Connect with us

Politics

In two L.A. City Council races, police 'abolition' is a wedge issue

Published

on

In two L.A. City Council races, police 'abolition' is a wedge issue

Long before she uttered the words “F— the police,” Los Angeles City Council candidate Ysabel Jurado made clear she was not happy with the city’s approach to public safety.

In a candidate questionnaire last year, Jurado promised to move money out of the LAPD and into other programs. She said police should be removed from K-12 schools. And she described herself as an “abolitionist” — someone who favors the “abolition of police and the prison industrial complex.”

“I believe that we keep ourselves safe,” she wrote in the 20-page questionnaire she provided to the Democratic Socialists of America — now one of her most crucial supporters.

Tuesday’s election will determine whether Jurado and her allies can push City Hall further left on public safety by expanding the bloc of council members who want to rein in police spending and reallocate the savings.

Jurado, a tenant rights attorney, is looking to unseat Councilmember Kevin de León in an Eastside district. Another DSA-backed candidate, business owner Jillian Burgos, is gunning for a seat in the San Fernando Valley.

Advertisement

In both contests, police abolition — and law enforcement spending overall — has emerged as a political fault line, particularly for voters worried about crime and disorder.

Jurado, through a spokesperson, has described abolition as an aspirational goal, one that would take many years and many steps. De León says Jurado’s words should be taken literally, and seriously, by voters in his district, which stretches from downtown to El Sereno and Eagle Rock.

Los Angeles City Councilman Kevin de León, pictured in 2023, has sent campaign mailers assailing his opponent’s stances on public safety.

(Christina House/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

De León, who has highlighted the issue in campaign mailers, calls Jurado’s approach to public safety “elitist and irresponsible,” saying low-income neighborhoods would suffer the most. He ramped up his attacks over the last week after Jurado told a group of college students, “What’s the rap verse? F— the police, that’s how I see ‘em,” in response to a question about abolishing the police.

“We need the police to keep our communities safe. It’s just that simple,” De León said. “Every nation in the world, including the most progressive nations — Scandinavian countries, Sweden, Finland, Norway — they have police.”

Jurado has disputed the idea that she would defund the LAPD, telling audiences she still wants officers responding to violent crime. At the same time, she has argued that — with 1 in 4 city dollars going to the Los Angeles Police Department — too much is being spent on police.

“The safest cities in America invest in recreation and parks, libraries and our youth, but we’re not doing that,” she said.

Three of the council’s 15 members voted against Mayor Karen Bass’ budget this year, in large part because of their objections to police spending. Jurado and Burgos, if elected, could add two more votes to that bloc.

Advertisement

De León and former state Assemblymember Adrin Nazarian, who is facing off against Burgos, support Bass’ push to hire more police and return the department to 9,500 officers. Both are in favor of the mayor’s decision to give a package of raises and bonuses to police, which is expected to add $400 million to the city’s yearly budget by 2027.

Jurado opposes both efforts. So does Burgos, an optician and part owner of a murder mystery theater company. On the day the council approved the police raises, Burgos accused city leaders of choosing “militarization” over humanity, saying the money should have gone to housing and community services instead.

“Crime is down overall,” she said in an interview. “I think we can invest in other solutions.”

Like Jurado, Burgos identified herself as an abolitionist in her DSA questionnaire. Like Jurado, she told the DSA she would remove police officers from K-12 schools. Both said police unions should not be part of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, which represents about 300 union groups and is a major fixture in city politics.

A woman smiles outdoors.

Los Angeles City Council candidate Jillian Burgos, pictured in January, has come out against the mayor’s effort to hire more police and return the LAPD to 9,500 officers.

(Michael Blackshire/Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

The DSA’s L.A. chapter has become a powerful political force, pushing city leaders for stronger tenant protections, higher wages and lower law enforcement spending. Over the last four years, the group has worked to successfully unseat three City Hall incumbents.

It has been a key supporter of Burgos, sending 167 people to knock on doors for her, according to a spokesperson for the L.A. chapter. Nearly 330 DSA volunteers have done the same for Jurado, the spokesperson said.

The Los Angeles Police Protective League, which represents rank-and-file officers, has sought to counter those efforts, sending campaign mailers that call Burgos’ public safety platform “dangerous.” The union has allocated $445,000 for canvassers, digital ads and other efforts to defeat Jurado and reelect De León.

“Ms. Jurado told [voters] loud and clear that if she wins, it will be ‘F-the police,’ and that means fewer officers patrolling neighborhoods and enforcing the law,” Police Protective League President Craig Lally said in a statement.

Advertisement

The two council contests come as LAPD sworn staffing has shrunk about 12% over the last five years, to about 8,800 officers — the lowest point since 2002. Bass and the council have attempted to reverse the slide by giving raises, increasing starting pay and offering retention bonuses.

Those measures are expected to take a big bite out of the city budget, adding an estimated $1 billion in costs over a four-year period. With city leaders struggling to balance the books, many other city agencies have had to make cuts, leaving positions vacant or eliminating them entirely.

Even with a smaller LAPD, homicides in the city have declined 29% this year compared with the same period in 2022. The number of gunshot victims dropped 27%, according to the LAPD.

Jennifer Macias, who co-chairs the DSA’s L.A. chapter, said her organization added the abolition question to its candidate surveys after George Floyd was murdered by police in Minneapolis. She called the question an important part of the endorsement process — and “integral” to the group’s values.

Macias, who lives in Jefferson Park, said the city needs a way to respond to emergencies without involving police who are “systemically violent.” She described police abolition — the idea of getting to zero officers — as “a North Star goal” that will be achieved only over time, after other programs are put in place.

Advertisement

“Not having the police doesn’t mean that we’re not responding to harm,” she said.

Burgos said that, for her, abolition means moving away from “reactive” law enforcement responses and toward expanded social services, such as job training, job placements and mental health care.

“All of that is community care, and that’s what I am for,” the North Hollywood resident said.

Nazarian, like the three other candidates, said he wants to expand the city’s network of unarmed responders to assist people experiencing nonviolent mental health crises. At the same time, he slammed the idea of police abolition, saying there’s “nothing progressive” about it.

“The rich and the upper class will always find a way. They will hire their own security,” the North Hollywood resident said. “What will be left is the majority of the population — the middle class and the poorer working class — who will be left to fend for themselves.”

Advertisement
A man next to a street.

Los Angeles City Council Candidate Adrin Nazarian says there’s “nothing progressive” about the concept of police abolition.

(Michael Blackshire/Los Angeles Times)

Nazarian, whose family fled Iran when he was 8, said there will always be people who seek to victimize others, and therefore, a need for police.

Jurado, for her part, said she has never used the phrase “defund” while referring to the LAPD. At the Cal State L.A. event where she said “F— the police,” she also argued that police should be focusing on gangs, violent crime and “the drugs that are invading our communities.”

In an interview, Jurado said she does not yet know whether she would routinely vote against LAPD spending proposals that come before the council, as one of her closest allies, Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, has done.

Advertisement

“We check boxes” on questionnaires, Jurado said. “But at the end of the day, we use our best judgment.”

Over the last week, Jurado has dismissed the criticism of her “F— the police” remark, saying it was “just a lyric” from a rap song. She called the attack ads from the police union “noise.”

A woman stands in the middle of a street.

Los Angeles City Council candidate Ysabel Jurado said the attacks on her campaign from the police union are just “noise.”

(Michael Blackshire/Los Angeles Times)

If recent L.A. elections are any guide, the Highland Park resident has reason to be confident.

Advertisement

Hernandez, who also represents part of the Eastside, defeated two-term incumbent Gil Cedillo in 2022 while identifying herself as an abolitionist. She scored that victory even after the police union sent mailers warning that her policies would result in the release of rapists and violent criminals.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, while running in 2022, also identified himself as an abolitionist in his DSA questionnaire. He defeated the incumbent, Mitch O’Farrell, by a wide margin.

“Abolition gets thrown out as a scare tactic and a way to divide people,” he said. “But many abolitionists believe that the way we root out crime, the way we stop crime, is by putting resources into families and into communities, and that will eventually lead to a society where we don’t need police officers. It’s very utopian when you think about it.”

Soto-Martínez pointed out that De León courted the Democratic Socialists in 2018, when he was a state lawmaker seeking to unseat U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Although De León’s DSA candidate questionnaire did not include a question about police abolition, he came out in favor of abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency that polices the border.

These days, De León is slamming Jurado as the “handpicked” DSA candidate, calling her public safety views “too dangerous” for L.A. That shows that De León is “a hypocrite,” Soto-Martínez said.

Advertisement

De León, in response, said this year’s DSA is “not the same as the Bernie Sanders DSA in 2016 or 2018.” Abolition of police, he said, is just one area where the group has become too extreme.

De León, who lives in Eagle Rock, has been at odds with Hernandez and Soto-Martínez over copper wire theft, which has left many streets — including the newly built 6th Street Bridge — in darkness. Hernandez and Soto-Martínez cast the only votes against De León’s plan to create a task force to combat such thefts.

Last summer, De León credited the task force with making 82 arrests and recovering 2,000 pounds of copper.

De León’s approach to public safety has resonated with at least some constituents. Last week, dozens gathered in Highland Park to denounce Jurado’s use of the F-word and voice support for the LAPD.

“In this crazy world that we live in, we need to fund the police, not you-know-what the police,” El Sereno resident Eddie Santillan said.

Advertisement

Times staff writer Libor Jany contributed to this report.

Politics

Dan Bongino officially leaves FBI deputy director role after less than a year, returns to ‘civilian life’

Published

on

Dan Bongino officially leaves FBI deputy director role after less than a year, returns to ‘civilian life’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Dan Bongino returned to private life on Sunday after serving as deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for less than a year.

Bongino said on X that Saturday was his last day on the job before he would return to “civilian life.”

“It’s been an incredible year thanks to the leadership and decisiveness of President Trump. It was the honor of a lifetime to work with Director Patel, and to serve you, the American people. See you on the other side,” he wrote.

The former FBI deputy director announced in mid-December that he would be leaving his role at the bureau at the start of the new year.

Advertisement

BONDI, PATEL TAP MISSOURI AG AS ADDITIONAL FBI CO-DEPUTY DIRECTOR ALONGSIDE BONGINO

Dan Bongino speaks with FBI Director Kash Patel as they attend the annual 9/11 Commemoration Ceremony at the National 9/11 Memorial and Museum in New York City on Sept. 11, 2025. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump previously praised Bongino, who assumed office in March, for his work at the FBI.

“Dan did a great job. I think he wants to go back to his show,” Trump told reporters.

FBI DIRECTOR, TOP DOJ OFFICIAL RESPOND TO ‘FAILING’ NY TIMES ARTICLE CLAIMING ‘DISDAIN’ FOR EACH OTHER

Advertisement

“After his swearing-in ceremony as FBI Deputy Director, Dan Bongino paid his respects at the Wall of Honor, honoring the brave members of the #FBI who made the ultimate sacrifice and reflecting on the legacy of those who paved the way in the pursuit of justice and security,” the FBI said in a post on X. (@FBI on X)

Bongino spoke publicly about the personal toll of the job during a May appearance on “Fox & Friends,” saying he had sacrificed a lot to take the role.

“I gave up everything for this,” he said, citing the long hours both he and FBI Director Kash Patel work.

“I stare at these four walls all day in D.C., by myself, divorced from my wife — not divorced, but I mean separated — and it’s hard. I mean, we love each other, and it’s hard to be apart,” he added.

The FBI’s J. Edgar Hoover headquarters building in Washington on Nov. 2, 2016. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen, File)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Bongino’s departure leaves Andrew Bailey, who was appointed co-deputy director in September 2025, as the bureau’s other deputy director.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Commentary: Unhappy with the choices for California governor? Get real

Published

on

Commentary: Unhappy with the choices for California governor? Get real

California has tried all manner of design in choosing its governor.

Democrat Gray Davis, to name a recent example, had an extensive background in government and politics and a bland demeanor that suggested his first name was also a fitting adjective.

Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, was a novice candidate who ran for governor on a whim. His super-sized action hero persona dazzled Californians like the pyrotechnics in one of his Hollywood blockbusters.

In the end, however, their political fates were the same. Both left office humbled, burdened with lousy poll numbers and facing a well of deep voter discontent.

Advertisement

(Schwarzenegger, at least, departed on his own terms. He chased Davis from the Capitol in an extraordinary recall and won reelection before his approval ratings tanked during his second term.)

There are roughly a dozen major candidates for California governor in 2026 and, taken together, they lack even a small fraction of Schwarzenegger’s celebrity wattage.

Nor do any have the extensive Sacramento experience of Davis, who was a gubernatorial chief of staff under Jerry Brown before serving in the Legislature, then winning election as state controller and lieutenant governor.

That’s not, however, to disparage those running.

The contestants include a former Los Angeles mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa; three candidates who’ve won statewide office, former Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, schools Supt. Tony Thurmond and former Controller Betty Yee; two others who gained national recognition during their time in Congress, Katie Porter and Eric Swalwell; and Riverside County’s elected sheriff, Chad Bianco.

Advertisement

The large field offers an ample buffet from which to choose.

The rap on this particular batch of hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, which, honestly, seems a greater concern to those writing and spitballing about the race than a reflection of some great upwelling of citizens clamoring for bread and circuses.

In scores of conversations with voters over the past year, the sentiment that came through, above all, was a sense of practicality and pragmatism. (And, this being a blue bastion, no small amount of horror, fear and loathing directed at the vengeful and belligerent Trump administration.)

It’s never been more challenging and expensive to live in California, a place of great bounty that often exacts in dollars and stress what it offers in opportunity and wondrous beauty.

With a governor seemingly more focused on his personal agenda, a 2028 bid for president, than the people who put him in office, many said they’d like to replace Gavin Newsom with someone who will prioritize California and their needs above his own.

Advertisement

That means a focus on matters such as traffic, crime, fire prevention, housing and homelessness. In other words, pedestrian stuff that doesn’t light up social media or earn an invitation to hold forth on one of the Beltway chat shows.

“Why does it take so long to do simple things?” asked one of those voters, the Bay Area’s Michael Duncan, as he lamented his pothole-ridden, 120-mile round-trip commute between Fairfield and an environmental analyst job in Livermore.

The answer is not a simple one.

Politics are messy, like any human endeavor. Governing is a long and laborious process, requiring study, deliberation and the weighing of competing forces. Frankly, it can be rather dull.

Certainly the humdrum of legislation or bureaucratic rule-marking is nothing like the gossipy speculation about who may or may not bid to lead California as its 41st governor.

Advertisement

Why else was so much coverage devoted to whether Sen. Alex Padilla would jump into the gubernatorial race — he chose not to — and the possible impact his entry would have on the contest, as opposed to, say, his thinking on CEQA or FMAP?

(The former is California’s much-contested Environmental Quality Act; the latter is the formula that determines federal reimbursement for Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents.)

Just between us, political reporters tend to be like children in front of a toy shop window. Their bedroom may be cluttered with all manner of diversion and playthings, but what they really want is that shiny, as-yet unattained object — Rick Caruso! — beckoning from behind glass.

Soon enough, once a candidate has entered the race, boredom sets in and the speculation and desire for someone fresh and different starts anew. (Will Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta change his mind and run for governor?)

