Reporter denies there are riots in LA while chaos unfolds behind him
A local TV reporter in Los Angeles questioned whether the city's violent unrest qualified as rioting - even as a fire burned behind him live on the air. ABC7 reporter Tim Caputo insisted that the 'vast majority' of protestors involved in the demonstrations were 'people taking videos [and] people waving flags' during his one-the-ground report. He made the remarks as black smoke billowed into the air behind him and a loud explosion could be heard in the distance.
During the segment, ABC7 anchor Jory Rand asked whether those responsible for torching five vehicles were 'a group that splintered off,' 'making it look like it's a lot worse than the situation actually playing out on the ground.' 'That's the quintessential question when you have rallies, demonstrations, riots, if you will,' Caputo replied.
'I wouldn't go as far to call it that. I know president Trump had tweeted about riots and looting - I don't know that I would characterize it that way.' As the broadcast showed aerial images of cars on fire, Caputo directed his cameraman away from rising smoke.
The clip was quickly re-shared on social media , earning swift criticism from viewers. 'If you take out the really violent stuff it's relatively peaceful,' one X user joked. 'He thinks we have no eyes to see,' another chimed.
'Is this AI,' a third quipped. The chaos was triggered Friday by immigration raids that resulted in dozens of arrests of what authorities say are illegal migrants and gang members. Police ordered the public to disperse from downtown overnight after an intense day of demonstrations in the region. Around 300 National Guard troops were deployed to the region, spurring anger and fear among many residents.
By noon local time on Sunday, hundreds had gathered outside the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles, where Caputo was reporting. Protesters there approached members of the federal agency and were fired upon with control munitions.
The group then moved to block traffic on the 101 freeway. The 300 guards called to the crisis have were seen using tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash bangs to control the crowds. President Trump has said the National Guard was necessary because Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats have failed to quell recent protests targeting immigration agents.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
23 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump: India 'hopeful' of reaching deal with US before tariff deadline
Delhi is "hopeful" of reaching a trade agreement with the US before the 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs ends on 9 July, India's foreign minister has said. In an interview with French daily Le Figaro on Tuesday, S Jaishankar, who is on a four-day visit to Belgium and France, said India and US had already begun trade negotiations before Trump unveiled his 2 April 'Liberation day' tariffs on global partners, including up to 27% on India. "Prime Minister [Narendra] Modi met with Donald Trump in February and they decided to further open access to our respective markets," Jaishankar told the paper."We are hopeful of reaching an agreement before the end of the tariff suspension on 9 July." Earlier in the day, a US delegation held closed-door meetings with Indian trade ministry officials in Delhi. An unnamed Indian official told Reuters news agency that the recent set of trade talks with US officials had been productive and "helped in making progress towards crafting a mutually beneficial and balanced agreement including through achievement of early wins". Until recently, the US was India's largest trading partner, with bilateral trade reaching $190bn. India has already reduced tariffs on a range of goods - including Bourbon whiskey and motorcycles - but the US continues to run a $45bn (£33bn) trade deficit with India, which Trump is keen to and Modi have set a target to more than double this figure to $500bn, though Delhi is unlikely to offer concessions in politically sensitive sectors such as agriculture. Earlier this month, the White House told its trade partners that the US wants them to make their best trade offers, with the deadline fast approaching, Reuters news agency reported. Last week, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said he was "very optimistic" about a deal between India and US, which he said said would come in the "not too distant future".In May, Trump made global headlines by claiming that Delhi had offered to drop all tariffs on goods imported from the US. These claims were swiftly disputed by India, with the foreign minister saying that "nothing is decided till everything is".Jaishankar had previously emphasised that any trade deal must be mutually beneficial and work for both separately about US foreign policy under Trump, Jaishankar told Le Figaro he sees the US "looking at things from the perspective of its immediate interest and seeking benefits for itself"."Frankly, I will do the same with them," Jaishankar added. Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's hush money case is back in court. These judges could decide what happens next
The appeals process begins in earnest on Wednesday, after a New York City jury last year convicted Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with a scheme to silence an adult film star, whose story about having sex with Trump threatened to derail his 2016 presidential campaign. That unanimous conviction on May 30 — and a judge's sentencing on January 10 that preserved the historic verdict — ensured that Trump would return to the White House as the first-ever criminally convicted president. The conviction carried no consequences for the president. Still, it left an indelible stain he has so far failed to remove despite successfully fighting off federal indictments that consumed his 2024 campaign. But his legal battle isn't over. On Wednesday, a federal appeals court in Manhattan will hear oral arguments as his attorneys attempt to transfer the case from New York criminal court to federal jurisdiction, a process known as 'removal.' The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg opposes the move, arguing such a case cannot be removed to federal court after a conviction. But attorneys for the president claim that his 'unprecedented prosecution 'belongs there. If the case is moved to federal court, Justice Department lawyers could theoretically dismiss it. In the weeks leading up to the 2016 election, Trump's then-attorney, Michael Cohen, paid Stormy Daniels $130,000 for the rights to her story, one of several so-called hush money schemes the president arranged with tabloid publishers to prevent embarrassing stories from being published anywhere. Trump then reimbursed Cohen in a series of checks, some of which were cut from the White House. Those reimbursements were falsely recorded in accounting records as 'legal expenses,' fulfilling what prosecutors called a conspiracy to influence the 2016 election unlawfully. A weeks-long trial in Manhattan criminal court last year included blockbuster testimony from Cohen, Daniels, White House aides, and Trump's allies. At the same time, emails, phone records, text messages, invoices, checks with Trump's Sharpie-inked signature, and other documents — including a handwritten note from his accountants that outlined the math for Cohen's checks — gave jurors the paper trail. Days before Trump's inauguration, and more than seven months after the jury's decision, New York Justice Juan Merchan handed Trump a sentence that preserved the verdict without any criminal consequences. Manhattan prosecutors and Judge Merchan agreed that the only remaining option for the conclusion of the case — navigating a landmark Supreme Court decision on 'immunity' and the potential interference with his second term — meant abandoning a typical sentence of jail, fines or probation. 'The only lawful sentence' that remained for Trump's crimes is that of an 'unconditional discharge,' Merchan told Trump during his sentencing hearing on January 10. Trump continues to deny any wrongdoing. His attorneys, whom the president has appointed to top roles at the Department of Justice, argued that certain evidence used at trial should have been withheld from jurors under the Supreme Court's 'immunity' decision, which shields the president from criminal prosecution for 'official' acts in office. However, those arguments were rejected by Judge Merchan, the New York appeals court, and the Supreme Court, which stated that Trump's challenges to 'alleged evidentiary violations' could be addressed through the normal course of appeal. Meanwhile, Trump's long-simmering fight to move the case entirely out of the hands of state courts will be heard before a panel of federal appeals court judges. The president has hired the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell to support his federal appeal. Last month, Justice Department lawyers filed a supporting brief in the case, arguing that the judges should throw it out entirely. Trump is simultaneously appealing an $83 million verdict in a defamation case from E. Jean Carroll as well as a massive judgment against him in a sprawling civil fraud case, with interest growing to more than half a billion dollars owed to the state of New York after the president and his top associates defrauded banks and investors to benefit his real-estate empire.
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
South Korea halts loudspeaker broadcasts along border with rival North Korea
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
