grilled

3 LAPD shootings in three days: Chief grilled on officers opening fire

After Los Angeles police officers shot at people on three consecutive days late last month, the LAPD’s civilian bosses turned to Chief Jim McDonnell for an explanation.

The Police Commission wanted to know: What more could the department be doing to keep officers from opening fire?

But in his response at the panel’s meeting last week, McDonnell seemed to bristle at the notion his officers were too trigger-happy.

“I think what we’re seeing is an uptick in the willingness of criminals within the community to assault officers head-on,” he said at the Aug. 26 meeting. “And then officers respond with what they have to do in order to control it.”

The commission has heaped praise on McDonnell for his performance since taking over the department in November. But the exchange over the recent cluster of police shootings — part of an overall increase that has seen officers open fire in 31 incidents this year, up from 20 at the same point in 2024 — marked a rare point of contention.

Commission Vice President Rasha Gerges Shields told the chief that she and her colleagues remained “troubled by the dealings of people both with edged weapons — knives, other things like that — and also those who are in the midst of a mental health crisis.”

During a radio appearance earlier this year, the chief brushed aside questions about shootings, saying officers are often put into dangerous situations where they have no choice but to open fire in order to protect themselves or the public.

“That is something that’s part of the job unfortunately,” he said. “It’s largely out of the control of the officer and the department as far as exposure to those types of threats.”

Such remarks have left some longtime observers worried that the department is backsliding to the days when department leaders tolerated pervasive and excessive use of force. McDonnell’s defense of aggressive tactics during this summer’s pro-immigration protests, critics argue, sends a dangerous message to the rank-and-file.

The LAPD sits at a “pivotal” crossroads, according to Jorja Leap, a professor at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.

The federal consent decree that followed the Rampart gang scandal of the late 1990s pushed the LAPD into becoming a more transparent and accountable agency, whose leaders accepted community buy-in as essential to their mission, said Leap.

Out of the reforms that followed came its signature outreach program, the Community Safety Partnership, which eschews arrests in favor of bringing officers together with residents to solve problems at some of the city’s most troubled housing projects.

Leap said support for the program has in recent years started to wane, despite research showing the approach has helped drive down crime. “The LAPD has now evolved into an inward-facing organization,” she said.

McDonnell was not available for an interview this week, an LAPD spokeswoman said.

Others faulted the chief for his response to the Trump administration’s immigration raids in Southern California, taking issue with the local police presence at federal operations and the aggressive actions of LAPD officers toward protesters and journalists during demonstrations in June.

Fernando Guerra, a political science professor at Loyola Marymount University, said McDonnell seems unwilling to acknowledge how the sight of riot-gear-clad officers holding off protesters created the impression that police were “protecting the feds and the buildings more than the residents of L.A. who pay for LAPD.”

McDonnell has repeatedly defended his department’s response, telling reporters earlier this year that officers were forced to step in to quell “direct response to immediate, credible threats.”

He also issued an internal memo voicing his support to officers in the Latino-majority department and acknowledging the mixed feelings that some may have about the immigration raids.

After his public swearing-in in November, McDonnell acknowledged how much had changed with the department since he left in 2010, while saying that “my perspective is much broader and wider, realizing that we are not going to be successful unless we work very closely with the community.”

At the time, his appointment was viewed with surprise in local political circles, where some questioned why a progressive mayor with a community organizing background like Karen Bass would hitch her fortunes to a law-and-order chief. Others argued that McDonnell was an appealing choice: A respected LAPD veteran who also served as the chief in Long Beach and later as Los Angeles County sheriff.

After numerous scandals in recent years, McDonnell’s selection for the job was widely seen as offering stability while the city prepared for the massive security challenges of the upcoming World Cup and Olympic Games.

With an earnest, restrained manner, McDonnell has won over some inside the department who were put off by his predecessor Michel Moore’s micromanaging leadership style. After his much-publicized union battles during his tenure as sheriff, McDonnell has courted the powerful Los Angeles Police Protective League by putting new focus on police hiring and promising to overhaul the department’s controversial disciplinary system.

By some measures, McDonnell has also delivered results for Bass. Violent crime numbers continue to drop, with homicides on pace for 50-year lows.

But the two leaders have taken starkly different positions on the White House’s indiscriminate raids and deployment of National Guard troops.

McDonnell took heat during a City Council hearing in June when he described federal law enforcement officers participating in immigration operations as “our partners.”

Andrés Dae Keun Kwon, policy counsel and senior organizer for the American Civil Liberties Union, said that McDonnell’s record on immigration was one of the reasons the ACLU opposed his selection as chief. Since then, Kwon said, the chief seems out of touch with the message of Bass and other local leaders rallying around the city’s immigrants.

“Given that we’re three months into this Trump regime siege of Los Angeles you’d think that the leader of this police department” would be more responsive to the community’s needs, Kwon said.

In a statement, Clara Karger, a spokeswoman for Bass, said that “each leader has a different role to play in protecting Angelenos and all agree that these indiscriminate raids are having devastating consequences for our city,” she said.

McDonnell’s relationship with the Police Commission has been cordial, but several department insiders — who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose private discussions — said that behind the scenes some commissioners have started to second-guess the chief’s handling of disciplinary cases.

The tensions were evident at the recent meeting when the issue of officer shootings led to a public dressing-down of the chief.

Echoing the frustrations of LAPD critics who flood the commission’s meetings on a weekly basis, board members questioned how it was possible that officers needed to fire their weapons on back-to-back-to-back days last month.

Commissioner Fabian Garcia called the three shootings “a lot.”

He and his colleagues told McDonnell they expected the LAPD to present a report on the shootings at a future meeting.

McDonnell responded, “Great, thank you,” before launching into his regular crime and staffing updates.

Source link

Commission’s EU-US trade deal broker to be grilled in Parliamentary hearing

By&nbspPeggy Corlin&nbsp&&nbspVincenzo Genovese

Published on
03/09/2025 – 8:00 GMT+2


ADVERTISEMENT

MEPs are set to complain widely about the EU-US trade agreement when they confront Commission trade chief and agreement negotiator Sabine Weyand during a Parliamentary hearing on the deal on Wednesday.  

“While clearly we understand that the EU has chosen stability, diplomacy and to keep a cool-minded approach, however this cannot translate into the acceptance of an unfair and asymmetric trade relation with our American friends and partners,” Italian MEP Brando Benifei.

“As it is now, it is not acceptable,” Benifei told Euronews, speaking on behalf of his Socialists & Democrats group.

Last week the Commission proposed reducing tariffs on most US industrial goods, as well as less sensitive agricultural products, to 0%, as it began implementing the agreement reached with the US at the end of August. At the same time, the agreement provides that the EU will pay a 15% tariff on its exports to the US.

The Commission’s legislative proposal must now navigate its way through the Parliament and the EU Council for approval.

The Greens are also speaking out against an unbalanced agreement and rejecting the Commission’s argument that it will ensure stable trade relations with the US.

“The deal has major disadvantages for the EU,” German Green MEP Anna Cavazzini said, adding: “The only ‘gain’ that the Commission is selling us is stability. However, Trump’s incessant demands and new tariff threats are turning this process into a waste of time.”

Just after the agreement was concluded, US President Donald Trump threatened countries with digital legislation — like the EU — with tariffs, accusing them of directly targeting Big Tech.

According to the German MEP, the proposal to reduce EU tariffs on US imports will clearly “not have a smooth sailing through the European Parliament.”

The agreement, which is still under discussion within the Parliament’s largest group, the centre-right EPP, has nonetheless failed to win the full support of some of its individual members within the parliamentary committee on trade.

“Capitulation”

“This is an outright capitulation — we’re committing to colossal sums for investments and pledges to purchase billions worth of chips and military equipment, while granting the US 0% tariffs,” French MEP Celine Imart (EPP) said, “all this for the reindustrialisation of the US !”

Swedish MEP Jörgen Warborn, who coordinates the work of the EPP within the trade committee, is more cautious.

“It is hard to put yourself in the situation of the negotiators of the Commission,” he told Euronews, adding: “It is good that we have a framework agreement, because hopefully this can give us more stability. But at the same time, I don’t see the deal as balanced as I would have hoped it to be.”

Within Renew, the liberal group at the Parliament, some MEPs are also angry. The treatment granted to US agricultural products — benefiting from 0% tariffs or favourable quotas for certain items — is not going down well.

“I’m outraged by the whole situation. Yes, of course, there are the US’s promises when it comes to defence, but this agreement truly exposes our total dependence, which forces us to sign just about anything,” Belgian MEP Benoit Cassart (Renew), who is also a farmer, said, adding: “I disagree with those who think the EU has ‘won’ just because things didn’t turn out worse. If that’s the logic, then next time the US will start at 50% and we’ll end up with 40% tariffs on all our exports.”

French MEP Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, who coordinates Renew in the committee, considers too that “there is a widespread feeling that we [the EU] failed to put any real leverage on the table.”

Source link

New boss of Paramount grilled about rumored Trump deal

David Ellison finally clinched his prize Thursday, completing Skydance Media’s $8-billion takeover of the historic Paramount.

But the tech scion immediately faced questions about President Trump’s boast that he expects $20 million in free advertising and programming as part of a settlement to end Trump’s lawsuit over CBS “60 Minutes” edits. The settlement cleared the way for Skydance’s takeover of the company that, in addition to CBS, includes MTV, Comedy Central and the storied Paramount Pictures.

Last month, Paramount paid $16 million to settle the lawsuit, which 1st Amendment experts said had no merit. Three weeks later, Ellison’s acquisition of Paramount was approved by federal regulators.

If Skydance participated in such a deal to give free public service announcements to Trump to settle his “60 Minutes” lawsuit, viewers are going to have to watch CBS to find out.

The first question Ellison, the newly minted chairman and chief executive of Paramount, fielded from reporters during a news briefing Thursday was about the purported PSAs. Ellison would not directly answer it.

“We are not going to politicize anything today,” Ellison said at the event held at Paramount headquarters in Times Square in New York.

Paramount Global handled the settlement and Skydance was not involved “in any way,” Ellison said. But Trump — who has a friendly relationship with Ellison’s father, Larry — has proclaimed numerous times that he’s been promised $20 million in free air time for public service announcements that promote causes favored by the White House. Trump’s former agent Ari Emanuel also helped Ellison make its case to the president to allow the deal to go forward.

Ellison and the other top executives stated their support for the news division at the news conference. Ellison said CBS News and “60 Minutes” were among the first stops on his tour of the company’s offices after the deal was closed.

As for the news ombudsman that Skydance agreed to as part of the terms to get approval, Paramount’s new president, Jeff Shell, said the position should not be viewed as a censor.

“The ombudsman is meant to be a transparency vehicle, not an oversight vehicle,” Shell said. “We do believe in transparency.”

Asked how Skydance will handle the ongoing attacks on mainstream media that continue to come from the White House, Ellison said the company will stand its ground.

“We’re obviously going to be fierce defenders of our talent,” Ellison said. “We always have been.”

Before the news conference, Ellison put out a mission statement for the merged company, promising to combine the company’s storied movie and TV properties with technological prowess. Paramount is also the home of several iconic but aging cable brand names, including MTV, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central.

“Moving forward, we will work with conviction and optimism to transform Paramount into a tech-forward company that blends the creative heart of Hollywood with the innovative spirit of Silicon Valley,” Ellison wrote.

The immediate challenge facing Skydance will be building the scale of Paramount+, which, despite a decent number of popular shows, has lagged in the streaming competition led by Netflix and Amazon Prime.

Ellison promised the direct-to-consumer offering can be “a leading global streaming service.”

The mogul is taking over the most-watched television network in CBS, but like the rest of the legacy media industry, it’s fighting the migration of viewers to streaming.

Ellison’s note made a point of praising “60 Minutes,” saying it has “a long tradition of impactful reporting led by seasoned journalists committed to accuracy, integrity, and public trust” and expressed thanks to the news division for continuing to toil through the controversy.

“We take immense pride in CBS News’ legacy of impactful journalism and look forward to continuing to foster a newsroom culture where journalists are empowered, trusted, and equipped to do their best work,” Ellison wrote.

The new company is now called Paramount, a Skydance Corp, with its stock trades under the PSKY ticker. Shares were trading down about 3%, to $11.25, in midday trading.

According to Ellison and his private equity Paramount investors, RedBird Capital Partners, the company will soon be positioned to reach new heights.

Ellison’s play for the studio began nearly two years ago during Hollywood’s summer of labor unrest, when then-controlling shareholder Shari Redstone’s family enterprise, National Amusements, found itself in a cash crunch after Paramount halted its dividend to its investors.

In December 2023, Redstone turned to Paramount’s board to approve the Skydance transaction. That triggered another fraught process as board members agonized over the structure of a deal that would reward rank-and-file shareholders — not just the Redstones.

The deal was finally signed July 7, 2024. As part of the Skydance buyout, the Redstones’ National Amusements Inc. was paid $2.4 billion. After the firm’s considerable debts are paid, the family should come away with about $1.75 billion.

Paramount shareholders will receive $4.5 billion. Skydance and RedBird Capital Partners also agreed to inject $1.5 billion into Paramount’s balance sheet to help pay down debt.

“Our investment in Paramount and long-term partnership with the Ellison family reflects our deep conviction in the value of world-class intellectual property and the potential to unlock substantial growth,” RedBird founder Gerry Cardinale said in a statement.

Source link