women

Former Liverpool and Burnley manager Matt Beard has died at the age of 47.

Beard led Liverpool to back-to-back Women’s Super League titles in 2013 and 2014.

He returned for a second spell at the club in 2021 but was sacked in February this year.

In a statement, Liverpool paid tribute to “an extremely committed and successful manager”.

They added: “He was also a person of real integrity and warmth, who will always be remembered with genuine fondness by everyone he worked with at the club. Rest in peace, Matt.”

Following his reappointment in 2021, Beard led the Reds to promotion back to the WSL and helped them to a seventh-placed finish on their return to the top flight.

Beard also managed Liverpool during their first ever Champions League campaign.

He was appointed Burnley manager in June but was sacked after just two months in charge.

Beard had previous spells at National Women’s Soccer League side Boston Breakers and West Ham, as well as an interim period in charge of Bristol City.

As the Nepali night takes on the texture of velvet, the party naturally divides. The men sway in a circle, singing plaintively. The women surround an elderly lady who smokes tobacco rolled in writing paper. And I settle into swapping stories with the girls. Alina and her younger cousins Miching and Blinka may be draped in the silks and heavy jewellery of the Indigenous Aath Pahariya Rai community, but they’re as keen to talk love and travel as any young women. “I’m too independent to get married until I’m very old,” declares 21-year-old Alina. “When I graduate, I want to go to Paris – and then come home to Sipting. Life’s peaceful here and the air is clear.”

EXCLUSIVE: Hollyoaks and Loose Women star Sherrie Hewson says older television viewers are being treated like “coffin dodgers” and more older people need to be seen on screen

Sherrie Hewson says TV bosses need to make more shows with older people in them.

The former Loose Women star, 75, believes mature telly fans are being treated like “coffin dodgers” and broadcasters are “chasing the young and forgetting the old”.

According to a new report called The Upper Third, commissioned by Freeview broadcaster Great! TV, more than a quarter of viewers feel forgotten by today’s TV producers, despite watching more television than any other age group.

The Great! network – including Great! TV, Great! Action, Great! Mystery, and Great! Romance – is relaunching for the very audiences who feel left behind by normal TV, prioritising much-loved and classic, high-quality TV series and movies.

Speaking about the campaign, Sherrie said: “This is a brilliant campaign and long overdue. If you lived in my world, you’d know this is exactly what people want.

“Today’s TV so often chases the young and forgets the rest but for many of us, the joy of great television has always been simple – you just watch a show and you laugh, or you don’t. Funny is funny.

“Look at the adverts on television, you never see older people in adverts unless they’re in a funeral parlour or a cremation or life insurance. It’s like we’re being treated like coffin dodgers or something.”

She continued: “I did the remake of Are You Being Served? and I played Mrs Slocombe and we got something like eight million viewers for that one episode and every character in that is older. Everybody loved it.

“You don’t have to remake these shows but just make the older shows more accessible so people can see them.”

Sherrie thinks entertainment shows such as Naked Attraction are taking too greater priority over the dramas and sitcoms she grew up loving.

She added: “Somebody’s paid to have these commissioned and I don’t get it. Maybe it’s because I’m the age I am but my daughter who’s 40 thinks its awful to so it’s not just me.”

Sherrie is currently playing Martha Blake in Channel 4 soap Hollyoaks, the mother of serial killer Jeremy Blake (Jeremy Sheffield).

She is also known for playing Maureen Holdsworth in Coronation Street, Lesley Meredith in Emmerdale, Joyce Temple-Savage in Benidorm and for her stint as Loose Women panellist.

WASHINGTON — Of all the investigations underway by the FBI, the case of Charlie Kirk’s killing is one that President Trump’s allies expect the bureau to get right. Yet its director, Kash Patel, has struggled out of the gate.

A series of missteps

He posted misleading updates of the manhunt for a suspect on social media, blaming “the heat of the moment” in testimony before a Senate panel on Tuesday. He failed to coordinate his messaging internally with Justice Department leadership. Instead of returning to headquarters, Patel dined at an exclusive restaurant in New York as the search unfolded. And after a suspect was apprehended, Patel joined Fox News to share unprecedented details.

It was a series of missteps viewed in law enforcement circles as rookie errors, reflective of a director in over his head.

Trump has publicly stood by Patel in recent days. But leading voices in the MAGA movement have wondered aloud whether it is time for Patel to be removed, and top officials at the White House and Justice Department are reportedly questioning his future at the bureau. The president has also installed another loyalist in a top deputy position at FBI headquarters, raising questions over his plans.

Kash Patel discusses the hunt for Charlie Kirk’s killer at a news conference Friday in Orem, Utah, joined by Utah Department of Public Safety Commissioner Beau Mason, left, and Utah Gov. Spencer Cox.

(Lindsey Wasson / Associated Press)

The renewed spotlight on Patel comes amid suspicion in right-wing circles the director is suppressing the release of files from the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious sex offender, at Trump’s direction. And last week, former bureau officials filed a lawsuit against the administration accusing the White House of exerting extraordinary political influence over the FBI, issuing loyalty tests for agents to determine their support for Trump.

On Saturday, Trump told Fox News that he was “very proud of the FBI,” praising the agency for ultimately catching the suspected killer. “Kash — and everyone else — they have done a great job,” he added.

“In normal times, any run-of-the-mill president of either party would certainly have serious concerns with keeping Patel around,” said Douglas M. Charles, a professor and FBI historian at Penn State Greater Allegheny, characterizing Patel as historically unqualified for the role. “Of course, we are not living in normal political times.”

Patel’s job sustainability, Charles said, “rests not on whether he is competent, but exclusively on whether President Trump is satisfied with him.”

“Patel is not acting as an independent FBI director,” Charles added, “the standard we have historically had since 1973.”

Jeopardizing the Kirk case?

Justice Department officials reacted with alarm after Patel shared the content of text messages from the suspect in Kirk’s shooting, revelations that got out front of official court filings.

“Why are we reluctant to share the details of the investigation itself, and comment on the case?” Jeff Gray, the Utah County attorney, said Tuesday, outlining state charges against the murder suspect. “Because I want to ensure a fair and impartial trial.”

“I can’t talk about details at all,” said Pam Bondi, the U.S. attorney general, asked for insight into the case in a Fox News interview on Monday.

The episode drew harsh rebuke from Democrats on Capitol Hill this week, where Patel was scheduled for hearings with the House and Senate judiciary committees. “Could I have been more careful in my verbiage?” he mused, before facing a slew of questions from lawmakers.

But Patel fiercely defended himself, repeatedly citing his experience as a prosecutor in the national security division of the Justice Department, and later at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and at the Defense Department.

“I’m not going anywhere,” Patel told the Senate. “If you want to criticize my 16 years of service, please bring it on.”

Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, a professor emeritus and FBI historian at the University of Edinburgh, said that precedent exists of public officials undermining the prosecution of high-profile cases, sometimes with devastating consequences. “The Patel remarks and actions may well prejudice the trial of Tyler Robinson,” he said, referencing Kirk’s murder suspect.

On Capitol Hill, Patel said his social posts and media appearances were in service of transparency with the American people. But the charges, trial, and evidence in the case are all public, said Norm Eisen, co-founder of the States United Democracy Center and counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment trial.

“Patel’s appointment as FBI director raised red flags from the start, mainly because of his lack of relevant experience and his partisan background. What we’ve seen in recent days has only reinforced those concerns,” Eisen said.

“The Utah County attorney leading the prosecution knew better than to comment on Patel’s speculative claims, correctly pointing out that it was necessary to preserve an impartial jury,” he added. “Making political speeches about the case undermines the integrity of the process and jeopardizes the prosecution.”

Political litmus tests

In a heated exchange with Patel this week, Sen. Adam Schiff, a Democrat from California, asked the director whether anyone from the bureau had been terminated or disciplined “in whole or in part” for being assigned to work on investigations of Trump in recent years. Trump was ultimately charged with federal crimes over his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and his handling of highly classified documents.

“Anyone that was terminated at the FBI was done so for failing to meet their standards, uphold their constitutional oath, and effectuate the mission,” Patel replied, adding: “No one at the FBI is terminated for case assignments alone.”

The line of questioning came amid reports and a lawsuit alleging Patel has taken direct instructions from the White House to fire individuals involved in the Trump investigations.

Three former senior FBI officials — Spencer L. Evans, Brian J. Driscoll Jr. and Steven J. Jensen — brought the lawsuit after being fired from their jobs in a “campaign of retribution,” according to the filing, a 68-page document that paints Patel as a vassal of Trump prioritizing his social media image over the work of the bureau.

“Patel not only acted unlawfully, but deliberately chose to prioritize politicizing the FBI over protecting the American people,” the lawsuit reads.

But it was questioning over the Epstein case that set off Patel’s patience.

At the end of their exchange, Schiff asked the director how he could possibly be in the dark over the circumstances of a prison transfer for Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s close confidante serving 20 years in prison for aiding his abuse of hundreds of women and girls, to one of the most comfortable facilities in the federal penitentiary system. Patel erupted, calling Schiff a “buffoon” over his investigations of the president.

“Here’s the thing, Mr Patel,” Sen. Cory Booker, a Democrat from New Jersey, told Patel, ending a similarly heated exchange. “I think you’re not gonna be around long. I think this might be your last oversight hearing.”

“Because as much as you supplicate yourself to the will of Donald Trump and not the Constitution,” Booker added, “Donald Trump has shown us he is not loyal to people like you.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: L.A.’s online ‘hood’ culture turns real-world violence into viral content
The deep dive: Primm was once an affordable casino mecca for L.A. Now it has become a ghost town
The L.A. Times Special: White supremacists, death threats and ‘disgust’: Charlie Kirk’s killing roils Huntington Beach

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

Nepal’s former Chief Justice Sushila Karki has been appointed as the country’s new interim prime minister, following days of deadly youth protests.

Karki’s appointment was announced by the office of President Ramchandra Poudel on Friday, September 12, and she was sworn into office as the country’s first-ever female prime minister later that day.

“I did not come to this position because I had sought it, but because there were voices from the streets demanding that Sushila Karki should be given the responsibility,” she said during her first public remarks on Sunday.

Here is what we know about Karki.

Who is Sushila Karki?

Following the youth-led “Gen Z” protests against corruption in Nepal, former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli resigned last Tuesday. Karki was appointed on Friday to lead the transitional government until snap elections in March 2026.

Karki, 73, is the first woman to head the government of Nepal.

She was born in June 1952 in what is now Nepal’s eastern city of Biratnagar, about 400km (250 miles) south of Kathmandu, the capital. Karki reportedly attended the Mahendra Morang College in Biratnagar and earned her Bachelor of Arts at age 20. Later, she attended graduate school in India, earning her Master’s degree from Banaras Hindu University before returning to Nepal.

Karki completed her law degree at Tribhuvan University in 1978, according to The Kathmandu Post, and went on to become a lawyer and teach law at Mahendra Multiple Campus in Nepal’s eastern city of Dharan.

Karki became the first female chief justice of Nepal in 2016.

In May 2017, the government tried to suspend her as members of parliament signed an impeachment motion against her after the court, under her leadership, overturned their appointment of Jaya Bahadur Chand as police chief. The court chose the highest-ranking officer, Nawaraj Silwal, for the position instead.

The United Nations labelled the impeachment effort, which was eventually dropped, as “politically motivated”, and Karki retired in June 2017.

What happened in Nepal?

Young people in Kathmandu and other cities took to the streets on September 8 to protest political corruption. There was also anger towards children of Nepali government officials – dubbed “Nepo kids” – who document their lavish lifestyles online.

