Connect with us

Politics

Column: Hey, Joe, it's OK to call it quits and leave with dignity and pride

Published

on

Column: Hey, Joe, it's OK to call it quits and leave with dignity and pride

If I were a relative or close confidant of President Biden, I’m pretty sure I’d give him a hug, thank him for his service, and tell him to seriously consider walking away.

I’d tell him that after a life of service, he can pass the torch with pride, with dignity, and with grace.

Someone probably should have done this months ago, out of love or duty, and out of the concern that Biden’s health is likely to get worse in coming years.

But we’re not very good at this sort of thing — at summoning the courage it takes to confront a loved one or a boss who’s in decline and being totally honest about it. To be courteous but firm. I had trouble telling my own father it was time to give up driving. He resisted, unaware of or unwilling to accept the reality of his obvious shakiness behind the wheel, and unwilling to surrender his keys or his pride.

California is about to be hit by an aging population wave, and Steve Lopez is riding it. His column focuses on the blessings and burdens of advancing age — and how some folks are challenging the stigma associated with older adults.

Advertisement

By many accounts, people close to Biden have been aware of a decline but have not pressed him to step aside. The New York Times reported on Tuesday that in “the weeks and months” before last Thursday’s presidential debate, “several current and former officials and others who encountered him behind closed doors noticed that he increasingly appeared confused or listless, or would lose the thread of conversations.” There are also reports that people are encouraging him to keep going.

There are some analogies to California‘s Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who died last year at the age of 90 after more than 30 years in office. If there was any inner-circle effort to persuade her to leave the Senate due to her obvious cognitive and physical decline, that effort failed. She died in office after announcing she would not run again.

In some cases, stepping aside is the right thing to do.

Advertisement

This might sound odd to those who’ve followed my Golden State column over the last 28 months. One of my driving principles has been to stand firm against the notion that we’re incapable of contributing as we age, or that our value diminishes.

In recent columns, I’ve been pointing out, with the help of experts, that you can’t diagnose dementia from afar, though many people have tried to do so in Biden’s case, especially after his debate performance.

I’ve also written that whatever the cause of his foggy gaze and occasional meandering phrase (the medical possibilities are numerous), Biden seemed lost and unsteady. He may still have some gas in the tank, but time is working against him. A year from now, or two, or three or four, how will he be?

The world population is aging rapidly, and more people are staying on the job longer — and while the benefits are many, the risks are real. Bodies and minds break down. It’s OK, when they do, to punch out and move on.

Since the debate, I’ve been thinking about something USC gerontology professor Caroline Cicero said to me last year, when I wrote about whether Biden or Feinstein should step aside.

Advertisement

“I’m very concerned about ageism in the workplace, but I’m also concerned about people who think they have to work forever,” said Cicero. “Giving people permission to retire is something I think we need to do.”

She picked up on that line of thinking this week.

“In recent decades, society has told us that we can have it all. In a battle against ageism, we tell people they can work as long as they want,” she said. “In a battle to prove ourselves, we tell ourselves we can beat normal slowdowns that come with the passage of time.”

But most of us can’t.

Mick Jagger and Paul McCartney, each north of 80, are still holding a tune, and Warren Buffett, at 93, seems to be doing OK. But that’s the thing about aging, as I‘ve said before: You can be old at 60 and young at 85.

Advertisement

Biden has obvious strengths, chief among them experience, wisdom, decency, civility and the empathy that comes with crushing loss. It may be that those in his inner circle, knowing what he’s made of, can’t bring themselves to question his strength and resolve, even in the face of obvious decline. Sure, his family knows him better than we do, but maybe they can’t see what we see from afar.

Some of you might be wondering, right about now, that if I’m all about frank discussions on knowing when it’s time to go, then how come I’m not bringing the Trump family into this.

I would, but their task is even harder than the Biden family’s. What would be the point of saying to a convicted felon who continues to insist he won the 2020 election, “Hey Pop, the fact-checkers are still recovering from the workout you gave them in the last debate”? It takes a bit of humility to see the truth about yourself, and when you begin listing the qualities that define Donald Trump, humility and truth do not make the cut.

