USA vs Paraguay World Cup Match at SoFi brings Hollywood’s biggest stars with Paris Hilton, Jamie Foxx and more
Some of Hollywood's biggest names turned up for USA's opening World Cup match against Paraguay on Friday.

Some of Hollywood's biggest names turned up for USA's opening World Cup match against Paraguay on Friday.
Being prosecuted for multiple rapes does make one undesirable. The post Alleged Serial Rapist Thomas Partey Denied Entrance in Canada, Will Miss Ghana’s First World Cup Game appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
The Supreme Court has left a trail of legal "wreckage" over the course of its last few terms, but according to one legal scholar writing for The Hill, a "fundamental" fix to get them back in line will be making them "fear" again.Paul M. Collins Jr. is a professor of Legal Studies and Political Science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who has written extensively about the Supreme Court and the issues pervading it. On Friday, The Hill published his latest piece, digging into the current situation surrounding it, with accusations of rampant political bias and disregard for clear legal precedents in order to aid President Donald Trump."In a few weeks, the Supreme Court will end its term, leaving behind a trail of legal wreckage that has become all too familiar since the emergence of its conservative supermajority in 2020," Collins wrote. "Although the headlines will focus on the specific casualties — most notably a crushing blow to the Voting Rights Act — the real story of this term is not what the court did, but why it felt so comfortable doing it. We are witnessing the solidification of a sovereign court: an institution that has effectively decoupled itself from the traditional gravity of American checks and balances."It was not always like this, he noted, explaining that the court once operated with a "healthy, if unspoken, anxiety," which he dubbed, "the fear of reversal.""This fear once acted as a structural brake, reminding the justices that if they strayed too far from the constitutional mainstream, the system would push back," he wrote. "For instance, the 11th, 13th, 14th, 16th and 26th Amendments to the Constitution were passed to overturn Supreme Court decisions. Congress has reversed several decisions by passing statutes as well, as exemplified in the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in 2009. And the Supreme Court occasionally overrules itself, including overturning Bowers v. Hardwick, which allowed states to criminalize same-sex sexual relations, in 2003."Now, however, the "era of hyper polarization" has created a status quo where Congress is barely ever able to pass anything due to the radically different priorities on each side of the aisle. In this environment, the odds are vanishingly slim that Congress would be able to pass a bill rebuking the Supreme Court, let alone a new constitutional amendment, and as Collins noted, the court itself is expected to retain a conservative majority for decades if it is not expanded, meaning that future iterations of it also will not be likely to reverse past decisions."To restore the court’s legitimacy, we must do more than simply add seats; we must change the fundamental math of judicial power," Collins argued. "The goal should be to reintroduce the very thing the conservative supermajority has lost: the possibility of being corrected. The most effective way to achieve this is a two-pronged structural reset. First, Congress should exercise its clear constitutional authority to expand the size of the court. Second, and more crucially, the justices should no longer sit as a permanent, monolithic body of nine. Instead, they should be required to hear cases in randomly assigned three-judge panels with final decision-making authority."He concluded: "Ultimately, instilling a fear of reversal is an act of institutional humility. With public confidence at a historic low, we can no longer afford a court that is always right simply because it is final. We need a court that is final only when it is right."
The Times spoke to three of Judge Ross's clerks and obtained the "offensively vague" apology letter.
President Donald Trump is not only underwater with Democrats and Independents, but now he's losing young Republicans. CNN data analyst Harry Enten revealed that when it comes to the Iran war and foreign policy in general, Trump has lost his own base. "Trump [has a] historically strong performance with younger voters. And here we're talking about voters under the age of 45. He beat Kamala Harris with them, or at least beat the prior Republican baselines with them," said Enten. "And you can see it right here on foreign policy. He absolutely crushed Kamala Harris, who was more trusted under the age of 45, on foreign policy."Trump had a nine-point lead over Harris on foreign policy, but that has shifted significantly. "He has a net approval rating now on foreign policy — 40 points underwater, a nearly 50-point switcheroo," Enten said. "So, after putting in the strongest performance, more trusted on foreign policy, the first since George W. Bush all the way back in '04, [Trump] has completely lost that advantage way down there. He is no longer groovy. According to the young people of America," Enten said. Those foreign policy numbers are coming from Trump's failure in the Iran war. "Just take a look at how people under the age of 45 feel about Iran not being worth the cost," said Enten. "Look at this: four in five —81 percent said the Iran war is not worth the cost. And look at Trump's disapproval. Basically simpatico with this, 77 percent of those under the age of 45 say the Iran war, or, excuse me, say that Trump's disapproval of the Iran war is way up there, up there like a rocket at 77 percent."The generations make it clear that it isn't worth the cost. The older end of those under 45 are members of the Millennial Generation, who faced the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Brown University's Costs of War Project showed that the casualty and injury rate for the 19 years of war come overwhelmingly from the Millennial Generation. The Harvard Institute of Politics showed that "young adults [18 to 29] are overwhelmingly skeptical about the current U.S. strategy in Iran."
One of President Donald Trump's top administration allies has been "thrown in front of the bus," according to his longtime biographer, with a bombshell new report making them look like a "dope" acting counter to the president's interests.The New York Times this week released a major new report, culled from an upcoming book two of its reporters wrote about the second Trump administration, revealing the panicked reactions that top figures in the Trump administration had to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, once it was clear to them that the president appeared in the files related to his crimes numerous times, and in damaging ways.Among those figures was Vice President JD Vance, who is depicted in the report as wanting to go the route of full transparency, believing that Trump would be fine with certain salacious allegations coming to light, despite how testy he had been with staffers about the subject. He also offered to do interviews about the situation, as part of an effort to be open about the files. These suggestions from Vance were largely dismissed by the rest of the administration, who strained for ways to protect Trump at all costs while feeding the MAGA base's demand for Epstein disclosure.Michael Wolff, a longtime reporter and author who had extensive access to Trump and his inner circle throughout his political career, said during the latest episode of his Daily Beast podcast, "Inside Trump's Head," that Vance was obviously being set up as some sort of scapegoat, given how poorly he came off in the report.“More interesting, probably than what it says about Epstein, is JD Vance, who is really dumped... thrown in front of the bus here,” Wolff told co-host Joanna Coles. “I mean, he looks like a dope. He’s described as panicking. Every adjective connected to him makes him seem like... he is, A,... not on the president’s side, and B, that he has no idea what he’s doing.”Coles countered that the report seemed to make Vance look better, like he "understood the enormity of the Epstein files,” and that he was “trying to get the Epstein files out there to pretend that the government was transparent.” Wolff further argued that the insiders who talked with reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan were more so attempting to make the vice president look out of step with Trump's plans.“JD Vance was not on Donald Trump’s side here,” Wolff said, adding that “this is all an audience-of-one thing.” He continued: “And remember, Donald Trump’s side is very clearly, ‘There is nothing her ... Why is anyone talking about Epstein? I don’t want to hear it. If you’re talking about it, you’re my enemy, not my friend. So the White House is throwing JD Vance over the side, that’s what’s going on here.”
An injury kept Chris Richards from the 2022 tournament
Globally, the tide has turned against sex changes for children, with multiple countries rolling back such policies. Even New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani can’t bring himself to transition children at his new taxpayer-funded gender clinic. City health officials under Mamdani are planning to open a “gender-affirming care clinic.” This state-run facility will use taxpayer money […]