Manhandling of US senator ups California tensions with Trump admin
LOS ANGELES, UNITED STATES: California's stand-off with President Donald Trump's administration ratcheted up Thursday, after a sitting US senator was handcuffed and forcibly removed from a press conference on immigration raids that have spurred days of protests.
The shocking incident, which came after the Republican president sent troops into Los Angeles over the objections of local and state officials, was swiftly slammed by furious Democrats who said it 'reeks of totalitarianism.'
Video footage shows Senator Alex Padilla, a Democrat, being pushed from the room at a federal building in Los Angeles as he tried to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the raids.
'I'm Senator Alex Padilla. I have questions for the secretary,' he said as two men grappled with him in front of journalists, including from AFP.
Footage filmed by Padilla's staff outside the room shows the senator being pushed to the ground and handcuffed.
Democratic-led California is currently embroiled in battles with the White House on several fronts, with Governor Gavin Newsom branding Trump 'dictatorial' as his lawyers prepared to face off with the administration over the deployment of 4,700 troops to the city.
'If this is how this administration responds to a senator with a question... you can only imagine what they're doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day laborers out in the Los Angeles community,' Padilla told reporters later at a press conference.
The incident 'reeks of totalitarianism,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, calling for an investigation.
'Trump and his shock troops are out of control,' Newsom posted on social media, while Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the incident 'abhorrent.'
The White House hit back, claiming it was a 'theater-kid stunt' and claiming without evidence that Padilla 'lunged toward Secretary Noem.'
Noem slammed Padilla's interruption as 'inappropriate.' A Homeland Security spokesman said she later met with the senator for 15 minutes.
Noem was addressing reporters after almost a week of protests in Los Angeles ignited by the Trump administration's immigration crackdown.
The mostly-peaceful demonstrations have been marred by some eye-catching violence, with cars torched and rocks thrown at police officers.
Trump, who has repeatedly exaggerated the scale of the unrest, deployed 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 US Marines.
Critics have accused him of a power grab and a judge was set to review the deployments' legality. Trump took credit Thursday for making Los Angeles 'safe and sound.'
Anger at Trump's crackdown and the use of masked, armed immigration agents, backed by uniformed soldiers, is spreading to other cities. Nationwide protests were planned for Saturday.
- 'Fear and terror' -
A federal judge in San Francisco was set to hear arguments on whether use of the troops is constitutional, with Newsom alleging the president 'is creating fear and terror.'
Trump on Thursday said Newsom -- seen as a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028 -- had 'totally lost control of the situation' and should thank him for 'saving his ass.'
California also sued Trump's administration Thursday over his move to scrap the state's tailpipe emission rules and its drive to phase out gas-powered cars.
Trump was elected last year after campaigning on a promise to launch historic mass deportations.
But with his mounting crackdown rippling through industries heavily reliant on immigrant labor -- such as farming, construction and hospitality -- Trump said he had heard employers' complaints and hinted at a forthcoming policy shift.
'We're going to have an order on that pretty soon, I think. We can't do that to our farmers -- and leisure too, hotels,' he said.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum spoke up Thursday, saying she had told a visiting US official that 'we didn't agree with the use of raids to detain people working honestly in the United States.'
Protests also took place in Spokane, Seattle, Tucson, Las Vegas, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Milwaukee, Chicago, Atlanta, and Boston, according to US media.
A nationwide 'No Kings' movement was expected on Saturday, the same day Trump attends a highly unusual military parade in the US capital.
The parade, featuring warplanes and tanks, has been organized to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the founding of the US Army but also happens to be on the day of Trump's 79th birthday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Attacking Iran, Israel again calls bluff of 'man of peace' Trump
WHEN US President Donald Trump publicly implored Israel not to attack Iran, he declared, once again, that his goal was to be a peacemaker. Hours later on Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – one of Trump's closest international allies – unleashed a major military campaign described as a "preemptive" strike against Iran's nuclear programme. The attack marks the latest setback for Trump's lofty goal set out at the start of his second term of being a "man of peace." Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom Trump has also boasted a warm relationship, has rebuffed his overtures for a ceasefire with Ukraine. And Israel resumed another massive offensive in Gaza after talks bogged down on extending a ceasefire with Hamas reached with Trump's support at the end of his predecessor Joe Biden's term. Trump's friend and roving envoy Steve Witkoff – who has negotiated in all three crises – had been set to meet Iranian officials again Sunday in Oman. Trump later was careful not to distance himself from Israel, where some sources sought to suggest that the public US statements were meant to catch Iran off guard. In successive social media posts, Trump said that Iran had failed to accept his terms and that the attack came one day after a 60-day deadline he had issued, although that did not explain why Witkoff had still scheduled talks with Iran. Trump separately has repeatedly hailed US diplomacy that helped reach a ceasefire last month between India and Pakistan as a triumph, saying he averted nuclear war. Before Israel launched its operation, Trump said: "I don't want them going in, because I think it would blow it." Netanyahu has described Iran's cleric-run government, which backs Hamas, as an existential threat and already last year ordered strikes that knocked out its air defences. "We've clearly seen a fork in the road in the American and Israeli approaches to this problem set," said Dana Stroul, a former senior Pentagon official who is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "These strikes are going to disrupt and delay and degrade Iran's nuclear program. The question, I think, is whether or not the United States and Israel in the future are going to work together on what to do to maximise the time that's put back on the clock," she said. Stroul noted that rifts had been building between Israel and Trump, who last month agreed to remove sanctions on Syria after former Islamist guerrilla Ahmed al-Sharaa swept into power. Trump embraced the new Syrian leader after appeals on a tour of Gulf Arab monarchies – which have also backed diplomacy on Iran. In Qatar last month, Trump said after meeting the emir that he believed a deal was in sight with Iran and that there would be no "nuclear dust" over the region. Despite growing disagreements, Israel enjoys robust support in Trump's right-wing base. The Trump administration in recent days has again taken lonely positions to back Israel, with the United States casting one of the only votes at the UN General Assembly against a Gaza ceasefire resolution and criticising top allies, including Britain, for imposing sanctions on far-right Israeli ministers. Justin Logan, director of defence and foreign policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the Israeli attack will "destroy US diplomatic efforts" on Iran and called for Trump to reject any US military role in protecting Israel from retaliation. "Israel has the right to choose its own foreign policy. At the same time, it has the responsibility to bear the costs of that policy," he said. But lawmakers in Trump's Republican Party quickly rallied behind Israel. Senator Tom Cotton said that the United States should "back Israel to the hilt, all the way," and topple Iran's Islamic Republic if it targets US troops. Trump's Democratic rivals, who mostly backed his diplomacy on Iran, were aghast at Israel's action ahead of new US-Iran talks. "Israel's alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence," said Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Forces Committee.
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
'Unacceptable': Iranians seethe after Israeli onslaught
IRANIANS called for revenge on Friday demanding a swift response to a dizzying wave of strikes by Israel, as some took to the streets in protest, while others sheltered inside, unsure what would happen next. The aerial onslaught killed several of the military's top brass, targeted an array of leading scientists and struck military and nuclear sites across Iran in an unprecedented attack that left many seething with anger. "How much longer are we going to live in fear?" asked Ahmad Moadi, a 62-year-old retiree. "As an Iranian, I believe there must be an overwhelming response, a scathing response." The raids appeared to push the longtime enemies into full-blown conflict following years of fighting a shadow war mostly conducted through proxies. Iran regularly arrests individuals it accuses of spying for Israel amid a flurry of targeted assassinations and acts of sabotage targeting its nuclear programme in recent years. At least six scientists involved in Iran's nuclear programme were killed in Friday's strikes. "They've killed so many university professors and researchers, and now they want to negotiate?" Moadi exclaimed, referring to calls for Iran to go ahead with nuclear talks with Israel's US ally planned for this weekend. As Iran continued to assess the damage, some residents rallied in the streets of Tehran chanting: "Death to Israel, death to America," while waving Iranian flags and portraits of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. State television said similar demonstrations were held in cities across the country. The Israeli strikes followed repeated threats from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who appeared to finally cap a years-long quest to strike Iran's nuclear programme. "We can't let this bastard continue, or we'll end up like Gaza," Abbas Ahmadi, a 52-year-old Tehran resident, told AFP from behind the wheel of his car. "Iran must destroy him, it must do something." Friday's attacks came after more than a year of soaring tensions as Israel took on Iran's regional allies Hamas in Gaza, Hizbollah in Lebanon and the Huthis in Yemen. Amid the tensions, Israel and Iran exchanged aerial barrages on two separate occasions last year. while stopping short of a full-scale war. But following Friday's attack, all bets were off over what would come next, with Khamenei warning Israel faced a "bitter and painful" fate, while the Iranian military said there would be "no limits" to its response. Apart from scattered protests, Tehran's streets were largely deserted, except for queues at petrol stations, a familiar sight in times of crisis. Air traffic was halted at Tehran's Imam Khomeini International Airport amid disruption across the region. In the upscale district of Nobonyad in north Tehran, rescuers continued to comb through the rubble of two apartment blocks targeted in Israeli strikes. Families with tear-streaked faces gathered nearby. "They want to deprive us of our nuclear capability - that's unacceptable," said Ahmad Razaghi, 56, calmly echoing the official line. For Farnoush Rezaei, a 45-year-old nurse wearing a colourful hijab, Friday's attacks represented a final act by Israel – a country "on its last breath."
