ReportWire

Tag: challenge

  • Independent studios scramble to stay afloat as film and TV production lags

    [ad_1]

    Shep Wainright sure would like to rent you a fancy new soundstage.

    Last week, he opened a $230-million movie and television studio on the edge of the Arts District in downtown Los Angeles nestled alongside the dramatic new Sixth Street Bridge.

    The state-of-the-art complex has five sound stages, offices and other proper movie studio features such as a mill, commissary and base camp.

    “We just had all the major networks, all the major streaming platforms walk through this facility and they can’t believe how nice it is,” said Wainright, managing partner of East End Studios.

    But so far, no one has signed up to make a project at East End Studios’ newest property, even as state and local leaders tout new tax incentives to boost the film industry.

    “Everyone is doing their best to try to bring productions back to Los Angeles,” said Wainright, “but it’s pretty dire.”

    The $230-million East End Studios – Mission Campus opened last week in Boyle Heights. It has five sound stages, offices and other production facilities.

    (East End Studios)

    The challenges facing owners of local sound stages came into sharp relief last week when one of the largest landlords in Hollywood — Hackman Capital Partners — said it was turning over the historic Radford Studio Center in Studio City to Goldman Sachs.

    After years of aggressive sound stage development across Southern California — fueled by a surge in TV production and low interest rates — the writing was on the wall as filming activity dropped to historic lows.

    The average annual sound stage occupancy rate dropped to 63% in 2024, the most recent year data are available, according to FilmLA, a nonprofit that tracks filming in the L.A. area.

    The 2024 rate is down from 69% the prior year and is well below the average occupancy rate of 90% seen between 2016 and 2022, according to FilmLA data.

    An upcoming report for 2025 is expected to reveal little change in occupancy levels, said spokesman Philip Sokoloski. The group recently reported a16% drop in film and TV shoot days last year compared with 2024.

    Those busy days were heady, but they weren’t built to last, said real estate broker Carl Muhlstein, who helps arrange sales and leases of studios and other large entertainment facilities.

    The dawn of the streaming era set off a scramble to grab market share among newcomers like Netflix and old-timers like Paramount and Disney, who created hundreds of original scripted televisions shows. By 2022, during the height of so-called peak TV, nearly 200 shows were in production industry-wide.

    “It was all about speeding to market and capturing eyeballs by throwing billions of dollars” at creating new shows and movies, Muhlstein said. “They were all building platforms.”

    Landlords raced to build or buy sound stages to accommodate all the production, and they may have overshot the mark.

    In 2021, independent studio giant Hackman Capital Partners and Square Mile Capital Management paid $1.85 billion for Radford Studio Center, a popular lot dating to silent film days that gave Studio City its name.

    Now the owners have defaulted on their $1.1-billion mortgage after production slowdowns made servicing its debt unsustainable and lender Goldman Sachs is expected to take control of the lot.

    For Culver City-based Hackman, the timing couldn’t have been worse. Shortly after it bought Radford Studio Center, the industry began to see theatrical slowdowns from the pandemic, the 2023 dual writers’ and actors’ strikes and the cutback in spending at the studios.

    California also lost market share to rivals as producers continued to migrate to other states and countries offering lower costs — and bigger tax breaks.

    “Los Angeles has the best infrastructure, the best crews, and the deepest creative talent in the world for film production, but California has failed to keep the industry competitive with tax credits offered by other states and countries,” Chief Executive Michael Hackman said in a statement. “We are now witnessing the cumulative impact of years of policy neglect compounded by the effects of COVID, strikes, and changes in industry trends.

    ‘We’re going to have fewer studios’

    — Real estate broker Carl Muhlstein

    “The flight of production from Los Angeles has caused extraordinary economic damage, job losses and declines in our tax base,” Hackman said. “If policymakers level the playing field, Los Angeles can recover and remain at the center of the entertainment industry where it belongs.”

    The problem for Hackman was that it bought Radford during “peak demand,” said Kevin Klowden, a Milken Institute fellow, focused on entertainment and technology. “Expect that whoever buys it is clearly going to look at the economics of it differently.”

    Other studios face similar challenges to Radford’s, Muhlstein said.

    “Unfortunately, this could be the first of several foreclosures,” he said. “We’re going to have fewer studios.”

    He didn’t identify other studios in distress, but said some have less filming business than Radford does and are facing more painful cost increases when refinancing short-term loans they took out to buy the properties.

    “More content is being produced in more places at lower costs by increasingly widespread teams,” Muhlstein said. “You can go to London, you can go to Hungary, you can go to Vancouver. “

    There is hope in the industry that local production — and with it, soundstage usage — will get a boost from California’s revamped film and TV tax credit program, which was overhauled last year.

    In addition to boosting the annual amount allocated to the production incentive program, state lawmakers expanded eligibility criteria to include new kinds of shows, including large-scale competition shows and 20-minute-per-episode shows.

    With that boost, FilmLA expects to see an increase to the current soundstage usage, but below the 90% occupancy of the peak TV period.

    “Our hope is that we can reach that sustainable place with a space for anyone who needs it as well as work opportunities for the crew here,” Sokoloski said.

    But the dynamics of streaming series, with shorter episode orders, doesn’t create the same economies of scale and consistent occupancy rates that network shows once did, Klowden said.

    “Under the new incentives and with the city actively trying to court productions back and make things easier, will things move back?” Klowden said. “That’s the real issue.”

    A representative of L.A. Center Studios in downtown L.A., where “Mad Men,” “The Rookie,” “Top Gun: Maverick” and many other movies and TV shows were filmed, declined to comment.

    The head of tiny but historic Occidental Studios is looking to bail out — for the right price. Craig Darian put the Los Angeles studio that was once used by silent film stars Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks on the market for $45 million last year.

    “Business has slowed but what little debt the studio has is at a low rate and not coming due any time soon, he said. “We’re looking for the correct exit. We’re not eager to sell.”

    Occidental is among the oldest continually operating studios in Hollywood, used by pioneering filmmakers Cecil B. DeMille, D.W. Griffith and Pickford, who worked there as an actor and filmmaker in its early years.

    More recently the three-acre lot has been used for television production for shows including “Tales of the City,” “New Girl” and HBO’s thriller “Sharp Objects.”

    “We mourn what everybody’s going through,” Darian said. “We’re in the land of ‘I don’t know.’ I think that’s a truism for everyone trying to figure things out.”

    With independent studios facing challenges finding tenants to rent their sound stages and services, old-line studio titans such as Warner Bros., Fox and NBCUniversal may gain an edge, analysts said.

    “The large corporate studios are going to gain market share because we’re going to go back to the old system,” Muhlstein said, “where they finance your film or television show and then distribute it.”

    Despite the dramatic pullback in production, Fox Corp. continues to inch forward with its massive $1.5-billion expansion on the Fox lot, which is adjacent to Century City, according to people familiar with the matter but not authorized to comment. The long-term project was unveiled two months before the L.A. production economy collapsed when the Writers Guild of America went on strike.

    Production on Rupert Murdoch’s lot has slowly been increasing after Walt Disney Co. relinquished its space to consolidate operations in Burbank.

    The reboot of the iconic television show “Baywatch” will largely film on the lot as well as Venice Beach, to stay true to the original, Fox said. The lot is home to a major chunk of Fox Sports productions, including “Fox NFL Sunday,” and “Fox NFL Kickoff.”

    The lot also hosts in-studio production across all of Fox Sports for linear and digital channels.

    Some are optimistic the state’s expanded film tax credits will stimulate more local film activity.

    Wainright says the incentives are starting to produce some “green shoots” for the industry.

    “I would like to think that 2024 and 2025 are kind of the bottom and that we’re going to be pulling ourselves up.”

    Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Roger Vincent, Samantha Masunaga

    Source link

  • Judge panel rules California’s open carry ban unconstitutional

    [ad_1]

    A dissenting panel of federal judges for the Ninth Circuit on Friday deemed California’s open carry ban in most counties unconstitutional.The ruling comes following a challenge by Mark Baird, who the San Francisco Chronicle identifies as a gun owner from Siskiyou County. Baird specifically challenged California’s restriction on open carry in counties with a population greater than 200,000.(Video Above: California ammunition background check law is unconstitutional)The panel ruled 2-1 in Baird’s favor. In favor of Baird, Judge Lawrence VanDyke noted that the restrictions apply to roughly 95% of the state’s population. And for those counties with populations under 200,000, the judge notes that those wanting to open carry need to apply for a license allowing them to do so, but that the ability to secure the license is “unclear.””California admits that it has no record of even one open-carry license being issued, and one potential reason is that California has misled its citizens about how to apply for an open-carry license,” the ruling’s summary states, referring to the opinions of VanDyke and Judge Kenneth K. Lee. The panel held that the open carry ban was inconsistent with the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms as applied to states under the Fourteenth Amendment. It also referred to the standard applied in 2022’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established that “historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition.”Judge N. Randy Smith, who dissented in part, noted that “open carry is not conduct that is covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment.” Smith also noted that reasoning in the Bruen case allows California to lawfully eliminate one manner of public carry to protect citizens, “so long as its citizens may carry weapons in another manner that allows for self-defense.”Smith asserted that because California allows concealed carry, it may restrict open carry.While the court primarily sided with Baird, it also rejected his related challenge to California’s licensing requirements in counties with fewer than 200,000 residents. Those counties may issue open-carry permits.See the full ruling here. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office slammed the ruling on social media Friday. “California just got military troops with weapons of war off of the streets of our cities, but now Republican activists on the Ninth Circuit want to replace them with gunslingers and return to the days of the Wild West. California’s law was carefully crafted to comply with the Second Amendment and we’re confident this decision will not stand,” the Newsom’s office said.KCRA 3 has reached out to California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s Office for comment.See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    A dissenting panel of federal judges for the Ninth Circuit on Friday deemed California’s open carry ban in most counties unconstitutional.

    The ruling comes following a challenge by Mark Baird, who the San Francisco Chronicle identifies as a gun owner from Siskiyou County. Baird specifically challenged California’s restriction on open carry in counties with a population greater than 200,000.

    (Video Above: California ammunition background check law is unconstitutional)

    The panel ruled 2-1 in Baird’s favor.

    In favor of Baird, Judge Lawrence VanDyke noted that the restrictions apply to roughly 95% of the state’s population. And for those counties with populations under 200,000, the judge notes that those wanting to open carry need to apply for a license allowing them to do so, but that the ability to secure the license is “unclear.”

    “California admits that it has no record of even one open-carry license being issued, and one potential reason is that California has misled its citizens about how to apply for an open-carry license,” the ruling’s summary states, referring to the opinions of VanDyke and Judge Kenneth K. Lee.

    The panel held that the open carry ban was inconsistent with the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms as applied to states under the Fourteenth Amendment. It also referred to the standard applied in 2022’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established that “historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition.”

    Judge N. Randy Smith, who dissented in part, noted that “open carry is not conduct that is covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment.” Smith also noted that reasoning in the Bruen case allows California to lawfully eliminate one manner of public carry to protect citizens, “so long as its citizens may carry weapons in another manner that allows for self-defense.”

    Smith asserted that because California allows concealed carry, it may restrict open carry.

    While the court primarily sided with Baird, it also rejected his related challenge to California’s licensing requirements in counties with fewer than 200,000 residents. Those counties may issue open-carry permits.

    See the full ruling here.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office slammed the ruling on social media Friday.

    “California just got military troops with weapons of war off of the streets of our cities, but now Republican activists on the Ninth Circuit want to replace them with gunslingers and return to the days of the Wild West. California’s law was carefully crafted to comply with the Second Amendment and we’re confident this decision will not stand,” the Newsom’s office said.

    KCRA 3 has reached out to California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s Office for comment.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Police warn of dangerous TikTok ‘door-kicking’ challenge

    [ad_1]

    Police in Pennsylvania are warning residents about a viral TikTok challenge where kids record themselves kicking in the front doors of people’s homes. Similar instances of door-kicking have been reported in other states.In Pennsylvania, Multiple police departments in the Susquehanna Valley have reported these incidents. The Lower Swatara Township Police Department said officers responded to a report of disorderly juveniles just before 3 a.m. on Sunday. Police reviewed video camera footage, which showed one juvenile kicking in a front door while recording on her phone before running off with two other juveniles. Watch: Ring camera footage of the incident Officers walked through the neighborhood and spoke to several residents who said the same incident had happened to them. Anyone who recognizes the individuals in this video is asked to contact Lower Swatara Township police. Police said this incident is likely related to a viral TikTok trend where kids are kicking in the front doors of people’s homes, warning that this challenge is very dangerous. Adams County Crime Stoppers reported a similar “door-kicking” incident where a male kicked the front door of a home in McSherrystown Borough, Pennsylvania, multiple times the night of Halloween, Oct. 31. Authorities said the male fled with two other individuals after causing damage to the door. Police released a photo of the male suspect. KCRA reports that police in the Sacramento, California, area have warned residents of an uptick in cases of kids kicking the front doors of strangers’ homes. In Baltimore, WBAL reported that two teenagers were arrested while carrying out the trend in July.In September, a “ding-dong ditch” prank in Houston, Texas, resulted in the death of an 11-year-old boy when the homeowner exited the house and shot him.Anyone who experiences similar activity at their home is advised to call the police immediately.

    Police in Pennsylvania are warning residents about a viral TikTok challenge where kids record themselves kicking in the front doors of people’s homes.

    Similar instances of door-kicking have been reported in other states.

    In Pennsylvania, Multiple police departments in the Susquehanna Valley have reported these incidents.

    The Lower Swatara Township Police Department said officers responded to a report of disorderly juveniles just before 3 a.m. on Sunday.

    Police reviewed video camera footage, which showed one juvenile kicking in a front door while recording on her phone before running off with two other juveniles.

    Watch: Ring camera footage of the incident

    Officers walked through the neighborhood and spoke to several residents who said the same incident had happened to them. Anyone who recognizes the individuals in this video is asked to contact Lower Swatara Township police.

    Police said this incident is likely related to a viral TikTok trend where kids are kicking in the front doors of people’s homes, warning that this challenge is very dangerous.

    Adams County Crime Stoppers reported a similar “door-kicking” incident where a male kicked the front door of a home in McSherrystown Borough, Pennsylvania, multiple times the night of Halloween, Oct. 31.

    Authorities said the male fled with two other individuals after causing damage to the door. Police released a photo of the male suspect.

    KCRA reports that police in the Sacramento, California, area have warned residents of an uptick in cases of kids kicking the front doors of strangers’ homes.

    In Baltimore, WBAL reported that two teenagers were arrested while carrying out the trend in July.

    In September, a “ding-dong ditch” prank in Houston, Texas, resulted in the death of an 11-year-old boy when the homeowner exited the house and shot him.

    Anyone who experiences similar activity at their home is advised to call the police immediately.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Pelosi faces challenges as age becomes unavoidable tension point for Democrats

    [ad_1]

    State Sen. Scott Wiener couldn’t wait any longer. The once-in-a-generation political opening he’d eyed for years had arrived, he decided — whether the grand dame of San Francisco politics agreed or not.

    On Wednesday, Wiener, 55, a prolific and ambitious lawmaker, formally announced his candidacy for the San Francisco congressional seat held for nearly four decades by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, 85, who remains one of the party’s most powerful leaders and has yet to reveal her own intentions for the 2026 race.

    “The world is changing, the Democratic Party is changing, and it’s time,” Wiener said in an interview with The Times. “I know San Francisco, I have worked tirelessly to represent this community — delivering housing, health care, clean energy, LGBTQ and immigrant rights — and I have a fortitude and backbone to be able to deliver for San Francisco in Congress.”

    State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) announced Wednesdat that he will run for the congressional seat currently held by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

    (Josh Edelson/For The Times)

    Wiener’s announcement — which leaked in part last week — caught some political observers off guard, given Wiener had for years seemed resigned to run for Pelosi’s seat only once she stepped aside. But it stunned few, given how squarely it fit within the broader political moment facing the Democratic Party.

    In recent years, a long-simmering reckoning over generational power has exploded into the political forefront as members of the party’s old guard have increasingly been accused of holding on too long, and to their party’s detriment.

    Long-serving liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ruffled many Democratic feathers by declining to step down during Barack Obama’s presidency despite being in her 80s. She subsequently died while still on the court at the age of 87 in 2020, handing President Trump his third appointment to the high court.

    Californians watched as the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, another D.C. power player from San Francisco, teetered into frailty, muddled through her final chapter in Washington and then died in office at 90 in 2023. The entire nation watched as President Biden, another octogenarian, gave a disastrous debate performance that sparked unrelenting questions about his age and cognitive abilities and cleared the way for Trump’s return to power last year.

    Visitors walk past a bust of U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein at San Francisco City Hall.

    Visitors walk past a bust of U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein at San Francisco City Hall. The former mayor of San Francisco served in the Senate until she died in 2023 at age 90.

    (Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images)

    As a result, age has become an unavoidable tension point for Democrats heading into next year’s midterm elections.

    It has also been an issue for Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), 83, the former Senate majority leader who has faced health issues in recent years and is retiring in 2026 after more than 40 years in the Senate. Other older Republicans are facing primary challenges for being perceived as too traditional or insufficiently loyal to Trump or the MAGA movement — including Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), 73 and in office since 2002, and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), 68 and in the Senate since 2015.

    For decades, many conservatives have called for congressional term limits in opposition to “career politicians” who cling to power for too long. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, and David Trone, a Maryland Democrat, renewed those calls on Wednesday, announcing in an op-ed published in the New York Times that they would co-chair a national campaign to push for term limits.

    However, perhaps because they are in power, the calls for a generational shake-up in 2026 have not been nearly as loud on the Republican side.

    Democratic Party activists have sounded the alarm about a quickening slide into gerontocracy on the political left, blamed it for their party’s inability to mount an energetic and effective response to Trump and his MAGA movement, and called for younger candidates to take the reins — while congressional leaders in their 70s and 80s have increasingly begun weighing their options in the face of primary challenges.

    “It’s fair to say the political appetite for octogenarians is not high,” said Eric Jaye, a veteran Democratic strategist in San Francisco.

    “The choice in front of people is not just age,” said Saikat Chakrabarti, a 39-year-old tech millionaire and Democratic political operative who is also running for Pelosi’s seat. “We need a whole different approach and different candidates.”

    “There’s like this unspoken rule that you don’t do what we’re doing in this moment. You sit out and wait your turn,” said Sacramento City Councilmember Mai Vang, 40, who has launched a primary challenge to Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Sacramento), who is 81 and has been in Congress since 2005. “But I’m not going to wait on the sidelines, because there is an urgency of now.”

    A national trend

    The generational shift promises to reshape Congress by replacing Democrats across the country, including some who are leaving without a fight.

    Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, 78 and a senator representing New Hampshire since 2009, said in March that it was “time” to step aside.

    In Illinois, Sen. Richard Durbin, 80 and a senator since 1997, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, 81 and in the House since 1999, both announced in May that they would not run again. Durbin said it was time “to pass the torch,” while Schakowsky praised younger “voices” in the party as “so sharp.”

    Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, 78 and in the House since 1992, announced his retirement last month, saying that “watching the Biden thing really said something about the necessity for generational change in the party.”

    New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks at a news conference.

    New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani speaks at a news conference.

    (Michael Nagle/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    Other older Democrats, meanwhile, have shown no intention of stepping aside, or are seeking out new roles in power.

    Maine Gov. Janet Mills, 77, recently announced she is running to challenge Republican Sen. Susan Collins, who is 72 and has been in the Senate since 1997. Mills has tried to soften concerns about her age by promising to serve just one term if elected.

    Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, 79 and in the Senate since 2013, has stiffly rebuffed a primary challenge from Rep. Seth Moulton, 46, accusing Moulton of springing a challenge on him amid a shutdown and while he is busy resisting Trump’s agenda.

    In Connecticut, Rep. John Larson, 77, who has been in office since 1999 and suffered a complex partial seizure on the House floor in February, has mocked his primary challengers’ message of generational change, telling Axios, “Generational change is fine, but you’ve got to earn it.”

    Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg speaks during the March for Our Lives in 2022.

    David Hogg, a survivor of the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., speaks at the 2022 March for Our Lives.

    (Leigh Vogel / Getty Images for March For Our Lives)

    David Hogg, a 25-year-old liberal activist who was thrust into politics by the 2018 mass shooting at his Parkland, Fla., high school, is among the party’s younger leaders pushing for new blood. He recently declined to seek reelection as the co-vice chair of the Democratic National Committee to bring primary challenges to older Democratic incumbents with his group Leaders We Deserve.

    When he announced that decision in June, Hogg called the idea that Democratic leaders can stay in power until they die even if they don’t do a good job an “existential threat to the future of this party and nation.” His group fundraises and disperses money to young candidates it backs.

    When asked by The Times about Pelosi and her primary challengers, however, Hogg was circumspect, calling Pelosi “one of the most effective and consequential leaders in the history of the Democratic Party.”

    A shift in California

    Pelosi is not the only older California incumbent facing a primary challenge. In addition to Matsui, the list also includes Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Porter Ranch), who is 70 and has been in office since 1997, and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), who is 74 and has been in office since 1999.

    But Pelosi’s challenges have attracted more attention, perhaps in part because her departure from Congress would be the clearest sign yet that the generational shift sought by younger party activists is fully underway.

    Nancy Pelosi waves the speaker's gavel

    Nancy Pelosi is sworn in as House speaker in 2007, surrounded by her grandchildren and children of other members of Congress.

    (Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images)

    A trailblazer as the first female speaker of the House, Pelosi presided over two Trump impeachments. While no longer in leadership, she remains incredibly influential as an arm-twister and strategist.

    She played a central role in sidelining Biden after his debate meltdown, and for the last couple months has been raising big money — a special skill of hers — in support of California’s Proposition 50. The measure seeks voter approval to redraw California’s congressional districts to better favor Democrats in response to Trump’s pressure campaign on Texas and other red states to redraw their lines in favor of Republicans.

    Pelosi has used Prop. 50 in recent days to deflect questions about her primary challengers and her plans for 2026, with her spokesman Ian Krager saying she “is fully focused” on the Prop 50 fight and will be through Nov. 4.

    Chakrabarti, who helped Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) unseat a longtime Democratic incumbent in 2019, said he sees even more “appetite for change” among the party’s base today — as evidenced by “mainstream Democrats who have voted for Nancy Pelosi their whole life” showing up to his events.

    And it makes sense, he said.

    For decades, Americans have watched the cost of essentials skyrocket while their wages have remained relatively flat, Chakrabarti said, and that has made them desperate to support messages of “bold, sweeping economic change” — whether from Obama or Trump — even as long-serving, mainstream Democrats backed by corporate money have worked to maintain the status quo.

    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leaves a news conference at the Capitol in 2019.

    Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leaves a news conference at the Capitol in 2019. At left is Saikat Chakrabarti, who was her chief of staff and is now a candidate for the congressional seat held by Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

    (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Imag)

    He said it is time for Democrats to once again push bold, big ideas, which he plans to do — including Medicare for all, universal child care, free college tuition, millions of new units of affordable housing, a new economy built around climate action, and higher taxes on billionaires and mega-millionaires like him.

    Wiener, who also backs Prop. 50 and would be the first out gay person to represent San Francisco in Congress, said he cannot speak to Pelosi’s thinking — or to Politico reporting Wednesday that Pelosi is considering her options and has been seen “publicly elevating” San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan in the race — but is confident in his readiness for the role.

    Wiener agreed with Chakrabarti that big ideas are needed from Democrats to win back voters and make progress. He also said that his track record in the state Legislature shows that he has “been willing to take on very, very big fights to make significant progressive change.”

    “No one has ever accused me of thinking small,” he said — citing his success in passing bills to create more affordable housing, reform health insurance and drug pricing, tackle net neutrality, challenge telecommunications and cable companies and protect LGBTQ+ and other minority communities and immigrants.

    “In addition to having the desire to make big progressive change, in addition to talking about big progressive change, you have to be able to put together the coalitions to deliver on that change, because words are not enough,” Wiener said. “I’ve shown over and over again that I know how to do it, and that I can deliver.”

    Political analysts said a message of big ideas will clearly resonate with some voters. But they also said that Pelosi, if she stays in the race, will be hard to beat. She will also face more serious questions than ever about her age and “her ability to function at the extraordinarily high level” she has worked at in years past, Jaye said, and will “have to answer those questions.”

    If Pelosi decides not to run, Chakrabarti has the benefit of self-funding and of the current party enthusiasm for fresh faces, they said, and anyone — Chan or otherwise — would benefit from a Pelosi endorsement. But Wiener already has a strong base in the district, a track record for getting legislation passed and, as several observers pointed out, a seemingly endless battery.

    “Scott Wiener is an animal. The notion of work-life balance is not a concept he has ever had. He is just like a robotic working machine,” said Aaron Peskin, who served 18 years on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, some alongside Wiener.

    Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Oakland) speaks to reporters at the Capitol in September.

    Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Oakland) speaks to reporters at the Capitol in September.

    (Kayla Bartkowski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    Amanda Litman, the president of Run for Something, which supports young progressive candidates, said there is pent-up demand for a new generation of leaders, and “older Democrats, especially those in Congress, need to ask themselves, ‘Am I the best person to lead this party forward right now?’”

    Rep. Lateefah Simon (D-Oakland), 48, won her seat in 2024 after longtime Rep. Barbara Lee, 79, who had been in the seat since 1998, decided to run for Oakland mayor. Simon said that to her, “it’s not necessarily about birthdays” but who can do the job — “who can govern, who can mentor and who can hold this administration accountable.”

    As a longtime community activist who worked with youth, Simon said she is “extremely excited” by all the energy of young Democratic office seekers. But as a freshman in Congress who has leaned on Lee, Pelosi and other mentors to help her learn the ropes, she said it’s also clear Democrats need to “have some generals who are really, really tried and tested.”

    “What is not helpful to me in this moment,” Simon said, “is for the Democrats to be a circular firing squad.”

    [ad_2]

    Kevin Rector, Ana Ceballos, Seema Mehta

    Source link

  • Trump’s top federal prosecutor in L.A. faces challenge over ‘acting’ status

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge heard arguments Tuesday to decide whether maneuvers used by the Trump administration to install Bill Essayli as acting United States attorney in Los Angeles are improper — and, if so, what should be done about it.

    During a Tuesday hearing in downtown L.A., Senior Judge J. Michael Seabright — who flew in from Hawaii for the proceeding — wondered how to proceed after defense attorneys sought to dismiss indictments against three clients and to disqualify Essayli “from participating in criminal prosecutions in this district.”

    Essayli, a former Riverside County assemblyman, was appointed as the region’s interim top federal prosecutor by U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi in April.

    His term was set to expire in late July unless he was confirmed by the U.S. Senate or a panel of federal judges. But the White House never moved to nominate him to a permanent role, instead opting to use an unprecedented legal maneuver to shift his title to “acting,” extending his term for an additional nine months without any confirmation process.

    Seabright was selected from the District of Hawaii after L.A.’s federal judges recused themselves from the proceedings. He questioned the consequences of dismissing any charges over Essayli’s title.

    “If I did this for your client, I’ll have to do it for every single defendant who was indicted when Mr. Essayli was acting under the rubric of acting U.S. attorney, correct?” Seabright said to a deputy federal public defender.

    “I don’t think you will,” replied James A. Flynn. “This is a time-specific, case-specific analysis and the court doesn’t need to go so far as to decide that a dismissal would be appropriate in all cases.”

    “Why not? You’re asking for a really draconian remedy here,” Seabright said, before questioning how many indictments had been made since Essayli was designated acting U.S. attorney at the end of July.

    “203, your honor,” Assistant U.S. Atty. Alexander P. Robbins responded.

    In a court filing ahead of the hearing Tuesday, lawyers bringing the challenge against Essayli called the government’s defense of his status a handbook for circumventing the protections that the Constitution and Congress built against the limitless, unaccountable handpicking of temporary officials.”

    During the nearly two-hour hearing, Flynn cited similar legal challenges that have played out elsewhere. A federal judge ruled in August that Alina Habba has been illegally occupying the U.S. attorney post in New Jersey, although that order was put on hold pending appeal. Last month, a federal judge disqualified Nevada’s top federal prosecutor, Sigal Chattah, from several cases, concluding she “is not validly serving as acting U.S. attorney.”

    The judges who ruled on the Nevada and New Jersey cases did not dismiss the charges against defendants, instead ordering that those cases not be supervised by Habba or Chattah.

    Flynn argued that the remedies in other states “have not been effective to deter the conduct.”

    “This court has the benefit of additional weeks and has seen the government’s response to that determination that their appointments were illegal and I submit the government hasn’t gotten the message,” Flynn said.

    Flynn said another option could be a dismissal without prejudice, which means the government could bring the case against their clients again. He called it a “weaker medicine” than dismissal with prejudice, “but would be a stronger one than offered in New Jersey and Nevada.”

    The hearing grew testy at times, with Seabright demanding that Assistant U.S. Atty. Robbins tell him when Essayli’s term will end. Robbins told the judge the government believes it will end on Feb. 24 and that afterward the role of acting U.S. attorney will remain vacant.

    Robbins noted that Essayli has also been designated as first assistant U.S. attorney, essentially allowing him to remain in charge of the office if he loses the “acting” title.

    Bondi in July also appointed him as a “special attorney.” Robbins told the judge that “there’s no developed challenge to Mr. Essayli’s appointment as a special attorney or his designation as a first assistant.”

    “The defense challenge here, the stated interest that they have, is Bill Essayli cannot be acting,” Robbins said. “But they don’t have a compelling or strong response to Bill Essayli is legitimately in the office and he can be the first assistant … he can supervise other people in the office.”

    Seabright asked both sides to brief him by Thursday on “whatever hats you believe [Essayli’s] wearing now” and “whether I were to say he wasn’t legitimately made acting U.S. attorney … what hats does he continue to wear.”

    “If I understand the government’s proposed remedy correctly … it would essentially be no remedy at all, because they would be re-creating Mr. Essayli as the acting United States attorney, he’d just be wearing a first assistant hat,” Flynn said.

    A spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office in L.A. did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    When asked by a Times reporter last month about the motion to disqualify him, Essayli said “the president won the election.”

    “The American people provided him a mandate to run the executive branch, including the U.S. attorney’s office and I look forward to serving at the pleasure of the president,” he said during a news conference.

    Since taking office, Essayli has doggedly pursued Trump’s agenda, championing hard-line immigration enforcement in Southern California, often using the president’s language verbatim at news conferences. His tenure has sparked discord in the office, with dozens of prosecutors quitting.

    [ad_2]

    Brittny Mejia

    Source link

  • California leaders say homeowners insurance companies are coming back to the state

    [ad_1]

    Several homeowners insurance companies that had either left the state or limited policies are coming back or committing to staying in California’s market, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California Department of insurance said on Wednesday. The development comes about nine months after Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and the department overhauled California’s insurance regulations after several companies had either dropped policies or limited them in the state. KCRA 3 was the first to report the update on Wednesday, after Gov. Newsom appeared to tell Bill Clinton at the Clinton Global Initiative that a handful of companies were coming back to the state. Newsom made the remarks in New York after Clinton asked Newsom what he thought should be done about the situation, which Newsom called one of the most pressing global issues. “We just had four of our admitted market come back,” Newsom told Clinton. “In the last two days or so we had our fourth come back in. We had a lot of folks who were leaving the market, they simply said it was too expensive and the losses are too significant.”Following the remarks, KCRA 3 asked the California Department of Insurance to confirm. A spokesman for the department said the governor’s remarks were accurate and provided a list of the companies that were committing to staying in California. The spokesman noted the list includes three of the state’s largest insurers. The five companies listed are Mercury, CSAA, USAA, Pacific Specialty and California Casualty. After this story first published Wednesday, both USAA and Mercury clarified in separate statements to KCRA 3 the company never stopped writing coverage in the state. A spokesman for Mercury would not say if the state leaders mischaracterized the situation but said they had “simplified” it.The new rules that lured the companies to return or do more business in the state allow insurance companies to consider new factors when they set premiums, including the likelihood of a catastrophe and the cost insurance companies pay to insure themselves, also known as reinsurance. In exchange, the companies have promised to provide more coverage in high-wildfire risk parts of California. State leaders have also been pushing to bring companies back into the market to reduce the number of properties relying on California’s FAIR plan, the state’s insurance of last resort. The plan provides insurance to those who can’t get private insurance and has been facing significant financial challenges as it takes on more claims. “The Sustainable Insurance Strategy helps restore stability and access to California’s homeowners insurance market,” said Mark Pitchford, the Chief Operating Officer at California Casualty Group in a press release Wednesday. “We appreciate all the work being done by the Commissioner and the Department to make coverage more accessible to homeowners across the state.”All five insurers have requested rate increases of 6.9%, according to Michael Soller, a spokesman for the California Department of Insurance. Soller noted the rate increase is identical to thousands approved under past insurance commissioners, but with a promise to remain and grow in the state. “This is a far cry from what has happened in the past, when insurance companies increased their rates and dropped policies,” Soller told KCRA 3 in an email. “Under Commissioner Lara’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy, we are seeing initial signs of market improvement despite the devastating L.A. wildfires. We won’t declare victory prematurely. We will thoroughly review companies’ rate filings to make sure consumers do not pay more than is required.” Speaking with Clinton, the governor acknowledged the new rules will allow for more rapid rate increases.”I think this issue requires leadership at the national level, it is under resourced, under focused. It’s a challenge for me, a challenge for Ron DeSantis, for governors in most states but it’s not top of mind and I think we need to be more focused on it,” Newsom said. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    Several homeowners insurance companies that had either left the state or limited policies are coming back or committing to staying in California’s market, Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California Department of insurance said on Wednesday.

    The development comes about nine months after Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and the department overhauled California’s insurance regulations after several companies had either dropped policies or limited them in the state.

    KCRA 3 was the first to report the update on Wednesday, after Gov. Newsom appeared to tell Bill Clinton at the Clinton Global Initiative that a handful of companies were coming back to the state. Newsom made the remarks in New York after Clinton asked Newsom what he thought should be done about the situation, which Newsom called one of the most pressing global issues.

    “We just had four of our admitted market come back,” Newsom told Clinton. “In the last two days or so we had our fourth come back in. We had a lot of folks who were leaving the market, they simply said it was too expensive and the losses are too significant.”

    Following the remarks, KCRA 3 asked the California Department of Insurance to confirm. A spokesman for the department said the governor’s remarks were accurate and provided a list of the companies that were committing to staying in California. The spokesman noted the list includes three of the state’s largest insurers. The five companies listed are Mercury, CSAA, USAA, Pacific Specialty and California Casualty.

    After this story first published Wednesday, both USAA and Mercury clarified in separate statements to KCRA 3 the company never stopped writing coverage in the state.

    A spokesman for Mercury would not say if the state leaders mischaracterized the situation but said they had “simplified” it.

    The new rules that lured the companies to return or do more business in the state allow insurance companies to consider new factors when they set premiums, including the likelihood of a catastrophe and the cost insurance companies pay to insure themselves, also known as reinsurance. In exchange, the companies have promised to provide more coverage in high-wildfire risk parts of California.

    State leaders have also been pushing to bring companies back into the market to reduce the number of properties relying on California’s FAIR plan, the state’s insurance of last resort. The plan provides insurance to those who can’t get private insurance and has been facing significant financial challenges as it takes on more claims.

    “The Sustainable Insurance Strategy helps restore stability and access to California’s homeowners insurance market,” said Mark Pitchford, the Chief Operating Officer at California Casualty Group in a press release Wednesday. “We appreciate all the work being done by the Commissioner and the Department to make coverage more accessible to homeowners across the state.”

    All five insurers have requested rate increases of 6.9%, according to Michael Soller, a spokesman for the California Department of Insurance. Soller noted the rate increase is identical to thousands approved under past insurance commissioners, but with a promise to remain and grow in the state.

    “This is a far cry from what has happened in the past, when insurance companies increased their rates and dropped policies,” Soller told KCRA 3 in an email. “Under Commissioner Lara’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy, we are seeing initial signs of market improvement despite the devastating L.A. wildfires. We won’t declare victory prematurely. We will thoroughly review companies’ rate filings to make sure consumers do not pay more than is required.”

    Speaking with Clinton, the governor acknowledged the new rules will allow for more rapid rate increases.

    “I think this issue requires leadership at the national level, it is under resourced, under focused. It’s a challenge for me, a challenge for Ron DeSantis, for governors in most states but it’s not top of mind and I think we need to be more focused on it,” Newsom said.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California’s lightning-fast push for partisan redistricting reflects Trump’s new America

    [ad_1]

    In an evening social media post about a supremely partisan battle that could reshape American political power for generations, President Trump sounded ebullient.

    “Big WIN for the Great State of Texas!!! Everything Passed, on our way to FIVE more Congressional seats and saving your Rights, your Freedoms, and your Country, itself,” Trump wrote, of the nation’s most populous red state pushing a mid-decade redistricting plan designed to win more Republican seats in Congress and protect Trump’s power through the 2026 midterms.

    “Texas never lets us down. Florida, Indiana, and others are looking to do the same thing,” Trump wrote — nodding to a potential proliferation of such efforts across the country.

    The next day, Gov. Gavin Newsom — projecting a fresh swagger as Trump’s chief antagonist on the issue — stood with fellow lawmakers from the nation’s most populous blue state to announce their own legislative success in putting to voters a redrawn congressional map for California that strongly favors Democrats.

    “We got here because the president of the United States is one of the most unpopular presidents in U.S. history,” Newsom said, couching the California effort as defensive rather than offensive. “We got here because he recognizes that he will lose the election, [and that] Congress will go back into the hands of the Democratic Party next November.”

    In the last week, with lightning speed, the nation’s foremost political leaders have jettisoned any pretense of political fairness — any notion of voters being equal or elected representatives reflecting their constituencies — in favor of an all-out partisan war for power that has some politicians and many political observers concerned for the future of American democracy.

    “America is headed towards true authoritarian rule if people do not stand up,” Texas state Rep. Gene Wu, a Democrat from the Houston area, said Friday on a call with reporters.

    The race to redistrict began with Trump, whose approval ratings have plummeted, pressuring Texas to manipulate maps to secure more House seats for Republicans so he wouldn’t face a hostile House majority in the second half of his second term. It escalated when Newsom and other California leaders said they wouldn’t stand idly by and started working to put a new map of their own on the November ballot — formally asking voters to jettison the state’s independent redistricting commission to counter Trump’s gambit in Texas.

    Those two states alone are home to some 70 million Americans, but the fight is hardly limited there. As Trump suggested, other states are also eyeing whether to redraw lines — raising the prospect of a country divided between blue and red power centers more than ever before, and the voice of millions of minority-party voters being all but erased in the halls of Congress.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom answers questions on Thursday after signing legislation calling for a special election on a redrawn congressional map.

    (Godofredo A. Vásquez / Associated Press)

    Of course, gerrymandering is not new, and already exists in many states across the country. But the bold, unapologetic and bipartisan bent of the latest redistricting race is something new and different, experts said. It is a clear product of Trump’s new America, where political warfare is increasingly untethered to — and unbound by — long-standing political norms, and where leaders of both political parties seem increasingly willing to toss aside pretense and politeness in order to pursue power.

    Trump on the campaign trail promised a new “Golden Age,” and he has long said his goal is to return America to some purportedly greater, more aspirational and proud past. But he has also signaled, repeatedly and with hardly any ambiguity, an intention to manipulate the political system to further empower himself and his fellow Republicans — whether through redistricting, ending mail-in ballots, or other measures aimed at curtailing voter turnout.

    “In four years, you don’t have to vote again,” Trump told a crowd of evangelical Christians a little over a year ago, in the thick of his presidential campaign. “We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.”

    ‘No democracy left’

    The redistricting war has dominated political news for weeks now, given its potential implications for reshaping Congress and further emboldening Trump in his second term.

    Sam Wang, president of the Electoral Innovation Lab at Princeton University, has studied gerrymandering for years, but said during the media call with Wu that he has never received more inquiries than in the last few weeks, when his inbox has filled with questions from media around the world.

    Wang said gerrymandering reached a high point more than a decade ago, but had been subsiding due to court battles and state legislatures establishing independent commissions to draw district lines.

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott defends his state's redistricting move while calling California's "a joke."

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott defends his state’s redistricting move while calling California’s “a joke.”

    (Eric Gay / Associated Press)

    Now, however, the efforts of Texas and California are threatening that progress and pushing things “to a new low point,” he said — leaving some voters feeling disenfranchised and Wang worried about further erosion of voter protections under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which he said the conservative Supreme Court may be preparing to weaken.

    Wu said allowing politicians to redraw congressional lines whenever they want in order to “make sure that they never lose” sets a dangerous precedent that will especially disenfranchise minority voters — because “politicians and leaders would no longer listen to the people.”

    “There would be no democracy left,” he said.

    That said, Wu drew a sharp distinction between Texas Republicans unilaterally redrawing maps to their and Trump’s advantage — in part by “hacking” apart minority populations — and California asking voters to counteract that power grab with a new map of their own.

    “California is defending the nation,” he said. “Texas is doing something illegal.”

    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday took the opposition position, saying Texas’ new map was constitutional while California’s was “a joke” and likely to be overturned. He also hinted at further efforts in other Republican-led states to add more House seats for the party.

    “Republicans are not finished in the United States,” Abbott said.

    Two legal experts on the call expressed grave concerns with such partisanship — especially in Texas.

    Sara Rohani, assistant counsel with the Legal Defense Fund, or LDF, said her organization has been fighting for decades to ensure that the promises of the Voting Rights Act for Black and other minority groups aren’t infringed upon by unscrupulous and racist political leaders in search of power.

    “Fair representation isn’t optional in this country. It’s the right of all Americans to [have] equal voting power,” she said.

    That said, “voters of color have been excluded” from that promise consistently, both before and after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, and “in 2025, it’s clear that our fight for fair maps continues,” Rohani said.

    Major victories have been won in the courts in recent years in states such as Alabama and Louisiana, and those battles are only going to continue, she said. Asked specifically if her group is preparing to sue over Texas’ maps, Rohani demurred — but didn’t back down, saying LDF will get involved “in any jurisdiction where Black voters are being targeted.”

    Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said there are definitely going to be challenges to Texas’ maps.

    By their own admission, Saenz said, Texas lawmakers redrew their maps in 2021 in order to maximize Republican advantage in congressional races — with the only limits being those imposed by the Voting Rights Act. That means in order to gain even more seats now, “they have to violate the Voting Rights Act,” he said.

    Texas Republicans have argued that they are acting in part in response to a warning from the Justice Department that their current maps, from 2021, are unlawful. But Saenz noted that the Justice Department dropped a lawsuit challenging those maps when Trump took office — meaning any threats to sue again are an empty ploy and “clearly orchestrated with one objective: Donald Trump’s objective.”

    The fate of any legal challenges to the redistricting efforts is unclear, in part because gerrymandering has become much harder to challenge in court.

    In 2019, the Supreme Court threw out claims that highly partisan state election maps are unconstitutional. Chief Justice John G. Roberts said such district-by-district line drawing “presents political questions” and there are no reliable “legal standards” for deciding what is fair and just.

    It was not a new view for Roberts.

    In 2006, shortly after he joined the court, the justices rejected a challenge to a mid-decade redistricting engineered by Texas Republicans, but ordered the state — over Roberts’ dissent — to redraw one of its majority-Latino districts to transfer some of its voters to another Latino-leaning district.

    Roberts expressed his frustration at the time, writing that it “is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

    Some legal experts say the new Texas redistricting could face a legal challenge if Black or Latino lawmakers are in danger of losing their seats. But the Supreme Court conservatives are skeptical of such claims — and have given signs they may shrink the scope of the Voting Rights Act.

    In March, the justices considered a Louisiana case to decide if the state must create a second congressional district that would elect a Black candidate to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and if so, how it should be drawn.

    But the court failed to issue a decision. Instead, on Aug. 1, the court said it would hear further arguments this fall on “whether the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority Congressional district” violates the Constitution.

    Justice Clarence Thomas has long argued it is unconstitutional to draw election districts based on racial lines, regardless of the Voting Rights Act, and he may now have a majority that agrees with him.

    If so, such a ruling could squelch discrimination claims from Black and Latino lawmakers in Texas or elsewhere — further clearing the path for partisan gerrymandering.

    Looking ahead

    Given the intensity of the battle and the uncertainty of the related legal challenges, few of America’s top political leaders are thinking to the future. They’re fighting in the present — focused on swaying public perception.

    In a YouTube Live video with thousands of supporters on Thursday, Newsom said Trump “doesn’t believe in the rule of law — he believes in the rule of Don; period, full stop,” and that he hoped it was “dawning on more and more Americans what’s at stake.”

    Newsom said that when Trump “made the phone call to rig the elections to Greg Abbott in Texas,” he expected Democrats to just roll over and take it. In response, he said, Democrats have to stop thinking about “whether or not we should play hardball,” and start focusing on “how we play hardball.”

    On Friday, Newsom said he was “very proud of the Legislature for moving quickly” to counter Texas, and that he is confident voters will support the ballot measure to change the state’s maps despite polls showing a sluggish start to the campaign.

    A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for The Times, found 48% of voters said they would cast ballots in favor of temporary gerrymandering efforts, though 20% were undecided.

    Asked if he is encouraging Democratic leaders in other states to revisit their own maps, Newsom said he appreciated both Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signaling that they may be willing to do just that.

    “I do believe that the actions of [the California] Legislature will inspire other legislative leaders to … meet this moment, to save this democracy and to stop this authoritarian and his continued actions to literally vandalize and gut our Constitution and our democratic principles,” Newsom said.

    [ad_2]

    Kevin Rector, David G. Savage, Melody Gutierrez, Laura J. Nelson

    Source link

  • ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 11 With Nia

    ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 11 With Nia

    [ad_1]

    Johnny is joined by a force of nature, Hurricane Nia, to get into her history on The Real World: Portland, showmances on Season 40 with Josh and Kyland, a phantom alliance with Jordan, and a recap of Episode 11.

    Watch the full video of this episode on YouTube:

    Subscribe to the Ringer Reality TV YouTube channel to watch our coverage of Battle of the Eras all season long: Ringer Reality TV

    Host: Johnny Bananas
    Guest: Nia Moore
    Producer: Sasha Ashall
    Engineer: Christian Porello

    Subscribe: Spotify / YouTube

    [ad_2]

    Johnny Bananas

    Source link

  • ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 10 With Tina

    ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 10 With Tina

    [ad_1]

    Johnny is joined in Amsterdam (a little later than usual this week) by the one and only Tina Barta to share behind-the-scenes stories, tell you what ended up on the cutting room floor, and recap all the drama between Bananas’s angels and Devin’s minions in Episode 10. Surprise guest Aviv Melmed Bruno pops by later to share her thoughts on everything that went down.

    Watch the full video of this episode on YouTube.

    Subscribe to the Ringer Reality TV YouTube channel to watch our coverage of Battle of the Eras all season long.

    Host: Johnny Bananas
    Guests: Tina Barta and Aviv Melmed Bruno
    Producer: Sasha Ashall

    Subscribe: Spotify / YouTube

    [ad_2]

    Johnny Bananas

    Source link

  • ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 7 With Wes

    ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ Episode 7 With Wes

    [ad_1]

    Johnny is joined this week by his archnemesis and good friend (and infamous ginger) Wes Bergmann to get his opinion on all the drama and gameplay on Season 40 of The Challenge, including Johnny’s beef with Devin, Laurel and Cara Maria’s ongoing conflict, the disintegration of Era 1, and so much more. They also discuss Wes’s return to the reality world on Season 2 of House of Villains, premiering next week on E!.

    Watch the full video of this episode on YouTube.

    Subscribe to the Ringer Reality TV YouTube channel to watch our coverage of Battle of the Eras all season long.

    Host: Johnny Bananas
    Guest: Wes Bergmann
    Producer: Sasha Ashall
    Additional Production: Milly Millhauser and T Cruz

    Subscribe: Spotify / YouTube

    [ad_2]

    Johnny Bananas

    Source link

  • ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ With Jordan Wiseley

    ‘The Challenge 40: Battle of the Eras’ With Jordan Wiseley

    [ad_1]

    Johnny is joined by friend and castmate Jordan Wiseley to discuss being disliked by other castmates, strategy, the toxic effects of social media on the game, and more

    Share this story

    [ad_2]

    Johnny Bananas

    Source link

  • Social Anxiety Hierarchy Worksheet (PDF)

    Social Anxiety Hierarchy Worksheet (PDF)

    [ad_1]

    Conquer your social fears one step at a time by climbing up your “Anxiety Hierarchy.” Here’s a simple and powerful worksheet to get you started.


    Download:

    Social Anxiety Hierarchy Worksheet (PDF)

    Additional tools and resources

    This worksheet mentions several mental tools and relaxation techniques that are essential for making the most of your anxiety hierarchy. Here are links to learn more about each one.

    Mental Tools:

    Relaxation Techniques:

    Further Reading:


    Check out more self-improvement worksheets here!

    [ad_2]

    Steven Handel

    Source link

  • The TikTok Butter Board Trend: Here Are The Dangers

    The TikTok Butter Board Trend: Here Are The Dangers

    [ad_1]

    Here’s a TikTok trend that you’d “butter” be careful about. It’s the “Butter board” trend that has folks slathering gobs of butter on cutting boards and dumping sauces, spices or fruits on top of said butter. They are then having people use pieces of bread to scoop up these concoction off the boards and into their mouths. If you search TikTok for the hashtag #butterboard, you’ll get a butter-load of videos with a total of 236.9 million views and counting. Before you deem this to be the best thing since sliced bread, though, you’d “butter” beware of the potential hazards of this spreading trend.

    Now, TikTok videos such as the following are calling “butter boards” extensions of or even improvements over traditional charcuterie boards:

    But there are several key differences between a “butter board” and a traditional charcuterie board, which is essentially a platter holding a bunch of cheeses, meats, dried fruits, and other things such as jams.

    First of all, the whole “butter board” thing is not exactly above board. By smearing the butter into the wooden board, the butter is going into all those crack and crevices in the wood. This is very different from traditional charcuterie boards, where people don’t tend to smear brie, chevre, camembert cheddar, gouda, or manchego cheese into the board’s cracks. Cracks of any sort can be kind of gross. They tend to be dark and dank, providing good conditions for nasty microbes to grow. A study published in the Journal of Food Protection showed how easily bacteria such as Escherichia coli , Listeria innocua, L. monocytogenes, and Salmonella typhimurium can stay and multiply in wooden cutting boards. Think about that the next time you get the urge to lick the charcuterie board at a party.

    Add butter at room temperature into the cracks in the wooden board and you’ve basically built a cheap motel for microbes to have their version of sexy time and reproduce. Being a breeding ground for bacteria is yet another reason why using butter that’s been sitting out for a while as toothpaste is not a great idea. Scooping up butter out of the cracks of a wooden board could in turn be scooping up a bunch of board bacteria that won’t be so bored once they get into your gastrointestinal tract. It could be like playing diarrhea roulette.

    A second difference is that eating gobs of butter is not the same as eating some salami, prosciutto, Italian speck, or cheese. While munching on traditional charcuterie board components in moderation may be OK, butter in large amounts can be particularly unhealthy, being high in both calories and saturated fat. That’s why you don’t regularly see sticks of butter on a charcuterie board, eat butter sandwiches, or order butter as a topping on your pizza. So regularly eating a butter board could eventually put you at higher risk for obesity, hypertension, heart disease, cancer, and other chronic medical conditions.

    A third difference is the potential for double-dipping, triple-dipping, quadruple dipping, and other types of communal contamination, assuming that you aren’t eating an entire butter board yourself. When a bunch of people are repeatedly smearing bread on a buttered-up surface, each can end up leaving his or her germs on board so to speak. This is very different from your typical charcuterie board situation where people tend to quickly grab the items that they want and not try to drive them into the board.

    The “Butter board” trend has melted into other similar offshoots as well. Some folks have been spreading other smearable substances such as cream cheese, goat cheese, Nutella, and the always delightful vegemite on their wooden boards and topping them with all sorts of things.

    Again before you get on board with any of these possibilities, think about the risks. If you’d like to enjoy some cream cheese or goat cheese mixed with other thing, eating it off of a wooden board is not all that it’s cracked up to be. Why not use a relatively non-porous surface like a properly glazed ceramic plate instead?

    [ad_2]

    Bruce Y. Lee, Senior Contributor

    Source link

  • Federal Employees Join the Feds in Motion Challenge in Honor of Public Service Recognition Week

    Federal Employees Join the Feds in Motion Challenge in Honor of Public Service Recognition Week

    [ad_1]

    A great event to honor public servants and increase movement.

    Press Release


    Apr 12, 2022

    In honor of Public Service Recognition Week and the Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund’s (FEEA) 36th Anniversary, federal employees and their families across the U.S. are joining the Feds in Motion Challenge taking place from May 1 to June 5, 2022. 

    The Challenge kicks off Public Service Recognition Week (#PSRW) and is all about moving—walking, running, biking, swimming and/or rolling — to reach the goal of 36 miles (or more) in 36 days. The event also includes a series of Wellness Wednesday workshops on yoga, improving sleep, increasing movement, healthy cooking, and ergonomics for the office and home.

    Proceeds benefit FEEA’s scholarship, disaster relief, and emergency hardship programs for feds in need. FEEA is the national, independent, non-profit 501c3 organization for federal employees and by federal employees.

    The event is being supported by a number of businesses, unions, associations, and individuals, including the Blue Cross Blue Shield Federal Employee Program as the Platinum Sponsor and WAEPA, GEHA, and the Senior Executives Association as Gold Sponsors.

    Learn more about the event and FEEA at feea.org/challenge.

    Over the last 36 years, FEEA has:

    • Given 13,000 no-fee, no-interest hardship loans to help make ends meet during personal tragedies like illness, death of a loved one or house fires;
    • Given nearly 14,000 families grants for wildfires, hurricanes, and other natural disasters, as well as for groceries, fuel, and diapers during the longest government shutdown in U.S. history; and
    • Provided over 11,000 merit-based scholarships to federal public servants and their children and spouses.

    For More Information, Contact:

    Robyn Kehoe, FEEA 

    202-554-0007, X 104

    Email: rkehoe@feea.org

    Source: FEEA

    [ad_2]

    Source link