California congressman Devin Nunes steps down from Russia investigation, state bail reform moves through legislature, is the future dim for American car sales?
Why did the LA Times editorial board do that 6-part series on President Trump?
This week, the L.A. Times dropped a series of editorials condemning President Donald Trump called the "The Problem with Trump."
Each day, the editorial board has served up a critical indictment of the new president, taking aim at everything from Trump's alleged falsehoods to his often-adversarial relationship with journalists. Though the editorials have received several shares, reader response has been (predictably) mixed.
Take Two spoke about the editorials with Nick Goldberg, editor of the paper's editorial page.
Highlights
The opinion pages at The Times has taken on Trump in the past, but this is something new: It's six days of straight of itemized criticism. Why did you feel this was necessary?
We've been writing about Trump from the beginning. We've been critical of him from the beginning. We were one of the earliest papers to say that he was both unsuited and unfit for the job he was running for. We said that in the early days of the Republican primaries.
Now he's president. We thought we were writing daily editorials about him, and we decided that it was important to try to pull it all together, connect the dots for people and give an assessment — we know it's early — but give an assessment of what we see happening in the presidency so far.
That's what I was going to ask. Trump's been in the White House for five minutes. It seems like it's really early to make these sweeping judgments.
He's been in office for more than five minutes, but he's also been on the campaign trail for more than a year.
We had hoped against hope that the new president would be constrained by the people around him or he would feel the enormity of the responsibility of his office, and he would temper himself, but we're not seeing that happening. We're very nervous.
Look, this is not the last thing we're going to write about Trump. We got four years to go. By all means, if he calms himself down, if he changes his ways, if he develops a different kind of personality than the one we've consistently seen over the last 20 years, then we're ready to reevaluate.
The Times has received a lot of pushback from readers. And you've published some of that criticism. I want to ask about one that stood out to us titled:
"When the L.A. Times editorial board condemns Trump, it preaches to the choir"
What's your response to that, and is this series really designed to change anyone's mind?
Well, it's hard to change people's minds in the political climate we have right now. We always want to change people's minds. We always hope to persuade; that's why we lay out a coherent argument as best we can, whether we succeed, I'm not sure.
I will say this: In the old days, the L.A. Times used to circulate to our subscribers in LA, where our paper was thrown down on their front yards every day. L.A. is a relatively homogenous community. If we write just for them, then you're right, we're probably preaching to the choir.
But the reality of the internet and the reality of social media is that this piece, the first piece in this series went entirely viral. It was read by more than 4 million people, and those people weren't just in L.A., they were all over the country and all of the world.
What's the end game, though? I can't imagine creating something like this and not thinking, "OK, if this happens, we can call it a success."
Well, I think we can call this series a success because it obviously struck a nerve. Four-and-a-half million people read the first installment, and millions more read the other pieces. Our job is to write what we think as clearly and honestly as we can and get it out to as many readers as we can. I think it was a huge success.
But in terms of whether it persuaded people, how it will affect the Trump presidency, how it will affect Trump, I can't tell you the answer to that.
The L.A. Times brand is still there, though. What do you say to people who point to the brand and say, "See? It's a partisan paper, just like always."
That's an important question because you're right, many people don't make a distinction between what we write in our opinion pages and what we write in our news pages.
The news pages — which are written entirely separately from our opinion pages — are supposed to be written by reporters who put their biases to the side, write as objectively as they can and present a story for readers to draw their own conclusions.
The editorial pages are very different. There, we say what we think. We give our opinions, and it's important to us that readers understand that we can do the one and the other without compromising them.
Press the blue play button above to hear the full interview.
(Audio has been edited for clarity and brevity.)
Will California do away with bail?
When someone is arrested in California, there process looks a little like this; there's a bail hearing, and if they can pull it off, they post the bail or secure a bail bond and are released.
If they can't, they're stuck behind bars until a trial is scheduled.
Now, some lawmakers in California are working to change this process, which they say is biased against lower income people.
One of those is California State Senator Bob Hertzberg, he's the lead author behind the proposed legislation known as SB 10, and he joined Take Two to talk about it.
HighQ: Patients who need transplants turned away for smoking pot
This week on HighQ I've got a mix of stories that I've been following related to the marijuana industry. If you want to hear my conversation about them with A Martinez, click on the audio at the top of the post — otherwise, follow some of the links below.
- BuzzFeed's Alyson Martin reports on people in multiple states being turned away for transplants after testing positive for THC. She writes that it's usually at the discretion of the hospital performing the transplant. In 2015, California moved to protect medical marijuana patients, who can't be denied transplants solely because they test positive for THC. But the law doesn't protect those who test positive after consuming recreational marijuana, which is now legal.
- Four men in Colorado were sentenced to federal prison for transporting drugs. They had planned to grow and ship weed to Florida, for sale. Even though recreational pot is legal in Colorado and medical pot is legal in Florida, shipping it across state lines is a felony, and a violation of laws in both states. One of the big questions in California is how the illicit market in the state will be policed. We'll have to wait and see.
- Right now in Sacramento, the state Legislature is trying to reconcile two different sets of laws currently governing marijuana in the state. This week, Gov. Jerry Brown's office jumped in on the debate with a 79-page list of suggestions for combining those regulations. A lot's being debated, including how to regulate local licenses, how many to hand out and whether to have an independent distribution model, like the alcohol industry (an issue I've talked about before).
Series: HighQ: Your California pot questions answered
This story is part of Take Two's look at California's burgeoning marijuana industry, with audience Q&As, explorations of personal narratives and an examination of how cannabis is changing the state.
Read more in this series, call or text us your questions at (929) 344-1948 or
Fixing California's roads: Caltrans puts winter storms damage at almost $900 million
Thursday is the day Governor Jerry Brown set to pass his $52 billion dollar road repair proposal.
No word yet on where it stands but the urgency to fix California's roads is more pressing than ever. After winter storms left highways and streets riddled with potholes and massive cracks.
The current price tag for a fix?
$866 million dollars.
That's according to a CalTrans assessment of California's roads, which have been ravaged by winter storms. But that number is expected to go up. Reporter Ben Christopher has been writing about this for CalMatters. He spoke to A Martinez about where California roads were hit the hardest, how Governor Brown's road repair plan stacks up against the actual needs that CalTrans has highlighted and more.
To listen to the full segment, click the blue play button above.
The Ride: With car sales falling, now might be a good time to buy
Auto makers enjoyed a six-year run of increasing passenger vehicle sales, but the gravy train is pulling into the station. In March, sales fell 1.6 percent.
“If you only look at the sales numbers, it could be tempting to say that the industry is just as strong as it was a year ago,” said Jessica Caldwell, Edmunds executive director of industry analysis. “But there are several areas of concern this year lurking just below the surface. Inventories have reached levels not seen in more than a decade, and incentives are rising. We’re also seeing an increase in loan duration and indications of an increase in subprime lending, both of which demonstrate sales aren’t coming as easily as they used to.”
Auto makers spent $441 more to sell a car in March compared with a year ago, according to Edmunds. Still, the average transaction price for a vehicle sold in the U.S. in March was $34,342 -- almost $600 more than the same month last year, according to Kelley Blue Book.
U.S. car sales peaked at 17.55 million last year, but they are unlikely to sustain that level through the end of 2017. Earlier this week, Deutsche Bank issued a report saying the industry was under a triple threat of rising interest rates, rising negative equity in vehicle loans and softening used car prices.
What that means for consumers is that it could be a good time to buy, especially a used car. Used car prices declined eight percent in February.