 Donald Trump raising his right hand as he speaks in front of a blue backdrop with repeated red and light blue CNN logos

Former President Trump, debating Biden last week, would be even less inclined to heed any advice to leave the race.

(Gerald Herbert / Associated Press)

Advertisement

Biden may be having trouble seeing himself as anything other than what he is now — a public servant at the top of the flow chart. You can’t be president of the United States without a healthy ego, and in jobs that people are passionate about — that become their very identity — they often can’t imagine what or who else they could be in retirement, provided they can afford to retire, which many cannot.

These people may not be able to imagine that anyone waiting in the wings is as up to the task as they are, and perhaps that’s part of Biden’s calculation. If he takes the next exit, who would take his place? And is there enough time for Vice President Kamala Harris or any of the other potential last-minute candidates to find traction?

It never should have come to this.

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg comes to mind as Exhibit A for lessons on the price of stubbornly holding on. She refused to surrender her position as her health faded, and women’s reproductive rights suffered a blow as a result.

“I see it with entrepreneurs who created a business and have hard time letting go,” said Helen Dennis, who started a support group called Renewment — combining the words “renewal” and “retirement” — 25 years ago for successful women who had trouble imagining the next versions of themselves. The group now includes “teachers, nurses, doctors, several attorneys,” all of them leaning on each other as they learn “how to navigate the next chapter.”

Advertisement

Work is not life, and life is not work, USC’s Cicero once said to me. That must be a foreign concept to a sitting president, but I’m thinking of former President Jimmy Carter as one of the best examples of those who have found ways to contribute after leaving office. He took up a hammer and went to work for Habitat for Humanity — and he won the Nobel Peace Prize for working on peaceful solutions to world conflicts.

“People often fear retirement because they don’t want to be labeled as old, invisible or unimportant,” Cicero said. And many of those who are “addicted to routine don’t know how they will spend their time without the rigors of a work schedule,” she added — but that “does not mean they need to keep working to have a satisfying later life.”

Biden, after his debate stumble, was quickly back on the stump, telling supporters that when you’re knocked down, you get back up and keep fighting.

But Father Time, as they say, is the one who’s undefeated.

I’d remind Biden that the country and the world have problems neither he nor Trump can fix, and that if he’s reelected he will be subjected to four more years of unrelenting judgments about his fitness to hold office.

Advertisement

I’d tell him that, at 81, when you’re knocked down, you’ve earned a rest.

And there’s no shame in that.

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Advertisement

Politics

Black mold and $1 wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

Published

on

Black mold and  wages: Settlement forces immigrant detention centers to protect workers

In 2023, California regulators levied more than $100,000 in fines against the private operator of a federal immigration facility, kicking off a three-year battle over whether detainees who do work at the facilities should be considered employees.

The question went beyond semantics: If considered employees, the detainees would be subject to state worker protection laws.

A legal settlement announced this week now affirms that private immigrant detention facilities are subject to California’s workplace safety and health requirements.

“Every worker deserves a safe and healthy workplace and should be able to report workplace hazards without fear of retaliation,” said Denisse Gómez, spokesperson for the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health or Cal/OSHA.

Advertisement

“Individuals who perform work in these facilities are entitled to workplace safety protections, and this settlement reinforces Cal/OSHA’s commitment to enforcing those protections and safeguarding vulnerable workers,” she added.

Under the settlement between California and the GEO Group, a Florida-based private prison company, the company recently withdrew its legal challenges and agreed to pay more than $100,000 in the fines.

The GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment.

Back in 2023, Cal/OSHA issued $104,510 in fines against the GEO Group. The agency had found six violations of state code by the company after detainees complained about a lack of protective equipment and proper training while cleaning the facility for $1 per day.

Detainees alleged they routinely wiped black mold off shower walls at the facility, saw black dust spew from air vents and used cleaning solutions that lacked instructions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement

The biggest fine levied against the GEO Group was for failure to establish and maintain “effective written procedures to reduce employee risk of exposure to aerosol transmissible disease.”

Advocates viewed Cal/OSHA’S recognition of the detainees as workers as a victory that could pave the way for future labor rights fights at other detention centers in the state.

But the GEO Group appealed, arguing that detainees participating in ICE’s voluntary work program make their own schedules and aren’t employees, so hazard exposure couldn’t be “as a result of assigned duties,” as California law states. Plus, the company argued, there wasn’t enough evidence that detainees were exposed to any hazard.

Early last year, the state’s Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board rejected the GEO Group’s argument and found that detainees should be considered “affected employees.”

The GEO Group sued, but three days before a California Superior Court hearing in May, the company and Cal/OSHA reached the settlement.

Advertisement

Along with paying the fines, the GEO Group agreed to draft plans for avoiding aerosol transmissions at 12 secure and reentry facilities in California, including five detention centers that hold immigrants.

“GEO ensures detainees are afforded the necessary tools, equipment, and personal protective equipment … to safely and effectively perform any necessary tasks,” the settlement states.

Gómez said the settlement also leaves intact the appeals board’s ruling that civil immigration detainees who participate in work programs can participate in proceedings anonymously, “acknowledging the potential for retaliation when individuals raise workplace safety concerns.”

But the question of whether detainees are employees and deserve certain protections isn’t entirely resolved — at least not for the federal government.

Last month, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement released new standards for detention facilities across the country. The revised guidelines “emphasize that detainee volunteers participating in the voluntary work program are not considered facility and/or government employees” and thus not entitled to labor regulations.

Advertisement

Attorney Mariel Villarreal said the timing of the new detention standards made her question whether the GEO Group had asked ICE to specify in its standards that detainees are not workers in response to its battle with Cal/OSHA.

“To me, it’s a reaction to this very settlement,” she said. Villarreal works for the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice, which filed the original complaint on behalf of detainees who said they worked in unsafe conditions.

Villarreal pointed to a Washington Post report that GEO Group executives privately asked ICE to specify that detainees are not employees of the facilities where they work. Two top Trump administration officials, border czar Tom Homan and acting ICE director David Venturella, previously worked for the GEO Group.

New versions of ICE detention standards take effect as contracts are established or modified, so this year’s rules won’t immediately apply to every facility.

An ICE spokesperson did not comment about the settlement. The spokesperson, who did not provide their name in an emailed statement Wednesday, said the agency has begun transitioning detention facilities to meet the 2026 standards, “building on its longstanding commitment to safe, secure, and professional detention operations.”

Advertisement

“ICE has consistently implemented many of these best practices independently, reinforcing its role as the leader in detention operations,” the spokesperson added.

The GEO Group and other immigrant detention center operators have faced other legal battles over workers’ rights, including lawsuits in Washington, Colorado and California over the $1-per-day payment.

Villarreal said she’s confident that the Cal/OSHA settlement would continue to hold even if California facilities incorporated the new standards. But she said she believes the statements are an attempt by the GEO Group to “sidestep responsibility” and avoid the possibility of being fined under similar circumstances in other states.

“These statements in the new standards are a way for them to try and preserve profits as much as possible,” she said. “GEO and ICE are so intertwined at this point that they have the same motives.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Israel shares intelligence warning Iran plotted new assassination attempt against Trump: report

Published

on

Israel shares intelligence warning Iran plotted new assassination attempt against Trump: report

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Israel recently shared intelligence with the United States indicating Iran had developed a fresh plan to assassinate President Donald Trump, according to a Wall Street Journal report Thursday citing people familiar with the matter.

The reported intelligence would mark an escalation in the longstanding threats against Trump, who Iran has repeatedly vowed to retaliate against over the 2020 U.S. strike that killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani. 

The White House referred Fox News Digital to Trump’s remarks Wednesday when asked about the report.

TRUMP FACES UNPRECEDENTED THIRD ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT

Advertisement

President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the NATO Summit in Ankara, Turkey, July 8, 2026. Trump addressed threats against his life after a report said Israel shared intelligence with the United States about an alleged new Iranian assassination plot. (Kerem Uzel/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“They want to take out the U.S. leader — me. I’m on whatever list. I saw this morning I’m on every single one of their lists,” Trump said. “And, so far, I guess I’ve been a bit lucky, but maybe that doesn’t last very long. These are evil, sick people. And we have to root out that cancer. That cancer. You know what you do? You’ve got to cut out cancer early. And that’s the way I feel.”

Fox News Digital has also reached out to Israel’s Embassy in Washington and Iran’s Mission to the United Nations for comment.

The Journal reported the intelligence surfaced as Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have diverged in recent weeks over how to proceed after last month’s conflict with Iran. Netanyahu has advocated for continuing military pressure on Tehran, while Trump has sought to preserve a fragile ceasefire after U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

NETANYAHU REJECTS REPORTS OF A RIFT WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, SAYS THE TWO REMAIN ALIGNED ON IRAN

Advertisement

President Donald Trump, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House March 25, 2019. The leaders spoke Thursday after The Wall Street Journal reported Israel had shared intelligence with the United States about an alleged new Iranian plot targeting Trump. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

Trump and Netanyahu spoke Thursday and agreed to continue coordination between the two countries, according to a statement from Netanyahu’s office, which said Trump also updated the Israeli leader on recent U.S. activity in the Gulf.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump. (Avi Ohayon/GPO)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Iranian mourners at the funeral for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei chanted for Trump’s death and displayed a banner that said, “We Will Kill Trump,” according to the Journal.

Advertisement

Iran has publicly vowed for years to retaliate against Trump over the U.S. operation that killed Soleimani, the former commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, in Baghdad in January 2020.

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran ceasefire is ‘over,’ Trump says, and orders additional strikes

Published

on

Iran ceasefire is ‘over,’ Trump says, and orders additional strikes

A tentative armistice between the United States and Iran reached less than a month ago appeared all but dead Wednesday after the two sides traded fresh military strikes, and as President Trump directed further attacks on the Islamic Republic.

The escalation marked a dramatic turn after the Trump administration spent weeks selling a diplomatic breakthrough with Tehran that proved controversial across the political aisle, lifting oil sanctions and a naval blockade on Iran in exchange for the promise of talks over the status of the Strait of Hormuz and its decades-old nuclear program.

Now, speaking to reporters at the NATO summit in Turkey, Trump said he believed the truce — which diplomats describe as a memorandum of understanding — was “over” and that it was a “waste of time” dealing with Iranian leadership.

“They’re scum. They’re sick people,” Trump said of Iranian leaders, whom he had characterized last month as “very rational people” and “very nice to deal with.”

The president’s dim views of the ceasefire agreement’s fate were shared by Iran’s foreign ministry, which issued a statement on Wednesday saying the American attacks, the reinstatement of a U.S. naval blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, and Israel’s continuing attacks in Lebanon rendered “important and fundamental” parts of the deal “ineffective.”

Advertisement

The truce’s unraveling was underscored by Trump ordering the U.S. military to launch a series of strikes against Iran on Wednesday afternoon to “further degrade their ability to threaten” the commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

“The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping and civilian crews freely navigating a vital international waterway,” U.S. Central Command said in a statement on social media.

Earlier in the day, Trump signaled that the United States planned to “hit them hard” and floated the possibility of taking over Kharg Island, which is vital to Iran’s economy. His remarks quickly prompted oil prices to rise and global stock markets to fall, a worry that Trump acknowledged but which did not seem to sway his decision-making in relation to Iran.

“If we hit Iran, oil goes up a little bit, it is all right,” Trump said. He later added that the United States may “do some other thing that could lift it a little bit, but I don’t think it’s gonna lift it a lot at all.”

As Trump signals the continuation of fighting, his administration has been seeking more than $67 billion in funding to cover expenses related to the Iran war, a request that Congress has not yet approved as lawmakers have been split over the president’s handling of the conflict.

Advertisement

“The American people are paying the price for Trump’s total failure in Iran,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement Wednesday. “Our troops are back in harm’s way and high gas costs are continuing to punish working families.”

The president’s stance on the war marked the latest setback to a fragile truce that has barely held since the 14-page agreement was signed June 17, as the U.S. and Iran engaged over the last few weeks in cycles of attacks and counterattacks.

Trump was noticeably angrier at Iran on Wednesday as he cast doubt over the deal. Last month, Trump had complimented Iranian leadership for trying to reach a peace deal and celebrated the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping route for the world’s oil and gas. But based on his remarks, it was clear he was out of patience.

“I am not happy with them,” Trump said. “They’re cuckoo. There’s something wrong with these people. For 47 years, they’ve been the bully of the Middle East and they are not the bully anymore. They are not the bully anymore.”

Trump expressed frustration with Iran’s negotiators and their resistance to abiding by U.S. demands to reopen the strait. When asked if he intended to send troops to Iran, the president dismissed the idea.

Advertisement

“Why would I go in now?” Trump said. “I’d go in when they’re completely eliminated or an agreement is made.”

Still, the president kept the door open for negotiations, saying that his envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner “want to negotiate.”

“They’re good people, Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, but they have to come back to me,” Trump said. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s just a waste of time dealing with [the Iranians]. They’re liars.”

The latest breakdown to the ceasefire followed a now-familiar chain reaction of tit-for-tat attacks, starting with a series of strikes on three oil tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, including a Qatari vessel carrying natural gas, according to the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center.

The Qatari tanker was off the coast of Oman when it was hit and caught fire, the maritime monitor said, in what experts say was a move to thwart ships attempting to use an alternate transit route to the one Iran specified. Iran did not claim responsibility, but a report on Iranian state television said the Qatari tanker came under attack after ignoring warnings to turn back.

Advertisement

The two other vessels were damaged but were able to continue to their destination, according to the U.K. group.

Qatar, which has played a vital role in facilitating negotiations between the U.S. and Iran, condemned the attack on its tanker as “unacceptable.”

The U.S. responded with a wave of strikes against more than 80 Iranian targets aimed at “impos[ing] heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway,” according to a statement from U.S. Central Command. That tally included roughly 60 Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps small boats in the strait.

Iranian state media said U.S. strikes targeted Sirik, Qeshm Island and Bushehr and Bandar Abbas, while a U.S. drone strike on the port city of Mahshahr killed one Revolutionary Guard member.

Ahead of the strikes, the White House revoked the 60-day temporary license given to Tehran to sell and deliver oil during the truce.

Advertisement

Iran’s military countered with its own strikes on 85 U.S. military facilities in Bahrain and Kuwait; it also shot down an MQ-9 drone, according to a statement on Wednesday.

Kuwait said its military intercepted two ballistic missiles and 13 drones, but that none had resulted in material damage or casualties.

Global oil prices surged 6% on news of Trump’s reversal on the deal, rising to more than $78 a barrel, down from the peak during the war but still above prewar levels.

The renewed violence appeared to have little effect on the funeral for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in an Israeli strike on Feb. 28, in the war’s opening hours.

The funeral, a days-long period of mourning, is set to end on Thursday, when Khamenei’s body will return from Iraq to be buried in the city of Mashhad, his birthplace. Negotiations were to begin once more.

Advertisement

In his remarks Wednesday, Trump said Iranian leaders had asked for a “timeout” to attend the funeral, and that he had promised not to kill them.

“And I said give it to them, and they start shooting missiles,” Trump said.

Whether those talks — which were meant to deal with the thorniest issues between the two countries, including the Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s nuclear program — will go ahead remains unclear. Iran, for its part, maintained a defiant attitude.

“The era of bullying and extortion is over,” wrote Mohammad Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker. “It leads nowhere. We don’t fold.”

Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior advisor to the supreme leader, posted on X that Trump’s policy had “driven the region towards fire.”

Advertisement

“We had previously warned that the region is not a place for the political gambling of small countries, and we have repeatedly proven that adventures are met with an immediate response,” he wrote.

He added that the Axis of Resistance — a reference to Iran’s network of allied groups in Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen — would not be “silent against humiliation and adventurism” and has “its finger on the trigger.”

Bulos reported from Beirut and Ceballos from Washington.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending