Politics
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.
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)
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
“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.”
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.
“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.”
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.
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.
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.
Times staff writer Libor Jany contributed to this report.
Politics
Trump-aligned House holdouts accused of holding ‘life-saving’ veterans bill ‘hostage’ over SAVE America Act
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A sweeping veterans package supporters describe as the largest expansion of veterans’ health care and benefits in more than a decade is expected to return to the House floor when lawmakers come back from the July recess, but backers warn the legislation could once again become collateral damage in the Republican standoff over the SAVE America Act.
The Take Care of America’s Veterans Act rolls roughly 60 veterans bills into a package that would dramatically expand veterans’ health care and benefits. At its core, the legislation would cement veterans’ access to community care outside the VA while increasing benefits for combat-wounded veterans, caregivers and Gold Star families, expanding mental health services and enacting dozens of additional reforms.
House Veterans’ Affairs Committee Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., told Fox News Digital he intends to bring the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act back for a vote as soon as the House reconvenes next week.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – MARCH 17: Eugene Simpson, 29, from Dale City, Virginia goes through physical therapy at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Washington, D.C. with Michael Minor, a kinesiotherapist with the United States Department of Veterans Affairs on March 17, 2006 in Washington, D.C., USA. (Photo by Jeff Hutchens/Getty Images) (Jeff Hutchens/Getty Images)
HOUSE CONSERVATIVES DERAIL GOP AGENDA IN SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWDOWN
The legislation was held up last month after a group of House Republicans joined Democrats to defeat a procedural vote, stopping the House from taking up the bill.
“I’m feeling good as long as my members stay with us on the rule,” Bost said. “Right now, there’s some politics being played, not about this bill, but just in general.”
The bill became entangled in a broader House Republican fight over the SAVE America Act, legislation championed by President Donald Trump that would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.
On June 30, the House voted on H. Res. 1398, the procedural rule governing floor consideration of several bills, including the National Defense Authorization Act and the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act. The rule failed after 14 Republicans joined Democrats in opposition, preventing the House from taking up the veterans package and bringing floor business to a standstill. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., claimed to have voted against the rules vote in protest against House leadership’s handling of the SAVE America Act. As a result, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson sent the members home early.
Bost accused the holdouts of effectively putting veterans legislation on hold.
The US Department of Veterans Affairs building is seen in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2019. (Photo by Alastair Pike / AFP) (Photo credit should read ALASTAIR PIKE/AFP via Getty Images) (Photo credit should read ALASTAIR PIKE/AFP via Getty Image)
‘IT’S A MESS’: GOP TURNS ON HOUSE CONSERVATIVES AS VOTER ID BLOCKADE STALLS TRUMP’S AGENDA
“They’re holding all bills hostage,” Bost said. “They’re not voting for any rule. Any bill that has to pass a rule before it comes to the floor—which this bill does because of its size—can’t move.”
Although Bost said he supports the SAVE America Act and has voted for it three times, he argued the Senate’s failure to act should not stop the House from advancing unrelated legislation.
“I agree with that bill,” Bost said. “But the Senate still has to do their work. We don’t stop our work because the Senate isn’t doing it.”
With 23 legislative days left in the Congressional session, Concerned Veterans for America Strategic Director John Byrnes, a supporter of the bill, said time is of the essence.
“There are lots and lots of things that have to get done,” Byrnes told Fox News Digital. “There’s also the National Defense Authorization Act, which is a must pass every year, so these things eat up time. There’s requirements to have debate on these, which eat up session time.”
Byrnes argued that every procedural delay pushes other legislation further down the calendar.
“This bill will save lives in 2027,” Byrnes said. “If we lose veterans because they could have had faster, better access to health care, we’re never going to get those veterans back.”
Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill. ( )
TRUMP’S SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWS SIGNS OF LIFE IN THE SENATE DESPITE REPUBLICAN REVOLT
But Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who also voted no on the procedural vote, told Fox News Digital that he has concerns about how the bill is financed.
“I appreciate what the chairman’s trying to do in some respects, but there’s a few issues,” Roy said.
Among them, Roy pointed to provisions offsetting new spending through changes affecting other veterans.
“You’re taxing certain veterans to provide some sort of benefits and changes to other veterans,” Roy said. “There are concerns about some of the pay-fors.”
Veterans of Foreign Wars has also taken issue with Section 108 of the bill, warning that it would codify changes to future disability ratings for tinnitus and sleep apnea to help finance other veterans priorities.
But Bost said this is inaccurate.
“No veteran is going to have their benefits reduced,” Bost said. “If you’re receiving a benefit right now, that’s not going to be reduced at all.”
Roy, who previously served two years on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, said he supported a lot of what the bill was seeking to accomplish; but said other pieces of legislation are priorities, too.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“There is a block of us for whom border security, the SAVE Act and demonstrating our leadership on major issues is critical,” Roy said. “Some of these other bills may or may not get hung up based on a desire of many in the conference to see movement on other things.”
Fox News Digital reached out to Luna’s office and the White House for comment.
Politics
Assassinations unleashed under Trump haunt Iran war endgame
WASHINGTON — Shortly before President Trump ended a ceasefire with Iran this week, Israeli officials presented his team with intelligence indicating Tehran was hatching new plots to kill him.
It was not the first such warning. U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies have tracked evidence for years of Iranian efforts to target the president, with signals only increasing since the start of the war.
Their desire to target Trump and his top aides began six years ago, just outside Baghdad International Airport, when the president ordered a drone strike that killed Iran’s most powerful general. The assassination of Qassem Suleimani brought the two countries to the brink of war.
Yet even as full-scale war was averted, top Iranian officials vowed revenge for the strike, authorizing attempts on the lives not just of the president, but of his secretary of State and national security advisor, among others, even after they had left office.
Now, calls for revenge have reached a sharper pitch in Tehran, after a joint U.S.-Israeli operation killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, at the start of the war in February.
At Khamenei’s funeral ceremonies this week, red flags of vengeance flew throughout the capital as protesters explicitly called on their government to “kill Trump.” His son, Mojtaba, the new supreme leader, was absent from the commemorations, fearing assassination himself.
Mourners hold an anti-President Trump banner at the Imam Khomeini Grand Mosque during mass funeral prayers for Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family in Tehran on Sunday.
(Morteza Nikoubazl / NurPhoto via Getty Images)
The prospect of foreign assassination plots targeting U.S. leaders puts the United States in dangerous new territory, where its embrace of political killings could ultimately place its own officials at unprecedented risk. And experts fear the existential threat of assassination has pushed peace further out of reach: When both sides believe their survival is at stake, the trust required for diplomacy becomes far harder to achieve.
Israeli news organizations have reported that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, cited Iranian attempts to kill Trump in recent years as part of his case to go to war in the first place.
A U.S. official told The Times that a range of serious threats exist against the president, including from Iran, but that Israel’s intelligence pointed to a more specific plot. The official did not provide further details. Israeli officials did not respond to requests for comment.
Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has said in recent months that the government sees vengeance against U.S. officials as “its legitimate duty and right,” and “will fulfill this great responsibility and duty with all its might.”
“The Suleimani killing accelerated a lifting of restraints on foreign assassinations — and the taboo on targeting and killing foreign leaders, with U.S. military assets, has been more or less lifted,” said Matt Dallek, a political professor at George Washington University.
“If the United States sets the example of how to conduct international relations, and it is using assassination of foreign leaders as a political weapon, it’s only logical that other countries will be more inclined to also engage in assassinations,” Dallek added. “It does seem likely that Trump will have a bigger target on his back.”
Returning from a NATO summit in Turkey on Wednesday, Trump was forced to switch back to an old model of Air Force One — equipped with specialized defensive technologies — from a new plane given as a gift by Qatar, after the Secret Service warned of potential threats to the aircraft from Iran.
“They want to take out the U.S. leader — me,” Trump told reporters aboard the plane. “I’m on whatever list. I saw this morning I’m on every single one of their lists. And so far, I guess I’ve been a bit lucky, but maybe that doesn’t last very long.”
The threat has remained on his mind in the days since. In an interview with the New York Post, Trump told the reporter, “I hope you’ll miss me,” adding that he has “been on their list for a long time.” And in a subsequent social media post Friday night, he warned of a catastrophic response he instructed the administration to pursue in the event Tehran succeeds.
“1000 Missiles are Locked and Loaded and aimed at the Islamic Republic of Iran,” he wrote, “with thousands of more to immediately follow, should the Iranian Government act on its threat, pronounced in many corners of the Globe, to assassinate, or attempt to assassinate, the sitting President of the United States of America, in this case, ME!”
The United States had a decades-old prohibition against assassinating foreign leaders before Trump’s presidency, codified in an executive order signed by President Ford in 1976 over concerns of a CIA plot to kill Fidel Castro.
The policy was only strengthened further by subsequent administrations, fearing a new international standard for targeted killings could result in unintended consequences in the halls of Washington.
Other administrations have been accused of targeting foreign leaders before. Under the Obama administration, an international coalition targeting the Libyan regime of Moammar Kadafi during the country’s 2011 civil war struck his fleeing convoy, leading to his capture and killing by rebel fighters.
But experts say Trump’s explicit targeting of Suleimani and Khamenei — and his public celebration of their deaths — marks a new paradigm.
“Through words and actions, President Trump has done more to normalize political violence than any other U.S. president, certainly in modern times,” said Robert Pape, a professor at the University of Chicago and author of “Our Own Worst Enemies: America in the Age of Violent Populism.”
“On the international front alone, the president routinely brags about killing Iranian leaders and seizing the leader of Venezuela, among others,” he added, “to the point that assassination is becoming the new normal in international politics.”
Politics
Trump takes unusual step, lets bipartisan housing bill become law unsigned amid SAVE pressure campaign
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A bipartisan housing bill became law Saturday at midnight after President Donald Trump declined to sign it, capping a weeks-long saga over whether the president would veto the measure amid frustrations with Congress over his stalled agenda.
