Cesar Chavez: Say it isn’t so!

In 30 years, every column I've written has been about policy or politics. This one is personal. I'll never forget, as a young political operative, how thrilled I was to meet the already legendary Cesar Chavez. And now I'll never forget, as an older political junkie, how stunned and devastated I was to learn the secret history of years of sexual abuse that was buried with him.

For more than 50 years, I worshiped Cesar Chavez. My very first political activity was joining a farmworkers protest against buying California table grapes in front of the Safeway at 14th and Market streets in San Francisco. "Don't Buy Grapes," we chanted. And then the Farmworkers' slogan: "Si se puede!"

In 1975, I was working for California Governor Jerry Brown when he signed the Agricultural Labor Relations Act, which gave farmworkers the right to vote by secret ballot whether to join a union - and which led directly to formation of the United Farm Workers, led by Chavez. One year later, when Brown ran for president, busloads of farm workers, led by master organizer Marshall Ganz, showed up to campaign for him in every state primary he entered. I know, I was there.

I finally got to meet the great man himself at the 1976 Democratic National Convention, and was struck by how humble and soft-spoken he was. The next day, he electrified the convention with a speech nominating Brown for president. I met with Chavez several times after that. And in 1993 I attended his funeral in Delano, California, and took turns with others carrying his casket on our shoulders to the gravesite.

Cesar Chavez was my hero - until the New York Times this week released the sickening results of a five-year investigation showing that Chavez, at the peak of his popularity and power, used his position to abuse, molest and rape young girls, some as young as 12 or 13. Shades of Jeffrey Epstein! To his glorified record of historic labor leader, civil rights icon, Latino legend, family role model and winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom must now be added one more title: criminal sexual pervert.

The news of Chavez's secret life as a pedophile came as a blow to the chest. But the immediate follow-up came as a hard kick in the groin: a statement by 95-year-old Dolores Huerta, who founded the UFW with Chavez and Gilbert Padilla, and whom I got to know well, attended several political rallies with and have interviewed many times.

Huerta told the Times what, out of loyalty to the cause of justice for farmworkers, she had chosen to keep secret for six decades: that Chavez had also raped her, co-founder of the union, repeatedly forced her to have sex with him, and fathered two children with her, whom she secretly put up for adoption. "Unfortunately, he used some of his great leadership to abuse women and children - it's really awful," she told the Times.

It's all so unbelievably shocking. And the fallout, as it should, will be brutal. Schools, streets, parks and public buildings will be renamed, statues torn down, marches canceled, and the federal holiday created on his March 31 birthday by President Obama will soon no longer be recognized. Even the UFW, the union he founded and led, announced it would never celebrate his birthday again.

For all of us who believed in Cesar Chavez and what he stood for, it's hard to process. We'd like to just remember all the good things he did, and forget the bad. But we can't. Because that would not only be denying reality, but ignoring the suffering of those young girls whose lives he destroyed. We must accept the facts, condemn him for his actions and deal with the consequences.

The Cesar Chavez story is an all-too-painful reflection of the human condition. Good people can still do horrible things. Thomas Jefferson is one of our most celebrated founders, one of only two to have his own memorial on the Washington Mall. Yet Jefferson not only owned slaves, he raped Sally Hemings when she was only 14 and later fathered six children with her.

And now another once-upon-a-time hero has let us down. Which, if nothing else, should remind us that, while we do need heroes to look up to, we must also always maintain a certain level of healthy skepticism about everybody. We have never met the perfect person - and never will.
____

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The maniacal leader of one country starts a war against another, not because he has to, nor because his own country is directly threatened, nor because the other country attacked first, but simply because he wants to, it makes him feel strong, and he's sure it'll be over in a couple of days. Instead, the war drags on forever and ends up destroying the economy of his own country.

Sound familiar? It should. It's Vladimir Putin's war against Ukraine. But it's also Donald Trump's war against Iran. Indeed, it's uncanny how closely Trump in Iran is following Putin's playbook in Ukraine, often using the very same language.

OK, to be honest, it's not exactly the same. There are no American troops on the ground in Iran (not yet). The United States is not trying to seize any Iranian territory (not until the Trump crime family builds a new Trump Tower in Tehran). And, so far, Trump's war has only lasted a couple of weeks, not four years. But the similarities between the two wars are striking.

For starters, neither Putin nor Trump call it an act of "war." When Putin launched Russia's attack on Ukraine in February 2022, he called it a "special military operation," or "S.V.O" - which is what Russians still call it today. Trump follows suit. Although he's occasionally slipped and uttered the "w" word, Trump and his followers know the American public have no stomach for another war in the Middle East. So they twist themselves inside out, trying to come up with non-war words.

Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters "I think it's an operation." Other Republicans in Congress have called it "strategic strikes," "combat operations," or a "military mission." On March 11, Trump himself called it nothing but a "little excursion."

Also out of the same playbook: Both Putin and Trump falsely accused the other country of starting the war. In 2022, Putin said Ukraine had harmed Russia for so many years, he had "no other choice" but to invade. Using almost the same words, in 2026, Trump blamed Iran for decades of "bloodshed and mass murder" and asserted that "we can't take it anymore." Although Ukraine never attacked Russia, and Iran never attacked the United States.

Obviously, Trump didn't learn anything from Putin. Like his BFF Vladimir, Trump started the war in Iran with unclear goals and shifting objectives. At first, Putin insisted his goal was "regime change." Then his goals narrowed to seizing most of eastern Ukraine and keeping Ukraine out of NATO. Similarly, Trump still hasn't provided any straight answer for what his war's all about. Depending on the last reporter he talks to, he shifts from regime change, to eliminating terrorist threats, to destroying Iran's nuclear capacity, to wiping out its missile arsenal. It's impossible for him to win a war, or for the American people to support a war, he can't explain.

Both Putin and Trump also operated on two false assumptions. One, that the other side would quickly collapse. Instead, both Ukraine and Iran have shown surprising resistance. Two, that once they launched their war, citizens would rise up and topple their own government. Putin urged Ukrainian soldiers to "take power into their own hands." Trump called on Iranians to "seize the moment." It didn't happen in Ukraine and hasn't in Iran.

Perhaps most troubling, both Putin and Trump started their wars with no obvious, achievable exit strategy. Which has already led to a long, deadly, costly conflict in Ukraine, with still no end in sight. Without a clear end game, many military experts warn that Iran could turn into a "Ukraine-like quagmire." Trump has no idea how long his war will last. One day, he predicts it'll take months. The next day, he says it's already over.

Meanwhile, of course, civilian casualties mount up. As of early 2026, 15,172 civilian deaths were documented in Ukraine. An estimated 1,800 so far in Iran, including 175 school girls, according to a preliminary Pentagon investigation, killed by a misguided U.S. Tomahawk missile. Which Trump, without any evidence, but solely in his "opinion," blamed on Iran.

One thing for sure. Watching Trump's war in Iran, now we know why he's done nothing to stop the war in Ukraine, which - remember? - he promised to end on day one. Why not? Because he's always had a man-crush on Putin and wanted to be just like him. So now in Iran he's following Putin's war-making tactics to the letter. Vladimir must be so proud.

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

How can you win a war you can't even explain?

America is at war. A full-scale, illegal, unnecessary war against a country that posed no imminent threat to the United States. A war that could have long-range, disastrous consequences in the Middle East. And we are in that war for one reason only: Because Donald Trump decided to start it. This is Trump's war.

In high school, we were taught there's such a thing as a "just war." I still believe that. But this is surely not one of them. If only, before attacking Iran, Donald Trump had considered the history of wars in the Middle East. Not ancient history, but in our own lifetime.

In 1990, when President George H. W. Bush was considering sending American troops to expel the Iraqi Army from Kuwait, he asked Gen. Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for advice. His response should be the test required of every president.

According to the "Powell Doctrine," before any military action is undertaken by the United States, eight questions must be asked - and each answered affirmatively.

Here they are: (1) Is a vital national security interest threatened? (2) Do we have a clear, attainable objective? (3) Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed? (4) Have all other nonviolent policy means been fully exhausted? (5) Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement? (6) Have the consequences of our action been fully considered? (7) Is the action supported by the American people? (8) Do we have genuine broad international support?

Again, under the "Powell Doctrine," the answer to every one of those questions must be "Yes." Under the "Donald Doctrine," the answer to every one of those questions is "No!"

There was no national security interest threatened by Iran. Diplomacy was barely tried, let alone exhausted. The American people don't support this war, not even Trump's MAGA followers, to whom he promised "no new wars." And, worst of all, Trump not only has no "exit strategy," he can't explain why he started this war in the first place.

We've heard nothing but an embarrassing string of what the media calls Trump's "evolving explanations" or "rolling rationales" for the war in Iran. The answer to "Why did you start this war, Mr. President?" seems to be whatever first pops into Trump's head.

First, Trump said it was because Iran posed an "imminent threat" to the United States in the form of long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States. Yet last year, Trump's Defense Intelligence Agency said Iran's capacity to develop a "militarily-viable" intercontinental missile was still 10 years away. Next, he said we needed "regime change," which didn't sit well with his MAGA base after having told them "regime change is a proven, absolute failure."

Then, Trump claimed Iran was within weeks of developing a nuclear bomb. Which also fell flat because, for the last nine months, Trump's been bragging that his June 2025 bombing of Iran had "obliterated" their nuclear capacity. He was either lying then, or he's lying now.

He also accused Iran of "walking away" from negotiations in Geneva, until the Foreign Minister of Oman, who was hosting the talks, said Iran had agreed to most terms and it was the United States who walked away, not the Iranians. Secretary of State Marco Rubio tried to blame it on Israel, saying they forced our hand by planning on bombing Iran first. Then, without any evidence, Trump said Iran was about to bomb us, so we had to bomb them.

How long will the war last? Again, that depends on the last reporter Trump talked to. It could be a week, two weeks, four or five months, or forever.

From all of this it's made clear: Donald Trump doesn't know what the hell he's doing. He started this war only because he could, and it makes him feel strong.

Hopefully, Trump's war will be over soon and lead to no wider war, no serious economic consequences, and no more Americans killed. Then, in November, will come the final reckoning: the midterm elections, a referendum on the first half of Trump's second term.

In 2024, Trump called himself the "peace candidate" and promised "I will not start another war." Yet in the last year, he's bombed seven countries, kidnapped one foreign leader, assassinated another and started the war in Iran. November's time for the American people, including Trump's MAGA followers, to stand up and say: This is not what we voted for.

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.