New Straits Times
5 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Malaysia needs to recalibrate long-term strategy
THE strategic rivalry between the United States and China has intensified in recent years, evolving into a long-term contest for primacy across technology, trade, ideology and defence. While the epicentres of this contest may lie in the Taiwan Strait, South China Sea and East Asian high-tech corridors, the ramifications reverberate far into Southeast Asia — placing heightened expectations on the foreign and defence policies of niched powers such as Malaysia. For Malaysia, the stakes have never been higher. After all, our strategic geography — located along the vital sea lanes of the Malacca Strait, a maritime choke point further connecting the Indian and Pacific Oceans — renders our country a natural focal point in this zero-sum contest. But unlike the US or China, Malaysia does not seek hegemony. Instead, it seeks relevance through diplomacy, strategic autonomy and non-alignment. However, such a posture is becoming harder to sustain when both great powers demand visible allegiance — whether in the form of defence procurement, port access or rhetorical support in multilateral forums. Recent developments only underscore this pressure. The US has called for Indo-Pacific partners to commit up to five per cent of their gross domestic product on defence spending, an unrealistic ask for a country like Malaysia, which is still navigating post-Covid-19 pandemic economic recovery. Similarly, great powers continue to deepen its presence in the South and East China Seas, testing the limits of many countries on their exclusive economic zone, as evidenced by repeated forays of their defence assets in these waters. While Malaysia has lodged diplomatic protests on some of these incursions, it has not escalated these incidents publicly, preferring quiet diplomacy without acquiescence and occasionally airing the concerns in institutional mechanisms such as Asean; often behind closed doors. But the room for ambiguity is narrowing. The revival of US-led security coalitions such as the Quad (with India, Japan, and Australia) and AUKUS (with Australia and the United Kingdom), as well as the Five Power Defence Arrangements (Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and the UK), demonstrates that security alignments are being reconfigured. These alliances suggest a rebalancing of defence resources and infrastructure away from ad hoc deterrence and towards integrated defence ecosystems. Thus, what is Malaysia's long-term strategy in navigating this geopolitical rivalry? FIRST, we must clearly articulate a doctrine of strategic autonomy. It involves having sufficient economic, diplomatic and defence capabilities to independently determine national interests without succumbing to pressure from any single external actor. SECOND, we should deepen multilateralism. As Asean chair, Malaysia has a unique platform to reinvigorate regional diplomacy, particularly through the Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting Plus, the East Asia Summit, and the Asean Regional Forum. They should be retooled to facilitate Track 1.5 and Track 2.0 dialogues that can defuse tensions and offer third-party mediation options in flashpoints in IndoChina such as Myanmar or the Thailand-Cambodia border skirmish; of which the latter is being adeptly handled by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as Asean chair. THIRD, Malaysia's defence modernisation must be calibrated and intelligent. We should prioritise unmanned systems, cyberdefence and maritime domain awareness — areas that offer asymmetrical advantages. The recent acquisition of Turkish-made drones and the partnership with the UK, France and South Korea on defence industrial collaboration provide a useful template. FOURTH, Malaysian diplomacy must evolve in line with 21st-century expectations. This involves embedding economic statecraft into foreign policy. The China-US contest is as much about 5G networks, semiconductors and artificial intelligence supply chains as it is about military deployment. Malaysia's participation in frameworks such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and digital economy partnerships can serve as hedging tools against overdependence. LASTLY, the political leadership must communicate this complexity to the public. Geopolitics can no longer be confined to bureaucratic corridors. The Malaysian public needs to understand why defence spending, diplomatic engagements and new partnerships matter in ensuring national sovereignty, food security and economic resilience. A well-informed populace can be a bulwark against foreign misinformation and manipulation.
