Times Special: More money and patience could help California’s vote count

Until next week,
George Skelton


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

Source link

Sudan’s maternity wards reopen, bringing hope amid post-war struggles | Health

After years of closure due to war, hospitals in the Sudanese capital are welcoming mothers again, despite lingering economic and logistical hurdles.

In the Sudanese city of Omdurman, the maternity hospital, known locally as Al-Dayat or ‘Midwives” in English, has resumed operations after a long closure caused by the war. Mothers are once again arriving at maternity wards, navigating difficult economic and logistical conditions to give birth safely.

Al-Toma Jabara, a mother from East Nile, gave birth to her daughter, Doaa, at the hospital two days ago. She told Al Jazeera that she was unable to conceive during the war years. Fighting between the Sudanese armed forces and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) separated Jabara from her husband for two years.

She has lived under constant bombardment and clashes in her home, making a normal family life seem impossible. She described Doaa’s arrival as a “new beginning” for her family after years of fear and deprivation.

At Bahri Hospital, Fatima Abdel Rahman, a mother from Al Jazirah state, recounted her exhausting and expensive journey to the capital Khartoum. Her family had to spend a large portion of their income on transportation and temporary accommodation near the facility to monitor her condition post-delivery.

Abdel Rahman noted that medication shortages forced her to buy basic drugs from outside pharmacies at inflated prices, adding to her financial burden. However, she stressed that the functioning maternity ward provided her with a vital sense of safety, sparing her the fear of dying due to lack of medical care – a constant dread she lived with during the war.

Rebuilding the shattered health sector

During the conflict, the closure of specialised maternity hospitals forced many women to undergo unsafe home births or travel long distances, drastically increasing risks for both mothers and infants. An anonymous official from the Khartoum State Ministry of Health confirmed that maternal and infant complications and mortality rates surged during the war due to closures.

The Neonatal Department at Omdurman Maternity Hospital is the largest of its kind in Sudan [Mohammed Mirghani/Al Jazeera]
The Neonatal Department at Omdurman Maternity Hospital is the largest of its kind in Sudan [Mohammed Mirghani/Al Jazeera]

The official told Al Jazeera that complication rates are now gradually decreasing as services resume. The health ministry has repaired and reopened 15 maternity wards across the capital, including Al-Dayat and the Saudi Hospital. The capital’s hospitals are now recording a significant increase in births, reaching about 7,000 new deliveries per month.

Emad Abdullah, director of the Omdurman Maternity Hospital, noted that it initially received only one or two cases a day upon reopening. Today, that number has climbed to approximately 60 births per day, as services expand to meet growing demand.

The hospital has several vital departments, including a caesarean section, an intensive care unit and a neonatal department equipped with about 140 incubators, making it the largest in Sudan.

Rising costs and logistical nightmares

Maternity costs vary significantly depending on the facility. At government hospitals, a natural birth typically costs about 130,000 Sudanese pounds ($216), while C-sections cost around 400,000 pounds ($666). In private hospitals, the cost of a natural birth shoots up to approximately 500,000 pounds ($813) and C-sections range between 600-800,000 pounds ($999-1,322), depending on the service level.

Despite the reopening of wards in Khartoum, Omdurman and Bahri, large challenges remain with patients from distant regions such as Al Jazirah and Kordofan facing exhausting journeys and exorbitant transport costs.

In the hospitals, there is a shortage of basic medicines and emergency rooms often operate beyond their capacity. In addition, the wartime exodus of doctors and nurses has left a critical gap in qualified staff, while essential medical equipment needs regular maintenance to keep up with demand.

Amira Othman Abdel Majeed, an infection control officer at Bahri Hospital, described the war as the most challenging period for the health sector, marred by severe shortages of supplies, electricity and water. That has imposed psychological pressure on medical staff who feared losing mothers and children during treatment.

However, she said the “liberation of Khartoum” and the resumption of maternity services have dramatically changed the landscape. Staff emerged stronger and more resilient, with the ongoing medical care serving as a prime symbol of the capital’s recovering health sector.

Source link

Britain makes official apology to women forced to give up their babies

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer formally apologized Thursday to women and their children caught up in a historic forced adoptions scandal in England and Wales over an almost three-decade long period between the 1950s and 1970s. File Photo Betty Laura Zapata/EPA

July 2 (UPI) — Outgoing British Prime Minister Keir Starmer apologized in person Thursday to women and some of their children who were caught up in a historic forced adoptions scandal in England and Wales dating back to the 1950s through the 1970s.

Stamer issued a formal apology on behalf of the British state, calling the taking of an estimated 185,000 babies from unmarried women, railroaded into allowing their children to be put up for adoption, a “stain on our history.”

The shame is not yours. The shame was never yours. The shame is ours,” he said in a statement to the House of Commons after earlier hosting a group of survivors in Downing Street.

“Mothers, many young, vulnerable, and without support were coerced, bullied, or misled into feeling that they had no choice but to have their children taken away from them. What a thing to do,” he said.

Speaking as some of those whose lives were severely impacted watched on from the public gallery, Starmer said that what happened to them and to tens of thousands of mothers, children and families “should never have happened.”

“It is a stain on our history,” he said.

Starmer said the victims had “very powerfully” relayed to him the “gut-wrenching” shame they were made to feel and how it was drummed into them that they were immoral young women whose children would be better off without them.

The experiences stayed with them through their lifetimes, while their children grew up believing they were unwanted, he said.

“We are deeply and profoundly sorry to the mothers who were told they were unfit, who were prevented from caring for the children they desperately wanted to help and to keep, and who have carried this loss for decades,” said Starmer.

Starmer acknowledged that the practice was deliberate and widespread, particularly between 1949 and 1976 when it was, he said, “embedded within systems across local authorities, across voluntary and faith-based institutions, and in health and social care services,” including parts of what is now the National Health Service.

“All institutions that operated with power over people’s lives, yet they did so without compassion, without consent, and without dignity or proper safeguards,” said Starmer.

He said some women, including those placed in Mother and Baby Homes and other institutions, were prevented from seeing their families and partners, denied education and job opportunities and kept in harsh living conditions.

Some of the treatment meted out to the women was tantamount to manipulation and abuse, said Starmer.

Mothers and adoptees campaigned for years for the state to acknowledge wrongdoing but no offer of compensation was forthcoming, although the government has announced a $5.3 million fund to improve access to adoption records and assist family reunions.

Survivor Ann Keen, whose baby son was adopted in 1966 after she was sent to a mother and baby home in Swansea in Wales at the age of 17, told the BBC she had “no say” in the decision.

The former Member of Parliament in the ruling Labour Party, told BBC Radio ahead of Starmer’s statement to lawmakers that she was eagerly anticipating the moment she would finally be “released from my shame.”

Source link