Connect with us

West

Unearthed FEC records expose Katie Porter’s hypocrisy after she fumes at ‘new billionaire’ joining race

Published

on

Unearthed FEC records expose Katie Porter’s hypocrisy after she fumes at ‘new billionaire’ joining race

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

After billionaire activist Tom Steyer entered the California gubernatorial race Wednesday, former Congresswoman Katie Porter, who is also running for governor, blasted him despite previously taking thousands of dollars from him when she was in Congress.

Porter said Steyer was entering the race claiming to fight “the very industries he got rich helping grow,” to which the former member of Congress said: “I call bulls—.” Meanwhile, FEC filings show Porter, who is claiming to fight Steyer, received more than $16,000 between her House campaigns and failed Senate campaign.

“Katie Porter is the ultimate hypocrite and all she’s done in this race is step on one rake after another,” a longtime Democratic strategist, who has worked with campaigns across the country, told Fox News Digital. “This is easily the most disastrous race a Democrat has been running in 2026, which is why Porter is a real liability at the top of the ticket and why Democrats are looking around for alternatives.”

TOM STEYER MOUNTS CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL BID, JOINING CROWD OF CANDIDATES JOCKEYING TO SUCCEED NEWSOM

Advertisement

Rep. Katie Porter is seen on May 28, 2023 in Los Angeles, Calif. (Jerod Harris/Getty Images for Demand Justice)

The Porter campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment on this story.

Steyer, who once financed his own unsuccessful presidential bid in 2020, announced plans to enter the California gubernatorial race this week. The billionaire anti-Trump activist pledged to make life more affordable for working-class Americans and take on corporate interests in an announcement advertisement alerting people of his candidacy. Steyer specifically said he would take on the oil and tobacco industries in particular, which he touted a record of doing in the past as well.  

“A new billionaire in our race claims he’ll fight the very industries he got rich helping grow — fossil fuel companies, tobacco, and private immigration detention facilities — at great cost to Californians,” Porter posted on X after Steyer announced his run. “I call bulls—.”

Attached to Porter’s post was also a screenshot of a news headline from The Sacramento Bee that reads: “Tom Steyer, starring in TV ads for tobacco tax hike, invested in tobacco companies.”

Advertisement

People commenting on Porter’s post highlighted her financial support she has received from Steyer in the past. Between 2018 and 2023, Porter received at least $16,100 from him, a Fox News Digital review found.

CALIFORNIA PARENTS CONVICTED OF STABBING, DECAPITATING 2 CHILDREN AND FORCING OTHER KIDS TO SEE BODIES 

For Steyer, his wealth will likely be a target for his opponents.

Democratic presidential candidate businessman Tom Steyer speaks, Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2020, during a Democratic presidential primary debate hosted by CNN and the Des Moines Register in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

“Tom Steyer tried to buy the presidency — and he failed,” Betty Yee, a former state controller who is running in the Democratic Primary for governor, said following Steyer’s announcement. “The California governorship is not going to be his consolation prize.” 

Advertisement

Porter, meanwhile, has faced criticism on the campaign trail for her attitude towards staffers and the media. She faced criticism last month after abruptly walking away from a CBS interview after lashing out at the reporter interviewing her. 

“What do you say to the 40% of CA voters who you’ll need in order to win, who voted for Trump?” Porter was asked by CBS California’s Julie Watts during a segment on the controversial redistricting effort launched by Democrats in the state. 

“How would I need them in order to win, ma’am?” Porter responded.

DID CALIFORNIA MISMANAGE THE DEADLY PALISADES FIRE?

“Well, unless you think you’re going to get 60% of the vote,” the reporter, asking about the voter breakdown of Democrats and Republicans in the state, said before Porter started laughing.

Advertisement

Porter then went back and forth with the reporter, arguing about whether she needs to court and win over Trump voters, particularly if she’s running head-to-head against another Democrat. 

“So you don’t need them to win,” Watts asked Porter.

“I feel like this is unnecessarily argumentative,” Porter said, prompting the reporter to point out that she had asked the same question to the other candidates in the race and they answered it. 

“I don’t want to keep doing this, I’m going to call it,” Porter said. 

When Watts reminded Porter that every candidate had answered the question, Porter said, “I don’t care.”

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Meanwhile, Porter has also faced repeated criticism about how she allegedly treats staffers. In just a span of a single week, three videos went viral of Porter berating her staff.  

The race for California governor is a crowded one, with big names like former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra. Former Vice President Kamala Harris was reportedly planning on getting involved but ultimately backed away.  

Lesser known candidates include state schools Superintendent Tony Thurmond, former Controller Betty Yee and former Assemblyman Ian Calderon.

Fox News Digital’s Andrew Mark Miller and Sophia Compton contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Read the full article from Here

San Francisco, CA

What’s next for San Francisco Giants as MLB trade deadline approaches?

Published

on

What’s next for San Francisco Giants as MLB trade deadline approaches?


play

The San Francisco Giants have a lot to consider at this juncture of the MLB season.

There were mid-level expectations for the Giants at the start of the season. On paper, it seemed like the Giants could battle for a wild card berth.

Advertisement

The Giants won’t meet those expectations.

A week before the All-Star break, San Francisco has the third-worst record in baseball at 38-54. The Giants lost 10-0 to the Toronto Blue Jays on July 8, held hitless through eight innings.

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that this team won’t be competitive down the stretch, which has many of the Giants faithful singing a NxWorries tune, wondering what to do and where to go from here.

It’s evident that a shake-up is needed. It’s simply a matter of where they start and what they can realistically do to change things in the dugout. But one thing’s for sure: the Giants are sellers heading into the trade deadline.

Advertisement

What should the Giants do now?

The Giants have to accept their fate. Entering the season, they looked like a team that could compete with anybody, but then the baseball games were played and that proved to not be the case. So now San Francisco has to look itself in the mirror and figure out what went wrong and how to make things right – well, better than they have been going, anyways.

Here are a few ideas:

Get aggressive in the trade market, sell high

It’s easier said than done, but the Giants have to get off the expensive contracts eating up their salary. Reason being, you won’t be able to get any talent, let alone invest in your prospects, if there isn’t enough dollars to go around by the time negotiations occur.

It’s also a matter of how aggressive they plan to be and who will be prioritized. Who is untouchable? ESPN’s Jeff Passan has Giants outfielder Jung Hoo Lee as a top-ranked trade candidate. He plays all throughout the outfield. Offensively, Lee ranks top 10 in MLB in batting average and strikeout rate.

Advertisement

Lee, 27, makes $22.83 million this season and next, before going down to $21.33 million in both 2028 and 2029. Although not a star, the Giants can sell teams on Lee being a promising, solid all-around player.

Move on from veteran players

With a record like San Francisco’s, the best thing you can do for the fans is give them something to be hopeful for. That’s not aging veterans.

Examine the market for your guys who are age 30 and up, or are occupying a ton of salary space.

Rafael Devers turns 30 in October. His age isn’t so much a problem, but his contract … combined with the lack of expected production. Devers has had a down year so far, batting .244, registering 86 hits and 18 homers. He’s under contract through 2033 at a hefty price tag.

Others to consider moving on from are Willy Adames and Matt Chapman. They’re fan favorites, but based on age and dollars it all makes sense. Adames is under contract through 2031 at over $31 million per season. Chapman is locked up through 2030 at over $25 million per year.

Advertisement

It’s hard to say goodbye, but in the best interest of the Giants, they have to find new homes for these guys. And honestly, it wouldn’t be surprising if Devers, Chapman and Adames wanted to find a new home if it meant playing for a contender and a chance at a World Series title.

Retain young talent, bring in fresh faces

There’s promise for the future in this squad with guys like Bryce Eldridge, Blade Tidwell and Drew Gilbert. It’s a start.

“The San Francisco Giants, who would love to trade two of their infielders at the trade deadline, need to clear space for power-hitter Bryce Eldridge. They realize it’s stunting his growth as an infielder to keep using him as a DH at the age of 21,” USA TODAY Sports’ Bob Nightengale wrote.

Eldridge has had plenty moments as a designated hitter but none bigger than his walk-off grand slam against the Washington Nationals on June 10.

Another intitiative San Francisco needs to focus on is hanging on to guys like Logan Webb, Heliot Ramos, Casey Schmitt and Landon Roupp. The best bet is to hang on to them to help usher in a new era. Years from now, when the team has a new look, you can decide whether to leverage them for additional assets.

Advertisement

However, in the interim, hold on to those guys for dear life because teams will come knocking as MLB gets closer to the trade deadline.



Source link

Continue Reading

Denver, CO

Denver officers cited for separate incidents, 1 fired

Published

on

Denver officers cited for separate incidents, 1 fired


DENVER (KDVR) — Two officers, one now formerly of the Denver Police Department, face multiple charges relating to separate incidents in the past two months.

According to a release, now-former Denver Police Officer Gabriel Lucero was issued a citation for third-degree assault, official misconduct and false reporting, while Officer Javon Leach was cited for reckless driving and eluding.

The incident involving Lucero reportedly occurred on May 22 just before 1 a.m. in the 500 block of 16th Street. According to a release, Lucero was involved in an assault at a business, as he allegedly assaulted a person and walked away as others continued to assault the victim.

Security guards and an off-duty officer escorted him and the group out; however, Lucero reportedly identified himself as a Denver police officer and attempted to re-enter by using his police badge.

Advertisement

Lucero reportedly provided a false name without any other information, and further investigation verified Lucero as the person involved. Lucero was hired in 2025 and, due to his current probationary status, was fired as of Wednesday.

The incident involving Leach occurred around 1:41 a.m. on June 21, when Leach was reportedly pulling out of a parking lot on Larimer Street, attempting to drive against traffic.

Leach reportedly refused commands to stop as he left the area. Officials said he was found just seven minutes later, traveling at high speeds northbound on Park Avenue West.

He reportedly fled a traffic stop and continued to drive away, and officials deemed Leach to be the suspect following an investigation. He was placed in an off-line assignment while the case progresses, as they are considered misdemeanors.

“The Denver Police Department’s administrative review of Leach’s incident will begin once the criminal case is adjudicated, and that process includes the Denver Department of Safety and the Office of the Independent Monitor, a civilian oversight agency,” the release said.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Seattle, WA

Study finds dangerous chemicals in the breast milk of Seattle moms

Published

on

Study finds dangerous chemicals in the breast milk of Seattle moms


Breast milk samples from moms in the Seattle area contained chemicals linked to health problems, new research has found.

The chemicals are often used in beverage can liners, receipt paper, and other products, and they’ve been linked to reproductive problems, cancer, and immune problems like asthma.

Ryan Babadi is the science director at the nonprofit Toxic Free Future, which co-authored the research. He said breast milk is still the best food for most babies.

Advertisement

“The problem is not breast milk,” he said. “The problem is that we have chemical policies that are allowing these contaminants to end up in women and breastmilk and result in exposure to infants during a very sensitive time period of development.”

Researchers collected breast milk from 50 women and tested it for various chemicals. They found that the majority of the samples contained BPA and the related chemical BPS, triclosan, and melamine. All three of these chemical groups are known as “endocrine disruptors” because they can mimic, block, or alter human hormones and thus affect a large number of systems. BPA, for example, has been linked to diabetes, the early onset of puberty, and a number of cancers. Triclosan interferes with thyroid function and could increase cancer risk. And melamine has been linked to kidney problems.

“This isn’t a problem that mothers or people in general can shop their way out of,” Babadi said. “We need government decision-makers and policymakers as well as the corporate environment to come up with policy solutions that protect us.”

RELATED: Trump administration actions contradict MAHA rhetoric on toxic chemicals

Advertisement

Breast milk for the study was collected in 2019. In the years since, Washington state has started regulating some of the chemicals the researchers found.

For example, as of last year, beverage cans in Washington aren’t allowed to contain BPA and related chemicals. And as of January, those chemicals aren’t allowed in receipt paper in the state.

That’s because, under a state law passed in 2019, the ecology department prioritizes harmful chemicals, identifies consumer products that contain those chemicals, and writes new regulations to ban or restrict them.

So far, the state has regulated not only BPA and related chemicals, but also phthalates in personal care products and vinyl flooring, triclosan in cosmetics, and PFAS chemicals in carpets, rugs, and furniture. Those last are known as “forever” chemicals because they do not degrade over time.

Advertisement

RELATED: 5 ways to reduce everyday exposure to ‘forever chemicals’

The state is now looking at chemicals in cosmetics, jewelry, cookware, paint, and artificial turf, among other products, for possible future regulation.

The state has not looked at banning or restricting melamine, one of the chemicals the researchers found in breast milk.

Babadi said in an email that Washington’s law is the nation’s strongest for regulating toxic chemicals, but he said it needed to be improved “to be able to enact bans in urgent scenarios when, for example, we observe harmful chemicals in breast milk.” The process for restricting new chemicals currently takes at least five years.

Marissa Smith is a toxicologist and the former technical lead for the Safer Products for Washington program. She now works on chemical policies across the ecology department.

Advertisement

She said the state’s current process of chemical regulation helps build compliance by giving manufacturers and industries plenty of lead time and compliance assistance.

“We generally do see compliance with state laws,” she added. “Most manufacturers want to sell products that are compliant.”

RELATED: Trump cuts demolish agency focused on toxic chemicals and workplace hazards

Smith emphasized that state-level chemical regulations like those in Washington and California can have an effect across the country, as manufacturers switch over to safer alternatives for their entire supply chain.

Advertisement

And Smith sees other reasons for hope.

“ Products are getting safer over time,” she said. “ There were some toxic flame retardants that were used in kids’ pajamas and other products, and we banned those, and we actually saw concentrations in our bodies and in our environment go down.”

For another example, Smith pointed to the dramatic decline in how much lead was in children’s blood after the U.S. banned leaded gasoline in 1996.

“ There’s just a lot of examples where we have actually regulated products and we’ve seen reductions in people’s exposure,” Smith said.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending