Live Updates: Police Clear Protesters in Seattle, Las Vegas and L.A.
California liberals welcomed Gov. Gavin Newsom's speech condemning President Trump, but some remained skeptical of the governor. Republicans, meanwhile, saw his address as opportunistic and blamed him for the state's turmoil.
For months, Californians weren't sure what to make of Gov. Gavin Newsom.
There was the new podcast on which he interviewed right-wing influencers and said he felt trans athletes shouldn't participate in women's sports. There was the meeting in February with President Trump in the White House. And there were occasional snipes at Republicans, but nothing like those Mr. Newsom had dished out in years past.
Then came a blistering nine-minute speech on Tuesday in which Mr. Newsom warned Americans that Mr. Trump was destroying democracy and acting as an authoritarian who would eventually send the military to states across the country.
Many liberals in California cheered Mr. Newsom, finally seeing in him the leader of the resistance that they had been missing. Those feeling confused and fearful since Mr. Trump started his second term were looking for someone to stick up for them and said they appreciated Mr. Newsom's forcefulness.
'In a time of rising fear and growing threats to democracy, he spoke not just as a governor, but as a moral leader,' said Representative Lateefah Simon, Democrat of California. 'He named the danger plainly.'
But others, while supportive of his message, were not entirely convinced. They said testing the political climate ahead of a potential run for president.
'Even if you're late to the party, you know, welcome to the fight,' said Hugo Soto-Martinez, a progressive City Council member in Los Angeles, who appreciated what Mr. Newsom said but wished the governor had stood up to the president sooner.
Adrian Tirtanadi, executive director of Open Door Legal, a nonprofit which provides free legal representation for immigrants and others, said he liked all of the words in Mr. Newsom's speech. But, he said, he wondered why the governor was not backing up the rhetoric with more financial support for immigration lawyers who could fight deportation.
Big talk without much action, Mr. Tirtanadi said, is often the California way.
Still, others appreciated that Mr. Newsom had demanded that Mr. Trump stop workplace raids and filed lawsuits seeking to block the deployment of National Guard troops and Marines in Southern California. That has given some hope to immigrants who have felt powerless.
When David Campos was 14, he and his family traveled by foot and by bus, across deserts and over mountains, to California from their home in Guatemala. They scurried under a border fence and settled in South Central Los Angeles without legal papers.
The family eventually obtained citizenship through his father's carpentry job. Mr. Campos went on to Stanford University and Harvard Law School, served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and is now the vice chairman of the California Democratic Party.
Mr. Campos said he was glad that Mr. Newsom, the former San Francisco mayor with whom he sometimes clashed, took a defiant stance toward Mr. Trump.
'I'm glad he's rising to this moment,' Mr. Campos, 54, said in an interview. 'The governor reminded us that if the president can do this in California, he can do it anywhere in this country. That's how a democracy can die.'
Republicans in California, many of whom have aligned with President Trump, said they were decidedly unimpressed with the governor's speech.
Senator Brian Jones, the State Senate minority leader, said that the governor seemed to have been filming an early campaign commercial with his speech, from the way the flags were set in his backdrop to the suit he was wearing.
'It doesn't do anything to lower tensions in L.A.,' Mr. Jones said. 'When he says we all need to stand up, is he encouraging more people to show up to the riots and participate?'
James Gallagher, the Republican leader of the California State Assembly, called the governor's address 'self-righteous political posturing.'
Mr. Gallagher said California's policy of preventing local law enforcement from working with federal immigration officials created the current tension. He said he found it funny that Mr. Newsom was accusing Mr. Trump of being authoritarian when the governor ordered Californians to close their businesses, stay home from church, attend school on Zoom, wear masks and get vaccinated during the Covid-19 pandemic.
'He was a total tyrant, and he has no business talking about authoritarianism because he is exhibit A,' Mr. Gallagher said.
Mr. Newsom's speech, as well as his sharp-tongued retorts to Republicans on social media this week, won some plaudits from younger influencers.
Dwayne Murphy, Jr., a 34-year-old content creator who lives in Downey, Calif., and said he votes Democrat, said he appreciated that the governor 'seems to be hyper-focused on standing up for this state at a time like this, and I feel like that's what people are very encouraged by.'
Inkiad Kabir, 20, a pop culture content creator who lives in the Inland Empire region of California, said that Mr. Newsom was the rare Democrat willing to go on the attack, calling him 'basically liberal Trump, in a way.'
Mr. Kabir created a popular TikTok video this week in which he called the governor 'Daddy Newsom' and likened the governor to a 'toxic ex that you promise you're not going to go back to, but you always go back to.'
For now, it seems, Mr. Kabir has gone back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NYC mayoral debate night: List of candidates, latest polls
The Brief With just weeks until the New York City mayoral primary, a high-stakes Democratic debate took place Thursday night, drawing increased attention to the tight race. Only seven candidates took the stage Thursday night including front runners, former Governor Andrew Cuomo and Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani. Thursday night's debate highlighted several hot-button issues, with rent-stabilized housing emerging as a key flashpoint. NEW YORK - With just weeks until the New York City mayoral primary, a high-stakes Democratic debate took place Thursday night, drawing increased attention to the tight race. Only seven candidates took the stage, including front-runners, former Governor Andrew Cuomo and Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani. Mayor Eric Adams, who is seeking reelection as an independent, will skip the June 24 primary and avoid a direct matchup with the two. Thursday night's debate highlighted several hot-button issues, with rent-stabilized housing emerging as a key flashpoint. Most candidates backed a rent freeze to address affordability and the city's housing shortage, while Andrew Cuomo and Whitney Tilson declined to support it. On immigration, nearly every contender positioned themselves as staunch defenders of New York City's sanctuary laws in response to President Trump's ongoing crackdown. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls For the first time since former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo entered the race back on March 1, one poll has him trailing. It comes as other recent polls show Cuomo roughly 10 percentage points ahead. Cuomo polls strongest with Black voters and those over 50, while Mamdani leads among younger voters, white voters, and the college-educated (Emerson/PIX11/The Hill, May 2025). New York City will use ranked-choice voting in primary and special elections for mayoral races. Here's everything to know about the 2025 Mayoral Election. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Why you should care: In ranked choice voting, you can rank up to 5 candidates. First Round: If a candidate gets over 50%, they win. No Majority? The lowest-ranked candidate is eliminated, and their votes go to voters' next choices. Repeat: This continues until two candidates remain, and the one with the most votes wins. Results are final only after all ballots (including absentees) are counted. For the June 27 Primary, ranked-choice voting will be used for City Council races. Here's a quick look at the key candidates vying for mayor and what they stand for. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls What they're saying: Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, 64, announced that he is running as an independent, forgoing the Democratic primary for mayor. The decision comes after a federal judge dismissed the corruption indictment against Adams, ending the first criminal case against a sitting city mayor in modern history. Adams explained that the case "dragged on too long" with "false accusations" hanging over him, and he believes the city is better served by independent leadership, not influenced by extremists on either side. Now he plans to appeal directly to all New Yorkers as an independent candidate in the general election. Jim Walden, 59, a longtime NYC lawyer, is running as an independent in the 2025 mayoral race. He is known for handling high-profile cases, including serving as special counsel to a task force created by New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy to investigate the state's tax incentive programs. He's also advocated for NYCHA families exposed to toxic lead. Walden has been openly critical of Mayor Adams' "City of Yes" plan, claiming it has serious flaws and doesn't address the housing crisis effectively. His campaign focuses on housing solutions and anti-corruption, with a promise to build over 50,000 new housing units every year. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, 67, seems to be focusing his 2025 mayoral campaign on what he describes as a city in crisis. In his 2025 mayoral campaign ad, Cuomo positioned himself as a leader ready to address what he calls "a city in crisis." Cuomo argues that the city feels unsafe and out of control because of poor leadership, and he believes his experience makes him the right person to fix these problems and bring the city back on track. Despite stepping down as governor in 2021 amid scandal, Cuomo is seeking a political comeback, positioning himself as a solution to the city's most pressing issues. Adrienne Adams, 64, jumped in as a contender to enter the race, directly after former Cuomo. Adams, who was first elected to the City Council in a 2017 special election, is nearing the end of her term due to term limits. If elected, she would make history as the first woman, the first Black woman, and the first City Council speaker to become mayor of New York City. If she officially enters the race, Adams will likely face significant obstacles, including limited campaign resources and a recent poll showing her with only 2% support among likely Democratic voters. Despite these challenges, she says her experience sets her apart and has reportedly been urged to run by key stakeholders, including unions such as District Council 37 and 32BJ. Brad Lander, 55, is the current NYC comptroller and a progressive who advocates for police reform, affordable housing, and better management of the migrant crisis. He has criticized Adams' handling of migrant services and aims to improve workforce development for migrants. Lander has faced criticism for speeding violations despite pushing for stricter traffic laws. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls SKIP TO: Candidates | How to vote | Ranked choice State Sen. Jessica Ramos, 39, announced that she would be running for NYC mayor amid calls for Eric Adams to resign. Ramos focuses on affordable housing, tackling human trafficking, and improving city services. As the only woman in the race, Ramos connects deeply with immigrant communities and emphasizes the importance of basic services like garbage collection and school funding. She is also a strong advocate for closing the immigrant trust gap and providing better support for migrant workers. Whitney Tilson, 58, is an investor and lifelong Democrat who has emphasized the need for a city that is safe, affordable, and prosperous, criticizing career politicians for failing to address key issues. Tilson, who is not a career politician, pledges to restore common sense to City Hall and fight for real change in leadership. He believes that with working families leaving the city, New York cannot afford more of the same leadership. Zellnor Myrie, 38, is a Brooklyn native focused on affordable housing and electoral reform. Myrie is known for legislative victories on tenant protections and voting rights. As Chair of the Elections Committee, Myrie has worked on improving election processes and policies. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls Zohran Mamdani , 33, is a self-declared socialist with a focus on rent freezes, free bus rides, and no-cost childcare. He advocates for housing affordability and aims to redirect funds to public institutions like CUNY. Mamdani reportedly reached the maximum funding limit of $8 million for the June primary, making him the first candidate to do so. Mamdani is known for his activism, including leading a hunger strike alongside taxi drivers. SKIP TO: Candidates | How to vote | Ranked choice Scott Stringer, 64, former NYC comptroller, is focused on transparency and good governance. Stringer was the first mayoral candidate to qualify for public matching funds. He gained attention last mayoral cycle in the race despite sexual misconduct allegations from a former intern, which he denies. Stringer is tied for third in the most recent poll with 8 percent alongside state Sen. Jessica Ramos, State Sen. Zellnor Myrie. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls Michael Blake, 42, a former Bronx assemblyman and vice chair of the DNC, is known for his focus on economic equity and social justice. He previously ran for New York's 15th congressional district, where he lost to Ritchie Torres. Blake, a former White House aide to President Obama, also served as campaign manager for Reshma Saujani's 2013 run for New York City Public Advocate. He has focused his run committed to issues like fair wages, universal childcare, and housing equality through his work with the Atlas Strategy Group, which focuses on policy issues for communities of color. Curtis Sliwa, 67, is a longtime New York City activist and founder of the Guardian Angels, a 1970s nonprofit known for its crime-fighting efforts and signature red berets. Sliwa says he's running for mayor to "finally end the disastrous reign of de Blasio-Cuomo," with public safety and police funding at the core of his campaign. He proposes adding 4,500 uniformed officers and 500 undercover officers to patrol the subways and pledges to restore all NYPD budget cuts, according to The City. Sliwa is a Republican who does not support President Donald Trump, and has noted that he's never voted for him. SKIP TO: Republicans | Democrats | Independents| How to vote | Ranked choice explained | Polls June 14: Last day to update your address for the general election. June 24: Primary Election Day. Polls open from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. Early voting: Available from Saturday, June 14 through Sunday, June 22. Make sure your registration and address are current so you can vote without any issues. New York City will use ranked-choice voting in Primary and Special Elections for Mayor, Public Advocate, Comptroller, Borough President, and City Council. This change was approved by voters in 2019.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Pritzker slams House Republicans after sanctuary law hearing: ‘Again, nothing accomplished'
The Brief Gov. J.B. Pritzker spent over eight hours testifying before the House Oversight Committee, criticizing Republicans for focusing on partisan attacks instead of immigration reform. Tensions rose during exchanges with Rep. Mary Miller, who questioned Pritzker about working with a potential Trump administration and ICE; Pritzker later called her a "terrible congresswoman." Pritzker defended Illinois' TRUST Act, saying it remains necessary due to federal inaction on immigration, and called for comprehensive reform from Congress. WASHINGTON, D.C. - After testifying before the House Oversight Committee in Washington, D.C. for eight hours on Thursday over the state of Illinois' sanctuary policies, Gov. J.B. Pritzker said ultimately, nothing was accomplished. "This Republican majority was not at all interested in addressing comprehensive immigration reform, which is what we need in this country, and instead, they simply attacked three Democratic governors who are all trying to deal with the failures of this Congress," Pritzker said. "Look, the Republicans have a bare majority in the House of Representatives, and they control the government. They should work with Democrats to get this reform done. They should have listened to us about the challenges that we have in dealing with their failures, but they did not. It was just attack after attack and it's too bad. We had an awful lot to offer." What we know Pritzker appeared before the committee alongside Democratic governors Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York to testify on state-level immigration policies, including Illinois' status as a sanctuary state. The hearing also touched on the incident that day in which U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., was shoved and handcuffed during a press conference led by South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem and officials from the Department of Homeland Security. "They showed no respect about the attack on Senator Padilla. All he wanted was just answers to questions. He went into a press conference that Kristi Noem was running, tried to ask questions and instead was thrown down to the ground and handcuffed. I mean, this is Donald Trump's America, where they take a Democratic senator, throw him down on the ground, and handcuff him for just wanting answers that his constituents need for him to do the job," Pritzker said. Another tense exchange came with U.S. Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., who cited a report that Pritzker had called for "mass protests, mobilization and disruption." She then asked whether he would commit to working with the Trump administration and ICE to prevent violence like that seen during protests in Los Angeles. "We work every day with our federal government… we do all the time work with the federal government, with law enforcement," Pritzker said. "I'm taking that as a yes," Miller said. Following the hearing, Pritzker criticized Miller, saying she "brings nothing home to her district." "Mary Miller is a terrible congresswoman for her district. She literally brings nothing home to the district. She does not believe in doing things for her constituents and, instead, all she does is attack, attack, and attack. She does that on her Twitter account, she does that on her Facebook account. She barely shows up for her constituents and almost never wants to engage in conversation about actual policies that will help the people of her district," Pritzker said. Illinois TRUST Act Throughout the hearing, lawmakers repeatedly brought up Illinois' TRUST Act, which limits how much local law enforcement can cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The law, enacted in 2017 under Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, has faced renewed scrutiny. Pritzker was asked if he would consider making any updates to the law, to which he responded, "I think the TRUST Act has done the work that it's supposed to do in an environment in which the federal government is not doing its job." "I said to Congressman LaHood, 'do your job.' And I say that to all members of the Congress. It is time for comprehensive immigration reform," Pritzker added. Pritzker closed his remarks after the hearing by condemning the overall conduct of the Republican-led committee. "An entire day of just harping on things that, frankly, were mostly false," he said. "Would I say it was a waste? I think this entire Republican-controlled Congress is a waste." RELATED: Pritzker testifies before Congress on Illinois sanctuary laws
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Israeli strikes on Iran lead to new test of Trump's ability to deliver on 'America first' agenda
WASHINGTON (AP) — Just hours before Israel launched strikes on Iran early Friday, President Donald Trump was still holding onto tattered threads of hope that a long-simmering dispute over Tehran's nuclear program could be resolved without military action. But with the Israeli military operation called 'Rising Lion' now underway — something Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says will go on for 'as many days as it takes' — Trump will be tested anew on his ability to make good on a campaign promise to disentangle the U.S. from foreign conflicts. The administration's immediate reaction to the Israeli assault came not from Trump, but from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is doubling as Trump's national security adviser. He made clear that the U.S. was 'not involved' and that the administration's central concern was protecting U.S. forces in the region. 'Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense,' Rubio said in a statement. 'President Trump and the Administration have taken all necessary steps to protect our forces and remain in close contact with our regional partners. Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel.' As Israel stepped up planning for strikes in recent weeks, however, Iran, had signaled that the United States would be held responsible in the event of an Israeli attack. The warning was issued by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi even as he engaged in talks with Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program. On Thursday, just hours before the strikes, Trump made the case that there was still time for diplomacy — but it was running out. The White House had even planned to dispatch Witkoff to Oman on Sunday for the next round of talks with Araghchi. It wasn't immediately clear how the strikes would affect plans for those discussions. Trump is set to meet with his National Security Council in the Situation Room on Friday to discuss the tricky path ahead. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., offered rare words of Democratic praise for the Trump administration after the attack 'for prioritizing diplomacy' and 'refraining from participating in tonight's actions.' But he also expressed deep concern about what the Israeli strikes could mean for U.S. personnel in the region. Iranian officials made clear that they intended to retaliate with decisive action after the Israeli strikes targeted Iran's main enrichment facility in Natanz and the country's ballistic missile program, as well as top nuclear scientists and officials. 'I cannot understand why Israel would launch a preemptive strike at this juncture, knowing high level diplomatic discussions between the United States and Iran are scheduled for this weekend,' Kaine said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the U.S. Senate 'stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region and, first and foremost, to defend the American people from Iranian aggression, especially our troops and civilians serving overseas.' Trump in the hours before the attack still appeared hopeful that there would be more time for diplomacy. The president, in an exchange with reporters, again urged Iran to negotiate a deal. He warned that a 'massive conflict' could occur in the Middle East without it. He later took to social media to emphasize that his 'entire Administration has been directed to negotiate with Iran.' As long as there was a chance for an agreement, Trump said of Israel, 'I don't want them going in because I think it would blow it.' But it was clear to the administration that Israel was edging toward taking military action against Iran. The State Department on Wednesday directed a voluntary evacuation of nonessential personnel and their families from some U.S. diplomatic outposts in the Middle East. 'I don't want to be the one that didn't give any warning, and missiles are flying into their buildings. It's possible. So I had to do it,' Trump explained. Before Israel launched the strikes, some of Trump's strongest supporters were raising concerns about what another expansive conflict in the Mideast could mean for the Republican president who ran on a promise to quickly end the brutal wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Trump has struggled to find an endgame to either of those conflicts and to make good on two of his biggest foreign policy campaign promises. And after criticizing President Joe Biden during last year's campaign for preventing Israel from carrying out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Trump found himself making the case to the Israelis to give diplomacy a chance. The push by the Trump administration to persuade Tehran to give up its nuclear program came after the U.S. and other world powers in 2015 reached a long-term, comprehensive nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. But Trump unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the 'worst deal ever.' The way forward is even more clouded now. 'No issue currently divides the right as much as foreign policy,' Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA and an ally of the Trump White House, posted on X Thursday. 'I'm very concerned based on (everything) I've seen in the grassroots the last few months that this will cause a massive schism in MAGA and potentially disrupt our momentum and our insanely successful Presidency.' Jack Posobiec, another prominent Trump supporter, warned a 'direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition.' 'Trump smartly ran against starting new wars, this is what the swing states voted for — the midterms are not far and Congress' majority is already razor-thin,' Posobiec added in a posting on X. Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, said the job ahead for Trump and his team is to protect U.S. forces who are highly vulnerable to Iranian retaliation. 'Israel's strike on Iran must not become the United States' war,' Kelanic said. 'The U.S. public overwhelmingly opposes another military engagement in the Middle East for good reason — an open-ended military campaign in Iran would risk repeating the catastrophic mistakes of the 2003 war in Iraq, which inadvertently strengthened Tehran's influence there.' ___ AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro contributed reporting.
