Politics
The Hollywood power players turning on the Biden campaign: 'It’s about the ability to WIN'
Hollywood knows a flop when it sees one.
So it’s hardly surprising that some of the industry’s biggest luminaries are engaged in a collective act of hand-wringing over President Biden’s weak performance during last week’s presidential debate against former President Trump.
Hollywood backers, including those who previously wrote large checks, are feeling skittish about Biden’s prospects, with some growing increasingly vocal in their calls to remove him from the top of the ticket.
The public drumbeat from the reliably liberal entertainment industry began to crescendo with a column published Wednesday in Deadline from “Lost” co-creator Damon Lindelof, who said he would withhold future donations until Biden stepped aside as the Democratic presidential candidate.
In a Friday email to The Times, Lindelof said Biden’s debate performance — which was supposed to assuage concerns about Biden’s age, but did the opposite — changed his mind about the president’s candidacy. Though he has “immense respect” for Biden, he said, the risks posed by the president remaining in the race were too high. Lindelof said he donated $125,000 this cycle to the Biden campaign and nearly as much to Democratic Party Senate and congressional candidates.
“For me, this isn’t about the ability to govern, it’s about the ability to WIN,” he wrote.
Many Democrats fear Biden’s liabilities put the party at risk of losing not just the White House but downballot races in a way that will do long-term damage to their causes.
Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, too, has called for Biden to “step aside to allow a vigorous Democratic leader to beat Trump and keep us safe and prosperous,” according to the New York Times. Hastings and his wife have contributed more than $20 million in donations to the Democratic Party over the last few years, the newspaper reported. Hastings declined further comment.
Other prominent Hollywood players have voiced concerns about Biden’s continued presence in the campaign, including Endeavor Chief Executive Ari Emanuel, brother of Democratic politician Rahm Emanuel, and media titan Barry Diller, who replied bluntly when asked by the Ankler if he would continue to support the Biden campaign: “No.” Filmmaker and Disney heir Abigail Disney said she would withhold donations until Biden was replaced at the top of the Democratic Party’s ticket.
Biden has said he will remain in the race, despite the mounting pressure. On Friday, speaking in front of supporters at a Wisconsin middle school, Biden acknowledged his subpar debate but vowed to keep fighting.
“I beat Donald Trump,” Biden said. “I will beat him again.”
Hollywood has long been a major funding source for the Democratic Party, with industry power players often hosting major fundraisers and publicly throwing their support behind candidates. That’s why the industry’s current anxiety looms large over the Biden campaign.
“The sense of things right now is that all this lives in the hands of Joe Biden and the people closest to the Biden family, as well as a handful of close advisors,” said Steve Caplan, adjunct instructor of public relations and advertising at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, who is currently teaching a course on political advertising and the 2024 election. “I think that’s certainly true, but without money — mega-donor money, including Hollywood money — there is no campaign.”
It wasn’t long ago that some of Hollywood’s elite were at a star-studded fundraiser for Biden at the Peacock Theater in downtown Los Angeles. Organized by industry titan and former DreamWorks Animation Chief Executive Jeffrey Katzenberg, the soiree boasted the likes of late-night TV host Jimmy Kimmel, along with actors George Clooney and Julia Roberts.
The event raised more than $30 million, according to the Biden campaign.
Katzenberg is one of Biden’s seven campaign co-chairs and has raised millions for his race. After he repeatedly dismissed Democrats’ concerns that Biden was too old to run — going so far as to call Biden’s age his “superpower” — some Hollywood donors are now frustrated. Since the June 27 debate, Katzenberg has been uncharacteristically silent.
Katzenberg, who created the short-lived streaming service Quibi, declined to comment for this story, referring questions to the Biden campaign.
Deciding whether Biden can stay in the presidential race will come down to three factors — Democratic Party leadership, the president’s polling performance and sentiment among big donors, said Jessica Levinson, who teaches election law at Loyola Law School.
“If your key donors jump ship, that’s not just a pocketbook hit, but it’s a big signal to other people as well,” she said.
Already, talk has started to turn toward who could replace Biden.
State and local politicians and activists are considering, “albeit with pain and reluctance,” the viability of a ticket led by Vice President Kamala Harris, said Donna Bojarsky, a longtime Democratic political consultant who runs a nonprofit dedicated to building civic engagement in L.A.
“There’s brewing potential excitement about Kamala,” she said. “The possibility of a next-generation team looking forward to the future could be very compelling.”
Hollywood insiders have said a fresh face could ignite more enthusiasm, such as Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear.
But not everyone in Hollywood is hitting the panic button.
“Everyone just needs to take a breath,” Democratic Party fundraiser and Hollywood advisor Andy Spahn said in an email Friday to The Times. “This will sort itself out soon enough.”
Politics
Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes
new video loaded: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes
transcript
transcript
Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes
The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.
-
“It is undisputed that states may separate their sports teams based on sex in light of the real biological differences between males and females. States may equally apply that valid sex-based rule to biological males who self-identify as female. Denying a special accommodation to trans-identifying individuals does not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender identity or deny equal protection.” “West Virginia argues that to protect these opportunities for cisgender girls, it has to deny them to B.P.J. But Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause protect everyone. And if the evidence shows there are no relevant physiological differences between B.P.J. and other girls, then there’s no basis to exclude her.” “Given that half the states are allowing it, allowing transgender girls and women to participate, about half are not, why would we at this point, just the role of this court, jump in and try to constitutionalize a rule for the whole country while there’s still, as you say, uncertainty and debate, while there’s still strong interest in other side?” “This court has held in cases like V.M.I. that in general, classification based on sex is impermissible because in general, men and women are simply situated. Where that’s not true is for the sorts of real, enduring, obvious differences that this court talked about in cases like V.M.I., the differences in reproductive biology. I don’t think the pseudoscience you’re suggesting has been baked.” “Well, it’s not pseudo. It’s good science.” “It’s not pseudoscience to say boys’ brain development happens at a different stage than girls does.” “Well, with all respect, I don’t think there’s any science anywhere that is suggested that these intellectual differences are traceable to biological differences.” “Can we avoid your whole similarly situated argument that you run because I don’t really like it that much either? And I’m not trying to prejudice anyone making that argument later. But I mean, I think it opens a huge can of worms that maybe we don’t need to get into here.”
By Meg Felling
January 13, 2026
Politics
Venezuela releases multiple American citizens from prison following military operation
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The interim government in Venezuela has released at least four U.S. citizens who were imprisoned under President Nicolás Maduro’s regime, Fox News confirmed.
The release marks the first known release of Americans in the South American country since the U.S. military completed an operation to capture authoritarian Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who is now facing federal drug trafficking charges in New York.
“We welcome the release of detained Americans in Venezuela,” a State Department official said Tuesday. “This is an important step in the right direction by the interim authorities.”
The release of American citizens was first reported by Bloomberg.
TRUMP SIGNS ORDER TO PROTECT VENEZUELA OIL REVENUE HELD IN US ACCOUNTS
Venezuelans celebrate after U.S. President Donald Trump announced that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had been captured and flown out of the country in Santiago, Chile, Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026. (Esteban Felix/AP Photo)
President Donald Trump said Saturday that Venezuela had begun releasing political prisoners.
“Venezuela has started the process, in a BIG WAY, of releasing their political prisoners,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Thank you! I hope those prisoners will remember how lucky they got that the USA came along and did what had to be done.”
Venezuela’s interim government has reported that 116 prisoners have been released, although only about 70 have been verified by the non-governmental organization Justicia, Encuentro y Perdón, according to Bloomberg.
National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez said prisoner releases would continue, according to the outlet.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FILES SEIZURE WARRANTS TARGETING SHIPS TIED TO VENEZUELAN OIL TRADE: REPORT
Nicolás Maduro is seen in handcuffs after landing at a Manhattan helipad, escorted by heavily armed federal agents as they make their way into an armored car en route to a Federal courthouse in Manhattan on January 5, 2026, in New York City (XNY/Star Max/GC Images via Getty Images)
The U.S. government issued a new security alert Saturday urging Americans in Venezuela to leave the country immediately, citing security concerns and limited ability to provide emergency assistance, the U.S. Embassy in Caracas said.
“U.S. citizens in Venezuela should leave the country immediately,” the embassy said in the alert.
The warning pointed to reports of armed groups operating on Venezuelan roads.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Venezuelan citizens in Cucuta, Colombia celebrate during a rally on the Colombia-Venezuela border after the confirmation of Nicolás Maduro’s capture in Caracas, on January 3, 2026. (Jair F. Coll/Getty Images)
Following the military operation, Trump suggested that the U.S. would “run” Venezuela for an extended period.
“We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” he said.
Politics
Lawsuits against ICE agents would be allowed under proposed California law
SACRAMENTO — A week after a Minnesota woman was fatally shot by a federal immigration officer, California legislators moved forward a bill that would make it easier for people to sue federal agents if they believe their constitutional rights were violated.
A Senate committee passed Senate Bill 747 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), which would provide Californians with a stronger ability to take legal action against federal law enforcement agents over excessive use of force, unlawful home searches, interfering with a right to protest and other violations.
California law already allows such suits against state and local law enforcement officials.
Successful civil suits against federal officers over constitutional rights are less common.
Wiener, appearing before Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, said his bill has taken on new urgency in the wake of the death of Renee Nicole Good in Minnesota, the 37-year-old mother of three who was shot while driving on a snowy Minneapolis street.
Good was shot by an agent in self-defense, said Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who alleged that Good tried to use her car as a weapon to run over the immigration officer.
Good’s death outraged Democratic leaders across the country, who accuse federal officers of flouting laws in their efforts to deport thousands of undocumented immigrants. In New York, legislators are proposing legislation similar to the one proposed by Wiener that would allow state-level civil actions against federal officers.
George Retes Jr., a U.S. citizen and Army veteran who was kept in federal custody for three days in July, described his ordeal at Tuesday’s committee hearing, and how immigration officers swarmed him during a raid in Camarillo.
Retes, a contracted security guard at the farm that was raided, said he was brought to Port Hueneme Naval Base. Officials swabbed his cheek to obtain DNA, and then moved him to Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles. He was not allowed to make a phone call or see an attorney, he said.
“I did not resist, I did not impede or assault any agent,” Retes said.”What happened to me that day was not a misunderstanding. It was a violation of the Constitution by the very people sworn to uphold it.”
He also accused Department of Homeland security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin of spreading false information about him to justify his detention. DHS said in a statement last year that Retes impeded their operation, which he denies.
Retes has filed a tort claim against the U.S. government, a process that is rarely successful, said his attorney, Anya Bidwell.
Lawsuits can also be brought through the Bivens doctrine, which refers to the 1971 Supreme Court ruling Bivens vs. Six Unknown Federal Agents that established that federal officials can be sued for monetary damages for constitutional violations. But in recent decades, the Supreme Court has repeatedly restricted the ability to sue under Bivens.
Wiener’s bill, if passed by the legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, would be retroactive to March 2025.
“We’ve had enough of this terror campaign in our communities by ICE,” said Wiener at a news conference before the hearing. “We need the rule of law and we need accountability.”
Weiner is running for the congressional seat held by former House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco).
Representatives for law enforcement agencies appeared at Tuesday’s hearing to ask for amendments to ensure that the bill wouldn’t lead to weakened protections for state and local officials.
“We’re not opposed to the intent of the bill. We’re just concerned about the future and the unintended consequences for your California employees,” said David Mastagni, speaking on behalf of the Peace Officers Research Assn. of California, which represents more than 85,000 public safety members.
Wiener’s bill is the latest effort by the state Legislature to challenge President Trump’s immigration raids. Newsom last year signed legislation authored by Wiener that prohibits law enforcement officials, including federal immigration agents, from wearing masks, with some exceptions.
The U.S. Department of Justice sued last year to block the law, and a hearing in the case is scheduled for Wednesday.
-
Montana4 days agoService door of Crans-Montana bar where 40 died in fire was locked from inside, owner says
-
Technology1 week agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Delaware5 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Dallas, TX6 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Dallas, TX1 week agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Virginia4 days agoVirginia Tech gains commitment from ACC transfer QB
-
Iowa1 week agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Education1 week agoVideo: This Organizer Reclaims Counter Space