Days before the protests, the Nepali government had banned more than 20 social media websites in the country for not complying with the government’s demands.

On the first day of protests, some demonstrators broke past police barriers and entered the parliament complex. A violent crackdown by security forces led dozens dead, inflaming tensions further.

The next day, protesters defied curfews to set fire to government buildings, including parliament, and freed thousands of prisoners. Nepali ministers were evacuated by helicopter to ensure their safety.

Many protesters were killed amid clashes with the police. On September 12, a police spokesman said the death toll from the protests had climbed to 51.

In response, Oli, who was elected as PM for the fourth time last year, announced his resignation last Tuesday, September 9. Other ministers also resigned from their posts.

Nepal’s army was deployed late on September 9 in an attempt to restore order. The situation has started to calm down, with schools reopening and businesses resuming operations.

Hami Nepal, the group that organised the protests, held a call on the messaging application, Discord, late last week to choose Nepal’s interim prime minister. About 10,000 Nepalis – including many from the diaspora – participated.

After hours of debate, they chose Karki.

Paudel announced Karki’s appointment on September 12. He also announced that the 275-seat parliament had been dissolved, and elections were then set for March 5, 2026, about two years earlier than planned.

Why Karki?

While the young protesters highlighted the generation gap between them and Nepal’s leaders during their agitation, they ended up picking septuagenarian Karki as their interim leader.

“This has been a concern from people here as well,” Anish Ghimre, a Nepali journalist with the Kathmandu Post, told Al Jazeera, referring to Karki’s age. “But I think the bigger picture here is people wanted someone they could trust, someone they can look up to.”

Ghimre, 24, said the decision was motivated by the young protesters researching Karki’s background and career. He pointed out how Karki has previously said during interviews that “many ministers came to her and they asked for some favour” but that she had refused to comply with their demands.

“Hopefully, after six months, maybe we can see a new face, maybe someone younger,” he added, referring to the March election.

Others also pointed to the selection of Karki being based on her reputation, despite her age.

“Gen Z protesters rallied behind septuagenarian Sushila Karki because, even in her earlier statements to the press, her image as Nepal’s first woman chief justice symbolised integrity and resistance against corruption,” Yog Raj Lamichhane, an assistant professor at the School of Business in Nepal’s Pokhara University, told Al Jazeera.

What has PM Karki done so far?

“We have to work according to the thinking of the Gen Z generation,” Karki said on Sunday.

She acknowledged the youth’s demands for the end of corruption, good governance and economic equality.

“We will not stay here more than six months in any situation. We will complete our responsibilities and pledge to hand over to the next parliament and ministers.”

On Monday, she named three new government ministers: Om Prakash Aryal as home minister, Rameshwar Prasad Khanal as finance minister and Kulman Ghising as energy minister.

What’s next for Nepal?

With the parliament dissolved, Karki is likely to face challenges in passing any new legislation.

“Although the government has changed and parliament dissolved, no concrete programme against corruption has been introduced, underscoring the concerns of the Gen Z movement,” Lamichhane said.

“The interim government must ensure timely elections and also address the challenge of reconstruction.”

HE was the golden boy of Hollywood.

Men envied his obvious friendship with Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid, and almost all his female co-stars adored him.

15

15

15

In fact, Jane Fonda admitted she couldn’t keep her hands off him on set, while Meryl Streep said he was the “best kisser ever”.

Robert Redford, who yesterday died in his sleep aged 89 at his ranch in Utah, was rejected for 1967 movie The Graduate because no one would ever believe he was a loser with women.

But the handsome star was haunted by nerves and self-doubt that caused him to be endlessly late on set.

As the greatest names in showbiz paid tribute to the blond-haired icon, his representative revealed Redford was “surrounded by those he loved” when he passed away. She added: “He will be missed greatly.”

‘Love of pranks’

In blockbusters such as Barefoot In The Park, The Sting, All The President’s Men, The Great Gatsby, The Horse Whisperer, Indecent Proposal and Up Close And Personal, Redford was box office dynamite.

But the Oscar-winning actor was terrified stardom might turn him into a product for Hollywood studios to sell. He moaned: “Films to them are just like vacuum cleaners or refrigerators. The approach sickens me.”

The megastar even refused to make sequels to his biggest hits, Butch ­Cassidy and The Way We Were with Barbra Streisand.

He hated franchises, but appeared in Captain America: The Winter ­Soldier to please his grandkids.

And he became a champion of independent film-makers, founding the annual Sundance Film Festival to showcase their work.

Born Charles Robert Redford Jr in Santa Monica, California, on August 18, 1936, the actor’s mum was Martha and his dad Charles, a milkman.

His first taste of Hollywood was breaking into a studio as a teenager and trashing the place. He once said: “There was a strong dividing line with a railroad which ran near our house.

“Those who lived on the south side of the tracks, like us, helped to service the big houses on the north side as gardeners, cleaners, whatever.

“My dad would get up to go to work at 2.30 in the morning, come home late afternoon and go to sleep.

“It wasn’t his fault, but it was an inspiration [for me] to do something else with my life.”

Redford’s first plan was to be a baseball star, and he won a sports scholarship to Colorado University.

But he told showbiz writer Garth Pearce: “I was asked to leave because I was drinking too much.”

15

15

15

His mother Martha had recently died and he turned to alcohol.

After being thrown out of college, he ­travelled to Europe. Redford recalled: “I became a pavement artist in ­Montmartre, Paris, and felt my life had begun at last. I had found my calling.

“Then I moved to Italy, where they openly laughed at my art. Eventually, I was told flatly that I would never make it or sell any paintings.”

So he moved back to New York and tried his hand at acting classes, enrolling at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts.

He said: “Suddenly, I was getting A-grade reports for the first time. I had failed at school, failed at university, failed as an artist. I thought, ‘There could be something in acting for me’. It was as simple as that, with no great calling.”

He couldn’t play a loser because of the way he looked

Director Mike Nichols

He began to get work, first on stage in New York and then in a succession of small-screen shows, such as ­Maverick, Perry Mason and Dr Kildare as TV boomed across America.

His movie breakthrough came opposite Jane Fonda in 1967’s Barefoot In The Park. She remembers: “I couldn’t keep my hands off him. I was ­constantly forcing myself on him.”

Redford auditioned for The ­Graduate, alongside Anne Bancroft as middle-aged Mrs Robinson.

But director Mike Nichols turned him down, recalling: “He couldn’t play a loser because of the way he looked.

“I told him so and he was dispirited. I said, ‘Look at it this way, ‘Have you ever been turned down by a woman?’. He replied, ‘What do you mean?’. I said, ‘My point precisely’.”

But his next part, The Sundance Kid, alongside Paul Newman as Butch Cassidy, would change Redford’s life forever. As they filmed the 1969 hit movie, he and Newman became best mates — bonding over Mexican beers and a love of pranks.

15

15

15

Redford was a terrible time-keeper and, at the end of filming — during which he did his own stunts — ­Newman presented him with a tapestry cushion that read, “Punctuality is the courtesy of kings”.

For Newman’s 50th birthday, Redford sent him a wrecked Porsche wrapped in a bow. Newman had it crushed and sent back to his pal. Redford then had it turned into a garden sculpture and returned it.

Despite their 40-year friendship, Newman admitted he never really came to know Redford.

Even though Butch Cassidy was a huge success, Redford, a keen environmental campaigner, was still gripped with doubts about his ability.

He admitted: “I actually quit in the late Sixties, after appearing in some big films. It was not reported at the time but I took my family to a remote part of Spain. I attempted once again to make my living as an artist. But I was not good enough.”

By 1973, The Sting, in which he was reunited with Newman, gave him his only Best Actor Oscar nomination.

‘Not good enough’

His blond hair became his ­signature and he refused to have it cut in a 1940s style for 1977 war film A Bridge Too Far.

Director Sir Richard Attenborough asked him personally to get a short back and sides, but was forced to admit: “It’s no use. He just won’t have it touched.”

Redford once asked angrily: “What is it about my hair? I played Jay Gatsby in The Great Gatsby in 1974 and the director Jack Clayton wanted to dye my hair black.

“Even the studio wanted my hair black. I said, ‘Find me the part of the original book where it says that Gatsby’s hair is black. It’s not there’.”

Irritated by filmmakers, he decided to direct a movie of his own.

15

15

15

Ordinary People, which came out in 1980, became one of the most acclaimed films of the decade and won him the only Oscar in his glittering career, for Best Director.

His hits dominated the Eighties and Nineties, with Out Of Africa alongside Meryl Streep winning seven Oscars, including Best Picture.

He directed A River Runs Through It starring a young Brad Pitt, Quiz Show and The Horse Whisperer, in which he also played the lead.

It was really hard . . . as a parent, you blame yourself. It creates a scar that never completely heals

Robert Redford

In between, he starred in Indecent Proposal as a millionaire who offered a married couple $1million if wife Demi Moore slept with him.

There was also romance in Up Close & Personal with Michelle Pfeiffer. But alongside great career success he suffered family tragedy.

His son Scott, who he had with first wife Lola, was a victim of cot death in 1959 at just two months.

The actor said: “It was really hard . . . as a parent, you blame yourself. It creates a scar that never completely heals.”

His second son, Jamie, who ­suffered constant ill health and underwent two liver transplants, died from cancer aged 58 in 2020.

15

15

15

And eldest daughter Shauna ­witnessed the murder of her long-term boyfriend at university.

Redford told Garth Pearce: “All that personal stuff with my children meant some tough times. When you’re going through it, you lose part of yourself. I confess that I used work to prop me up.”

The Hollywood legend produced and directed films right into his 80s.

His final performance was an uncredited cameo earlier this year as a chess player in Dark Winds, a TV show he executive-produced. Redford officially retired from ­acting in 2018.

Redford is survived by second wife Sibylle, some 21 years his ­junior, who he married in 2009, and daughters Shauna, 64, and Amy, 54, from first wife Lola, who he divorced in 1985.

He said of his success: “The key to sanity in Hollywood is to have a life separate from movies and to never repeat yourself on film by doing a sequel.

“I lost my way and my focus ­several times. Having to deal with life, death, illness and catastrophe puts anyone to the test. Movies and acting was never my first love, but it was an enduring one.”

SACRAMENTO — Hello and happy Monday.

Pigs are flying and Satan has on a puffer jacket. I know these things because the impossible is happening — I am writing about why Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nancy Mace and Lauren Boebert are right.

And why California’s Republican congressional representatives should be ashamed and shamed.

You may know these women as beacons of the far right, maybe even the fringe-right, in Congress. Hailing from Georgia, South Carolina and Colorado, respectively, they have dabbled in QAnon conspiracy theories, including about sex trafficking and powerful pedophiles, among other questionable actions.

But I’ll say this for the trio — they’ve stayed true to their beliefs, even under direct pressure from the White House. So a (limited) shout-out to Greene, Mace and Boebert.

What am I talking about? Jeffrey Edward Epstein, of course (I think he committed enough crimes to earn his middle name included, serial killer style).

Boebert, Mace and Greene are three of only four Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives who have signed a discharge petition (a kind of work-around to bypass leadership) to release the full Epstein files, supposedly containing a trove of information on men who bought and sold sex with teenage girls.

“These are some of the richest, most powerful people in the world that could sue these women into poverty and homelessness,” Greene said at a recent news conference with some of the victims. “Yeah, it’s a scary thing to name names, but I will tell you, I’m not afraid to name names, and so if they want to give me a list, I will walk in that Capitol on the House floor, and I’ll say every damn name that abused these women. I can do that for them.”

And, to my immense shock at having something in common with Greene, I say — that is how it’s done, lady. You go.