For their part, many voters always seem to be searching for some idealized candidate who exists only in their imagination.

Advertisement

Someone strong, but not dug in. Willing to compromise, but never caving to the other side. Someone with the virginal purity of a political outsider and the intrinsic capability of an insider who’s spent decades cutting deals and keeping the government wheels spinning.

They look over their choices and ask, in the words of an old song, is that all there is? (Spoiler alert: There are no white knights out there.)

Donald Trump was, foremost, a celebrity before his burst into politics. First as a denizen of New York’s tabloid culture and then as the star of TV’s faux-boardroom drama, “The Apprentice.”

His pizzazz was a large measure of his appeal, along with his manufactured image as a shrewd businessman with a kingly touch and infallible judgment.

His freewheeling political rallies and frothy social media presence were, and continue to be, a source of great glee to his fans and followers.

Advertisement

His performance as president has been altogether different, and far less amusing.

If the candidates for California governor fail to light up a room, that’s not such a bad thing. Fix the roads. Make housing more affordable. Help keep the place from burning to the ground.

Leave the fun and games to the professionals.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Kamala Harris blasts Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s Maduro as ‘unlawful and unwise’

Published

on

Kamala Harris blasts Trump administration’s capture of Venezuela’s Maduro as ‘unlawful and unwise’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Former Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday evening condemned the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, calling the operation both “unlawful” and “unwise.”

In a lengthy post on X, Harris acknowledged that Maduro is a “brutal” and “illegitimate” dictator but said that President Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.”

“Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable,” Harris wrote. “That Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator does not change the fact that this action was both unlawful and unwise. We’ve seen this movie before.

“Wars for regime change or oil that are sold as strength but turn into chaos, and American families pay the price.”

Advertisement

SEE PICS: VENEZUELANS WORLDWIDE CELEBRATE AS EXILES REACT TO MADURO’S CAPTURE

Vice President Kamala Harris had strong words for the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. (Montinique Monroe/Getty Images)

Harris made the remarks hours after the Trump administration confirmed that Maduro and his wife were captured and transported out of Venezuela as part of “Operation Absolute Resolve.”

The former vice president also accused the administration of being motivated by oil interests rather than efforts to combat drug trafficking or promote democracy.

“The American people do not want this, and they are tired of being lied to. This is not about drugs or democracy. It is about oil and Donald Trump’s desire to play the regional strongman,” Harris said. “If he cared about either, he wouldn’t pardon a convicted drug trafficker or sideline Venezuela’s legitimate opposition while pursuing deals with Maduro’s cronies.”

Advertisement

SECOND FRONT: HOW A SOCIALIST CELL IN THE US MOBILIZED PRO-MADURO FOOT SOLDIERS WITHIN 12 HOURS

President Donald Trump shared a photo of captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro aboard the USS Iwo Jima after Saturday’s strikes on Venezuela. (Donald Trump via Truth Social)

Harris, who has been rumored as a potential Democratic contender in the 2028 presidential race, additionally accused the president of endangering U.S. troops and destabilizing the region.

“The President is putting troops at risk, spending billions, destabilizing a region, and offering no legal authority, no exit plan, and no benefit at home,” she said. “America needs leadership whose priorities are lowering costs for working families, enforcing the rule of law, strengthening alliances, and — most importantly — putting the American people first.”

MADURO’S FALL SPARKS SUSPICION OF BETRAYAL INSIDE VENEZUELA’S RULING ELITE

Advertisement

CIA Director John Ratcliffe, left, President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio watch U.S. military operations in Venezuela from Mar-a-Lago in Florida early Saturday. (Donald Trump via Truth Social)

Maduro and his wife arrived at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn late Saturday after being transported by helicopter from the DEA in Manhattan after being processed.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Earlier in the day, Trump said that the U.S. government will “run” Venezuela “until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

Harris’ office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Advertisement

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending