trust

Travel expert says ‘trust me’ and book these five holiday destinations for 2026

The On The Beach worker shared five destinations he is convinced will go viral next year

With 2026 rapidly approaching, many families are already planning next year’s holiday. For those in need of inspiration, a travel blogger and On The Beach specialist has revealed five destinations he expects to explode in popularity next year – and which you could book now to avoid the rush.

Rob Brooks, a travel enthusiast and influencer with the travel company On The Beach. He is well-known online for providing budget-friendly travel advice, hotel reviews, and holiday tips, which has helped him amass a significant following on social media, especially on TikTok where he goes by the username @Robonthebeach.

In a new post, Rob shared a video titled: “Five destinations I think are about to go viral, my 2026 holiday destination predictions.” His caption said: “Trust me, these 5 holiday destinations will be all over your ‘for you’ page next year.” Rob told viewers: “There are five destinations that I think are about to go viral in 2026.

“I spent a lot of time recently looking through the holiday data from this year, and I think these places are gonna be huge next year. These are places rising fast in 2025 that I think are about to hit the next level next year.”

Sharing fifth place on his list, Rob said: “Porto in Portugal. Lisbon had its moment, and Porto’s next. It’s cheaper. People say it’s trendier, and it’s got that perfect mix of Old Town charm and ocean views.

Content cannot be displayed without consent

“It’s becoming the new city break with sunshine favourite, and we’ve seen bookings here shoot up already this year. The fact that it still flies under the radar against Lisbon and the Algarve makes it feel like the next big thing for travellers, and I found three nights in Porto next year with flights from £213 per person. Not bad.”

Moving onto the fourth spot, he said: “Seville in Spain. Seville is the Spanish city that’s finally getting the love it deserves. It’s got the architecture of Madrid, the atmosphere of Barcelona, but it’s half the price and the food’s better. 2025 was its breakout year, and we can see that in the booking numbers. But 2026 is when it’ll go properly big time. And at these prices, I’m not surprised. I found three nights in Seville with flights for just £182 per person.”

In third, Rob said: “Bulgaria. This one’s a bit of a dark horse. Bulgaria is becoming the go-to for affordable beach holidays. But it’s not just about being cheap anymore. The hotels are improving, the beaches are spotless, and Sunny Beach is growing up a little bit. It’s still dead fun. There’s just less chaos. If value stays king next summer, which I think it will, Bulgaria will be massive.

“We’ve seen more bookings this year, and the data shows more searches for lower-cost Eastern European holidays. And when I did a search myself, I found seven nights in Sunny Beach with flights for a family of four for £214 per person, and that’s all-inclusive.”

Revealing second place, the blogger said: “Agadir in Morocco. It’s a four-hour flight from the UK, the weather is about 25 degrees all year, and the resorts have gone up a notch in the last few years. All-inclusive holidays here tend to be cheaper than the Canaries, and people are realising that it’s an exotic destination, but without a long-haul flight. In recent years, we’ve seen Agadir popping up as a real contender to the usual winter sun destinations. This year it’s gone up again. You can expect to see more deals like this one in 2026. Seven nights in Agadir, all-inclusive package with flights, just 370 quid per person. It’s a no-brainer.

Rob’s top spot goes to Egypt, reports the Express. He said: “I feel like I bang on about Egypt, but it’s had one of the biggest glow-ups in years. Sharm El-Sheikh and Hurghada genuinely have world-class hotels now, proper five-star resorts with stunning views of the Red Sea, and unbeatable weather all year round. The beaches and the diving and the all-inclusives are unmatched at its price. And I think 2026 is the year that Egypt becomes the luxury destination without the long-haul flight. And here’s why. Five-star all-inclusive in June 2026 for seven nights is just £412 per person.

“So that’s my five to watch for 2026. Porto, Seville, Bulgaria, Agadir and Egypt. Each one of them has seen a big surge already, and each one of them offers something different to people.”

The video racked up over 300k views and thousands of likes. One viewer replied: “Agadir in November was gorgeous! Just chilly on evenings.”

Another commenter thought: “Seville is so beautiful and underrated. Great food spots and amazing things to do. Just don’t go in June you will be cooked in the heat.”



Source link

Contributor: Left and right have united in favor of puerile, violent rhetoric

In recent weeks, American politics have stopped resembling a democracy and started looking more like a Manson family group chat, with a flag emoji right next to the “pile of poo” emoji in our bio.

First it was the Young Republicans (you know, the nerds who used to wear ill-fitting sports jackets and drone on about budgets) who were caught on Telegram saying things such as “I love Hitler,” calling Black people “watermelon people,” and joking about gas chambers and rape. Hilarious, right?

Then came Paul Ingrassia, Trump’s now-aborted nominee to head the Office of Special Counsel, who texted that he has “a Nazi streak” and that Martin Luther King Jr. Day belongs in “the seventh circle of hell.

But the moral rot isn’t exclusive to Republicans. Not to be outdone, Democrat Jay Jones (who is currently running for attorney general in Virginia) was caught with texts from 2022 saying another Virginia lawmaker should get “two bullets to the head,” and that he wished the man’s children would “die in their mother’s arms.”

Charming.

Meanwhile, in Maine’s race for the U.S. Senate, old posts on Reddit reveal that Democrat Graham Platner — oysterman, veteran and self-described communist — said that if people “expect to fight fascism without a good semi-automatic rifle, they ought to do some reading of history.”

Did I mention that he called police officers “bastards,” broadly criticized rural white folks and had a tattoo on his chest that resembled Nazi imagery?

What we are witnessing is a trend: Bipartisan moral collapse. Finally, something the two parties can agree on!

Keep in mind, these are not randos typing away in their parents’ basements. These are ambitious young politicos. Candidates. Operatives. The ones who are supposed to know better.

So what’s going on? I have a few theories.

One: Nothing has really changed. Political insiders have always done and said stupid, racist and cruel things — the difference is that privacy doesn’t exist anymore. Every joke is public, and every opinion is archived.

It might be hard for older generations to understand, but this theory says these people are merely guilty of using the kind of dark-web humor that’s supposed to stay on, well, the dark web. What happened to them is the equivalent of thinking you’re with friends at a karaoke bar, when you’re actually on C-SPAN.

For those of us trying to discern the difference, the problem is that the line between joking and confession has gotten so blurry that we can’t tell who’s trolling and who’s armed.

Two: Blame Trump. He destroyed norms and mainstreamed vulgarity and violent rhetoric. And since he’s been the dominant political force for a decade, it’s only logical that his style would trickle down and corrupt a whole generation of politically engaged Americans (Republicans who want to be like him and Democrats who want to fight fire with fire).

Three (and this is the scary one): Maybe the culture really has changed, and these violent and racist comments are revelatory of changing hearts and worldviews. Maybe younger generations have radicalized, and violence is increasingly viewed as a necessary tool for political change. Maybe their words are sincere.

Indeed, several recent surveys have demonstrated that members of Gen Z are more open to the use of political violence than previous generations.

According to a survey conducted by the group FIRE, only 1 in 3 college students now say it is unacceptable to use violence to stop a speaker. And according to the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, “53 percent of those aged 18-34 – approve of one or more forms of hostile activism to bring about change.” This includes “threatening or committing violence, and damaging public or private property.”

Of course, it’s possible (and probably likely) that some combination of these theories has conspired to create this trend. And it comes on the heels of other trends, too, including the loss of trust in institutions that began somewhere around the Nixon administration and never reversed.

Put it all together, and we’ve arrived at a point where we don’t believe in democracy, we don’t believe in leaders, and we barely believe in each other. And once you lose trust, all that’s left is anger, memes and a primal will to power.

Worse, we’ve become numb. Every new scandal shocks us for approximately 15 minutes. Then we scroll to another cat video and get used to it.

Remember the Charlie Kirk assassination? You know, the gruesome murder that freaked us all out and led to a national discussion about political violence and violent rhetoric? Yeah, that was just last month. Feels like it was back in the Eisenhower administration.

We’re basically frogs in a pot of boiling political sewage. And the scariest part? We’re starting to call it room temperature.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Source link

Trust Co Goes Big on Bonds With $15 Million BND Buy

Trust Co disclosed the purchase of 209,679 additional shares of Vanguard Bond Index Funds – Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF, estimated at $15.44 million (rounded from $15,439,353), in its SEC filing for the period ended September 30, 2025, submitted on October 6, 2025.

What happened

According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated October 06, 2025, Trust Co increased its stake in Vanguard Bond Index Funds – Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF(BND 0.40%) by 209,679 shares during the quarter. The estimated value of shares acquired is $15.44 million, based on the average price for the period.

What else to know

The fund added to its BND position, which now represents 7.0660% of reportable assets under management.

Top holdings following the filing:

  • SHV: $84,464,498 (8.6% of AUM)
  • BND: $69.08 million (7.1% of AUM)
  • AGG: $66.39 million (6.8% of AUM)
  • VUG: $62,950,365 (6.4% of AUM)
  • VTV: $59,005,900 (6.0% of AUM)

BND’s trailing twelve-month dividend yield was 3.79% as of October 6, 2025.

Company overview

Metric Value
AUM N/A
Dividend Yield 3.79%
Price (as of market close October 3, 2025) $74.31
1-Year Price Change (0.44%)

Company snapshot

Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) tracks the performance of the broad U.S. investment-grade taxable bond market through a passively managed, index-sampling strategy.

Its portfolio includes U.S. government, corporate, mortgage-backed, and asset-backed securities with maturities over one year, providing diversified fixed income exposure.

The fund serves institutional and retail investors seeking broad, low-cost exposure to the U.S. bond market.

Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) is one of the largest fixed income ETFs, offering investors comprehensive access to the U.S. investment-grade bond universe.

Foolish take

Trust Co added $15.4 million worth of Vanguard Bond Index Funds – Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF. This addition increased it position to roughly 7% of total AUM, showing meaningful exposure.

As one of the largest bond ETFS, BND gives investors a one-stop exposure to the U.S bond market, spanning Treasuries, corporate bonds and mortgage backed securities. It is often used as a foundation for income-oriented portfolios that value stability and diversification.

The renewed demand for broad funds like BND reflects a shift from several years of stock-heavy market leadership. With interest rates still elevated, investors are finding value in locking in higher bond yields while they last. That makes funds like BND appealing again to both institutional and individual investors looking for steady returns.

For long term investors, adding BND can steady a portfolio while still collecting a reliable income stream. Its stability and diversification make it a solid foundation for any balanced portfolio.

Glossary

13F reportable assets:Assets that institutional investment managers must disclose quarterly to the SEC if they exceed $100 million.

AUM (Assets Under Management):The total market value of assets an investment manager handles on behalf of clients.

ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund):A fund that trades on stock exchanges and holds a diversified portfolio of securities.

Dividend yield:Annual dividends paid by an investment, expressed as a percentage of its current price.

Trailing twelve-month (TTM) dividend yield:Dividend yield calculated using dividends paid over the last twelve months.

Index-sampling strategy:A method where a fund holds a representative sample of securities from an index, not every component.

Investment-grade:Bonds rated as relatively low risk of default by credit rating agencies.

Fixed income:Investment securities that pay regular interest, such as bonds, providing predictable income streams.

Mortgage-backed securities:Bonds secured by a pool of mortgages, with payments passed through to investors.

Asset-backed securities:Bonds backed by pools of assets like loans, leases, or receivables, rather than mortgages.

Passively managed:An investment approach aiming to replicate the performance of a market index, with minimal trading.

Stake:The total ownership or holding an investor has in a particular security or fund.

Source link

Frustrated lawmakers say lack of trust is making it harder to end the government shutdown

A president looking to seize power beyond the executive branch. A Congress controlled by Republican lawmakers unwilling to directly defy him. And a minority party looking for any way to fight back.

The dynamic left Washington in a stalemate Thursday — the ninth day of the government shutdown — and lawmakers openly venting their frustration as they tried to gain traction without the trust that is typically the foundation of any bipartisan deal.

“To have good-faith conversations, you have to have trust. There’s a real challenge of trust,” said Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the New Democratic Coalition, a pragmatic group of House Democrats.

Groups of lawmakers — huddled over dinners, on phone calls, and in private meetings — have tried to brainstorm ways out of the standoff that has shuttered government offices, kept hundreds of thousands of federal employees at home and threatened to leave them without a scheduled payday. But lawmakers have found themselves running up against the reality that the relationship between the two parties is badly broken.

The frustration was evident this week as House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, on separate occasions, engaged in tense exchanges in the Capitol hallways with members of the opposing party.

“We’re in an environment where we need more than a handshake,” said Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat who has engaged in talks with Republicans.

President Trump and Republicans have so far held to the stance that they will only negotiate on Democratic demands around health care benefits after they vote to reopen the government. They also say Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer is beholden to the left wing of his party and only staging the shutdown fight to stave off a primary challenge.

Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Punchbowl News in an interview that Democrats were winning the shutdown fight, saying, “Every day gets better for us.”

Republicans quickly seized on those comments, arguing it showed that Schumer is approaching the shutdown with purely political motives.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune stood on the Senate floor flanked by a poster printed with Schumer’s words.

“This isn’t a political game. Democrats might feel that way, but I don’t know anybody else that does,” said Thune, a South Dakota Republican. “The longer this goes on, the more the American people realize that Democrats own this shutdown.”

Schumer, in his own floor speech, responded that it was Trump and Republicans who are “playing with people’s lives.”

“Every day that Republicans refuse to negotiate to end this shutdown, the worse it gets for Americans and the clearer it becomes who is fighting for them,” said the New York senator.

When a handshake deal is not enough

Democrats have insisted they can’t take Trump at his word and therefore need more than a verbal commitment for any deal.

Conflicts over spending power had already been raging before the shutdown as the White House pushed to assert maximum power over congressionally approved budgets. The White House budget office had canceled scores of government contracts, including cutting out the legislative branch entirely with a $4.9 billion cut to foreign aid in August through a legally dubious process known as a “pocket rescission.”

That enraged Democrats — and disturbed some Republicans who criticized it as executive overreach.

“I hate rescissions, to be honest with you, unless they’re congressionally approved,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican.

Matt Glassman, a fellow at the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University, said the president’s use of rescissions was “blowing up the underlying dynamic of the bargaining” because it inserts intense partisanship into the budget appropriations process that otherwise requires compromise, particularly in the Senate.

Then, as the government entered a shutdown, Trump’s budget director Russ Vought laid out arguments that the president would have even more power to lay off workers and even cancel pay due to furloughed federal workers once the funding lapse is solved. Vought has also announced that the administration was withholding billions of dollars for infrastructure projects in states with Democratic senators who have voted for the shutdown.

Trump has cast Vought’s actions as the consequences of Democratic obstruction, even sharing a video that depicted him as the grim reaper. But on Capitol Hill, there has been an acknowledgment that the hardball tactics are making it harder to negotiate.

“I think with senators, carrots work better than sticks,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican.

One Democratic idea may win GOP support

Before they vote to reopen the government, Democrats’ main demand is that Congress take up an extension of tax credits for health plans offered on Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Trump has sounded open to a deal, saying that he wants “great health care” for Americans.

What’s received less attention is that Democrats also want new safeguards in the law limiting the White House’s ability to claw back, or rescind, funding already approved by Congress. While final appropriations bills are still being worked out, Republicans have been open to the idea.

“When you end the shutdown and get back to regular order within the appropriations bills, there’s very clear language about how we feel about rescissions,” said Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “I think you’ll find hard, solid support from Republicans to see that what we agree to will be executed on.”

In the meantime, the main sticking point for lawmakers this week has been finding any agreement on extending the health care subsidies.

The consequences of an extended shutdown

As the shutdown drags on without sign of significant progress to ending the impasse, lawmakers are looking ahead to the dates when federal employees will miss a payday.

Active-duty military troops would miss a paycheck on Oct. 15. Some lawmakers are getting nervous about both the financial implications for the troops and the political blowback of allowing soldiers to go without pay.

As House Speaker Mike Johnson fielded questions on C-SPAN Thursday morning, one caller pleaded with him to pass legislation that would allow the military to get paid during the government shutdown.

The woman, identified as Samantha, said her husband serves in the military and that they “live paycheck to paycheck.”

She pleaded with Johnson to call the House back to Washington, saying, “You could stop this.”

Johnson said he was sorry to hear about her situation, blamed Democrats for refusing to pass a stop-gap spending bill and added, “I am angry because of situations just like yours.”

Groves, Jalonick and Brown write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro, Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

Source link

Where Will iShares Ethereum Trust ETF Be in 5 Years?

Wondering where Ethereum and its ETFs are headed? Here’s what the five-year roadmap says about fees, network speed, global adoption, and investor value.

You know what Yoda would say if you asked him what Ethereum (ETH -4.29%) will do in the next five years: “Difficult to see. Always in motion, the crypto market is.” As always, the Jedi master would be absolutely right.

And if you changed your focus to an exchange-traded fund (ETF), like the sector-leading iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA -5.28%), he’d just shake his head and take a nap. Whatever Ethereum might do, the iShares fund will copy in detail. It doesn’t make sense to analyze the cryptocurrency and the ETF separately. Right?

Then again, Yoda couldn’t have foreseen cryptocurrencies — and the first ETF was launched years after his passing. I still agree that nobody knows everything that will happen to these assets by the year 2030, but I do have some clues to Ethereum’s general direction, and the ETF deserves another layer of analysis.

What Vitalik Buterin wants to build by 2030

At an Ethereum developers conference in September, the keynote from founder Vitalik Buterin provided a helpful overview of what’s happening in this cryptocurrency over the next few years.

Users and app developers will see lower usage fees and faster execution of Ethereum’s smart contracts. More to the point, the underlying global computer network will continue to grow more scalable, ultimately able to handle massive workloads without blinking.

The scaling effort isn’t limited to pure Ethereum upgrades. It also involves several Layer-2 (L2) blockchains that accelerate the central Ethereum network’s performance. Importantly, it should eventually be easy to move data and app links from one L2 platform to another. Today, leading L2 systems like Arbitrum and Optimism are fast on their own, but difficult to use together. That separation is up for change.

As a result, the overall user experience should grow smoother. The end goal is to make Ethereum-based apps just as common and natural as the Java, Python, and C# apps you’re using today. If none of those programming language names meant anything to you, that proves my point about the user-friendly experience. That’s what the Ethereum community wants to build someday: a platform you’re using all the time without knowing or caring about it.

And for those who do care about the technical guts, Buterin envisions a more decentralized Ethereum network with lower hardware requirements for running a node. This goal only matters to Ethereum’s insiders — except that more decentralization will ultimately support a better user experience. When your next Ethereum transaction can be verified by laptops and smartphones, you’re looking at a pretty slick Ethereum experience.

A large pile of gold coins with the Ethereum logo.

Image source: Getty Images.

Transaction fees are where the money is

I can boil the user-oriented improvements down to an investment thesis. Five years from now, Ethereum will be much more powerful and easier to use, to the point where most people might interact with it every day, and it’s no big deal. The actual large-scale adoption may take longer, but the technical platform will be there by 2030.

And that’s where Ethereum starts to build real value for its investors — more usage equals higher prices.

Remember, this cryptocurrency isn’t designed to preserve wealth in a secure asset with strictly limited supply. That would be Bitcoin. Instead, its blockchain ledger holds transactions used in real-world apps. Its ledger and smart contracts can manage financial accounts, hold ownership records for virtual or physical assets, and generally provide the digital data connections needed to run a modern application on a global scale.

Each transaction generates a tiny fee, adding value to the Ethereum coin. Widespread adoption of Ethereum’s tools should generate massive growth in the generation of these fees.

That’s exactly what the user-focused platform upgrades are meant to do over time.

So I won’t put a firm price target on Ethereum in 2030, but I do expect it to gain value. Anything less would be a massive failure of the Ethereum vision, the Web3 concept, and modern data management in general.

Why the ETF wrapper actually matters

And the ETF structure really can change how investors approach Ethereum:

  • The iShares Ethereum Trust ETF behaves much like any other stock or ETF. You can buy it through your stock brokerage and hold it in your regular portfolio, even if it’s a tax-advantaged retirement account like an IRA. You can’t do that with a raw Ethereum coin (yet, anyway).

  • The ETF structure is wrapped in extra layers of regulation, making institutional investors and billionaires more comfortable with the cryptocurrency.

  • Just like Ethereum itself, the ETFs can add new features over time. For example, the Grayscale Ethereum Trust (ETHE -5.30%) just enabled staking of its Ethereum holdings. That’s a dividend-like 3% annual return that didn’t exist last week. These innovations can help one ETF steal market share from its peers.

Five years from now, I expect a juicier price tag on Ethereum coins as the underlying technology slowly becomes a normal (and often ignored) part of everyday life. The iShares Ethereum Trust ETF will largely follow along, providing a more convenient buying system for traditional investors — and perhaps a couple of new features along the way. How long will it take before all the Ethereum ETFs come with dividend-style staking enabled?

Crypto is “always in motion,” but now you can tell Yoda where Ethereum and its ETFs are going in five years. The destination is more real-world usage and higher value, all wrapped in a handy ETF if you prefer.

Anders Bylund has positions in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and iShares Ethereum Trust – iShares Ethereum Trust ETF. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin and Ethereum. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Tyler Glasnow, Roki Sasaki showcase Dodgers’ NLDS pitching depth

The Dodgers spent more than $125 million on their bullpen last winter. But when they needed relief late in Game 1 of the National League Division Series on Saturday, they turned to a couple of starters who spent much of the season on the injury list.

And it worked out — though just barely — with Tyler Glasnow and Roki Sasaki combining for eight of the final nine outs in a 5-3 victory over the Philadelphia Phillies.

Alex Vesia got the other out, retiring pinch-hitter Edmundo Sosa on a fly ball to center with the bases loaded to end the eighth. Sasaki then came on to close it out in the ninth, getting Bryson Stott, representing the tying run, to pop up in foul territory behind third base to end the game.

“What Glas did tonight, it’s not easy to do. And so for him to give us the innings he gave us tonight was huge,” third baseman Max Muncy said.

The four pitchers the Dodgers used all spent time away from the mound this season.

Starter Shohei Ohtani, who didn’t pitch at all last season, didn’t pitch until June and hadn’t thrown past the fifth inning until his final regular-season start. He went six innings against the Phillies, giving up three runs and three hits and striking out nine.

Glasnow missed more than two months with shoulder inflammation and other issues. Sasaki went to the sideline in early May with a right shoulder impingement and wasn’t reactivated until the final week of the season — as a reliever. Even Vesia missed a couple of weeks with an oblique strain.

But they were all ready for the start of the NDLS. Well, kind of — Glasnow said he was in the bathroom when the call came down for him to start warming up.

“The phone rang and they yelled my name,” he said. “Here we go. It definitely felt weird, but fun. [With the] adrenaline, there’s not as much effort to get the same stuff and [get] warmed up.”

When Glasnow first began throwing the Dodgers trailed 3-2. But by the time he entered the game they were front 5-3 on Teoscar Hernández’s three-run homer. So his assignment changed from keeping his team close to protecting a lead.

“For them to trust me to go out there and throw some big innings, it was awesome,” Glasnow said.

His first inning, the seventh, went pretty well, with Glasnow setting down the side in order. The first batter, J.T. Realmuto, reached on an error, but he was erased on a double play.

The eighth didn’t go as well. Trea Turner walked with one out, and although manager Dave Roberts had Vesia, a left-hander, in the bullpen, the right-handed Glasnow was allowed to face lefty sluggers Kyle Schwarber and Bryce Harper.

He struck out Schwarber on three pitches, but Harper singled to right. So when Alec Bohm walked to load the bases, Roberts finally called in Vesia, who got Sosa to pop out, ending the threat.

“The coaches put the trust in him and he just kept telling me, ‘You’re driving me. Just tell me what to do’,” catcher Will Smith said of guiding Glasnow through his first relief appearance since 2018. “He’s put trust in me and I put trust in him. And it worked out tonight.”

Dodgers pitcher Roki Sasaki celebrates after the final out of a 5-3 win over the Phillies on Saturday.

Dodgers pitcher Roki Sasaki celebrates after the final out of a 5-3 win over the Phillies on Saturday.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

It worked out because Sasaki came out of the bullpen throwing gas, topping 99 mph on seven of his 11 pitches, including the final one, which hit 100. Sasaki, who earned the save, also pitched the final inning of the wild-card series against the Cincinnati Reds and has thrown two scoreless innings, striking out three.

In fact, three pitchers who spent most of the season as starters — Emmet Sheehan, Glasnow and Sasaki — have combined to throw more innings out of the bullpen in the playoffs than the Dodgers’ regular relievers. That wasn’t the way the front office drew it up when they spent wildly on the bullpen over the winter. But it’s working.

“One real strength of this roster is our starting pitching,” Andrew Friedman, the Dodgers’ president of baseball operations, said before the game. “It speaks to that depth. Those guys are really talented.

“And I can see it factoring in and helping us.”

It already has.

Source link

Want to protect officers — and our democracy? Ban masks

If you thought Jimmy Kimmel saved free speech, think again.

To hear President Trump tell it, no one, especially law enforcement officers, is safe from the dangers caused by opposing his policies — and he’s ready to do something about it.

“This political violence is not a series of isolated incidents and does not emerge organically,” Trump wrote in a new executive order. “A new law enforcement strategy that investigates all participants in these criminal and terroristic conspiracies — including the organized structures, networks, entities, organizations, funding sources, and predicate actions behind them — is required.”

Of course, despite his menacing tone, I agree with Trump that politically motivated violence against law enforcement — or anyone, be it Charlie Kirk or immigrant detainees — is reprehensible and completely unacceptable.

The deadly shooting in Dallas this week, which Trump referred to in the order, is a tragedy and any political violence should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the many laws on the books that protect our public servants, and the public at large.

But criticizing government overreach is not inciting violence, and calls for Democrats to stop attacking Trump’s policies are just calls to silence dissent — one more attack on free speech at a moment when it’s clear this administration is intent on demolishing opposition.

If we are serious about preventing further political violence, trust in our justice system must be a priority. And you know what’s really eroding trust? Scary masked agents on our streets who refuse to even say what agency they work for.

In recent days, about 6,700 federal workers from agencies outside of ICE have been pulled into its immigration mission, according to the non-partisan Niskanen Center.

The anxiety brought on by an unaccountable and unknowable federal force, one that is expected to grow by thousands in coming years, is what is raising the temperature in American politics far more than the words from either side, though I am not here to argue that words don’t have power.

Ending the fear that our justice system is devolving into secrecy and lawlessness will reduce tension, and the potential for violence. Want to protect officers — and our democracy?

Ban masks.

“Listen, I understand that it being a law enforcement officer is scary,” former Capitol police officer Harry Dunn told me Wednesday during a press event for the immigration organization America’s Voice.

Dunn was attacked, beaten and called racial slurs during the political violence on Jan. 6, 2021.

“Nobody ever signed up to be harassed, to be targeted. That should never happen,” he said.

But Dunn said he’d never don a mask, because it harms that public trust, that mission to serve and protect.

When officers cover their faces and demand to be nameless and faceless, “They are terrorizing … with something just as simple as a mask,” he said.

Which is why California just passed a law attempting to ban such masks, effective next year — though it will likely be challenged in court, and federal authorities have already said they will ignore it.

“We’re not North Korea, Mr. President. We’re not the Soviet Union. This is the United States of America, and I’m really proud of the state of California and our state of mind that we’re pushing back against these authoritarian tendencies and actions of this administration,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom before signing the bill.

The argument in favor of masks is that some officers are afraid to do their jobs without them, fearing they or their families will be identified and targeted. The Department of Homeland security claims that assaults on officers are up 1,000%, though it’s unclear what data produced that figure.

“Every time I’m in a room with our law enforcement officers, I’m talking to them before they go out on our streets, I’m just overwhelmed by the fact that all of these young men and women have families that they all want to go home to,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said. “(P)eople like Gavin Newsom are making it much more dangerous for them just to go do their job.”

Federal immigration authorities are not required by their agencies to wear masks. Not ski masks, not balaclavas, not even medical masks — which many officers refused to don even during the pandemic.

Like the choice to become a federal law enforcement officer, hiding their identity while doing their duty is a personal decision. Some agents aren’t masked. There is no rule to bring clarity, only leaders pushing the false narrative that protecting officers is impossible at this moment of unrest, and they must do what they see fit to protect themselves.

Which raises the question, why not help all officers feel safe enough to go unmasked, rather than allowing some to work in a fearful environment? Surely, if some officers feel safe enough to go about their duties in a regular fashion, there must be something their leaders can do to promote that sense of strength among the ranks rather than cave to the timidity of anonymity and helplessness?

“Things can be done,” Gabriel Chin told me. He’s a professor of law at UC Davis and an expert on criminal procedure.

“The nice thing about being a law enforcement officer is if somebody does something illegal to you, you have the resources to investigate and have them criminally charged,” Chin said. “But you know, this kind of thing has happened to judges and police and prosecutors, apart from ICE, for some years, unfortunately, and yet we don’t have masked judges and masked prosecutors.”

In 2020, for example, the son of New Jersey judge Esther Salas was shot and killed by a self-described men’s rights lawyer who came to her front door and had a list of other judges in his car.

Salas did not respond by demanding judges become faceless. Instead, she successfully lobbied for greater protection of all judges nationwide.

U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, a Republican-appointee who was the first to block Trump’s executive order axing birthright citizenship, has spoken publicly, along with five other federal judges, about continuing threats facing his brethren, including both a recent “swatting” incident and a bomb threat against him and his family.

“It’s just been stunning to me how much damage has been done to the reputation of our judiciary because some political actors think that they can gain some advantage by attacking the independence of the judiciary and threatening the rule of law,” he told Reuters — an attack coming from the right.

Speaking at the same event, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island said that like many other judges, he’s been harassed with pizzas being sent to his home address — including “one in the name of Daniel Anderl,” Reuters reported. That’s the name of Salas’ murdered son.

Just this week, a Santa Monica man was arrested and charged with doxxing an ICE lawyer.

But McConnell’s face is still visible when he takes the bench, as is Coughenour’s and every other judge and prosecutor. They face those who come before them for justice, because that is what justice requires.

What ultimately keeps them — and our system — safe is our collective belief that, even if imperfect, it has rules, stated and implied.

The most basic of these is that we face each other, even if we are afraid.

Source link

It’s more than Justin Herbert. Chargers receivers poised for big season

The Chargers embracing an opposite approach in play-calling — moving away from a run-heavy philosophy — left many bemused during their season-opening win over the Kansas City Chiefs in Brazil.

Justin Herbert was given free rein to showcase his arm, firing pass after pass against the defending AFC champions. This approach hinged on trust; not necessarily in Herbert’s ability, but in his receivers’ capabilities.

“It’s all about having a clear mind and trust,” Quentin Johnston said. “Trusting the play call, and then trusting yourself to get open. Trusting Justin that the ball will be in the right place when you get open.”

A byproduct of learning a new system last year, with young receivers thrust into pivotal roles, Herbert and his wideouts looked out of sync at times, whether from a lack of trust, chemistry or rhythm.

With Week 1 as a litmus test, the dynamic looked much improved, thanks to another year of bonding with Johnston and Ladd McConkey and the added reliability of a returning Keenan Allen.

“We were all really close last year and bonded well, so this is just a continuation,” McConkey said. “We know the offense. We have a year under our belt with it, and now we can play more freely, be ourselves.”

A group of “regular guys,” as McConkey puts it, the bond has only grown stronger as the connection off the field has grown through beach volleyball sets, casual board game sessions and rounds of golf.

“Everybody comes in with a positive attitude,” Johnston said. “Never a dull moment with us. Always in the meeting room, just bouncing ideas off each other. I’m having fun on the field, between plays, cracking jokes.”

Chargers wide receiver Keenan Allen celebrates with Ladd McConkey and Quentin Johnston.

Chargers wide receiver Keenan Allen, right, celebrates with Ladd McConkey, center, and Quentin Johnston after making a touchdown catch against the Chiefs on Sept. 5.

(Buda Mendes / Getty Images)

That camaraderie has been most vivid in times of adversity.

As a rookie in 2023, Johnston was a lightning rod for ridicule on social media for his inconsistent performances — particularly drops — with many expecting more from a former first-round pick.

But after making two touchdown catches in the best prime-time performance of his three-year career in Brazil, Johnston was showered with positivity.

Herbert called Johnston a “special player” and would continue to “find ways to get him the ball, because good things happen.” McConkey added that “there’s nobody better” when Johnston is playing with confidence.

“First thing that jumps into my mind is, ‘In your face,’” said coach Jim Harbaugh, referring to Johnston’s critics. “If I were Quentin, that’s what I’d be saying, so allow me to say it for him.”

Chargers wide receiver Quentin Johnston (1) celebrates with Ladd McConkey (15) and Omarion Hampton.

Chargers wide receiver Quentin Johnston (1) celebrates with Ladd McConkey (15) and Omarion Hampton after scoring a touchdown against the Chiefs on Sept. 5.

(Buda Mendes / Getty Images)

For Johnston, support from Harbaugh and his teammates means everything to him.

“These are the guys I come to work with, and go to war with every day. So to have the main dude on the team just be there, always uplift me, it feels good.”

With Johnston, McConkey and Allen, Herbert has a formidable arsenal. The trio were targeted on 26 of his 34 pass attempts and they combined for 221 yards and three touchdowns on 20 receptions.

“Those guys, especially on third down, they came in clutch,” Herbert said. “To have Q, Ladd, Keenan, those guys make plays on third down. It’s only going to help our offense.”

When the Chargers needed an opening-drive score, Johnston hauled in a pass in the back of the end zone. With the offense looking to extend the lead before the half, McConkey made an acrobatic first-down catch. And when they needed to sustain a crucial fourth-quarter drive, Allen picked up just enough yardage to keep it alive after just scoring one of his own.

All on third down.

For Allen, clutch execution has become expected, even at 33. All-Pro safety Derwin James Jr. coined the phrase “Third and Keenan,” a standout soundbite from James’ mic’d-up audio during the game.

“I was trying to express to them [the young guys] what it means having a guy like that,” James said.

From what James saw during the opener, the phrase could extend beyond Allen: “It can be ‘Third and Ladd too.’ You want to double Keenan, Ladd’s gonna do the same thing.”

With a decade more experience than the next-longest-tenured wideout, Allen has been a well of knowledge.

“He’s made a big difference,” Johnston said. “He’s a Chargers legend. So, having a guy like that to look up to and bounce ideas off is always good.”

As the group continues to feed off each other, Allen gave high praise to what could be his final receiving corps.

“I’ve been in some solid receiver rooms — this one’s right up there,” Allen said.

Source link

Digital Realty Trust: A Cautionary Tale in the AI Boom

Explore the exciting world of Digital Realty Trust (NYSE: DLR) with our contributing expert analysts in this Motley Fool Scoreboard episode. Check out the video below to gain valuable insights into market trends and potential investment opportunities!

*Stock prices used were the prices of Aug. 13, 2025. The video was published on Sep. 10, 2025.

Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »

Should you invest $1,000 in Digital Realty Trust right now?

Before you buy stock in Digital Realty Trust, consider this:

The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Digital Realty Trust wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $670,781!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,023,752!*

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,052% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the 10 stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of September 8, 2025

Anand Chokkavelu, CFA has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Jason Hall has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Tyler Crowe has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Digital Realty Trust. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Fox Corp. CEO and favored son Lachlan Murdoch prevails in family succession drama

The closely watched Murdoch succession drama has ended with a $3.3-billion settlement that gives Lachlan Murdoch control of the family’s influential media assets, including Fox News, the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal.

Fox Corp. on Monday announced the “mutual resolution” of the legal wrangling that had clouded the future direction of the television company and the Murdoch-controlled publishing firm News Corp. The dollar figure was confirmed by a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly.

The succession dispute flared into public view last year after three of Murdoch’s children attempted to block proposed changes that patriarch Rupert Murdoch wanted to make to his trust to cement his oldest son Lachlan’s grip on power. In December, a Nevada probate commissioner rejected Rupert Murdoch’s request to amend his trust amid the opposition by his three adult children.

The 94-year-old mogul wanted to ensure the conservative leanings of his media empire would carry on and felt that Lachlan Murdoch, who serves as chairman and chief executive of Fox, was the most ideologically compatible with his own point of view.

Until now, Rupert’s four oldest children — Prudence MacLeod, Elisabeth Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch and James Murdoch — were set to jointly inherit control of the businesses. But, as part of the settlement, Prudence, Elisabeth and James agreed to relinquish their shares in the family trust and give up any roles going forward.

Two new trusts will be established. One will benefit Lachlan Murdoch and Rupert Murdoch’s two youngest daughters, Chloe and Grace Murdoch, who were born during his union with ex-wife Wendi Deng.

The second trust will benefit Prudence, Elisabeth, James and their descendants. Fox Corp. separately announced a public offering of 16.9 million shares of Fox Corp. stock, currently held by the Murdoch Family Trust.

Those proceeds, along with the sale of 14.2 million shares of publishing company News Corp.’s Class B common stock, will fund the new trust.

Fox said Monday that voting control of the Fox and News Corp. shares held by this trust “will rest solely with Lachlan Murdoch through his appointed managing director” through 2050.

“Fox’s board of directors welcomes these developments and believes that the leadership, vision and management by the Company’s CEO and Executive Chair, Lachlan Murdoch, will continue to be important to guiding the Company’s strategy and success,” the board said in a statement.

Fox said it is not selling any of its stock.

The family will sell nonvoting Class B shares and hold on to its voting shares — and control. Rupert Murdoch will remain the company’s chairman emeritus.

During a six-month period following the stock sales, James, Prudence and Elisabeth will be expected to “sell their de minimis personal holdings in FOX and News Corp.” to severe all ties with the companies.

Source link

If You’d Invested $1,000 in the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) 10 Years Ago, Here’s How Much You’d Have Today

The tech-heavy ETF has been a lucrative investment over the past decade.

One of the most popular exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on the stock market is the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ 0.70%). It mirrors the Nasdaq-100, an index that tracks the 100 largest companies on the Nasdaq stock exchange (excluding financial names such as banks and insurance companies). It is the second-most traded ETF in the U.S. based on average daily volume.

Over the past decade, QQQ has also been one of the best ETFs for investors to hold. Had you put $1,000 in the ETF 10 years ago (using Aug. 25, 2015, as the starting point), it would be worth over $5,800 today. And if you include dividends paid out during that time, the investment would be worth over $6,200.

QQQ Chart

Data by YCharts.

What could the next 10 years look like for QQQ?

The QQQ is a tech-heavy ETF (the sector makes up over 60% of the fund), so as the industry goes, so does the fund. This has worked in its favor so far, but will that be the case going forward? I believe so as the technology sector still has some of the most compelling growth opportunities across the entire economy.

The one making the most headlines right now is artificial intelligence (AI) and its potential to help companies across every industry increase their efficiency. Other opportunities that will drive tech sector growth over the next decade include cloud computing, cybersecurity, and digital advertising.

With companies like Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Meta Platforms leading the way, the QQQ is in good hands for the foreseeable future.

Stefon Walters has positions in Apple and Microsoft. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Navy Fighter Pilots Need To Gain Trust In Pilotless Wingmen By Actually Flying With Them

Naval aviators need to be able to trust any future drone wingmen as much as their human counterparts, a U.S. Navy strike fighter tactics instructor has told TWZ. This echoes past comments from members of the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Marine Corps, and is set to be a critical factor in turning the Navy’s still very nascent and evolving crewed-uncrewed teaming vision into a reality.

Navy Lt. Cdr. Mark “Tugboat” Jbeily talked about ‘loyal wingman’ type drones, now commonly called Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), and crewed-uncrewed teaming, and how they factor into his service’s plans for future carrier air wings, with our Jamie Hunter at the Tailhook Association’s annual symposium today. Jbeily is a career F/A-18 pilot and TOPGUN graduate currently assigned as an instructor to the Strike Fighter Weapons School, Pacific (SFWSPAC) at Naval Air Station Lemoore in California.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet takes off from Naval Air Station Lemoore. USN

“I think, currently, we’re [the Navy] still figuring out exactly what the specific type of [CCA] platform is going to look like, how it’s going to integrate into the air wing, [and] how we’re going to use it for maximal advantage,” Jbeily explained. “But I think some common themes … are going to be consistent regardless of the specific platform, range, vendor, whatever it is.”

“You know, the wings on your chest are a sign of trust, ultimately, right? They represent that you’ve been through an established training pipeline. You’re going to behave in a predictable manner, in a standardized manner. We can trust you with this awesome power of an F-18 or F-35,” he continued. “How do we take that concept of trust and now bring it to collaborative autonomy, or manned-unmanned teaming? How do we train to get them comfortable so, in the same way that if you and I were flying, if you were my wingman, I would know you’re going to behave in a repeatable, consistent [manner]?”

“I can have insight on your behaviors. We can do a thorough debrief about why did you do this or why did you do that?” Jbeily added. “And the key, I think, is going to be, regardless of the specific platform, how do we build that element of trust, and how do we get folks comfortable to be able to use it in a combat scenario if we have to.”

The video below from Collins Aerospace offers a vision of what a future conflict involving U.S. CCAs, including ones launched from carriers, teamed up with crewed fighters might look like.

When it comes to advanced autonomous capabilities, whether they be integrated into drone wingman or another platform, the essential need for trust has now been a common refrain from members of the U.S. military for years. This trust will be just as critical during routine training and other day-to-day activities involving crewed-uncrewed teams as it will be during any future combat scenario, for exactly the kinds of reasons that Lt. Cdr. Jbeily cited today.

At a separate conference earlier this year, a U.S. Marine Corps aviation officer highlighted how just making sure that CCA-type drones do not collide with their crewed companions remains a challenge. TWZ noted at the time that this underscored the many basic problems still to be solved before CCAs can be regularly deployed, launched, recovered, supported, and otherwise operated at all, let alone employed tactically.

In speaking with TWZ today, Lt. Cdr. Jbeily further talked about how CCAs could be incorporated in training in the future using what are called live, virtual, constructive (LVC) concepts. As the name indicates, LVC training blends together real and simulated elements in real-world and virtualized settings using a mixture of systems networked together, as you can read about in more detail here. LVC concepts are already regularly used as part of research, development, test, and evaluation activities related to advanced uncrewed capabilities. In line with his comments on trust, Jbeily put particular emphasis on the need for the live component.

“We already, within the Navy, have an established process of, if you take, for example, live-fires for missiles, air-to-air missiles, folks will go down to our test and evaluation ranges and actually live employ a real missile against some sort of drone or something,” he said. “And that is meant to build that comfort, so, ultimately, when game day comes, you’re not going to rise to another level, you’re going to fall back to your basic level of training.”

“I think that when you think about the Live, Virtual, Constructive piece of this, there’s absolutely going to be a component, because you’re never going to see these collaborative combat aircraft, potentially, right? They may be dozens or hundreds of miles away, even,” he continued. “So, there’s got to be a constructive bit, but I think, ultimately, if we want to get that comfort level of having another piece of metal in the sky that you either join on, or you trust to employ weapons, or you trust to execute your mission command, there has to be some element of live flight. What the specific combination will be and where we can realize optimizations, I think, is still kind of to be determined, but it’s a place that I think we can realize gains on both ends, both the live and the sort of virtual, constructive piece.”

On a broader level, the Navy still has yet to settle on a clear vision for how it will incorporate CCAs into its future carrier air wings and what forms those drones might take, as a result. In the past, the service has put forward a concept for lower-cost carrier-capable drone wingmen in the past that envisions them being “consumable,” and expended as one-way kamikaze drones or aerial targets for training or testing use at the end of relatively short service lives. In recent years, the Navy has also openly talked about a more general goal to eventually see the aircraft in its carrier air wings become at least 60 percent uncrewed.

In addition, the Navy is party to a tri-service CCA agreement with the Air Force and the Marines, but, by its own admission, is trailing behind those services on all fronts. The Air Force currently has two CCAs – General Atomics YFQ-42A and Anduril’s YFQ-44A – under development, and is already looking toward future designs. The Marines are in the process of transforming their work with the XQ-58A Valkyrie into an operational capability.

A composite rendering of the YFQ-42A (at bottom) and YFQ-44A (at top). USAF composite artwork courtesy General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. and Anduril Industries
A Marine XQ-58A Valkyrie. USAF An XQ-58A seen during the type’s first flight in Marine Corps service in October 2023. USAF

The Navy’s current stated focus is on getting the MQ-25 Stingray tanker drone into service, which it hopes will lay the foundation for adding more uncrewed aircraft to its carrier air wings. The service has also expressed a strong interest in Boeing’s MQ-28 Ghost Bat, a loyal wingman-type drone.

An MQ-28, at left, alongside a demonstrator Boeing has been using in the development of the MQ-25, called the T1. Boeing An MQ-28 Ghost Bat, at left, alongside an MQ-25 Stingray. Boeing

“I think right now, within the experimental community, the VXs [air test and evaluation squadrons], there’s a lot of discussion there,” Lt. Cdr. Jbeily told TWZ today about what might be on the horizon drone-wise for the Navy. “I think that the Air Force has potentially taken the forefront on this with their Collaborative Combat Aircraft program.”

