Politics
Stakes are high for Newsom and California when Trump visits L.A. wildfires
SACRAMENTO — California Gov. Gavin Newsom and President Trump shared a surprisingly symbiotic relationship during the Republican’s first term in the White House, with their public sparring and ability to work together in times of crisis elevating both politicians.
Whether the two men can overcome an ugly 2024 election cycle and resume a respectful rapport for the benefit of Californians should become clearer when Trump surveys wildfire damage in Los Angeles County, possibly as soon as Friday.
The visit gives the president an opportunity to show that during a disaster, he can rise above petty partisanship and name-calling to provide aid to Americans in need, regardless of whom they voted for in November.
The stakes are considerable for Newsom, who finds himself in a precarious position with his state on fire.
The governor could end the day with a presidential example of acting like a level-headed leader capable of putting politics — and personal feelings — aside to help his state. Or, Newsom could walk away more vulnerable to criticism that his political gamesmanship and thirst for the national spotlight compromised his ability to deliver for Californians.
“We’re going to learn with this week’s visit whether Donald Trump and Gavin Newsom will treat each other as the president of the United States and the governor of California, or two individuals with completely opposite ideologies who have been sparring continuously,” said Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego.
Trump said over the weekend that he was planning to visit Southern California on Friday, but has not released any details about his trip.
Regardless of when the president visits, Kousser said a disaster provides an easy “political script” for both leaders to notch a win.
History shows they’ve acted as statesmen in times of crisis and temporarily paused their jousts on social media and in the courts.
During Trump’s first term, the governor often commended Trump for taking his calls and delivering everything he requested to support California, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Still today, Newsom asserts that his relationship with Trump was as good as any other governor’s during the initial term.
At the same time, their battles over the environment, immigration and other areas where their liberal and right-wing politics collided gave Newsom an opportunity to define himself as a fighter for Democratic values to a national audience. Newsom and California similarly gave Trump a chance to highlight the follies of Democratic rule and cast himself as a more sensible alternative.
Bob Salladay, the governor’s top communications advisor, said it’s a more complex relationship “than the simple friend or foe” narrative.
“If the past repeats itself as it often does, the governor and President Trump could easily have the same type of relationship that began six years ago,” Salladay said. “That is, we will protect California by fighting against misinformation and, yes, fighting in court to protect our values — while working cooperatively on important issues as we did during the pandemic. You can do both things.”
But the relationship between the two leaders also appears more complicated this time around.
After the president lost his reelection bid in 2020, Newsom continued to run against Trumpism in his successful effort to beat a recall campaign the following year and win reelection in 2022. The governor traveled the country during the 2024 presidential election cycle in support of then-President Biden and then-Vice President Kamala Harris, all the while growing his list of supporters across the nation.
Newsom has said after the November election that Trump did not respond to his effort to congratulate him for defeating Harris.
Two days after the election, the governor reignited the California vs. Trump narrative when he announced a special session to increase funding for the state Department of Justice to fight the incoming administration in court. Trump responded by calling out Newsom’s “insane policy decisions” that he claimed were forcing people to leave his state.
Rob Stutzman, a Republican political consultant, said leaning back into the “resistance” narrative so quickly after an election where voters rebuked progressive Democrats was a miscalculation.
“He went streaking in the quad thinking everyone was behind him and no one was behind him,” Stutzman said. “There’s no resistance to lead this time around.”
At a time when other prominent Democrats seem to be backing away from the national culture wars, Newsom has been slower to relinquish his high-profile role on the front lines. He’s also refused to follow the path of corporate leaders and bend the knee to Trump.
Newsom tried to tone down his message, trading his offensive posture for a narrative about defending the state’s values, while he talked about affordability in the weeks after the election. But the change hasn’t protected him, or his fellow California Democrats, from criticism.
Democratic lawmakers were set to begin special session hearings over the increase in legal funding Newsom requested to fight Trump when the fires broke out in L.A. County, giving the GOP a potent avenue to question their priorities as Los Angeles burned.
Despite initially insisting the special session was imperative to ensure lawmakers approved the extra legal money to fight Trump before the inauguration this week, that bill has been delayed.
Instead, Newsom expanded the special session to include another bill to provide $2.5 billion in wildfire recovery support for affected communities.
Restraining himself from fighting every battle with Trump is a challenge at a time when the president is blaming him for the wildfires.
Trump has repeatedly alleged that Newsom is at fault for fire hydrants that ran dry in the Palisades fire. Experts have debunked his claims about a lack of water in Southern California, but that hasn’t stopped the allegations from being repeated thousands of times.
Newsom launched a website as part of a campaign to correct misinformation about the fire shared by Trump and others. The site refutes claims from Fox News that California cut its firefighting budget during the governor’s tenure and shoots down allegations in social media posts about the state mismanaging forest lands.
The governor’s assault on misinformation, which Newsom discussed in national television appearances, comes as a familiar cast of California Republicans say they’re mounting another effort to recall him after more than a half-dozen attempts failed.
Mike Madrid, a “never-Trump” Republican political consultant, said Trump’s claims and the deluge of misinformation that spread on Elon Musk’s X platform after the fires broke out have become harder to disrupt since the president’s first term.
Trump’s infrastructure to share his message is stronger than Newsom’s, particularly as facts get drowned out on social media. The announcement that Facebook will no longer censor or try to combat incorrect information in posts will also put Newsom at a disadvantage, Madrid said.
“The reason why that’s so damaging and so destructive is the misinformation comes and it’s hitting, not just with right-wing trolls on Twitter, and it’s still reinforcing the narrative that California is not a functional government,” Madrid said.
Newsom’s political aides say the governor is providing an example for other Democrats about the best way to push back on Trump’s misinformation in his second term. They disagree with criticism about his special session, arguing that Trump would have targeted California regardless.
The governor, through his personal account, has offered retorts to a host of claims about his governance from popular and little-known Republicans. Despite his near-constant presence in Los Angeles since the fires broke out, his effort to swat down misinformation has opened him up to jabs about his focus.
“Instead of making highly produced clap-back videos with social media influencers, you should get to work helping Californians,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said on X. “You’re the leader of a state in crisis, and you should finally start acting like it.”
In his rebuttal, Newsom urged Johnson to “do the right thing” and help people in need instead of “playing partisan games.”
He made a similar case in his letter imploring the president to visit the state and survey the wildfire damage.
“In the spirit of this great country, we must not politicize human tragedy or spread disinformation from the sidelines,” Newsom wrote. “Hundreds of thousands of Americans — displaced from their homes and fearful for the future — deserve to see all of us working in their best interests to ensure a fast recovery and rebuild.”
Trump has not responded to the letter, or invited the governor to join him on his visit to Los Angeles.
Politics
Video: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
new video loaded: Virginia Voters Approve New Map Favoring Democrats
By Shawn Paik
April 22, 2026
Politics
WATCH: Sen Warren unloads on Trump’s Fed nominee Kevin Warsh in explosive hearing showdown
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Sparks flew on Capitol Hill as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., accused Federal Reserve nominee Kevin Warsh of being a potential “sock puppet” for President Donald Trump.
Warsh, tapped by Trump in January to lead the Federal Reserve, faced a two-and-a-half-hour confirmation hearing before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
If confirmed, he would take the helm of the world’s most powerful central bank, shaping interest rates, borrowing costs and the financial outlook for millions of American households for the next four years.
WHO IS KEVIN WARSH, TRUMP’S PICK TO SUCCEED JEROME POWELL AS FED CHAIR?
Kevin Warsh, nominee for chairman of the Federal Reserve, listens to ranking member Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., make an opening statement during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
In her opening remarks, Warren sharply criticized Warsh’s record and questioned his independence, arguing he is “uniquely ill-suited for the job as Fed chair” and warning he could give Trump influence over the central bank.
She accused Warsh of enabling Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis, which fell during his tenure as a Federal Reserve governor when he served from 2006 to 2011.
“In our meeting last week, we discussed the 2008 financial crash, where 8 million people lost their jobs, 10 million people lost their homes and millions more lost their life savings,” Warren said. “Giant banks, however, got hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts… and he said to me that he has no regrets about anything he did.”
She added that Warsh “worked tirelessly to arrange multibillion-dollar bailouts” for Wall Street CEOs, with nothing for American families.
The hearing grew more tense as Warren pivoted to ethics concerns, pressing Warsh over his undisclosed financial holdings and questioning him over links to business dealings connected to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The two spoke over each other and raised their voices in a heated exchange on Capitol Hill.
WARSH’S $226 MILLION FORTUNE UNDER SCRUTINY AS FED NOMINEE FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Fed has been plagued by deeply disturbing ethics scandals in recent years. It’s critical that the next chair have no financial conflicts — none. You have more than $100 million in investments that you have refused to disclose. So let me ask: do the Juggernaut Fund or THSDFS LLC invest in companies affiliated with President Trump or his family, companies tied to money laundering, Chinese-controlled firms, or financing vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein?
