claim

Police and military officials launched a joint investigation Monday to investigate North Korea‘s claims of drone incursions across the inter-Korean border.

On Saturday, the North’s military claimed that South Korea violated the North’s sovereignty by sending drones into its territory in September and on Jan. 4, but Seoul’s defense ministry denied the claim.

The joint team of some 30 police and military officials has started investigating the alleged incursions, according to the National Police Agency’s National Office of Investigation.

South Korea’s military has denied sending the drones or operating the models allegedly found in the North, raising the possibility that private entities may have been behind them.

Police are reportedly prioritizing looking into past cases involving drones similar to the model unveiled by North Korea.

Experts have rejected the drones in question were operated by the military, saying they appear to use low-cost commercial parts unfit for military purposes.

Some have said the drones appear similar to a model from Chinese drone manufacturer Skywalker Technology.

Kanye West, the rapper now known as Ye, is suing his former project manager and his lawyers, alleging they wrongfully put a $1.8 million lien on his former Malibu mansion.

The suit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Thursday, alleges that Tony Saxon, Ye’s former project manager on the property, and the law firm West Coast Trial Lawyers, “wrongfully” placed an “invalid” lien on the property “while simultaneously launching an aggressive publicity campaign designed to pressure Ye, chill prospective transactions, and extract payment on disputed claims already being litigated in court.”

Saxon’s lawyers were not immediately available for comment.

Saxon, who was also employed as West’s security guard and caretaker at the Malibu property, sued the controversial rapper in Los Angeles Superior Court in Sept. 2023, claiming a slate of labor violations, nonpayment of services and disability discrimination.

In Jan. 2024, Saxon placed the $1.8 million “mechanics” lien on the property in order to secure compensation for his work as project manager and construction-related services, according to court filings.

A mechanics lien, also referred to as a contractor’s lien, is usually filed by an unpaid contractor, laborer or supplier, as a hold against the property. If the party remains unpaid, it can prompt a foreclosure sale of the property to secure compensation.

Ye has denied Saxon’s allegations. In a Nov. 2023 response to the complaint, Ye disputed that Saxon “has sustained any injury, damage, or loss by reason of any act, omission or breach by Defendant.”

According to Ye’s recent complaint, he listed the property for sale in December 2023. A month later, he alleged, Saxon and his attorneys recorded the lien and “immediately” issued statements to the media.

The suit cites a statement Saxon’s attorney, Ronald Zambrano, made to Business Insider: “If someone wants to buy Kanye’s Malibu home, they will have to deal with us first. That sale cannot happen without Tony getting paid first.”

“These statements were designed to create public pressure and to interfere with the Plaintiffs’ ability to sell and finance the Property by falsely conveying that Defendants held an adjudicated, enforceable right to block a transaction and divert sale proceeds,” the complaint states.

The filing contends that last year the Los Angeles Superior Court granted Ye’s motion to release the lien from the bond and awarded him attorneys fees.

The Malibu property’s short existence has a long history of legal and financial drama.

In 2021, West purchased the beachfront concrete mansion — designed by Pritzker Prize-winning Japanese architect Tadao Ando — for $57.3 million. He then gutted the property on Malibu Road, reportedly saying “This is going to be my bomb shelter. This is going to be my Batcave.”

Three years later, the hip hop star sold the unfinished mansion (he had removed the windows, doors, electricity and plumbing and broke down walls), at a significant loss to developer Steven Belmont’s Belwood Investments for $21 million.

Belmont, who spent more money to renovate the home, had spent three years in prison after being charged with attempted murder for a pitchfork attack in Napa County. He promised to restore the architectural jewel to its former glory.

However, the property has been mired in various legal and financial entanglements including foreclosure threats.

Last August, the notorious mansion was once again put on the market with a $4.1 million price cut after a previous offer reportedly fell through, according to Realtor.com.

The legal battle surrounding Ye’s former Malibu pad is the latest in a series of public and legal dramas that the music impresario has been involved in recent years.

In 2022, the mercurial superstar lost numerous lucrative partnerships with companies like Adidas and the Gap, following a raft of antisemitic statements, including declaring himself a Nazi on X (which he later recanted).

Two years later, Ye abruptly shut down Donda Academy, the troubled private school he founded in 2020.

Ye, the school and some of his affiliated businesses faced faced multiple lawsuits from former employees and educators, alleging they were victims of wrongful termination, a hostile work environment and other claims.

In court filings, Ye has denied each of the claims made against him by former employees and educators at Donda.

Several of those suits have been settled.

That escalated quickly. We’re barely into 2026, and events are already unfolding that could meaningfully reshape the political landscape.

The death of Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother and U.S. citizen who was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis on Wednesday, has the potential to shake the political landscape in ways reminiscent of George Floyd’s killing in 2020.

The Trump administration initially claimed Good “weaponized her vehicle” in an act of “domestic terrorism,” an account that appears to be contradicted by video evidence. Whether the incident escalates into a broader political reckoning — or fades from public attention — may determine its lasting effect on President Trump’s popularity and his immigration policies.

Meanwhile, Trump’s decision to invade Venezuela and capture then-President Nicolás Maduro remains controversial, even among some of his fans.

The attack drew immediate criticism from Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson and Laura Loomer, with Carlson and Loomer going so far as to float the claim that Maduro’s ouster was really about imposing gay marriage on Venezuela (this is impressive, because it manages to combine foreign policy, culture war panic and complete nonsense into a single sentence).

But this schism isn’t limited to ex-House members, podcasters and conspiracy theorists. Inside the administration, the balance of power appears to be tilting away from the noninterventionists and toward the hawks — at least, for now.

The current beneficiary of this shift is Secretary of State Marco Rubio. As recently as last month, JD Vance, who has generally staked out an anti-interventionist posture, seemed like Trump’s obvious heir. Now, Rubio’s stock is up (if “Lil Marco” falls short, he can always settle for Viceroy of Venezuela).

That’s not to say Rubio is anywhere near being Trump’s clear successor. Venezuela could disappear from the headlines as quickly as it arrived, buried beneath the next crisis, scandal or social media outburst. Or it could go sideways and dominate headlines for years or decades.

Military adventurism has an uncanny habit of doing exactly that.

If Venezuela turns into a slow-motion disaster, Democrats will reap the benefits as will the GOP’s “America First” contingent.

But January hasn’t just presented a possible touchstone for Republicans; Democrats have been hit with their own challenge, too: the Minnesota fraud scandal, which has already pushed Democratic Gov. Tim Walz out of a reelection bid. It is the kind of story that reinforces voters’ worst suspicions about their party.

During the past five years, parts of Minnesota’s Somali diaspora became entangled in alleged fraudulent activity, reportedly submitting millions of dollars in claims for social services that were not actually rendered.

The details are complicated; the implications are not. Public programs retain support only when voters believe they are competently managed, and this story suggests the opposite.

The fact that the scandal involves the Somali community makes it even more combustible. Fair or not, it provides ready-made ammunition for those eager to stoke racial resentment, discredit refugee policies and turn bureaucratic failure into an indictment on Democrats.

The fallout extends well beyond Minnesota. Kamala Harris has been signaling interest in another presidential run, and Walz was her vice-presidential pick in what was already a truncated and awkward campaign. That decision alone won’t sink a future bid for her, but it certainly doesn’t strengthen her already dubious case that she has exceptional political judgment.

More troubling for Democrats is the fear that Minnesota is the tip of the iceberg. Walz’s exodus was sparked by a right-wing YouTuber who started doing some sleuthing — and brought attention to years-old investigations by the Walz and Biden administrations. Other influencers are already promising similar exposés elsewhere.

Right-wing podcaster Benny Johnson, for example, has announced plans to descend on California, declaring it “the fraud capital of the world.” Newsom returned fire with a vicious Trump-like retort, demonstrating once again why he became the Democratic frontrunner in 2025.

Newsom’s Twitter rejoinder aside, it’s not crazy to think that the Democrats’ recent momentum could be squandered if it turns out more of these scandals exist and have been ignored, downplayed or (worse) covered up.

It’s risky to describe anything in modern politics as a turning point, because each week reliably produces something that eclipses the last outrage. Still, the opening days of this new year already feel consequential. Seeds have been planted. Whether they mature is the question.

Buckle up. It’s only January.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Russia’s Defence Ministry had published a video of a downed drone it said Ukraine had launched at Putin’s residence, which Kyiv rejected.

United States President Donald Trump has dismissed claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s residence had been attacked by Ukraine as the war grinds on, saying he did not “believe that strike happened”, after having initially accepted the Kremlin’s version of events at face value.

On Sunday night, Trump, on board Air Force One, told reporters that “nobody knew at that moment” whether a report about the alleged incident was accurate. He added that “something” happened near Putin’s residence, but after US officials reviewed the evidence, they did not believe Ukraine targeted it.

Ukraine immediately denied its involvement, accusing Russia of a false-flag type operation to undermine peace negotiations. Moscow promptly said the incident would harden its peace talks stance.

Reports of the attack emerged last week after Russia’s Ministry of Defence published a video of a downed drone it said Kyiv had launched at Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region.

According to the ministry, the residence was not damaged, and Putin was elsewhere at the time.

Alongside Ukraine, its Western allies also heavily disputed that the attack had occurred at all.

The claim of the attack came as Russia and Ukraine work towards agreeing to a ceasefire deal to end the nearly four-year-long war.

European leaders are expected to meet in France on Tuesday for further talks on a US-backed ceasefire plan, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said was “90 percent ready”. Territorial issues over ceding land conquered in war or not remain at the heart of the matter.

First civilian deaths in Kyiv in 2026

Ukraine’s authorities reported on Monday morning that an overnight Russian attack on the Kyiv region had killed two people, in the first casualties in the capital in 2026.

According to the State Emergency Service of Ukraine, the Russian attack set a medical facility in the Obolonskyi district in Kyiv’s northern sector, where an inpatient ward was operating, on fire.

The service said once the fire was extinguished, a body was found inside. A woman was also injured, and 25 people were evacuated, the service added on Telegram.

Towns and villages across the Kyiv region were also damaged and critical infrastructure hit, leading to the killing of a man in his 70s in the Fastiv district, southwest of the capital, Governor Mykola Kalashnyk said on Telegram.

Kalashnyk added that small parts of the region were left without power.

Russia has not commented on the overnight strike yet.

Senegal beat Benin 3-0 to top AFCON 2025 group, while DR Congo beat Botswana, setting up a mouth-watering Algeria tie.

Senegal saw off Benin on Tuesday to go through to the last 16 of the Africa Cup of Nations as winners of Group D, leaving the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to settle for second place, which means they will play Algeria in a heavyweight tie in the next round.

Sadio Mane’s Senegal, the 2022 African champions, came into the final round of group games needing to beat Benin in Tangier, and hope their Congolese rivals have not managed to move above them on goal difference.

Senegal ran out 3-0 winners against Benin, with Abdoulaye Seck and Habib Diallo scoring before skipper Kalidou Koulibaly was sent off in the second half. Cherif Ndiaye then added a late penalty.

The DRC beat the already-eliminated Botswana 3-0 at the same time in Rabat, meaning the leading duo both finished with seven points from three games, but Pape Thiaw’s Senegal topped the section by a difference of two goals.

As a result, Senegal have a far kinder path in the knockout phase and will remain in Tangier for a last-16 tie on Saturday against the third-place finisher in Group E.

That will be either Burkina Faso or Sudan, who play each other in Casablanca on Wednesday.

The Leopards, in contrast, must play the 2019 champions Algeria in the last 16 next Tuesday, with the winner of that potentially having to face Nigeria in the quarterfinals.

Benin’s three points, courtesy of a solitary 1-0 win over Botswana, are enough for them to go through as one of the best third-placed teams.

It will be just their second appearance in the AFCON knockout stages, and their reward is a meeting with Mohamed Salah’s Egypt in Agadir on Monday.

Israel-based centre-back Seck headed Senegal into the lead from Krepin Diatta’s free kick on 38 minutes, and their second goal arrived just after the hour, when a superb cutback by Mane was turned in by Diallo.

Skipper Koulibaly was then sent off after a yellow card was upgraded to red following a VAR review, leaving the Lions of Teranga to play out the final 19 minutes plus stoppage time a man down.

Ndiaye’s 97th-minute penalty made it 3-0 and ended any doubt about Senegal’s final position in the group.

Playmaker Gael Kakuta, once of Chelsea and now playing in Turkiye, was in outstanding form for the DRC against Botswana at Al Medina Stadium, as his back heel set up Nathanael Mbuku for the opener.