Trump refused to sign the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act — legislation aimed at expanding the nation’s housing stock and lowering costs — in an attempt to pressure Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, despite the housing bill clearing both chambers with overwhelming majorities.
“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT, which is polling at 97% with the Republican Party, and very high with the non-politician Dumocrats,” he declared on Truth Social Friday morning.
The Trump-backed election measure, which would require proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections and impose voter ID requirements, has struggled to overcome the Senate’s 60-vote threshold.
Meanwhile, the House has not passed a version of the bill that includes the president’s proposed crackdown on mail-in voting and banning men from women’s sports.
President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, June 3, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon/AP)
HOUSE CONSERVATIVES DERAIL GOP AGENDA IN SAVE AMERICA ACT SHOWDOWN
Under the U.S. Constitution, Trump had 10 days, not including Sundays, to sign or veto the housing measure after the House formally transmitted the legislation to the White House in late June. The president ultimately chose neither option, allowing the measure to become law without his signature.
Though Trump declined to veto the legislation, he sharply criticized elements of the bill and argued it should not have been a legislative priority in recent weeks.
“It’s so unimportant … compared to the SAVE America Act,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in late June. “I think the SAVE America Act is exactly what it says. It’s saving America from crooked elections.”
Trump went on to call the housing bill “a yawn,” adding, “compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn.”
It would have taken a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override a veto — a margin the House and Senate exceeded when they passed the legislation. However, it remains unclear whether so many Republicans would have defied the president had he vetoed the bill.
Trump also appeared to criticize the bill over a provision restricting Wall Street investors from purchasing single-family homes — a policy he first proposed during his January State of the Union address and later urged Congress to pass. Trump previously argued the investor ban would give individual homebuyers a leg up against private equity firms in the housing market.
“I don’t want to hurt people that own houses, too,” Trump later told reporters, appearing to reference the provision. “These people, for the first time in their lives, they have valuable houses. They’ve become rich. I don’t want to hurt them either. What you want to do is what’s good for everyone, get the interest rates down.”
The law also aims to boost housing supply by streamlining federal environmental reviews, loosening rules around the construction of factory-built homes, and incentivizing local governments to modify their zoning laws to allow more housing, among roughly 60 provisions.
Trump’s souring on the legislation created headaches for Republicans, who touted the bill as an affordability win as voters grapple with high housing costs.
“It’s irresponsible to postpone signing the Housing bill due to the SAVE Act,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., a retiring lawmaker who lost re-election to a Trump-backed challenger, wrote on social media. “We need to start delivering relief to people for the high cost of housing ASAP!!”
Construction workers stand on the roof of homes under construction at a new housing development on June 24, 2026, in Valencia, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
WARREN TELLS TRUMP TO ‘SIGN THE DAMN BILL’ AS BIPARTISAN HOUSING PACKAGE REMAINS STALLED IN WASHINGTON
Trump abruptly canceled a signing ceremony for the legislation at the U.S. Capitol in June with GOP leaders. The stage had already been set, with at least one senior Republican arriving unaware the president had called off the event shortly before it was scheduled to begin.
The president then declared he would not sign the legislation until Congress passed the SAVE America Act, despite Senate GOP leaders insisting the votes do not exist to advance the measure.
Trump has also expressed frustration with the Republican-controlled Senate for declining to weaken the legislative filibuster, which requires 60 votes to advance most legislation in the upper chamber.
“GET SMART REPUBLICANS, IF YOU DON’T, YOU WON’T BE IN OFFICE FOR LONG!” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Sunday.
Before Trump came out against the bill, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called it “one of the most significant pieces of housing affordability legislation in American history” and said it included an array of policies “long championed” by Trump.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 15, 2025. (Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Meanwhile, Trump political operative James Blair touted the legislation for including the president’s Wall Street investor ban, which he referred to as a “signature commitment.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has argued that Republicans will still promote the landmark housing bill ahead of November.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We’ll still celebrate it, but he’s trying to make a point, and I think he’s making it very effectively,” the speaker recently told reporters, referring to Trump. “And the fact that you all ask me every three steps down the hallway illustrates that he has achieved the desired objective, and that is to make SAVE America the number one thing, because if we don’t get that right, everybody’s concerned about what happens next.”
-
Lifestyle3 minutes agoAzar Nafisi on the movie adaptation of ‘Reading Lolita in Tehran’
-
Technology16 minutes agoAfter years of teasing, the viral Nopia synth is ‘basically finished’
-
World18 minutes agoBeloved musicians among victims in deadly Bahamas plane crash; aviation authority grounds flights
-
Politics23 minutes agoTrump-aligned House holdouts accused of holding ‘life-saving’ veterans bill ‘hostage’ over SAVE America Act
-
Health31 minutes agoSimple sitting change linked to lower risk of cancer death, study finds
-
Sports33 minutes agoGolf star records lowest round in LPGA major history with astounding performance at Evian Championship
-
Technology39 minutes agoMeta Verified scam threatens Facebook deletion
-
Business46 minutes agoMeta discontinues Instagram feature on new AI image generation tool after Hollywood backlash