Kevin Warsh: Senator, I’ve worked closely with the Office of Government Ethics and agreed to divest all of my financial assets.
Warren: Could you answer my question, please? You have more than $100 million in undisclosed assets. Are any of those investments tied to the entities I just mentioned? It’s a yes-or-no question.
Warsh: I have worked tirelessly with ethics officials and agreed to sell all of my assets before taking the oath of office.
Warren: Are you refusing to tell us if you have investments in vehicles linked to Jeffrey Epstein? You just won’t say?
Warsh: What I’m telling you is those assets will be sold if I’m confirmed.
Warren: Will you disclose how you plan to divest these assets? The public might question your motives if, for example, someone who profits from predicting Fed policy cuts you a $100 million check as you take office.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren questions Kevin Warsh during his Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Warsh: I’ve reached a full agreement with the Office of Government Ethics and will divest those assets before taking the oath.
Warren: I’m asking a very straightforward question. Will you disclose how you divest those assets?
Warsh: As I’ve said, I’ve worked with ethics officials.
Warren: I’ll take that as a no.
In a separate exchange, Warren invoked Trump’s past statements about the Fed and challenged Warsh to prove his independence in real time.
She insisted that Warsh answer whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election and if he would name policies of the president with which he disagrees. The hopeful future Fed chair dodged the question and said he would remain apolitical, if confirmed.
THE ONE LINE IN WARSH’S TESTIMONY SIGNALING A BREAK FROM THE FED’S STATUS QUO
Warren: Donald Trump has made clear he does not want an independent Fed. He has said, “Anybody that disagrees with me will never be Fed chairman.” He’s also said interest rates will drop “when Kevin gets in.” Let’s check out your independence and your courage. We’ll start easy. Mr. Warsh, did Donald Trump lose the 2020 election?
Warsh: Senator, we should keep politics out of the Federal Reserve.
Warren: I’m asking a factual question.
Warsh: This body certified the election.
Warren: That’s not what I asked. Did Donald Trump lose in 2020?
Warsh: The Fed should stay out of politics.
Warren: In our meeting, you said you’re a “tough guy” who can stand up to President Trump. So name one aspect of his economic agenda you disagree with.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Kevin Warsh listens to a question during a Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee confirmation hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Warsh: That’s not something I’m prepared to do. The Fed should stay in its lane.
Warren: Just one place where you disagree.
Warsh: I do have one disagreement — he said I looked like I was out of central casting. I think I’d look older and grayer.
Warren: That’s adorable. But we need a Fed chair who is independent. If you can’t answer these questions, you don’t have the courage or the independence.
Politics
Commentary: He honked to support a ‘No Kings’ rally. A cop busted him
On March 28, a sunny Saturday in southwestern Utah, Jack Hoopes and his wife, Lorna, brought their homemade signs to the local “No Kings” rally.
The couple joined a crowd of 1,500 or so marching through the main picnic area of a park in downtown St. George. Their signs — cut-out words on a black background — chided lawmakers for failing to stand up to President Trump and urged America to “make lying wrong again.”
After about an hour, the two were ready to go home. They got in their silver Volvo SUV, but before pulling away, Jack Hoopes decided to swing past the demonstration, which was still going strong. He tooted his horn, twice, in a show of solidarity.
That’s when things took a curious turn.
A police officer parked in the middle of the street warned Hoopes not to honk; at least that’s what he thinks the officer said as Hoopes drove past the chanting crowd. When he spotted two familiar faces, Hoopes hit the horn a third time — a friendly, howdy sort of honk. “It wasn’t like I was being obnoxious,” he said, “or laying on the horn.”
Hoopes turned a corner and the cop, lights flashing, pulled him over. He asked Hoopes for his license and registration. He returned a few moments later. A passing car sounded its horn. “Are you going to stop him, too?” Hoopes asked.
That did not sit well. The officer said he’d planned to let Hoopes off with a warning. Instead, he charged the 71-year-old retired potato farmer with violating Utah’s law on horns and warning devices. He issued a citation, with a fine punishable up to $50.
Hoopes — a law school graduate and prosecutor in the days before he took up potato farming — is fighting back, even though he estimates the legal skirmishing could cost him considerably more than the maximum fine. The ticket might have resulted from pique on the officer’s part. But Hoopes doesn’t think so. He sees politics at play.
“I’ve beeped my horn for [the pro-law enforcement] Back the Blue. I’ve beeped my horn for Black Lives Matter,” Hoopes said. “I’ve seen a lot of people honk for Trump and for MAGA.”
He’s also seen plenty of times when people honked their horns to celebrate high school championships and the like.
But Hoopes has never heard of anyone being pulled over, much less ticketed, for excessive or unlawful honking. “I think it’s freedom of expression,” he said.
Or should be.
Jack and Lorna Hoopes made their own protest signs to bring to the “No Kings” rally in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
St. George is a fast-growing community of about 100,000 residents set amid the jagged red-rock peaks of the Mojave Desert. It’s a jumping-off point for Zion National Park, about 40 miles east, and a mecca for golf, hiking and mountain-bike riding.
It’s also Trump Country.
Washington County, where St. George is located, gave Trump 75% of its vote in 2024, with Kamala Harris winning a scant 23%. That emphatic showing compares with Trump’s 59% performance statewide.
St. George is where Hoopes and his wife live most of the time. When summer and its 100-degree temperatures hit, they retreat to southeast Idaho. The couple get along well with their neighbors in both places, Hoopes said, even though they’re Democrats living in ruby-red country. It’s not as though they just tolerate folks, or hold their noses to get by.
“Most of my friends are conservative,” Hoopes said. “Some of the Trump people are very good people. We just have a difference of opinion where our country is going.”
He was speaking from a hotel parking lot in Arizona near Lake Havasu while embarked on an annual motorcycle ride through the Southwest: four days, a dozen riders, 1,200 miles. Most of his companions are Trump supporters, Hoopes said, and, just like back home, everyone gets on fine.
“Right?” he called out.
“No!” a voice hollered back.
Actually, Hoopes joked, his charitable road mates let him ride along because they consider him handicapped — his disability being his political ideology.
Hoopes is not exactly a hellion. In 2014, he and his wife traveled to Africa to participate in humanitarian work and promote sustainable agriculture in Kenya and Uganda. In 2020, they worked as Red Cross volunteers helping wildfire victims in Northern California.
Virtually his entire life has been spent on the right side of the law, though Hoopes allowed as how he has racked up a few speeding tickets over the years. (His career as a prosecutor lasted four years and involved three murder cases in the first 12 months before he left the legal profession behind and took up farming.)
He’s never had any problems with the police in St. George. “They seem to be decent,” Hoopes said.
A department spokesperson, Tiffany Mitchell, said illicit honking is not a widespread problem in the placid, retiree-heavy community, but there are some who have been cited for violations. She denied any political motivation in Hoopes’ case.
“He must’ve felt justified,” Mitchell said of the officer who issued the citation. “I can’t imagine that politics had anything to do with it.”
And yes, she said, honking a horn can be a political statement protected by the 1st Amendment. “But, just like anything else, it can turn criminal,” Mitchell said, and apparently that’s how the officer felt on March 28 “and that’s the direction he took it.”
The matter now rests before a judge, residing in a legal system that has lately been tested and twisted in remarkable ways.
Jack Hoopes’ case is now before a judge in St. George, Utah.
(Mikayla Whitmore / For The Times)
As he left an initial hearing earlier this month, Hoopes said his phone pinged with a fresh headline out of Washington. Trump’s Justice Department, it was reported, was asking a federal appeals court to throw out the convictions of 12 people found guilty of seditious conspiracy for their roles in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.
“We have a president that pardons people that broke into the Capitol and defecated” in the hallways and congressional offices, Hoopes said. “Police officers died because of it, and yet I get picked up for honking my horn?”
Hoopes’ next court appearance, a pretrial conference, is set for July 15.
-
Maryland4 minutes agoU.S. Air Force reverses course on retiring A-10 Thunderbolt planes, making way for potential Maryland return
-
Michigan10 minutes agoUS supreme court sides with Michigan in its fight to shut down ageing pipeline
-
Massachusetts16 minutes agoHeavy police presence due to ‘ongoing incident’ in Tewksbury
-
Minnesota22 minutes agoTikToker’s ban from St. Paul parks lifted after appeal, agent says
-
Mississippi28 minutes ago
8 rivers, lakes are the most alligator-infested water in Mississippi
-
Missouri34 minutes agoGroundbreaking date announced for Springfield Missouri Temple
-
Montana40 minutes agoWalker Hayes to headline 2026 Northwest Montana Fair
-
Nebraska46 minutes agoCarriker Chronicles: Sean Callahan on Matt Rhule’s Critical Year 4 with Nebraska Football