The Air Force’s CCA program does appear to be the leading effort in this vein across the services, as you can read about more in TWZ‘s past reporting.

“I think that those decisions about what we’re going to buy, when we’re going to buy it, are a little bit above my level, but I know that the Navy is still deeply interested in looking in terms of how we can, for the purpose of maintaining warfighter advantage, how we can keep the Navy and the Air Wing relevant with this sort of precision, mass and collaborative autonomy,” Jbeily added. “[The] Air Boss’s big initiative has been MQ-25 in ’25 to get sort of that specific aerial refueling platform, [to] lessen the burden on Super Hornets, which currently perform the aerial fueling role. So I think what that’ll end up being is a good model for how do we integrate autonomous systems into the air wing and ensure that we can get folks comfortable to accomplish these missions.”

The T1 demonstrator Boeing has been using in the development of the MQ-25 links up with a Super Hornet during a test. USN

The “Air Boss” that Jbeily is referring to here is Vice Adm. Daniel Cheever, head of Naval Air Forces. “MQ-25 in ’25” refers to the goal for the Stingray to fly for the first time before the end of this year, a milestone that has already been much delayed, reflecting larger schedule slips and cost growth for the program.

“There’s so much sense of urgency and purpose amongst our junior officers who recognize the peer competition that we’re in and recognize the role that the Navy will play in providing peace through deterrence, and we want to prepare for the future fight,” the strike fighter tactics instructor told TWZ today, speaking more generally. “That urgency that you see amongst the junior officers is focused on being the change and bringing the change, and not simply accepting business as usual.”

“We just want to keep the carrier relevant and effective, and that’s the energy that’s shared amongst junior officers.”

As noted, the Navy does see drones as a key element of its future carrier air wings. Ensuring that there is trust in those uncrewed aircraft to perform, especially among the junior officers who will be flying alongside them, will be of vital importance.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Joseph has been a member of The War Zone team since early 2017. Prior to that, he was an Associate Editor at War Is Boring, and his byline has appeared in other publications, including Small Arms Review, Small Arms Defense Journal, Reuters, We Are the Mighty, and Task & Purpose.


Source link

Kerry Promises Trust, Strength, Leadership

Casting his life as an embodiment of the nation’s patriotism and principles, Sen. John F. Kerry vowed Thursday night to rebuild alliances and restore “trust and credibility to the White House” as he concluded the Democratic National Convention with a sweeping account of his personal story.

Seconds into his 45-minute speech, Kerry summed up the theme of the four-day event and the message he planned to carry into the fall campaign against President Bush.

“We’re here tonight united in one purpose,” he said, speaking in a hometown convention hall awash in red, white and blue. “To make America stronger at home and respected in the world.”

Questioning the strength of the economy, Kerry said, “We can do better, and we will.” Addressing terrorists around the world, he said, “You will lose and we will win.”

The senator from Massachusetts, unfamiliar to millions of voters despite more than two years of steady campaigning, had the challenge of delivering the most important speech of his 22-year political career. While polls have showed many voters are dissatisfied with Bush, many are not yet convinced of Kerry’s ability to lead the nation.

His closing speech to the convention and the roof-shaking response sent the nominee off to a battle against Bush that polls indicated had been a virtual dead heat for months.

Kerry and his running mate, North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, are to set out today on a two-week, cross-country campaign swing that takes them through 21 states via plane, train, bus and boat.

After spending the week out of sight at his Texas ranch, Bush plans to resume his campaign today with a bus tour through four swing states, and Vice President Dick Cheney is to continue his campaigning in the West.

Kerry, working his way through a text he spent weeks drafting in longhand, stirred the 4,000-plus convention delegates with an address that was poetic in parts and blunt in others, broad in biography but stinting in policy details.

“I will be a commander in chief who will never mislead us into war,” Kerry said, reminding the audience of his military experience in Vietnam. “I will have a vice president who will not conduct secret meetings with polluters to rewrite our environmental laws. I will have a secretary of defense who will listen to the best advice of the military leaders. And will appoint an attorney general who will uphold the Constitution of the United States.”

On a night that bristled with martial talk and patriotic imagery, Kerry also sought to seize back the symbolism of the Stars and Stripes, which Republicans captured as their political totem in the 1988 presidential campaign, when they used patriotism as an issue to defeat the last Democratic nominee from Massachusetts, former Gov. Michael S. Dukakis.

Kerry pointed to a huge American flag painted overhead, and recalled the one that flew tattered from the gun turret on his aluminum Swift boat in Vietnam. “That flag doesn’t belong to any president,” Kerry said to roars, which turned to chants of “U.S.A! U.S.A!”

“It doesn’t belong to any ideology,” Kerry shouted. “It doesn’t belong to any party. It belongs to all the American people.” Conjuring memories of World War II, the Cold War and the civil rights movement — epochal events that have shaped the country, — Kerry said: “We have it in our power to change the world again. But only if we are true to our ideals — and that starts by telling the truth to the American people.”

Turning around a line from Bush’s 2000 campaign, Kerry continued, “That is my first pledge to you tonight: As president, I will restore trust and credibility to the White House.”

The response was ear-splitting inside the FleetCenter arena, just a few miles from Kerry’s residence on elegant Beacon Hill. People hollered as they filled the aisles to capacity, perched on ledges, hung over railings and sat on the floor of balconies, their legs dangling over the edge. Outside, hundreds more were turned away under the fire marshal’s order.

Kerry’s speech was intended to be more personal than policy-oriented, reflecting a strategic sense that it was most important for voters to develop a gut-level sense of the Democratic nominee.

So even as he mentioned his proposals for job creation, pledged to expand the availability of healthcare and promised a middle-class tax cut, the address broke no new policy ground.

Instead, Kerry sought to wrap his principles in a narrative of his 60 years.

He spoke of his decorated military service as a Navy lieutenant in the Vietnam War. “I know what kids go through when they are carrying an M-16 in a dangerous place and they can’t tell friend from foe,” he said.

“I know what they go through when they’re on patrol at night and they don’t know what’s coming around the next bend. I know what it’s like to write letters home telling your family everything’s all right when you’re just not sure that that’s true.”

As president, he said, he would put into practice the lessons he learned from that unpopular war. “Before you go to battle, you have to be able to look a parent in the eye and truthfully say, ‘I tried everything possible to avoid sending your son or daughter into harm’s way.’ ”

Kerry cracked the book on earlier chapters in his life, speaking of his parents, the Cub Scouts and “my first model airplane, my first baseball mitt and my first bicycle.”

“What I learned has stayed with me for a lifetime,” he said of living in occupied Berlin, where his father worked in the Foreign Service. “I saw the gratitude of people toward the United States for what we have done … I learned what it meant to be America at our best. I learned the pride of our freedom. And I am determined now to restore that pride to all who look to America.”

He was vague about Iraq, reflecting the political bind he faced. Kerry voted to support the March 2003 invasion, which many Democrats opposed. Since then he has criticized Bush’s conduct of the war.

Kerry reiterated his call to reduce the U.S. cost in lives and aid by enlisting help from the country’s allies, but he said that could never come about under Bush.

“That won’t happen until we have a president who restores America’s respect and leadership so we don’t have to go it alone in the world,” Kerry said. “And we need to rebuild our alliances so we can get the terrorists before they get us.”

Much of the speech was an effort to turn away the criticisms that Republicans had leveled in tens of millions of dollars in advertising since Kerry clinched the Democratic nomination in March — that he was outside the mainstream, flip-flopped on issues and lacked the toughness to be commander in chief.

Latching on to a phrase often used by Bush and Cheney, Kerry sought to define “family values” in terms of economic stability.

“We value jobs where, when you put in a week’s work, you can actually pay your bills, provide for your children, lift up the quality of your life,” Kerry said. “We value an America where the middle class is not being squeezed, but doing better.”

Kerry said he would repeal the Bush tax cuts for individuals making more than $200,000 a year, “so we can invest in healthcare, education and job creation.”

He pledged to close the tax loopholes that reward companies for shipping jobs overseas, and vowed to cut the federal deficit in half in four years by imposing a “pay-as-you-go” system of federal budgeting.

He promised he would not raise taxes on middle-class Americans, calling that a false charge put out by Republicans. “Let me say straight out what I will do as president: I will cut middle-class taxes. I will reduce the burden on small businesses.”

Other issues such as healthcare and energy received passing mention. Kerry drew one of his biggest ovations by declaring: “I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation — not the Saudi royal family.”

Kerry has made energy independence a central part of his domestic platform, calling for promotion of alternative and renewable energy sources so that by 2020, Americans would be getting 20% of their electricity from those fuels. He also has proposed a $20-billion fund to research new forms of energy.

Kerry presented vague details of his healthcare plan. He said it would allow Americans to import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada and allow them to select their own doctors under any reform plan he approved.

Kerry has proposed extending coverage to almost three-fourths of uninsured Americans by allowing the working poor to obtain insurance through the existing federal-state partnership that covers children in their families. He would also seek to reduce insurance premiums for those with insurance by having the federal government assume the cost of the most expensive cases.

On foreign policy, Kerry pledged to wage war only as a last resort. But he said, “Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and a certain response. I never will never give any nation or any institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.”

He acknowledged those who had criticized him “for seeing complexities.”

“And I do,” he said. “Because some issues just aren’t all that simple.”

Swiping at Bush, Kerry went on: “Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn’t make it so. Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn’t make it so. And proclaiming ‘mission accomplished’ certainly doesn’t make it so.”’

As president, Kerry said, he would “not evade or equivocate,” but would immediately adopt the recommendations of the 9/11 commission to revamp the nation’s foreign policy and restructure its intelligence services.

Even before Kerry spoke, the last night of the Democrats’ four-day gathering included some of the convention’s most pointed attacks on Bush’s handling of terrorism and the war in Iraq. One after another, speakers tore into the president’s credibility and blamed him for souring relations with U.S. allies.

“Because we waged the war in Iraq virtually alone, we are responsible for the aftermath virtually alone,” said Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, who is one of Kerry’s closest foreign policy advisors. “And the price is clear: Nearly 90 percent of the troops and the casualties are American. And because the intelligence was hyped to justify going to war, America’s credibility and security have suffered a terrible blow.”

In one of the few departures from the week’s script, home-state Rep. Barney Frank delivered an impassioned defense of gay marriage.

“It is the Democratic Party — as opposed to our very right-wing Republican opponents — who support that agenda … of allowing us to marry, of allowing us to go forward as human beings with the rights of everyone else,” said Frank, who is openly gay and went beyond remarks vetted by the Kerry campaign.

The Massachusetts congressman, however, was consigned to an early speaking slot, well before the national television networks tuned in for Kerry’s speech.

The convention ended on the positive note Kerry had promised. He challenged Bush to join him in waging their campaigns as “optimists, not just opponents.”

Invoking the nation’s spirit of discovery — the first flight at Kitty Hawk, man’s mission to the moon, the invention of the computer chip — Kerry put forth a lyrical challenge: “What if?”

“What if we find a breakthrough to cure Parkinson’s, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and AIDS? What if we have a president who believes in science, so we can unleash the wonders of discovery like stem-cell research to treat illness and save millions of lives?

“What if we … make sure all our children are safe in the afternoons after school? And what if we have a leadership that’s as good as the American dream, so that bigotry and hatred never again steal the hope and future of any American?”

Times staff writers Michael Finnegan, Janet Hook, Maria L. La Ganga, Robert Schiff and Stephen W. Stromberg contributed to this report.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Politics vs. other stuff

Americans have more than politics on their minds these days. The top five Yahoo searches so far this week: Tour de France, Maria Sharapova, right, Britney Spears, NASCAR, and Usher. (The political satire Web cartoon at JibJab.com that lampoons President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry was No. 6, but the real Kerry and the Democrats didn’t crack the top 15.)

Source: Yahoo

*

Convening on a budget

Although convention costs had risen steadily since 1984 as both parties’ political fests grew more elaborate, this year the Democrats reversed the trend. Their convention costs:

1984: $18.1 million

1988: $26.7 million

1992: $38.3 million

1996: $47.4 million

2000: $85.4 million

2004: $64.4 million

SOURCE: Campaign Finance Institute

*

Safety team

Securing the convention involved no fewer than 27 agencies. In addition to biggies such as the Boston police and the Secret Service, those keeping politicians and others safe included: Massachusetts Turnpike Authority; North American Aerospace Defense Command; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Northern Command; Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Construction.

SOURCE: United States Secret Service

*

History on the block

Scores of vintage convention items have been put up for auction on EBay. Among them:

* A Georgia state seal from the 1912 Democratic National Convention, at $1,999.99

* A 2000 tambourine, right, that reads “Tipper Rocks,” at $9.99

* $3,000 worth of domain names in the event of a second vote recount, including UncountedVote.com

*

Secret Service’s secret out

Kerry and Edwards enjoy at least one trapping of the presidency and vice presidency — Secret Service protection and cool code names.

John Kerry Minuteman

John Edwards Speedway

Teresa Heinz Kerry Mahogany

SOURCE: National Journal

*

Plugged In

The Democratic National Convention website has turned into a virtual hot spot. Dems2004.org has received 50 million hits during the convention this week — more Monday and Tuesday alone than during the entire 2000 event in Los Angeles. There were 341,700 requests for live video streams in the 24-hour period after Sen. John Edwards’ speech.

SOURCE: Democratic National Convention Committee

*

Eventually, Nov. 2

The Democratic National Convention has come and gone. The GOP’s is just weeks away — from Aug. 30 to Sept. 2 in New York City. After that, debates will await:

Kerry vs. Bush: Sept. 30 in Miami;

Oct. 8 in St. Louis; Oct. 13 in Tempe, Ariz.

Edwards vs. Cheney: Oct. 5 in Cleveland

*

A TALE OF RESCUE

“The hamster was never quite right after that.”

ALEXANDRA KERRY

Telling the Democratic National Convention about how her father, Sen. John F. Kerry, did CPR on a family pet that had fallen overboard.

Source link

Darius Khondji is the visual genius that auteurs like Ari Aster trust

The day before our interview, cinematographer Darius Khondji tells me he went to see a Pablo Picasso exhibit in uptown New York City. And though he would never compare himself to the Spanish painter, Khondji says he found a kinship in the way he described his artistic practice.

“About his style, he said that he was like a chameleon, changing completely from one moment to another, from one situation to another,” Khondji, 69, recalls via Zoom. “This is exactly how I feel. When I’m with a director, I embrace that director completely.”

Backlit, with natural light coming from the large windows behind him on a recent afternoon, Khondji appears shrouded in darkness, at times like an enigmatic silhouette with a halo of sunshine around his fuzzy hair. The Iranian-born cinematographer speaks animatedly, with hand movements accentuating every effusive sentence.

“Sometimes I talk in a very impressionistic way,” Khondji says, apologetically. “I might be confusing but I try to be just honest and say what I feel.”

Khondji’s eclectic resume flaunts an exceptional collection of collaborations, some of the best-looking movies of their moments: David Fincher’s gruesome but gorgeous “Seven,” Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro’s darkly whimsical and richly textured “Delicatessen” and “The City of Lost Children,” Michael Haneke’s unflinching love story “Amour,” James Gray’s old-school luxurious “The Immigrant,” the Safdie Brothers’ nerve-racking and kinetic “Uncut Gems,” and now Ari Aster’s paranoid big-canvas pandemic saga “Eddington,” in theaters Friday.

Khondji stands simultaneously as a wise member of the old guard and a hopeful champion for the future of film. Sought in decades past by the likes of Woody Allen, Roman Polanski and Bernardo Bertolucci, he’s now lending his lensing genius to a new generation of storytellers with ideas just as biting.

“Darius understands the human soul and he masters the tools to express it,” says filmmaker Alejandro González Iñárritu via email. “All the technical choices — framing decisions, uses of color and lighting techniques — he is able to apply them, but always subordinated to the director’s vision and, most importantly, to the needs of the film itself.”

Men shoot a scene standing in water.

Khondji, left, with director Alejandro González Iñárritu on the shoot of 2022’s “Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths.”

(SeoJu Park / Netflix)

Khondji earned his second Oscar nomination for his work on the Mexican director’s surrealist 2022 film “Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths.” The motion picture academy first acknowledged his artistry with a nod for Alan Parker’s sumptuous 1996 musical “Evita.”

“Darius is kind of a poet — everything is feeling-based with him,” says Aster via video call from Los Angeles. “He is an intellectual but he is also decidedly not.”

If you were to dissect the pivotal memories that shaped Khondji’s creative mind, the array of touchstones would include a photograph of Christopher Lee as Dracula that his brother would bring him from London. Also in prime of place: an image of his older sister, Christine, whom he considers an artistic mentor.

You would also find the intense orange color of persimmons squashed in his family’s garden in Tehran during winter — the only sensory memory he has from his early childhood before his family moved to Paris when he was around 3 1/2 years old in the late 1950s.

“Sometimes I look at my granddaughter and grandson and say, ‘OK, they are 3, almost 3 1/2, so this is the amount of language I had, but it was probably mostly in Farsi,’” he says. Khondji returned to Iran only once, as a teenager in the early 1970s, with a Super 8 camera in hand.

He has been watching movies since infancy. His nanny, an avid moviegoer, would take him to the cinema with her. And later, his father, who owned movie theaters in Tehran and would source films through Europe, brought him along to Parisian screening rooms as a kid.

“These are all stories told to me and a mix of impressions and feelings of things that I remember,” Khondji explains. That visceral, heart-first way of perceiving the world around him might be the defining quality of his approach to image-making. It’s always about how something feels.

“Cinema is a strong force,” he says. “You cannot limit it only with aesthetic taste or things that you like or don’t like or rules. You just have to go with the flow and give yourself to it. You need a lot of humility.” At that last thought, Khondji laughs.

A man with graying hair looks into the lens.

Cinematographer Darius Khondji, photographed in France in 2021.

(Ariane Damain Vergallo)

When he started making his own Dracula-inspired short films on Super 8 as a teenager, Khondji had little idea about the distinct roles of a film production. Slowly, he started noticing that the directors of photography for the movies he liked were often the same artists.

“I was discovering that some films looked incredible — they had a very strong atmosphere,” Khondji recalls. “Then I found that the same name of one person was on one movie and then another movie, and I thought, ‘OK, this person really is very important.’” He mentions Gregg Toland, the legendary shooter of Orson Welles’ “Citizen Kane.”

But it wasn’t until Khondji attended NYU for film school that he dropped his aspirations for directing and decided on becoming a cinematographer. His film exercises leaned more toward the experiential than the narrative. He refers to them as “emotional wavelengths.”

“It’s really the director and the actors that trigger my desire to shoot a movie,” says Khondji. “The script is, of course, a great thing, but once I want to work with the director, I really trust them.”

Hearing Khondji speak about directors, it’s clear that he puts them in a privileged light — so much so that he makes a point of creating what he calls a “family” around them to ensure their success. This means he ensures the director feels comfortable with the gaffer, the dolly grip, the key grip, so that there’s no one on set that feels like a stranger.

With Aster, for example, their bond emerged from a shared voraciousness for film. The pair had several hangouts together before a job even entered the equation. Khondji is a defender of the polarizing “Beau Is Afraid,” his favorite of Aster’s movies. “Eddington” finally brought them together as collaborators for the first time.

“Ari and I have a common language,” he says. “We discovered quite early on working together that we have a very similar taste for dark films, not dark in lighting but in storytelling.”

Two men argue on a small town's street.

Joaquin Phoenix, left, and Pedro Pascal in the movie “Eddington.”

(A24)

While scouting locations in Aster’s native New Mexico, he and Khondji came across the small town where the Coen brothers’ “No Country for Old Men” was filmed. And though they both revere that arid 2007 thriller, they wanted to get away from anything tied to it, so they pivoted again to the community of Truth or Consequences.

Khondji recalls Aster describing his film, about a self-righteous sheriff (Joaquin Phoenix) in a grudge match against the mayor (Pedro Pascal), as “a European psychological thriller on American land.” For the cinematographer, the movie is “a modern western.”

“We wanted the exterior to be very bright, like garishly bright, like the light has almost started to take off the color and the contrast a little bit because it’s so bright, never bright enough,” explains Khondji about shooting in the desert.

For Khondji, working Aster reminded him of his two outings with Austria’s esteemed, ultra-severe Michael Haneke, with which the cinematographer made the American remake of “Funny Games” and “Amour,” the latter on which he discovered a “radically different kind filmmaking” where “everything in the set had to have a grace of realness.”

“‘The color is vivid in a way that it isn’t in any of his other films,” says Aster about the quality that Khondji brought to “Amour,” Haneke’s Oscar-winning film.

Still, after working with some of the world’s most acclaimed filmmakers on features, music videos, commercials and a TV show (he shot Nicolas Winding Refn’s 2019 “Too Old to Die Young” and became infatuated with the San Fernando Valley), Khondji prefers to be reinvigorated by younger artists challenging the rules.

“‘Uncut Gems’ was like turning a page for me in filmmaking,” he says, calling out to Josh and Benny Safdie. “These two young filmmakers were making films in a different way. And the fact that I could keep up with them — they are in their 30s — psychologically, it gave me a lot of strength.” Khondji also shot Josh Safdie’s upcoming “Marty Supreme,” out in December.

Is there a visual signature that defines Khondji’s work? Perhaps, even if he doesn’t consciously think of it. A lushness, a preference for olive greens and blacker-than-black shadows. An intense fixation on color in general. There are also aesthetic preferences that Aster noticed from their work on “Eddington.”

“Darius and I hate unmotivated camera movement,” Aster says. “But there are certain things that never would’ve bothered me compositionally that really bothered Darius, and now they’re stuck in my head. For instance, Darius hates it when you cut off somebody’s leg, even if it’s at the ankle. A lot of Darius’s prejudices have gone into my system.”

Khondji concedes to these particularities, yet he doesn’t think in rigid absolutes.

“You have a rule, and then you decide this is the moment to break the rule,” he says, citing the rawness of the films of French director Maurice Pialat or how actor Harriet Andersson looks directly into the camera in Ingmar Bergman’s 1953 “Summer with Monika.”

He recently watched Ryan Coogler’s box-office hit “Sinners” without knowing anything about its premise beforehand. “People who know me know that I don’t like spoilers,” he says. “I’m very cautious with film reviews. They are very important, but at the same time, I don’t want to know the story.”

Khondji had never seen one of Coogler’s films, but was impressed. “I really enjoyed it,” he says. “After I watched it I wanted to know who shot the film, but I enjoyed the actors so much and I love just being a real member of the audience.”

It might surprise some to learn that Khondji’s initial interest in seeing a film is unrelated to how it looks or who shot it.

“When I watch a film people say, ‘Oh, did you notice how it was shot?’ And I don’t really go for that,” he says. “I mostly go to watch a film for the director.”

These days, his wish list includes the opportunity to shoot a proper supernatural horror film (Aster might be handy to stay in touch with) and for a company to make a modern film-stock camera. Khondji is not precious about format but believes shooting on film should stay an option as it is the “natural medium” of cinema.

He tells me how much he loves going to the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood. “It’s really like a shrine for me,” he says, recalling seeing Alfred Hitchcock’s “Vertigo” there on true VistaVision.

“It was an incredible emotion,” he adds. “Like the emotion I had when I grew up with my dad, when they would take me to see big films in the cinemas where the ceiling had stars to make you dream even before the film started.”

That dream is what Khondji is still chasing, in the cinema and on set.

Source link

ICE is gaining access to Medicaid records, adding new peril for immigrants

The Trump administration is forging ahead with a plan that is sure to fuel alarm across California’s immigrant communities: handing over the personal data of millions of Medicaid recipients to federal immigration officials who seek to track down people living in the U.S. illegally.

The huge trove of private information, which includes home addresses, social security numbers and ethnicities of 79 million Medicaid enrollees, will allow officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement greater latitude to locate immigrants they suspect are undocumented, according to an agreement signed this week between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Department of Homeland Security and obtained by the Associated Press.

“ICE will use the CMS data to allow ICE to receive identity and location information on aliens identified by ICE,” the agreement says.

The plan, which has not been announced publicly, is the latest step by the Trump administration to gather sensitive information about people living in the U.S. as it seeks to deliver on its pledge to crack down on illegal immigration and arrest 3,000 undocumented immigrants a day. It is certain to face legal challenges.

Critics have sounded the alarm ever since the Trump administration directed the CMS last month to send the DHS personal information on Medicaid enrollees, including non-U.S. citizens registered in state-funded programs in California, Illinois, Washington and Washington, D.C.

These states operate state-funded Medicaid programs for immigrants who are otherwise ineligible for federal Medicaid and had committed not to bill the federal government.

California Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff warned last month of potential violations of federal privacy laws as Trump officials made plans to share personal health data.

“These actions not only raise ethical issues but are contrary to longstanding HHS policy and raise significant concerns about possible violations of federal law,” the Senators wrote in a letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz.

“We are deeply troubled that this administration intends to use individuals’ private health information for the unrelated purpose of possible enforcement actions targeting lawful noncitizens and mixed status families,” Padilla and Schiff said in a statement. “The decision by HHS to share confidential health information with DHS is a remarkable departure from established federal privacy protections that should alarm all Americans.”

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin declined to answer questions about whether immigration officials are now accessing the personal Medicaid data or how they plan to use it.

“President Trump consistently promised to protect Medicaid for eligible beneficiaries,” McLaughlin said in a statement. “To keep that promise after Joe Biden flooded our country with tens of millions of illegal aliens CMS and DHS are exploring an initiative to ensure that illegal aliens are not receiving Medicaid benefits that are meant for law-abiding Americans.”

Undocumented immigrants are not permitted to enroll in Medicaid, a joint federal and state program that helps cover medical costs for low-income individuals. The program also limits benefits for other lawfully present immigrants, with some required to undergo waiting periods before they can receive coverage.

However, federal law requires states to offer emergency Medicaid, coverage that pays for lifesaving services in emergency rooms to everyone, including non-U.S. citizens.

A 2024 Congressional Budget Office report found that a total of $27 billion was spent on emergency Medicaid for non-citizens between 2017 and 2023. That number represents less than 1% of overall spending on Medicaid during that time period. Nevertheless, Trump and other federal leaders have pushed to reduce spending on Medicaid, alleging that undocumented immigrants have been taking advantage of the program.

Hannah Katch, a CMS advisor during the Biden administration who previously worked for California Medicaid, told The Times that the Trump administration’s plan to turn over Medicaid data represented “an incredible violation of trust.”

The data that states send to CMS has certain protections and requirements in statute and also by custom, Katch said. For CMS to share the information of Medicaid enrollees outside the agency, she said, would have a devastating impact on people who depend on emergency Medicaid to access critical care.

“Making people afraid to seek care when they are experiencing a medical emergency, or when their child is experiencing a medical emergency, it is an incredibly cruel action to take,” Katch said.

Elizabeth Laird, the director of equity in civic technology at the Center for Democracy & Technology, said the sharing of such data would further erode people’s trust in government.

“By turning over some of our most sensitive healthcare data to ICE, Health and Human Services has fundamentally betrayed the trust of almost 80 million people,” she said in a statement to The Times.

“This jaw-dropping development proves that the Administration’s claim of using this information to prevent fraud is a Trojan horse that instead will primarily advance their goal of deporting millions of people,” she said. “Over 90 percent of entitlement fraud is committed by U.S. citizens, underscoring the false pretense of sharing this information with ICE.”

The plan to share Medicaid data is not the first time the Trump administration has sought to share personal information across departments. In May, the Department of Agriculture told states they had to turn over data on the recipients of SNAP food benefits.

Last month, the California Medical Assn. warned that the Trump administration’s sharing of personal Medicaid data would put nearly 15 million patients and their families at risk statewide.

Dr. René Bravo, CMA’s president elect, said that sending sensitive patient information to deportation officials “will have a devastating impact on communities and access to care that all people need.”

“Our job is not protecting the borders, it’s protecting our patients and providing the best health care possible, “ Bravo said in a statement. “When patients come to us it’s often the most vulnerable times in their lives, and we offer a safe space for their care.”

Orange County’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs notified the public last month that the CMS had been directed to send DHS personal information of Medicaid enrollees, including non-citizens.

“This data, provided for the purpose of administering healthcare, may now be used to locate individuals for immigration enforcement or to challenge their future immigration applications,” the statement read.

The agency wrote that it had already heard of increased anxiety among clients who are fearful that their personal information could be used against them if they seek health care services.

“We are concerned this will further erode trust in public institutions and care providers,” the agency wrote.

Orange County Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento, who represents a large Latino population that includes Santa Ana and portions of Anaheim, said the families enrolled in Medi-Cal did so with the reasonable expectation their information would be kept private.

He called the action a “cruel breach” that erodes people’s trust in government.

“These actions discourage participation in healthcare and mean that some individuals may not seek needed medical services,” he said in a statement. “This hurts the overall community, creates serious public health concerns, and increases costs for our healthcare system.”

Jose Serrano, director of Orange County’s Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, said certain information about those who sign up for benefits has long been shared with the state, which passes it along to the federal government for research, funding and eligibility purposes.

“The one thing that is different during this time is that the information is being used against people, especially those who are immigrants,” he said.

The situation has already caused anxiety among immigrant populations in Orange County, Serrano said. Some have reached out to the agency asking whether they can un-enroll from programs or change their addresses for fear that they or their families may be targeted by immigration officials.

“The truth is immigrants spend more and invest more in our communities and the economy then they take away,” Serrano said, adding that it’s unfortunate that this medical information is “going to be used against the same families that are already investing in our communities through the taxes they pay on a yearly basis.”

Source link

Polls show Californians sour on leaders, fret about democracy

California is having a bummer of a political summer.

With the state under daily siege by the Trump administration, Los Angeles occupied by federal troops and our gallivanting governor busy running for president, is it really any surprise?

A recent UC Irvine poll found that residents, by a 2-to-1 margin, believe California is headed on the wrong track, a mood consistent with other gauges of Golden State grumpiness.

Why the sad faces?

“We are so divided as a country that people feel like there’s no common purpose and the other guys are out there about to do mayhem to the things that they believe in,” said Jon Gould, dean of UC Irvine’s School of Social Ecology. “Number two, there is a substantial portion of people who feel that their economic situation is worse than it was four years ago, two years ago, one year ago.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom also gets some credit, er, blame for the state’s darkened disposition.

A poll conducted by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies found California voters have little faith in their chief executive as he rounds the turn toward his final year in office. (Which may be one reason Newsom would rather spend time laying the groundwork for a 2028 White House bid.)

Only 14% of voters surveyed had “a lot” of trust in Newsom to act in the best interests of the California public, while another 28% trusted him “somewhat.” Fifty-three percent had no trust in the governor, or only “a little.”

Not a strong foundation for a presidential campaign, but Potomac fever is a powerful thing.

The Democratic-run Legislature fared about the same in the Berkeley survey.

Forty-four percent of respondents had either a lot or some degree of trust in Sacramento lawmakers — not a great look, but a number that positively shines compared to attitudes toward California’s tech companies and their leaders as they increasingly try to spread their overweening influence to politics. Only 4% had a lot of trust in the companies acting in the best interest of the California public; nearly six in 10 did not trust them at all. (There was similarly little faith in business groups.)

But it’s not just the state’s leaders and institutions that fail to engender much trust or goodwill.

A survey by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found residents have also soured on the three branches of the federal government.

Fewer than a third of Californians expressed approval for President Trump and the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. Just 2 in 10 Californians approved of the job Congress is doing.

Some of that is colored by partisan attitudes. Registered Democrats make up the largest portion of the electorate and, obviously, most aren’t happy with the GOP stranglehold on Washington. But that distrust transcended red and blue loyalties.

Overall, 8 in 10 adults said they do not fully trust the federal government to do what is right. A nearly identical percentage said they trust the government to do what is right only some of the time.

That, too, is part of a long-standing pattern.

“It’s a concern, but it’s not a new concern,” said Mark Baldassare, who directs research for the Public Policy Institute. “It’s been around in some form for decades.”

Back in 1958, when the National Election Study first asked, about three-quarters of Americans trusted the federal government to do the right thing almost always or most of the time — a level of faith that, today, sounds like it comes from people in another galaxy.

Starting in the 1960s, with the escalation of the Vietnam War, and continuing through the Watergate scandal of the 1970s, that trust has steadily eroded. The last time the Pew Research Center asked the question, in the spring of 2024, just 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents nationwide said they trusted the federal government just about always or most of the time. That compared to just 11% of Republicans and Republican leaners.

What’s new — and perhaps most troubling — in the recent batch of opinion surveys are growing fears for the state of our democracy.

Nearly two-thirds of those sampled in the Berkeley poll felt that “American democracy is under attack” and another 26% described it as “being tested.” Only 1 in 10 said our democracy is in “no danger.”

America has had some knock-down political fights in recent decades. But it’s only in the Trump era, with his incessant lying about the 2020 election and assault on the rule of law, that the durability of our democracy has become a widespread concern.

Pollsters didn’t even ask that question “10 years ago, 20 years ago, because it was just inconceivable,” said Eric Schickler, who co-directs Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies.

“Even in moments when people were mad, say after [Hurricane] Katrina, Iraq with Bush, or amid the Lewinsky scandal or various other moments of trouble and conflict you would never have seen… 64% say American democracy is under attack and only 10% saying democracy is not in danger,” Schickler said. “That’s just a pretty stunning number … and I think it suggests something really different is going on now.”

Perhaps this is just a temporary cloud, like the coastal fog that dissipates as summer rolls on?

“In the short to medium term, I’m not optimistic,” Schickler said. “I think that the problems that we have, the challenges, have just been growing over a period of time. Starting before the Trump era, for sure, but then accelerating in recent years. I think we’re heading more toward a politics where there just aren’t limits on what a party in power is going to do or try to accomplish, and the other party is an enemy and that’s a really bad dynamic.”

Oh, well.

There’s always the mountains, beach and desert offering Californians an escape.