Not a single Republican House member from California has backed releasing the Epstein files. Every California Democratic representative has signed. So let’s talk about that.

I am sick of Epstein. Why are you writing this?

Like most of you, I too am tired of hearing endless political chatter about Epstein.

For the blessedly uniformed among you, Epstein was an extremely rich dude. No one is quite sure where all that money came from, but he apparently used a great deal of it to buy influence with powerful men, and sex traffic underage girls — allegedly children as young as 11 .

He died by suicide while in jail in 2019 (lots of conspiracy theories on whether it was in fact suicide) but in 2021 his paramour-partner Ghislaine Noelle Maxwell was also convicted of child sex trafficking and other offenses.

Epstein and Maxwell have ties to Donald Trump, including a much-discussed “birthday book” that honestly I do not care about other than to say, “Ick.” That has made the whole thing an endless political brouhaha.

But many of the many victims of Epstein and Maxwell have called for their information to be released by the Justice Department, which holds more than 100,000 pages of the investigation. They, like survivors of sexual assault everywhere, want accountability, if justice remains elusive. They want names named. They want to stop being afraid, stop being stuck by their pain and their past, and allow the world to decide, if courts won’t, just how much truth they are telling.

These are brave women who were brutalized as children for the pleasure of men with money. They have a right to have their stories known if that’s what they choose.

This is not politics. This is decency.

The California problem

Like Greene, I’m willing to name some names. Here they are — California’s GOP representatives in the House:

Releasing the Epstein files requires only one of them to sign the discharge petition. Just one of these fine representatives from the Golden State could do the right thing, stand for a bipartisan value that Californians of both parties hold — sex trafficking is bad — and show what real leadership looks like.

Anyone? Anyone?

“If Epstein survivors want this information released, it should be released. These women have had the courage to speak out and it’s infuriating that Congress would block release of information — they’d rather help with a cover-up than stand with survivors,” state Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento) told me.

She’s a former state Justice Department prosecutor who specialized in trafficking, and has worked on controversial bipartisan legislation at the Capitol with Republican Sen. Shannon Grove of Bakersfield. That legislation earned her the ire of her own party, but on an issue this important, she did what she believed was right over what was easy.

“Protecting kids and standing up for survivors of human trafficking should not be a partisan issue and in California, we’ve shown it doesn’t have to be,” Krell said.

In fact, the discharge petition in the House is a bipartisan effort — introduced by Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and our own Ro Khanna of California, a Democrat.

In particular, I’d like to call out Kiley for his hypocrisy. Recently, he introduced a bipartisan sex trafficking bill in Congress that’s a smart idea — the National Human Trafficking Database Act, which would create a database at the Department of Justice that tracks cases across the country. He did it with Reps. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo) and Hank Johnson (D-Ga). Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) are carrying the bill in the Senate.

“We must do everything we can to prevent human trafficking and having the necessary tools at our disposal will bring us closer to stopping this awful crime,” Kiley said in a press release.

Huh.

Seems like Kiley gets the issue. Seems like he’s saying the right things. And for a guy about to be gerrymandered out of his own district — with his own party not seeming to care — he doesn’t have much to lose by doing the right thing and signing the discharge petition. My email to his office on the topic remains unanswered.

Liz Stein, an Epstein and Maxwell survivor who spoke at the news conference, said (as reported by the 19th News) that her life has never been the same since the abuse started. Since then, it has “felt like someone shut off the lights to my soul.”

There. Is. No. Excuse.

“This is not a partisan issue, but an American issue,” New Mexico Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, chair of the Democratic Women’s Caucus, said in a press release. “To my Republican colleagues, if these heartbreaking stories aren’t enough, sign the petition for your daughters and for all the women in your lives that you would want protected from pedophiles. Because it’s not just about Epstein, but about all the women and children who are trafficked, abused, sexually assaulted, and ignored in their pain. The survivors today told their stories to not only push for the Epstein files to be released, but for a better future where women and girls are believed and supported, and abusers are held accountable.”

I can’t say it any more directly. Hiding behind politics on this one is the act of a coward.

If you won’t stand up against the rape of children, what do you stand for?

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: L.A. fires burned their block. For each, the disaster was just beginning.
The what happened: Lawyers fear 1,000 children from Central America, dozens in California, are at risk of being deported
The L.A. Times special: What the writings on the bullet casings from Charlie Kirk’s killer might mean

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

WASHINGTON — Warning signs of eroding trust in public health under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have prompted growing calls for his resignation from Democratic lawmakers, career public servants and his own family. But one doctor-turned-governor has other ideas.

Democratic Gov. Josh Green of Hawaii, a career emergency room physician, has privately pressed the Trump administration to create a new post for Kennedy that would remove him from responsibility over vaccines, while allowing him to focus on areas of public health where his theories enjoy greater scientific backing — on nutrition, pesticides and chronic disease, the governor said in an interview.

“They’ve simply gone too far, and it’s not the president who’s gone too far. It’s Secretary Kennedy,” Green told The Times, suggesting two Republican appointees — Mehmet Oz, Trump’s current administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and Jerome Adams, former U.S. surgeon general during Trump’s first term — as potential replacements he would publicly support.

“We’re entering flu season,” Green said. “These viruses, if people aren’t vaccinated, will cause large numbers of excess fatalities, and there will be no one to look to for responsibility other than the secretary of Health.”

“I recommended it to people at the highest levels, and I have worked hard to maintain a constructive relationship with the current administration,” Green added. “It’s up to them to make this call. But you can see now that it’s very possible.”

A tense public hearing on Capitol Hill last week laid bare bipartisan concerns over Kennedy’s vaccine skepticism, with three Republican senators — Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, John Barrasso of Wyoming and Thom Tillis of North Carolina — expressing alarm at turmoil within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention over vaccine guidance and accessibility.

Kennedy, at the hearing, stated without evidence that COVID-19 vaccines had caused harm and death, and questioned CDC statistics on how many lives they had saved.

“The president is not pleased deep down with this as a distraction,” Green added. “It is not helpful to any administration to have outbreaks.”

A Western health alliance

Without changes in Washington, Hawaii will join a burgeoning alliance of western states to issue independent public health guidance, Green said.

The West Coast Health Alliance, formed this month by California, Washington and Oregon, will issue recommendations that rely on many of the career scientists and experts dismissed by Kennedy in recent months, as well as organizations such as the the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Heart Assn.

Hawaii Gov. Josh Green shown during a black-tie dinner at the White House in 2024.

(Anna Rose Layden / Getty Images)

Kenneth Fink, director of the Hawaii Department of Health, will be the state’s day-to-day representative to the alliance. But “as a physician, I’m also available to the group, to help bring other experts from across the country into the fold,” Green said.

The collective has not yet decided whether to set up a formal alternative to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, a vaccine advisory panel of experts whose entire membership was fired by Kennedy and replaced by vaccine skeptics.

But many experts are already in touch with Green and other members of the alliance, which has begun discussing how to structure itself.

Green, 55, will serve next year as head of the Western Governors Assn., representing 19 states west of the Mississippi River, and is encouraging other states to join the effort, including those led by Republicans. “I really do want to take public health out of politics,” he said.

Already, Green and his counterparts have discussed executive actions they can take at the gubernatorial level, in coordination across the alliance, to protect vaccine access.

Vaccines pushed off-label by the FDA may need special authorization for access, for example. States may also need to fund vaccine access to individuals who fall outside new federal recommendations for eligibility.

Hawaii already anticipates having to spend $15 million in state dollars to ensure everyone who wants a COVID booster shot can receive one, supplementing federal funding, the governor said.

“There are going to be some needs to use executive orders from us as governors,” Green said. “I will be doing that. And I’ll be recommending that to my colleagues in the alliance.”

A national security threat

In May, Green traveled to Washington to testify before a Senate subcommittee where Republican lawmakers were holding a hearing titled, “The Corruption of Science and Federal Health Agencies.” Its main target was the administration of COVID vaccines.

Green was the sole defender of the pandemic response on a six-member panel.

“As a physician, I cared for patients all the way through the COVID pandemic, and we would have had thousands of additional deaths if we didn’t vaccinate our state,” he said. “This is no joke.”

“Mr. Kennedy referred to his Senate hearing as theater,” he added. “It’s not theater when you’re an ER doc and you’re caring for patients and having to intubate them.”

Hawaii emerged from the pandemic with the lowest mortality rate of any state in the union, and one of the highest vaccination rates. Green served as lieutenant governor at the time.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. testifies before the Senate Finance Committee.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

A CDC analysis presented in June, under Kennedy’s leadership, found that COVID vaccines “have been evaluated under the most extensive safety monitoring program in U.S. history,” rejecting conspiracy theories around their association with a range of alleged side effects.

The CDC has found a rare but statistically significant number of cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart, in males between ages 18 and 24 who have taken the shots, 90% of whom experience full recoveries and resulting in no known deaths.

Under Kennedy, for the first time since its introduction, the COVID vaccine has become difficult to find. The FDA has revoked emergency-use authorization for the shots and is recommending them only for individuals over 65 years old, or those over 5 with underlying health conditions.

The Trump administration has also gutted funding of the National Institutes of Health and cut $500 million in funding for mRNA vaccine research, a development that Green called an imminent risk to national security, allowing countries such as China to dominate access to critical technologies during future public health emergencies that could leave Americans vulnerable.

Trump himself has indicated concern, last week telling reporters, “I think you have to be very careful when you say that some people don’t have to be vaccinated. It’s a very, you know, it’s a very tough position.”

“You have vaccines that work. They just pure and simple work,” Trump added. “They’re not controversial at all. And I think those vaccines should be used, otherwise some people are going to catch it and they endanger other people. And when you don’t have controversy at all, I think people should take it.”

Green saw Trump’s remarks as a sign of a potential shift.

“I think that Secretary Kennedy is doing our country a disservice, and frankly, he’s doing the president a disservice,” Green said. “This is going to hurt the president of the United States and his administration.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Barabak: ‘I think it was recklessness’: Harris bashes Biden for late exit from 2024 campaign
The deep dive: California has a strict vaccine mandate. Will it survive the Trump administration?
The L.A. Times Special: Fewer jobs, AI threats and rising healthcare costs. A tough role for SAG-AFTRA’s new leader

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

Anya Jade Sadler recently travelled to Magaluf with a friend as the pair wanted to soak up the sun; however, despite hoping to catch a tan, they ended up coming home with something totally different

There’s nothing like jetting off on holiday to spend some time in the sun but, sometimes, you don’t always come home with a tan. Anya Jade Sadler recently shared her experience of travelling to Spain, and it’s fair to say Magaluf was a little different to what she expected.

She shared a clip on TikTok which showed her and another woman at the party hotspot, and she admitted they ventured on holiday in a bid to get some September sun. Despite their intentions, it seems mother nature had other plans, as the weather made it rather tricky to catch a tan at the popular destination.

Magaluf has long had a reputation for being a party hotspot, and it’s also known for the good weather. However, Anya seems to have been left a little underwhelmed by the experience, and it’s not the first time Magaluf has left someone amazed.

Over a video of them dancing in the rain, Anya wrote: “POV: You come to Maga for September sun.” Underneath, her friend cheekily quipped: “Knew I should have packed my wellie boots.”

Based on the video shared, it seems as though the only thing they will return home with is soggy clothes, as their shorts and vest tops look soaking as they walk around in the rain. Though they have sunglasses on their heads, it’s clear they don’t need them as the sky is totally grey.

Even though the rain pours in the clip, they seem to make the best of the situation. Luckily, they could laugh about it, even though they hoped to top up their tans while being away.

Little you may know, this week the municipality of Calvià (Palmanova, Magaluf, Illetas and Paguera) was hit by a severe storm with strong winds and heavy rain. The weather led to several incidents across the area.

This week Palma in particular saw the impact of the high winds, as the area witnessed up-rooted trees and damage to property and vehicles. Delays were also experienced on some flights.

However, it looks as though the weather is set to improve for the rest of the week, with sunnier climates being predicted. According to the Met Office, highs of 29°C will be seen this week, with sunny weather mostly forecast.

It should be noted that, generally speaking, Magaluf is hot and pleasant in September, with daytime temperatures typically reaching highs of around 26°C to 28°C. As well as this, warm sea temperatures usually lie at around 25°C, making it ideal for beaches and outdoor activities.

Visitors should be mindful that it can still be slightly cooler, and there is a greater potential for scattered rain showers when compared to the peak summer months. During the evenings, temperatures are usually around 16°C to 20°C.

TUI states: “Summers in Magaluf are typically warm, making September a pleasant month to visit. During this time, visitors can expect mild temperatures, moderated rainfall and plenty of sunshine, creating perfect conditions for outdoor exploration.

“The weather is typically conducive to enjoying the outdoor sights and local attractions of this picturesque Spanish locale. Rainfall in September tends to be occasional and scattered, not typically intense or persistent.

“It should not notably disrupt outdoor plans, so travellers can feel confident in arranging their daily excursions.”

A POPULAR Loose Women star has landed a huge new weekend TV gig after impressing bosses.

This panellist, 45, shared the news on Instagram after becoming a key player at ITV.

3

3

3

Loose Women anchor Charlene White revealed her exciting news today.

The TV star told fans that her Talking Royals podcast is now being turned into a weekly TV show that will air on Sunday mornings on ITV and ITVX.

The show has proved popular as a podcast and revisits historic moments from royal history, alongside discussing the headlines of the day.

An excited Charlene shared the news that the show was now going to be on TV, and told fans: “Some work news… ITV liked our @itvnews Talking Royals podcast so much, it’s heading to Sunday mornings on ITV1 and ITVX from Sept 21st at 12.30pm.

“It’s a modern take on a centuries-old establishment. Join me @chris.ship.itv @lizzierobinsonitv and a mix of incredible guests for debate, updates, and analysis.

“And since flags are having a moment .. do notice that our backdrop represents the Commonwealth countries, of whom the King is also head. A fact often forgotten in the current climate.”

Fans immediately rushed to congratulate Charlene, one fan wrote: “Well done! Can’t wait to watch!”

Another added: “Awesome news Charlene!”

This one said: “Brilliant news, congratulation!”

Hailing from Greenwich in South London, Charlene’s journalism career began as a reporter on Radio 1’s Newsbeat and its sister digital station, BBC Radio 1Xtra back in 2002.

Charlene got her big break into TV six years later, when she landed a job as an ITN newsreader.

In 2014, she became the first black woman to present ITV News at Ten.

In 2021, it was announced that Charlene would be the new anchor on Loose Women.

Speaking at the time about joining the show, she said: “This is rather exciting, isn’t it?

Regular Loose Women panellists

Katie Piper – Former Strictly Come Dancing star, activist, model and author

Sunetra Sarker – A former Strictly Come Dancing star, and known for her role in Casualty

Kaye Adams – Scottish journalist and one of the original Loose Women

Christine Lampard – ITV presenter

Ruth Langsford – Presented Loose Women on and off since 1999

Jane Moore – Sun columnist and former I’m A Celebrity contestant

Coleen Nolan – Became known for her family girl band called The Nolans and went on to compete on Celeb Big Brother

Nadia Sawalha – Former EastEnders star and Celebrity MasterChef winner

Stacey Solomon – Known for her reality show Sort Your Life Out and winning series 10 of I’m A Celeb

Janet Street-Porter – A journalist and president of the Ramblers’ Association

Brenda Edwards – Came fourth on The X Factor and went on to become a pop star and act in hit musicals such as Hairspray

Charlene White – Lead presenter at ITV News London

Kelle Bryan – Former EastEnders star and was in girl group Eternal alongside her sisters. Also starred in Hollyoaks

Olivia Attwood – Love Island star who joined the cast of The Only Way Is Essex

Frankie Bridge – Participated in Strictly Come Dancing and came third on I’m A Celeb in 2021

Judi Love – A stand up comedian and radio presenter, who has also made a variety of TV appearances in shows such as Strictly Come Dancing, Celebrity MasterChef, and Taskmaster

Linda Robson – Played iconic character Tracey Stubbs in Birds Of A Feather

Denise Welch – A soap queen, she starred in Coronation Street, Waterloo Road and Hollyoaks. Also the mother of Matt Healy, the lead singer of pop rock group the 1975

Gloria Hunniford – TV presenter who’s appeared on The Masked Singer and Strictly

Penny Lancaster – Model who is married to Rod Stewart

Dame Kelly Holmes – Double Olympic gold medallist in the 800m and 1500m

Myleene Klass – Member of pop group Hear’Say and classically trained musician

Ayda Field – American actress who is married to Robbie Williams

Sue Cleaver – Known for playing Eileen Grimshaw on the ITV soap opera Coronation Street

Kelly Brook – Model who found fame on The Big Breakfast with Johnny Vaughan

Mariella Frostrup – British-Norwegian journalist and presenter

“I am very happy, thank you so much for having me, ladies.”

Charlene added: “I am, I’m officially a Loose Woman! I am honestly absolutely stoked.

“I have been buzzing all this time to be able to reveal that I am the latest and the newest Loose Woman.”

Away from Loose Women and ITV news, Charlene has also dipped her toe in reality TV.

She has appeared on I’m A Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here!, and also Celebrity Gogglebox.

SACRAMENTO — Sneha Revanur has been called the “Greta Thunberg of AI,” which depending on your politics, is an insult or, as the youngs would say, means she’s eating.

That’s good.

Either way, Revanur, a 20-year-old Stanford University senior who grew up in Silicon Valley, isn’t worried about personal attacks, though she’s been getting more of them lately — especially from some big tech bros who wish she’d shut up about artificial intelligence and its potential to accidentally (or purposefully) destroy us all.

Instead of fretting about invoking the ire of some of the most powerful men on the planet, she’s staying focused on the breakneck speed with which AI is advancing; the utter ignorance, even resistance, of politicians when it comes to putting in place the most basic of safety measures to control it; and what all that will mean for kids who will grow up under its influence.

“Whatever long-term future AI creates, whether that’s positive or negative, it’s [my generation] that’s going to experience that,” she told me. “We’re going to inherit the impacts of the technology we’re building today.”

This week, California will make a big decision about that future, as legislators vote on Senate Bill 53.

Because I am a tech idiot who struggles to even change the brightness on my phone’s display, I will use the simplest of metaphors, which I am sure will make engineers wince.

Imagine lighting your gas stove, then leaving on vacation. Maybe it will all be fine. Maybe it will start a fire and burn your house down. Maybe it blows up and takes out the neighborhood.

Do you cross your fingers and hope for the best? Do your neighbors have a right to ask you to pretty please turn it off before you go? Should you at least put a smoke alarm up, so there’s a bit of warning if things go wrong?

The smoke alarm in this scenario is SB 53.

The bill is a basic transparency measure and applies only to the big-gun developers of “frontier” AI models — these are the underlying, generic AI creatures that may later be honed into a specific purpose, like controlling our nuclear weapons, curing cancer or writing term papers for cheating students.

But right now, companies are just seeing how smart and powerful they can make them, leaving any concerns about what they will actually do for the future — and for people like Revanur, whose lives will be shaped by them.

If passed, the law would require these developers to have safety and security protocols and make them public.

It would require that they also disclose if they are aware of any ways that their product has indicated it may in fact destroy us all, or cause “catastrophic” problems, defined as ones with the potential to kill or seriously injure more than 50 people or cause more than $1 billion in property damage.

It requires the companies to report those risks to the state Office of Emergency Services, and also to report if their models try to sneakily get around commands to not do something — like lying — a first requirement of its kind in law.

And it creates a whistleblower protection so that if, say, an engineer working on one of these models suddenly finds herself receiving threats from the AI (yes, this has happened), she can, if the company won’t, give us a heads-up about the danger before it’s unleashed.

There are a couple other rules in there, but that’s the gist of it. Basically, it gives us a tiny glimpse inside the companies that quite literally hold the future of humanity in their hands but are largely driven by the desire to make oodles of money.

Big Tech has lobbied full force against the bill (and has been successful in watering it down some). Enter Revanur and the AI safety organization she started when she was 15: Encode.

The California Capitol is nothing if not a mean high school, so maybe Revanur was more prepared than the suits expected. But her group of “backpack kids,” as they have been derogatorily called, has lobbied in favor of government oversight of AI with such force and effect that SB 53 actually has a chance of passing. This week, it is likely to receive final votes in both the Assembly and Senate, before potentially heading to the governor’s desk.

I’m not huge on quoting lobbyists, but Lea-Ann Tratten summed it up pretty well.

Revanur and her group have gone from being dismissed with a “who are you, you’re nothing” attitude from lawmakers to having “an equal seat at the table” with the clouty tech bros and their billions, Tratten said. And they’ve done it through sheer persistence (though they are not the only advocacy group working on the bill).

Tratten was hired by Encode last year when Revanur was backing a much stronger piece of legislation by the same author, Sen. Scott Wiener. That bill, SB 1047, would have regulated the AI industry, not just watched over it.

Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed that bill, basically saying it went too far, but still acknowledging that a “California-only approach may well be warranted especially absent federal action by Congress.” He also set up a commission to recommend how to do that, which released its report recently — much of which is incorporated into the current legislation.

But since that veto, Congress has indicated approximately zero interest in taking on AI. And last week, Trump hosted a formal dinner for the titans of AI where they sucked up to the businessman-in-chief, leaving little hope of any federal curbs on their aspirations.

Shortly after that meal, the White House sent out a press release entitled, “President Trump, Tech Leaders Unite to Power American AI Dominance.”

In it, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, gushed, “Thank you for being such a pro-business, pro-innovation President. It’s a very refreshing change. We’re very excited to see what you’re doing to make our companies and our entire country so successful.”

That left me wondering who exactly will be dominated. OpenAI recently sent a subpoena to Encode, digging around to see if it’s being funded by competitor Elon Musk (who is in a notoriously nasty legal battle with Altman), and demanding all their emails and communications about the bill. Revanur said Encode has no affiliation with Musk other than having filed an amicus brief in his lawsuit, and those claims are “ridiculous and baseless.”

“Like, we know for a fact that we have no affiliation with Elon,” she said.

Still, “people expect us to sort of hide in the corner and stop what we’re doing,” because of the pressure, she said.

But that’s not going to happen.

“We’re going to keep doing what we’re doing,” she said. “Just being a balanced, objective, thoughtful third party that’s able to be this watchdog, almost, as the most powerful technology of all time is developed. I think that’s a really important role for us.”

Right now, AI is in its toddler stages, and it’s already outsmarting us in dangerous ways. The New York Times documented how it may have pushed a teen to suicide.

In July, Musk’s AI tool Grok randomly starting calling itself “MechaHitler” and began making antisemitic comments, according to the Wall Street Journal. Another AI model apparently resorted to blackmailing its maker when it was threatened with being turned off.

An AI safety researcher familiar with that blackmail incident, Aengus Lynch, warned it wasn’t a one-off, according to the BBC.

“We see blackmail across all frontier models — regardless of what goals they’re given,” he said.

So here we are in the infancy of a technology that will profoundly change society, and we already know the genie is out of the bottle, has stolen the car keys and is on a bender.

Before we get to the point of having to choose who will go back in time to save Sarah Connor from Skynet and the Terminator, maybe we just don’t go there. Maybe we start with SB 53, and listen to smart, young people like Revanur who have both the knowledge to understand the technology and a real stake in getting it right.

Maybe we put up the smoke alarm, whether the billionaire tech bros like it or not.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: ICE Agents Are Wearing Masks. Is That Un-American?
The Sign of the Times: In face of extreme heat, L.A. may require landlords to keep their rentals cool
The L.A. Times Special: A ‘Roomba for the forest’ could be SoCal’s next wildfire weapon

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

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

HELLO AND HAPPY THURSDAY. IT’S ME, ANITA LYNNE CHABRIA, COMING TO YOU IN ALL CAPS — BECAUSE THAT’S NOW HOW POLITICS IS DONE.

No, I won’t really torment you with shift-lock psychosis. But we will be diving into Gov. Gavin Newsom’s wildly successful social media trolling of Donald Trump. Although much has been written about his parody of the president’s bombastic style, replete with weird syntax and tongue-in-cheek self-aggrandizement, it turns out it’s far more than just entertaining.

More than any other Democratic presidential hopeful out there, the social media offensive has raised both his profile and political fortunes — and highlighted some uncomfortable truths about American politics in this moment when the vast majority of voters are getting their information in 20-second snippets on TikTok, YouTube and X: Social media is not the sideshow, it’s the main event.

But it’s about more than GCN (Gavin Christopher Newsom, as he now signs his posts) making it to the Resolute desk.

Whether you love Newsom or hate him, California is the epicenter on the resistance to Trump’s push to expand presidential powers into authoritarianism. In courts, in the Legislature and on social media, this is the state that has fought back most effectively.

Newsom’s recent decision to throw caution and subservience to the wind is at the heart of that, a move from frenemy to fighter that is essential to shaping and protecting the future of our democracy. One cheeky post at a time.

The seed of inspiration

How did we wind up here? Although January may seem like eons ago, it was in reality only nine short months since Newsom showed up uninvited on the tarmac in L.A. to greet Trump, even embrace him, as the president came to view the fire damage in Pacific Palisades and Altadena.

Newsom was still in that frenemy phase, trying to reason with, flatter and cajole a president who demands praise, but who, like the fable of the scorpion and the frog, will always attack because it’s in his nature. California needs fire aid, and as Newsom said at the time, “I hope he comes with a spirit of cooperation and collaboration. That’s the spirit to which we welcome him.”

That, however, didn’t work out great. Trump not only dillydallied with fire money, threatening conditions, he also sent the National Guard into L.A. for a nonexistent emergency around immigration protests, then strong-armed Texas into redrawing voting maps to help ensure MAGA keeps control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections.

So now California has Proposition 50, the effort to redraw our own maps to find more Democratic seats, and a hoppin’-mad governor (get that frog reference?) who knows a scorpion when he sees one.

What does this have to do with social media, you ask? In mid-August GCN wrote to DJT with one last peace offering: California would stop its push for redistricting if other states stopped as well. No luck, big surprise.

But staffers at Newsom’s office were in a mood, and thought it would be funny to tweet out the last paragraph of that letter in all caps, Trump-style. The only change? Switching the last line from the statesman-like “And America will be better for it” to the Trump-favored “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

And there, in a moment of frustration and gallows humor — no grand strategy intended — the seed of inspiration was planted.

The Result

That post has received 5 million views so far, and emboldened Newsom to go further. Since then, his trolling has been both prolific, pointed, and extremely popular.

The X account where Newsom does most of his smack-posting, @GovPressOffice, gained more than 500,000 followers in recent weeks, and racked up more than 480 million impressions. That’s up 450%, according to CNN’s Harry Enten.

He’s been in demand on traditional media as well (and seems to be living rent-free in the brains of right-wing Fox commentators), and has made himself available to digital content creators — who have helped him reach more than 30 million views across various platforms.

Newsom’s speech about the National Guard coming into L.A. — at nine minutes long, an eternity these days — was viewed more 40 million times in a week.

And, as Enten also pointed out, 75% of California Democrats now say they want Newsom to run for president, and betting markets give Newsom a 24% chance of being the Democratic nominee, rating him with the highest potential in the pack.

Love-bombed with all that success, Newsom has pushed further into the rage-baiting. The “GCN” sign-off? That came from Newsom himself. But there’s a team behind the effort, and they’re running 24/7 to keep the big, beautiful bludgeoning going.

But what about democracy?

Great for Newsom, you say, but how does a meme of him with bulging biceps save democracy? Here’s the thing I learned covering the rise not just of Trump, but of the extremist and fringe ideologies such as QAnon that fueled his base: It would not happen without social media.

Social media is the sauce that has seasoned this change in our politics, which sounds obvious but is much deeper than most realize. Social media created communities, communities largely without physical or ethical boundaries. Anything goes, and the more intense and crazy, the deeper it tends to go. The more people believe, the more involved they become.

Short take: Social media spreads extremism.

But can social media also spread resistance?

The hardest parts of an autocracy are division and fear. It feels lonely and scary to speak out. Newsom has done two crucial things with his social media barrage.

First, he showed us that the Republicans were right all along. For years, the far-right has found Trump’s social media hilarious, and all the funnier because Democrats were outraged by its crassness, vulgarity and childishness. Many Democrats found no humor in a president behaving in ways that would get their own teenagers grounded.

But as soon as Newsom did it, Democrats were the ones who found it funny, especially the irony-free Republican outrage. And empowering. And awesome. Suddenly, they got the joke.

In copying, Newsom was subverting — not just holding up a mirror to the bad behavior, but revealing that Democrats have in fact had a stick somewhere unnecessary and need to admit that low humor tickles the American fancy. He has given Democrats something light and amusing to rally around, creating community that has been sadly lacking.

And community is where resistance thrives, same as with extremism. When people feel not alone, they feel stronger.

That’s the second thing Newsom has brought with his trolling. Democrats, Republicans, democracy-backers of any stripe are relieved to laugh at Trump together — because nothing undermines his power more than a collective chuckle at his expense.

Like this:

What else you should be reading:

The must-read: The AI Doomsday Machine Is Closer to Reality Than You Think
The what happened: Trump can’t use Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan gang members, court rules
The L.A. Times special: California pushes back on Trump’s CDC with West Coast Health Alliance

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

SACRAMENTO — There are echoes from California Republicans’ disastrous past in their solid support of the Trump administration’s ugly raids targeting Latinos suspected of illegal immigration.

California’s GOP apparently still hasn’t learned. Scaring, insulting and angering people is not an effective recruiting tool. It doesn’t draw them to your side. It drives them into the opposition camp.

That should have been a lesson learned three decades ago when Republicans strongly pushed a harsh anti-illegal immigration ballot initiative, Proposition 187. It became principally responsible for changing California from a politically competitive state to one where the GOP is essentially irrelevant.

This occurred to me when reading recent poll data that showed strong overall objection in California to President Trump’s oft-inhumane immigration enforcement policies — among virtually every group, that is, except Republican voters. They overwhelmingly support his tactics.

The in-depth poll by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies delved into voter attitudes toward Trump’s mass deportation actions.

On the basic question of his immigration enforcement strategy, 69% of registered voters disapproved and just 29% approved. But there was a sharp difference between political parties. Democrats almost unanimously disapproved — 95%. And 72% of independents were opposed. But 79% of Republicans approved.

Interviewers also asked about specifics. And GOP voters were with Trump all the way.

Strong majorities of Republicans disagreed that federal agents “have unfairly targeted Latino communities for their race or ethnicity,” believed the raids have “primarily focused” on undocumented “serious” criminals — although evidence shows that many law-abiders have been snatched — and thought “all undocumented immigrants need to be deported.”

Smaller Republican majorities disagreed that detained undocumented immigrants “have a right to due process” and a court hearing — although the due process clause of the 5th Amendment indicates they do — and agreed that “agents should expand enforcement into schools, hospitals, parks and other public locations.”

Democrats and independents expressed emphatically opposite views — and they greatly outnumber Republicans in California.

The parties also reported diametrically opposite feelings when viewing news accounts of raids by federal agents. Nearly two-thirds of Republicans said it made them feel “hopeful, like justice is finally being served.” Democrats said they were “enraged and/or sad. What is happening is unfair.”

Republicans were more divided on whether immigration agents should be required to show clear identification, such as wearing badges. Armed agents have been going incognito in street clothes, traveling in unmarked vehicles and wearing masks.

Among GOP voters, 50% opposed requiring identification and 45% supported the idea.

Two bills currently are awaiting votes in the state Assembly to require agent identification and ban masks in most circumstances.

“Agents have been running around wearing essentially ski masks, grabbing people, throwing them into unmarked cars and disappearing them,” says Sen. Mark Wiener (D-San Francisco), author of the mask ban bill. “In a democracy, we don’t have secret police running around masked.”

Listening to Republican voters, I’m hearing reverberations from 1994 when that GOP generation overwhelmingly backed Proposition 187, led by Gov. Pete Wilson, who was subsequently demonized by Democrats and, particularly, Latinos.

That now-infamous measure would have denied most public services — including schooling — to undocumented immigrants, and turned teachers and nurses into snitches. It passed by a landslide, but a federal judge ruled it unconstitutional.

Republicans voted for Proposition187 by 3 to 1 and independents by 3 to 2, according to a Los Angeles Times exit poll. Democrats opposed it by 2 to 1.

White people voted for Proposition 187 by 59% to 41% — the exact victory margin — but Latinos opposed it by 78% to 22%. Today, there are a lot fewer white people and lots more Latinos in California.

The measure awakened Latinos and spawned a new generation of Democratic political leaders, including U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, former L.A. Mayor and Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa and other legislative honchos.

And it instigated a hemorrhaging of Republican voters in California. In the November presidential election, Republicans amounted to only 25% of registered voters. In 1994, they were 37%. Many have since shifted to registering as independents, who amounted to only 10% back then and are 22% now. Democrats also have lost slightly to nonpartisan ranks, falling from 49% to 46%.

No Republican candidate has won a statewide race since 2006, and Democrats hold supermajorities in both legislative houses.

The GOP has been touting an uptick in Latino support in November’s election. But is that a trend, or just the reflection of a sorry Democratic presidential campaign? How will Latino voters react to immigration agents chasing people through farm fields, seizing teens without telling their parents and stalking picnickers?

“Republicans can talk about crime and homelessness and gas prices all they want but the immigration issue is a boulder in the road that will keep large numbers in California from listening to what they say on any other issue,” says Dan Schnur, a USC and UC Berkeley political science instructor who was Wilson’s spokesman in 1994.

GOP consultant Mike Madrid, who has written a book about how Latinos are transforming democracy, says Republicans “are limiting what could be a tidal wave of voters in their direction. They’re their own worst enemies.”

He adds: “Latinos are primarily economic voters but will respond when attacked. As long as the GOP resorts to anti-Latino appeals they’ll fight back.”

Republican voter attitudes also are symptomatic of today’s extremely polarized politics.

“Wherever Trump decides to steer the ship, Republicans are following him. Trump is the Pied Piper here,” says Mark DiCamillo, the IGS pollster.

Republican consultant Kevin Spillane theorized that Republican respondents in the poll were “rallying around Trump. They thought they were really being asked about him.”

Whatever. They need to evolve into the increasingly diverse 21st century. We can secure the border without storming churches, hospitals and schools.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Newsom, California lawmakers strike deal that would allow Uber, Lyft drivers to unionize
The TK: ‘The party is in shambles.’ But some Democrats see reasons for optimism
The L.A. Times Special: Their brotherly love transcends politics — and California’s tooth-and-nail redistricting fight

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

IT was 1984 and newly qualified doctor Daniel Drucker was excited to dive into the world of ­scientific research.

Fresh out of the University of Toronto Medical School, the 28-year-old was working at a lab in Boston in the US when his supervisor asked him to carry out a routine experiment — which proved to be anything but.

5

5

For it led to Dr Drucker’s discovery of a previously unknown hormone, sparking a new era in medicine.

What he modestly calls a “happy accident” then kick-started a series of ­discoveries that made today’s game-changing weight loss jabs a reality.

The hormone was called glucagon-like peptide 1 — or GLP-1, as the world now knows it.

And the drugs that have resulted from its discovery have produced amazing effects — with users losing up to a fifth of their body weight.

So far around 50,000 of us have been prescribed jabs on the NHS for weight loss, but it is ­estimated around 1.5million people here are buying them privately — a figure that is expected to rise sharply.

Dr Drucker, now 69, tells The Sun: “I never felt like I was on the brink of something huge.

“It was just a fantastic stroke of luck to be in the right place at the right time and to be part of an ­innovation that could improve the health of hundreds of millions of people all over the world.”

The drugs are now being hailed as a possible cure for a range of other conditions too, including dementia and migraine.

But Dr Drucker warns: “We need to be cautious, respect what we don’t know, and not rush into thinking these medicines are right for everyone.

‘Full of hope’

“There could be side-effects we haven’t seen yet, especially in groups we haven’t properly studied.”

Some studies have also raised concerns about gallbladder problems and in rare cases, even ­suicidal thoughts.

GLP-1 was found to play a key role in regulating the appetite and blood sugar levels, by slowing digestion and signalling a feeling of fullness to the brain.

Fat jabs such as Mounjaro and Wegovy contain synthetic versions of GLP-1, tirzepatide and semaglutide, which mimic the natural hormone with astonishing, fat-busting results.

Originally these drugs — known as GLP-1 agonists — were licensed to treat Type 2 diabetes, due to their ability to stimulate the body’s production of insulin, which cuts high blood glucose levels.

But over the past 15 years, after studies ­confirmed the potential to tackle obesity, pharmaceutical firms have reapplied to have the drugs approved as weight loss treatments.

And now evidence is emerging almost daily to suggest these drugs could help treat and even prevent other chronic and degenerative diseases.

Hundreds of scientific trials are under way, and Dr Drucker is “full of hope”, adding that he would consider taking the drugs himself, to ward off ­Alzheimer’s disease.

He says: “I think the next five years is going to be massive. These drugs won’t fix everything, but if they help even half the ­conditions we are testing them for, we could finally find ­treatments for conditions once thought untreatable.”

Decades after his discovery, Dr Drucker is now a professor of ­medicine at the University of Toronto, and a senior investigator at the affiliated Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, where GLP-1 research now fills his life.

He says: “Every morning I turn on my phone and check what’s happened overnight — what new ­discovery has been made, what could this hormone cure or treat.”

Even so, in May UK health chiefs warned that the jabs must not be taken during pregnancy or in the two months before conception, after studies of animals found that semaglutide can cause ­pregnancy loss and birth defects.

But with human use, no such ­danger has been ­confirmed, Dr Drucker says, and dozens of women have ­conceived while taking them.

5

5

Some scientists even believe GLP-1 drugs may boost ­fertility, and could become a go-to for infertility treatment.

Dr Drucker, listed in Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in 2024, says: “It wouldn’t surprise me if five years from now, once we have more clinical trial evidence, if we start recommending these medicines to help people get pregnant, and have safer pregnancies.”

It is exciting stuff, but Dr Drucker admits he also worries about people using the drugs for the wrong ­reasons — such as slim, young women in pursuit of unrealistic beauty ideals on social media.

He says: “If I’ve got a 17-year-old who wants to lose another five per cent of her body weight to look like some celebrity, that’s a real concern.

“We haven’t studied 10,000 teenage girls on these drugs over five years. We don’t know how they affect bones, fertility, mental health or development in the long term.”

Last year model Lottie Moss, sister of supermodel Kate, revealed she had ended up in hospital after a seizure linked to high doses of weight loss drug Ozempic.

I think the next five years will be massive. These drugs won’t fix everything, but if they help even half the conditions we are testing for, we could find treatments for conditions thought untreatable

Dr Daniel Drucker

A nurse told her the dose she had been injecting was meant for someone twice her size.

Dr Drucker warned that older adults, people with eating disorders and those with mental health ­conditions may respond differently to the drugs.

He says: “We’re still ­learning, and just because a medicine works well in one group doesn’t mean it is safe for everyone.”

One of the biggest risks is dehydration, which OnlyFans star Lottie blamed for her seizure.

Dr Drucker says: “Some people experience nausea and vomiting, which can lead to dehydration, and that in itself can be dangerous.”
He also warns that losing weight too quickly can reduce muscle mass and bone density, which is especially risky for older people.

He adds: “This is why it is important people only take these drugs when being monitored by medical professionals, so they can be properly assessed for side-effects and receive the safest, most effective care.”

5

So far at least 85 people in the UK have died after taking weight loss jabs, according to reports sent to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency watchdog.

While none of the deaths has been definitively linked to the drugs, health bodies noted a “suspicion” that they may have played a role.

Dr Drucker says: “Reports like these can raise flags, but without proper comparison groups they don’t tell the full story.

‘Drugs aren’t candy’

“In fact, large trials show GLP-1 drugs actually reduce death rates in people with Type 2 diabetes and those with obesity and heart disease.

“So far, the evidence looks solid and reassuring.”

With millions of patients treated over the years, GLP-1s have a well-established safety record for diabetes and obesity.

But Dr Drucker warns that for newer uses, such as ­Alzheimer’s, fatty liver disease or sleep apnoea, we need more data.

He says: “I don’t think there are any hidden, terrifying side-effects waiting to be uncovered.

“But that doesn’t mean people should take them lightly. We don’t yet have 20 years of experience ­treating some of these ­conditions.

“We need to approach each new indication with appropriate caution, to really understand the benefits ­versus the potential risks.

“These drugs aren’t candy, they won’t fix everything — and like all medicines they have side-effects.

“I don’t think we should abandon our focus on safety. We need to move carefully and thoughtfully as this field evolves.”

I’m not struggling with Type 2 diabetes or obesity, but I do have a family history of ­Alzheimer’s. I’m watching the trials closely and, depending on the results, I wouldn’t rule out taking them in the future

Dr Daniel Drucker

He continues: “I’m not struggling with Type 2 diabetes or obesity, but I do have a family history of ­Alzheimer’s. I’m watching the trials closely and, depending on the results, I wouldn’t rule out taking them in the future.

“I have friends from college who are already showing early signs of cognitive decline, and there’s hope that in some cases, ­semaglutide might help to slow it.”

Several studies over the years ­support that theory.

A recent study by a US university found that the jabs could prevent Alzheimer’s-related changes in people with Type 2 diabetes.

Separate research from Taiwan found that people on GLP-1 agonist drugs appeared to have a 37 per cent lower risk of dementia.

Dr Drucker now regularly receives messages from people around the world whose lives have been changed by the drugs his lab helped to create.

He says: “I get tons of stories. ­People send me emails and photos, not just showing their weight loss, but how their health has changed in other ways too.”

Some say the jabs have helped their chronic pain, cleared brain fog or improved long-standing health conditions such as ulcerative colitis or arthritis.

Dr Drucker adds: “It’s incredibly heartwarming and I never get tired of hearing these stories.”

But for him there is even deeper meaning attached to his discovery.

His 97-year-old mother Cila, ­originally from Poland, survived the Holocaust, spending months as a child hiding in the family’s attic before they were captured and held in a ghetto, where her mother and sister were later shot dead.

At the end of the war in 1945 she became a refugee in Palestine, then in 1953 she emigrated to Canada, first settling in Montreal then making Toronto her home in the 1990s.

Dr Drucker says his work has helped to ease Cila’s survivor’s guilt which had consumed her for decades.

He says: “She looks at my work and she’s so proud of how many people it could potentially help.”

Melbourne, Australia – Lee Little recalls the phone call with her daughter in December 2017; it was just minutes before Alicia was killed.

“I spoke to her 15 minutes before she died,” Little told Al Jazeera.

“I asked her, was she OK? Did you want us to come up to pick you up? And she said, ‘No, I’ve got my car. I’m right, Mum, everything’s packed.’”

Alicia Little was on the verge of finally leaving an abusive four-and-a-half-year relationship.

Not only had Alicia rung her mother, but she had also called the police emergency hotline for assistance, as her fiance Charles Evans fell into a drunken rage.

Alicia knew what to expect from her partner: extreme violence.

Evans had a history of abuse towards Alicia, with her mother recounting to Al Jazeera the first time it occurred.

“The first time he actually bashed her, she was on the phone to me. And the next minute, I heard him come across and try to grab her phone,” Little said.

“I heard her say, ‘Get your hands off my throat. I can’t breathe.’ And the next minute, you hear him say, ‘You’re better off dead.’”

Little told how she had taken photos of her daughter’s terrible injuries.

“She had broken ribs. She had a broken cheekbone, broken jaw, black eyes, and where he’d had her around the throat, you could see his finger marks. It was a bruise, and where he’d give her a kick, and right down the side, you could see his foot marks.”

Like many abusive relationships, a pattern would emerge, whereby Alicia would leave temporarily, only to return after Evans promised to change his behaviour.

“This went on and off for the four and a half years,” Little said.

“He’d bash her, she’d come home, and then she’d say to me, ‘Mum, he’s told me that he’s gone and got help.’”

Yet the violence only escalated.

On the night Alicia decided to leave for good, Evans drove his four-wheel-drive at her, pinning her between the front of the vehicle and a water tank.

Alicia Little, aged 41 and a mother of two boys, died within minutes before the police she had called could arrive.

As she lay drawing her final breaths, security camera footage would later show her killer drinking beer at the local pub, where he drove to after running Alicia down.

Evans was arrested, and after initially being charged with murder, had his charges downgraded to dangerous driving causing death and failing to render assistance after a motor vehicle accident.

He would walk free from jail after only two years and eight months.

The statistics

Alicia Little is just one of the many women in Australia killed every year, in what activists such as The Red Heart Campaign’s Sherele Moody are saying is so prevalent that it amounts to a “femicide”: the targeted killing of women by men.

According to government data, one woman was killed in Australia every eight days on average between 2023-2024.

Moody, who documents the killings, contests those statistics, telling Al Jazeera they do not represent the true scale of deadly attacks on women in the country.

Government data records “domestic homicide”; women killed resulting in a conviction of murder or manslaughter.

As in the case of Alicia Little, the lesser charges her killer was convicted on related to motoring offences and do not amount to a domestic homicide under government reporting and are not reflected in the statistics.

“One of the key weapons that perpetrators use against women in Australia is vehicles,” Moody told Al Jazeera.

“They almost always get charged with dangerous driving, causing death. That is not a homicide charge. It doesn’t get counted despite it being a domestic violence act, an act of domestic violence perpetrated by a partner,” Moody said.

“The government underrepresents the epidemic of violence. And in the end, the numbers that they’re using influence their policy. It influences their funding decisions. It influences how they speak to us as a community about violence against women,” she said.

Moody said that between January 2024 and June this year, she had documented 136 killings of women; many – like Alicia Little – by their partners. “Ninety-six percent of the deaths I record are perpetrated by men.”

“Around 60 percent of the deaths are the result of domestic and family violence,” she said.

While much focus is on women’s safety in public spaces – for example, walking home alone at night – Moody said the least safe place for a woman is actually in her own home.

“The reality is that if you’re going to be killed, whether you’re a man or woman or a child, you’re going to be killed by someone you know,” she said.

Data shows that only about 10 percent of female victims are killed by strangers, deaths often sensationally covered by the media and prompting public debate about women’s safety.

“Yes, stranger killings do happen, and when they do, they get a lot of focus and a lot of attention, and it lulls people into a false sense of security about who is perpetrating the violence,” Moody said.

Male violence in Australia

Patty Kinnersly, CEO of Our Watch, a national task force to prevent violence against women, said attacks on women are the “most extreme outcome of broader patterns of gendered violence and inequality”.

“When we refer to the gendered drivers of violence, we are talking about the social conditions and power imbalances that create the environment where this violence occurs,” Kinnersly said.

“These include condoning or excusing violence against women, men’s control of decision-making, rigid gender stereotypes and dominant forms of masculinity, and male peer relations that promote aggression and disrespect towards women,” she said.

“Addressing the gendered drivers is vital because violence against women is not random; it reflects deeply entrenched inequalities and norms in society. If we do not address these root causes, we cannot achieve long-term prevention,” she added.

Patterns of male violence are deeply rooted in Australia’s colonial history, in which men are told they need to be physically and mentally tough, normalising male aggression, write authors Alana Piper and Ana Stevenson.

“For much of the 19th century, men far outnumbered women within the European population of the Australian colonies. This produced a culture that prized hyper-masculinity as a national ideal,” they write.

Colonial male aggression also resulted in extreme violence perpetrated on Indigenous women during the frontier times, through rape and massacres.

Misogyny and racism were also promoted in Australia’s parliament during the 20th century, as legislators crafted assimilationist laws aimed at controlling the lives of Indigenous women and removing their children as part of what has become known as the “Stolen Generations”.

Up to a third of Indigenous children were removed from their families as part of a suite of government policies between 1910 and 1970, resulting in widespread cultural genocide and intergenerational social, economic and health disparities.

This legacy of colonial racism and discrimination continues to play out in vast socioeconomic inequalities experienced by Indigenous people in the present day, including violence against women, activists say.

Recent government data shows that Indigenous women are 34 times more likely to be hospitalised due to violence than non-Indigenous women in Australia and six times more likely to die as a result of family violence.

“Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are among the most at-risk groups for family violence and intimate partner homicide in Australia,” First Nations Advocates Against Family Violence (FNAAFV) Chief Executive Officer Kerry Staines told Al Jazeera.

“These disproportionately high rates are the result of historical injustice and ongoing systemic failure,” Staines said, including forced displacement of Indigenous communities, child removals and the breakdown of family structures.

“Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities have been affected by multigenerational trauma caused by institutional abuse, incarceration and marginalisation. When trauma is left unaddressed, and support services are inadequate or culturally unsafe, the risk of violence, including within relationships, increases,” she said.

Indigenous women are also the fastest-growing prison cohort in Australia.

On any given night, four out of 10 women in prison are Indigenous women, despite making up only 2.5 per cent of the adult female population.

Staines said there is a nexus between domestic violence and incarceration.

“There is a clear and well-documented relationship between the hyper-incarceration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the high rates of family violence experienced in our communities,” she said.

“The removal of parents and caregivers from families due to imprisonment increases the likelihood of child protection involvement, housing instability and intergenerational trauma, all of which are risk factors for both perpetration and victimisation of family violence.”

‘Toxic culture’

While Australia was one of the first Western countries to grant women voting rights, deeply rooted inequalities persisted through much of the 20th century, with women being excluded from much of public and civic life, including employment in the government sector and the ability to sit on juries, until the 1970s.

This exclusion from positions of authority – including the judicial system – allowed a culture of “victim blaming” to develop, particularly in instances of domestic abuse and sexual assault, activists say.

Rather than holding male perpetrators to account and addressing violence, focus remained on the actions of female victims: what they may have been wearing, where they had been, and prior sexual histories as a basis for apportioning blame to those who had suffered the consequences of gender-based violence.

Such was the case with Isla Bell, a 19-year-old woman from Melbourne, who police allege was beaten to death in October 2024.

Media reporting on Isla’s death focused largely on her personal life and provided graphic details about her death, while little attention was given to the two men who were charged with Isla’s alleged murder.

Isla’s mother, Justine Spokes, said the reporting “felt really abusive”.

“The way in which my daughter’s murder was reported on just highlights the pervasive toxic culture that is systemic in Australia,” said Spokes, describing a “victim-blaming narrative” around the killing of her daughter.

“It was written in a really biased way that felt really disrespectful, devaluing and dehumanising,” she said, adding that society had become desensitised to male violence against women in Australia.

“It’s just become so normalised, which I think is actually a sign of trauma, that we’re numb to it. It’s been pervasive for that long. If that’s the mainstream psyche in Australia, it’s just so dangerous,” she said.

“I really think that this pervasive, toxic, misogynistic culture, it’s definitely written into our law. It’s very colonial,” she added.

The Australian government, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, has committed to the ambitious task of tackling violence against women within a generation.

A spokesperson from the Department of Social Services told Al Jazeera the government has invested 4 billion Australian dollars ($2.59bn) to deliver on the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-2032.

“The Australian Government acknowledges the significant levels of violence against women and children including intimate partner homicides,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

“Ending gender-based violence remains a national priority for the Australian Government. Our efforts to end gender based violence in one generation are not set-and-forget – we are rigorously tracking, measuring and assessing our efforts, and making change where we must,” the spokesperson added.

Yet for Lee Little, mother of Alicia Little who was killed in 2017, not enough is being done, and she does not feel justice was served in the case of her daughter, describing the killer’s light sentence as “gut-wrenching”.

Little is now petitioning for a national domestic violence database in a bid to hold perpetrators accountable and allow women to gain access to information regarding prior convictions.

“Our family would love a national database, because perpetrators, at this moment, anywhere in Australia, can do a crime in one state and move to another, and they’re not recognised” as offenders in their new location, she said.

Little said public transparency around prior convictions would protect women from entering into potentially abusive relationships in the first place.

Yet the Australian federal government has yet to implement such a database, in part due to the complexities of state jurisdictions.

The federal attorney-general’s office told Al Jazeera that “primary responsibility for family violence and criminal matters rests with the states and territories, with each managing their own law enforcement and justice systems”.

“Creation of a publicly accessible national register of perpetrators of family violence could only be implemented with the support of state and territory governments, who manage the requisite data and legislation.”

Despite the apparent intransigence in law, Little remains committed to calling out violence against women wherever she sees it.

“I’ve been to supermarkets where there’s been abuse in front of me, and I’ve stepped in,” she said.

“I will be a voice for Alicia and for a national database till my last breath,” she added.

WASHINGTON — The ghost of Jeffrey Epstein is back in Washington as Congress prepares to return for the fall.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson called an early start to summer break in July, attempting to shut down bipartisan clamor for the full release of the Epstein files. But Democrats are eager to launch back into a scandal that has dogged President Trump and divided his MAGA base.

Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, plans to partner with Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky to quickly force a vote on the House floor ordering the Justice Department to release its entire trove of documents from the investigation of Epstein, a convicted sex offender who abused hundreds of women and girls.

The success of the measure is far from guaranteed. It is unclear whether the Justice Department would even abide by it. But Democrats plan to make sure the issue does not go away, regardless of its outcome, multiple Democratic aides said.

Democratic lawmakers’ focus on Epstein will be “high” out of the gate once Congress returns after Labor Day, one senior House Democratic staffer told The Times.

Republicans “will not want to be put in a position of voting against disclosure,” said the staffer, who requested anonymity to share internal discussions. “The same thing that tripped up Johnson in July is still there.”

California Dems lead charge for release

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) has pushed for the release of the Epstein documents.

(Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)

Epstein, a wealthy financier with a deep bench of powerful friends, died in a New York City prison in August 2019 facing federal charges in a sprawling child sex trafficking conspiracy.

The charges followed reporting by the Miami Herald of a scandalous sweetheart deal brokered by federal prosecutors in Florida that had allowed Epstein to serve a months-long sentence, avoiding federal charges that could have resulted in life imprisonment.

The chief prosecutor in that case, Alex Acosta, the former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida, went on to serve as Labor secretary in Trump’s first term.

Acosta has agreed to sit for a transcribed interview with the House Oversight Committee on Sept. 19.

It is just one of several milestones coming up for the Oversight Committee, which voted to subpoena all Justice Department records in the case before dismissing for recess. Democrats, partnering with Republicans rebelling against the party line, forced the subpoena vote.

The first set of those documents were delivered last week. But Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), the top Democrat on the committee, said that 97% of the 33,000 pages of documents handed over by the Justice Department so far were already public.

The Justice Department and the Oversight Committee said that the records would be released on a piecemeal basis as department officials work to redact sensitive information on Epstein’s victims.

Garcia and Khanna have been leading the charge for an expansive release of documents in the Epstein case — a call that has drawn fierce pushback from Trump, who had a close friendship with Epstein for roughly a decade.

“There is no excuse for incomplete disclosures,” Garcia said. “Survivors and the American public deserve the truth.”

‘Gentleman in all respects’

Democrats never made an issue of the Epstein files when they held Congress and the White House under President Biden, dismissing the story as another right-wing conspiracy theory. But Democratic lawmakers now see the issue as an opportunity to cause a split between Trump and his supporters, highlighting his resistance to releasing the files for a voter base that has called for their disclosure since Epstein’s 2019 death.

Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, chairman of the Oversight Committee, issued a new subpoena this week to Epstein’s estate for all material from 1990 through his death that references presidents and vice presidents, as well address books, contact lists, and videos recorded at Epstein’s properties.

That could result in the disclosure of a book compiled for Epstein marking his 50th birthday in the early 2000s, first reported over the summer by the Wall Street Journal, that allegedly includes a letter from Trump featuring a lewd doodle and a note that reads, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.” Trump has denied he wrote the note.

The Oversight Committee has also voted to subpoena Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s close associate who is serving a 20-year sentence in federal prison for her role in a scheme to sexually exploit and abuse multiple minor girls.

Maxwell and her attorneys are openly angling for a pardon from Trump, raising suspicions among Democrats over the reliability of her testimony. But any appearance by Maxwell on Capitol Hill would become a media sensation, drawing national attention back to the case.

The second most powerful figure in the Justice Department, Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general, personally interviewed Maxwell in July over the course of two days. She absolved Trump of any criminality in the interview without even being asked to do so.

“The president was never inappropriate with anybody,” Maxwell said, according to a transcript released last week.

“In the times I was with him,” she added, “he was a gentleman in all respects.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Why the Grateful Dead are one of California’s greatest natural phenomena
The deep dive: Will your congressional district shift left or right in Newsom’s proposed map?
The L.A. Times Special: Why COVID keeps roaring back every summer, even as pandemic fades from public view

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

NIGEL Farage today appeared to row back on his pledge to include women and children in illegal migrant deportations.

The Reform leader said the two groups would be “exempt” from being sent packing for five years – but not “forever”.

2

2

On Tuesday Mr Farage declared that under his mass deportation plan, 600,000 illegal migrants, including females of all ages, would have no right to stay in Britain.

But pushed on the issue again at a press conference in Edinburgh today, he clarified:  “I was very, very clear yesterday in what I said, that deportation of illegal immigrants – we are not even discussing women and children at this stage.

“I didn’t say exempt forever, but at this stage it’s not part of our plan for the next five years.”

It comes as the Taliban confirmed it is “ready and willing” to strike an illegal migrant returns deal with Mr Farage.

A senior official suggested the extremist group would ask for aid to support deported Afghans instead of money.

The official told The Telegraph: “We are ready and willing to receive and embrace whoever he [Nigel Farage] sends us.