Source link

Wimbledon 2025: Emma Radacanu does not trust ‘dodgy’ electronic line calls

It is not just the accuracy of the automated ‘out’ calls that have been questioned this week, with players saying they have also been too quiet.

Raducanu said she had not been able to hear all of the calls during her match against Sabalenka on Centre Court, where the roof was closed and the partisan fans were noisy during a gripping encounter.

“Some of them were a little bit quiet or dulled out by the crowd,” she said. “But overall you kind of have an idea if the ball was in or out. And then hope that Hawk-Eye calls it the same.”

Sabalenka agreed, adding: “It was quite loud and I think people also weren’t sure if it’s in or out. So there was a little pause and then they figured [it out] by the scoreboard.”

When there were human line judges, players could challenge the calls by using electronic reviews, which were shown on a big screen. Now the screens show replays of close calls but they can not be overruled.

Raducanu said she thought the Hawk-Eye electronic line calling system “was way more accurate back in the day when there were lines judges and you could challenge”.

“It’s difficult to deal with. And also [it is] a shame that the tradition’s kind of been broken with the linesmen and women,” she said, referring to the smartly dressed officials who were a familiar sight around the court.

When it announced it would be introducing the technology this year, Wimbledon said it considered “the technology to be sufficiently robust and the time is right to take this important step in seeking maximum accuracy in our officiating”.

Earlier this week Wimbledon’s operations director Michelle Dite was asked about the player feedback about the sound level of the calls and she replied: “The team are obviously working to make sure that it’s optimum.

“We’re also just making sure that it’s not too loud and it disrupts the play on the next court. It’s always something that’s being managed, and the teams will take all the feedback and keep working on it as we go.”

Wimbledon has not commented on the most recent players’ concerns about accuracy.

Source link

RFK Jr. is dismantling trust in vaccines, the crown jewel of American public health

When it comes to vaccines, virtually nothing that comes out of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s mouth is true.

The man in charge of the nation’s health and well being is impervious to science, expertise and knowledge. His brand of arrogance is not just dangerous, it is lethal. Undermining trust in vaccines, he will have the blood of children around the world on his hands.

Scratch that.

He already does, as he presides over the second largest measles outbreak in this country since the disease was declared “eliminated” a quarter century ago.

“Vaccines have become a divisive issue in American politics,” Kennedy wrote the other day in a Wall Street Journal essay, “but there is one thing all parties can agree on: The U.S. faces a crisis of public trust.”

The lack of self-awareness would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.

Over the past two decades or so, Kennedy has done more than almost any other American to destroy the public’s trust in vaccines and science. And now he’s bemoaning the very thing he has helped cause.

Earlier this month, Kennedy fired the 17 medical and public health experts of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — qualified doctors and public health experts — and replaced them with a group of (mostly) anti-vaxxers in order to pursue his relentless, ascientific crusade.

On Thursday, at its first meeting, his newly reconstituted council voted to ban the preservative thimerosal from the few remaining vaccines that contain it, despite many studies showing that thimerosal is safe. On that point, even the Food and Drug Administration website is blunt: “A robust body of peer-reviewed scientific studies conducted in the U.S. and other countries support the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines.”

“If you searched the world wide, you could not find a less suitable person to be leading healthcare efforts in the United States or the world,” psychiatrist Allen Frances told NPR on Thursday. Frances, who chaired the task force that changed how the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, defines autism, published an essay in the New York Times on Monday explaining why the incidence of autism has increased but is neither an epidemic nor related to vaccines.

“The rapid rise in autism cases is not because of vaccines or environmental toxins,” Frances wrote, “but is rather the result of changes in the way that autism is defined and assessed — changes that I helped put into place.”

But Kennedy is not one to let the facts stand in the way of his cockamamie theories. Manufacturers long ago removed thimerosal from childhood vaccines because of unfounded fears it contained mercury that could accumulate in the brain and unfounded fears about a relationship between mercury and autism.

That did not stop one of Kennedy’s new council members, Lyn Redwood, who once led Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine group founded by Kennedy, from declaring a victory for children.

“Removing a known neurotoxin from being injected into our most vulnerable population is a good place to start with making America healthy again,” Redwood told the committee.

Autism rates, by the way, have continued to climb despite the thimerosal ban. But fear not, gullible Americans, Kennedy has promised to pinpoint a cause for the complex condition by September!

Like his boss, Kennedy just makes stuff up.

On Wednesday, he halted a $1-billion American commitment to Gavi, an organization that provides vaccines to millions of children around the world, wrongly accusing the group of failing to investigate adverse reactions to the diptheria vaccine.

“This is utterly disastrous for children around the world and for public health,” Atul Gawande, a surgeon who worked in the Biden administration, told the New York Times.

Unilaterally, and contrary to the evidence, Kennedy decided to abandon the CDC recommendation that healthy pregnant women receive COVID vaccines. But an unvaccinated pregnant woman’s COVID infection can lead to serious health problems for her newborn. In fact, a study last year found that babies born to such mothers had “unusually high rates” of respiratory distress at or just after birth. According to the CDC, nearly 90% of babies who were hospitalized for COVID-19 had unvaccinated mothers. Also, vaccinated moms can pass protective antibodies to their fetuses, who will not be able to get a COVID shot until they are 6 months old.

What else? Oh yes: Kennedy once told podcaster Joe Rogan that the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic was “vaccine-induced flu” even though no flu vaccine existed at the time.

He also told Rogan that a 2003 study by physician scientist Michael Pichichero, an expert on the use of thimerosal in vaccines, involved feeding babies 6 months old and younger mercury-contaminated tuna sandwiches, and that 64 days later, the mercury was still in their system. “Who would do that?” Kennedy demanded.

Well, no one.

In the study, 40 babies were injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, while a control group of 21 babies got shots that did not contain the preservative. None was fed tuna. Ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal, the researchers concluded, “seems to be eliminated from blood rapidly via the stools.” (BTW, the mercury found in fish is methylmercury, a different chemical, which can damage the brain and nervous system. In a 2012 deposition for his divorce, which was revealed last year, Kennedy said he suffered memory loss and brain fog from mercury poisoning caused by eating too much tuna fish. He also revealed he has a dead worm in his brain.)

Kennedy’s tuna sandwich anecdote on Rogan’s podcast was “a ChatGPT-level of hallucination,” said Morgan McSweeney, a.k.a. “Dr. Noc,” a scientist with a doctorate in pharmaceutical sciences, focusing on immunology and antibodies. McSweeney debunks the idiotic medical claims of non-scientists like Kennedy in his popular social media videos.

Speaking of AI hallucinations, on Tuesday, at a congressional committee hearing, Kennedy was questioned about inaccuracies, misinformation and made up research and citations for nonexistent studies in the first report from his Make America Healthy Again Commission.

The report focused on how American children are being harmed by their poor diets, exposure to environmental toxins and, predictably, over-vaccination. It was immediately savaged by experts. “This is not an evidence-based report, and for all practical purposes, it should be junked at this point,” Georges C. Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Assn. told the Washington Post.

If Kennedy was sincere about improving the health of American children he would focus on combating real scourges like gun violence, drug overdoses, depression, poverty and lack of access to preventive healthcare. He would be fighting the proposed cuts to Medicaid tooth and nail.

Do you suppose he even knows that over the past 50 years, the lives of an estimated 154 million children have been saved by vaccines?

Or that he cares?

@rabcarian.bsky.social
@rabcarian



Source link

Trust in elections dips as GOP clings to Trump’s ‘Big Lie’

Just over a quarter of Republicans accept President Biden as the winner of the 2020 election, according to a new survey that underscores the instability of American democracy and the growing partisan divide over the legitimacy of elections.

“There was a hope there would see growing acceptance of Biden’s victory over time, as people moved away from the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement after Jan. 6. Instead, we saw the numbers stay in place,” said Brendan Nyhan, a Dartmouth political scientist and one of the founders of Bright Line Watch, an organization that monitors the health of U.S. democracy.

Sinking confidence in election outcomes appears to have been fueled by former President Trump’s “Big Lie” — his continued claims of voter fraud in key states, even though such allegations were repeatedly discredited in numerous lawsuits and audits. The fallout of such lies was especially evident on Jan. 6, when thousands of Trump supporters violently stormed the U.S. Capitol in a brazen attempt to halt lawmakers’ certification of Biden’s victory.

Since then, many Republican officeholders and some of the biggest voices in conservative media have clung to the notion that the election was stolen from Trump.

Bright Line Watch’s November survey, released Thursday morning, shows that only 27% of Republicans accept Biden as the rightful winner — the exact same figure as in the group’s February poll — compared with 94% of Democrats who do.

The survey also shows that the 2020 election and its aftermath have hardened partisan attitudes about future elections, leaving Republicans less confident that their votes will be counted accurately in 2022.

Even amid Trump’s constant rhetoric during the 2020 campaign about a potentially rigged outcome, Democrats and Republicans had roughly equal confidence in October 2020 that the coming election would be decided fairly, with 59% of Democrats and 58% of Republicans believing that would be the case.

But the new survey reveals that a partisan gap has opened up in response to that question. Now, 80% of Democrats believe next year’s midterm election will be fair, with just 42% of Republicans saying the same.

“That’s a really scary fact for our democracy right now, that so many Republican voters don’t have confidence in the election,” said Susan Stokes, another founder of Bright Line Watch and a political scientist at the University of Chicago.

As Trump and so many Republicans have sowed mistrust in last year’s election results, they have used their misinformation campaign to justify new laws in several GOP-controlled states to restrict ballot access and, in some cases, allow partisan lawmakers to overrule election officials in determining outcomes.

That could lead to a scenario in which Democratic voters, even those who understand their party is facing stiff political headwinds next year, lose confidence in the legitimacy of the 2022 electoral results.

“This is an asymmetric moment. Republicans are leading the assault on our democracy,” Nyhan said. “At same time, you can imagine a world where an election is decided because of genuinely dubious election administration practices, and Democrats would become quite distrustful of such an election in the aftermath, and rightfully so.

“You can see a situation where neither side trusts the election results,” he continued. “The potential for a spiral of illegitimacy is real, and that’s not sustainable for our democracy in the long term.”

At the federal level, Democrats have been unable to agree on a legislative response that would protect voting rights, largely because they have the most slender of Senate majorities. Two centrists in the caucus, Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), oppose changing Senate rules to enable Democrats to pass a voting rights law with just 50 votes. And they continue to call for a bipartisan agreement even though few Republicans have been willing to compromise in what has become a zero-sum policy battleground.

The November survey, which questioned 2,750 individuals, also found that partisans tend to overestimate the antidemocratic leanings of the other side, like a reflection of the increasingly partisan nature of cable news and the proliferation of incendiary politically oriented posts and memes across social media platforms.

Compared to past Bright Line Watch surveys, fewer respondents expressed support for political violence. Only 9% condoned making threats, 8% were OK with verbal harassment, and just 4% said they accepted the kind of mob violence that occurred on Jan. 6.

But researchers worry those numbers may not reflect how many partisans might be led to take or support extreme actions that they claim to oppose, with the justification that they need to overcome alleged extremism by the opposing side.

“It’s still millions of Americans condoning violence, and that makes for a very explosive environment and is quite dangerous,” Stokes said. “What people are saying to themselves is: ‘Whatever my side is doing, it’s worth it, because the other side is so terrible.’

“It’s not at all hard to imagine a lot of people in the public going along with a real stealing of the election next time because they have come to believe the other side stole it — or even if they don’t, it’s so important to keep the other side out, it doesn’t matter how you do it.”

Source link