“We are prepared to work with anyone who can help end the struggles of Afghan refugees, as we know many of them do not have a good life abroad.

“We will not take money to accept our own people, but we welcome aid to support newcomers, since there are challenges in accommodating and feeding those returning from Iran and Pakistan.

“Afghanistan is home to all Afghans, and the Islamic Emirate is determined to make this country a place where everyone – those already here, those returning, or those being sent back from the West by Mr Farage or anyone else – can live with dignity.”

The Taliban official also suggested it will be easier for Afghanistan to “deal” with Reform than Labour.

He said: “We will have to see what Mr Farage does when or if he becomes prime minister of Britain, but since his views are different, it may be easier to deal with him than with the current ones.

 “We will accept anyone he sends, whether they are legal or illegal refugees in Britain.”

The Taliban are hardline Islamist militants who seized back control of Afghanistan in 2021 after two decades of war.

They enforce brutal Sharia law, with strict rules on women, media and daily life, backed by violence and fear.

Branded terrorists by the West, they’re accused of harbouring extremists and crushing human rights while clinging to power.

Mr Farage yesterday vowed to deport 600,000 illegal migrants in his first term in office – in a crackdown he claims will save taxpayers billions.

The Reform UK boss said the public mood over Channel crossings was “a mix between total despair and rising anger”, warning of a “genuine threat to public order” unless Britain acts fast.

This morning Tory Chairman Kevin Hollinrake confirmed his party would also “potentially” look to strike a returns agreement with the Taliban.

He added that his party’s deportation plan, which was published in May, is “far more comprehensive than the one we’ve seen from Reform, in that it dealt with both legal migration and illegal migration”.

Unveiling a five-year emergency programme, dubbed Operation Restoring Justice, Mr Farage yesterday tore into what he called an “invasion” on Britain’s borders and pledged the boldest deportation plan ever put forward by a UK party.

Speaking at an aircraft hangar in Oxfordshire, Mr Farage declared: “If you come to the UK illegally, you will be detained and deported and never, ever allowed to stay, period. 

“That is our big message from today, and we are the first party to put out plans that could actually make that work.”

Reform’s plan centres on a new Illegal Migration (Mass Deportation) Bill, which would make it the Home Secretary’s legal duty to remove anyone who arrives unlawfully, and strip courts and judges of the power to block flights. 

Britain would quit the European Convention on Human Rights, scrap the Human Rights Act and suspend the Refugee Convention for five years.

Reform would also make re-entry after deportation a crime carrying up to five years in jail, enforce a lifetime ban on returning, and make tearing up ID papers punishable by the same penalty.

Mr Farage said women and children would be detained and removed under the plans, with “phase one” focusing on men and women and unaccompanied minors deported “towards the latter half of that five years”.

He even raised the prospect that children born in Britain to parents who arrived illegally could also be deported, but admitted it would be “complex”. 

He said: “How far back you go with this is the difficulty, and I accept that… I’m not standing here telling you all of this is easy, all of this is straightforward.”

There would also be a six-month “Assisted Voluntary Return Window” with cash incentives to leave before Border Force begins US-style raids. Mr Farage said: “Will Border Force be seeking out people who are here illegally, possibly many of them working in the criminal economy? 

“Yes, it’s what normal countries do all over the world. 

“What sane country would allow undocumented young males to break into its country, to put them up in hotels, they even get dental care? How about that?

“Most people can’t get an NHS dentist. This is not what normal countries do.”

The scheme would also see prefab detention camps built on surplus RAF and MoD land, holding up to 24,000 people within 18 months. 

Inmates would be housed in two-man blocks with food halls and medical suites – and would not be allowed out.

Five deportation flights would take off every day, with RAF planes on standby if charter jets were blocked. 

SACRAMENTO — There are “Wizard of Oz” echoes in the retaliatory redistricting fight being waged by California Democrats against President Trump and Texas Republicans.

That’s mainly because of the script being followed by Republican opponents. But Democrats seem to be parroting some Oz lines, too.

That was evident last week during several tense debates by California lawmakers on legislation setting a special state election for Nov. 4 to counteract Texas’ attempts to flip five congressional seats from Democrats to Republicans.

The California measures would temporarily suspend the state Constitution to allow legislators — rather than an independent citizens commission — to redraw U.S. House districts. The Democrats’ aim is to flip five Republican seats in California and neutralize the Texas GOP’s action. Democrats already have drawn the new lines, but voters must approve them.

At stake is control of the U.S. House of Representatives after next year’s midterm elections.

California’s Legislature, after much emotional rhetoric, easily passed the Democrats’ proposed constitutional amendment and supporting legislation on party-line, supermajority votes. The bills were immediately signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, their instigator and chief promoter. They’ll be Proposition 50 on the November ballot.

All the while, script lines from “The Wizard of Oz” movie classic kept ringing in my ears.

“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain,” the Wizard implores Dorothy and her pals after her little dog, Toto, pulls back the curtain to reveal him as a fraud.

In Sacramento, it’s as if Republicans — and progressive do-gooders — are being admonished to pay no attention to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who has committed the same sins of partisan redistricting that they’re attacking Newsom for. The Texan isn’t even mentioned by California assailants of Newsom’s gerrymandering. It smacks of hypocrisy.

What Abbott’s doing is even worse by good government standards. Unlike Newsom, he isn’t seeking voter approval.

Abbott doesn’t have to, of course. In Texas, it’s perfectly legal for the legislature to rig congressional districts for partisan advantage. In California, voters banned gerrymandering of congressional districts in 2010 and turned over their drawing to the bipartisan citizens commission. Newsom needs voter permission to suspend that law.

Nationally, Democrats need to gain only a handful of seats to capture control of the House and end the GOP’s one-party rule of Washington. Trump fears that likelihood. So he pressured Abbott into engineering a legislative gerrymandering of Texas’ House districts in mid-decade, rather than wait for the normal redrawing after the 2030 census. And he’s browbeating other red state governors to likewise rig their congressional lines.

“California will not be a bystander to Trump’s power grab,” Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Salinas) said as Newsom signed the legislation. “We will not stand by while the House is hijacked by authoritarianism.”

But back to the Emerald City.

The Wizard introduces himself to Dorothy by bellowing behind the curtain: “I am Oz, the great and powerful.” Later, he breaks his word to the girl, she sees through his bullying and stands up to him, scolding: “If you were really great and powerful, you’d keep your promises.”

Trump is a great big bully whose word can’t be taken at face value because he consistently changes his mind to fit the moment. He’s clearly anti-California, holding back federal funds, assessing fines and reducing environmental protections. Newsom and Democratic leaders will repeatedly remind voters of that as the election approaches.

Unlike Dorothy, it’s a rare Republican elected official who has the courage to stand up to this power-obsessed bully. But one surprisingly surfaced during the Assembly redistricting debate.

Referring to Trump’s urging Abbott and other GOP governors to gerrymander districts, Assembly Minority Leader James Gallagher of Yuba City asserted: “He is wrong to do so.” And he added for emphasis: “Let me repeat. He is wrong…. Where does it end?”

Later, Gallagher reiterated, “My president is wrong on this point. What I don’t hear from the other side is, ‘My governor is wrong.’ ”

Gallagher and several Republicans insist — as Newsom and Democrats do — that gerrymandering should be outlawed in every state and district lines drawn by citizens’ commissions rather than self-interested legislators. But that won’t happen in the foreseeable future.

Gallagher also contended that Democrats are hyping Trump’s threat to democracy. He said they’re arguing that “in order to save democracy, we must undermine it” by committing sleazy gerrymandering.

He has a point about the Democrats’ excessive warning of democracy’s peril under Trump.

“Californians won’t stand by while Donald Trump destroys democracy,” Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) declared during an oft-uncivil hearing of the Assembly Elections Committee. “If we let Trump get away with this rigging of elections, then we may not have free and fair elections in the future.”

That seems a stretch.

This and other hyperbole by several legislators of both parties reminded me of frightened Dorothy, Tin Man and Scarecrow chanting in the dark forest: “Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!”

I suspect the best pitch for Proposition 50 in this heavily Democratic state is a straight-forward anti-Trump message focused on his inhuman policies and the urgent need to restore checks and balances in Washington.

“We are going to punch this bully in the mouth,” Newsom vowed during a press conference hosted by the Democratic National Committee.

OK, but the governor should cool the Trump-like rhetoric. It probably wouldn’t impress Dorothy or — more important — her Uncle Henry and Aunt Em.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Most California voters disapprove of Trump’s immigration enforcement policies, poll shows
The TK: The Supreme Court could give immigration agents broad power to stop and question Latinos
The L.A. Times Special: This red state fears Californians bringing ‘radical, leftist ideology.’ It’s targeting teachers

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

POLICE are urgently searching for two women who “may be together” after they vanished months ago.

Lorna Nightingale, 70, was last seen in Lowestoft, Suffolk, in February while Emma Nightingale, 36, has not been seen since being spotted in Colchester, Essex, in June.

Cops said it is known that both women have connections to Essex, suggesting that they may have travelled there.

Suffolk Police added that officers believed the women “may be together.”

Both women are from Lowestoft, cops said.

Lorna is described as being 5ft 2in tall, of a slim build, with short grey hair.

Emma is described as 5ft 8 in tall, with mousey-coloured long hair.

If you have seen Lorna or Emma, or have any information about them, contact police by calling 999.

1

THIS is the woman who is hired by others to get their husbands to dump their lovers in secret.

Wang Zhengxi, who operates out of Henan province in northern China, helps women deal with a growing problem.

5

5

5

As growing numbers of women suspect their husbands of cheating, Wang is on call to help save their marriages.

Speaking to one client Ms Li, she said: “The most urgent matter at hand is how to inject me organically into your family.”

Wang comes to the rescue after Ms Li found texts on her husband’s phone suggesting he was having an affair.

Instead of confronting her husband, Ms Li is employing Wang to help save her marriage.

She will befriend a cheating husband and his mistress and convince them to both break it off.

Wang is one of a growing number of “mistress dispellers” – and has been featured in a documentary by the Hong Kong filmmaker Elizabeth Lo.

In the film, Wang says: “When people come to me for help because a mistress has appeared, I can provide them with solutions to fix the problem.”

It comes amid a crisis of confidence in the institution of marriage across China.

There were fewer than 300,000 divorces back in 1978, but this jumped by 2019 to 4.7 million.

Lo said: “In Asian cultures, the mode of conflict resolution is different.

“Solving a problem and maintaining face on the surface while not poking a hole directly in the bubble or reality they live in is a form of preserving harmony.”

When she approaches the husband and mistress, Wang works subtly.

She asks Mr Li to teach her badminton and befriends the mistress at the same time.

Wang said: “When someone becomes a mistress, it’s because they feel they don’t deserve complete love.

“She’s the one who needs our help the most.”

Eventually, at his home, Wang reveals Ms Li’s suspicions to her husband when the wife is out of the room.

“He confessed everything, but you should pretend to know nothing,” Wang whispered to Mrs Li.

“I think there’s hope, but I don’t know the girl yet. I can only advise you after I see her.”

Mr Li even broke down in front of Wang at one point.

It comes after a model was hired by anxious girlfriends to test if their partners are truly loyal.

Dubbing herself the “ultimate temptation”, Lana Madison helps women catch cheating boyfriends by flirting with them to see if they’ll make a move.

Lana, 29, said: “They slide into my inbox and ask me to flirt with their boyfriend to find out if he’ll cheat.”

She added: “Spoiler alert – a lot of them will. I didn’t plan to become a real-life honey trap.

“But once a few girls online saw what I look like and what I do for work, they realised that I’m the ultimate temptation.”

5

5