Kakuta then converted a penalty shortly before half-time and got his second and his team’s third on the hour mark from Theo Bongonda’s assist.

Another goal at that point could have left the DRC and Senegal with identical records and facing a possible drawing of lots to determine their final group positions.

The DRC thought they had it when Fiston Mayele put the ball in the net on 64 minutes.

Dec. 30 (UPI) — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Russia of lying over a large-scale drone attack on President Vladimir Putin’s state residence 300 miles northwest of Moscow, which it claims was carried out by Kyiv.

Monday’s alleged attack shortly after high-level U.S.-Ukraine talks at Mar-a-Lago ended was an excuse to attack Ukraine, most likely Kyiv and government buildings there, and keep the war going, Zelensky told reporters.

Zelensky said it was no accident that Moscow announced the attack after he and U.S. President Donald Trump said they had made good progress toward finalizing a peace agreement framework, as well as lengthy security guarantees, in talks Sunday at Trump’s resort in Palm Beach.

“It’s obvious that yesterday we had a meeting with President Trump, and it’s clear that when there is no scandal for the Russians, when there is progress, it is a failure for them. They do not want to end this war and are only capable of doing so under pressure. So they are looking for a pretext,” said Zelensky.

“Russia is at it again, using dangerous statements to undermine all achievements of our shared diplomatic efforts with President Trump’s team. We keep working together to bring peace closer. This alleged ‘residence strike’ story is a complete fabrication intended to justify additional attacks against Ukraine, including Kyiv, as well as Russia’s own refusal to take necessary steps to end the war. Typical Russian lies,” Zelensky wrote on X.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Monday that Moscow had already decided on when and which targets it would hit in retaliation for Kyiv’s targeting of Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region with 91 drones, which he described as a terrorist attack.

All the drones were downed by air defenses or electronic means and neither Putin or anyone else was hurt in the incident, according to Lavrov.

However, he warned Russia would revise its stance on the peace negotiations accordingly, “taking into account the Kyiv regime’s final transition to a policy of state terrorism,” but said Moscow would not be sharing details of its new tougher policy.

Speaking at a briefing on Tuesday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov ruled out Moscow pulling the plug on the peace talks.

“Russia is not withdrawing from the negotiation process, and will certainly continue talks and dialogue, primarily with the Americans,” he said.

Speaking to journalists at Mar-a-Lago on Monday night, Trump said he was very angry about the attack, which he said he learned about directly from Putin, saying it was not the right time for offense when peace negotiations were in such a “delicate phase.”

“I don’t like it. It’s not good. I learned about it from President Putin today. I was very angry about it. It’s a delicate period of time. This is not the right time. It’s one thing to be offensive, because they’re offensive. It’s another thing to attack his house. It’s not the right time to do any of that.”

However, he acknowledged the attack may never have taken place and vowed that U.S. intelligence would get to the bottom of it.

According to the Kremlin, the attack in the early hours of Monday local time came “almost immediately” after the American and Ukrainian teams’ talks ended on Sunday evening.

Zelensky and Trump emerged from the talks to say they were at least 95% agreed on extendable 15-year security guarantees for Ukraine, but that the issues of territory and the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant remained sticking points.

U.S. President Donald Trump added new details on Monday to his claim that the U.S. carried out an attack last week inside Venezuela; however he did not provide any proof. If true, such a strike would mark a significant escalation of a months-long pressure campaign on Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro and the cartels. Until now, U.S. publicly acknowledged kinetic actions have been limited to attacks on alleged drug-running boats, even as Washington’s military presence in the region continues to grow.

You can catch up with our most recent coverage of Operation Southern Spear here.

“We hit all the boats and now we hit the area, it’s the implementation area. That’s where they implement,” the president said while at Mar-a-Lago, standing alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “And that is no longer around.”

Trump declined to say whether it was the U.S. military or the CIA that carried out the attack.

Trump first made the claim of the attack inside Venezuela last week during a phone call with WABC radio in New York.

“I don’t know if you read or you saw, they have a big plant, or a big facility where they send the, you know, where the ships come from,” Trump told John Catsimatidis, the billionaire Trump supporter who owns the radio station. “Two nights ago, we knocked that out. So we have hit them very hard, but drugs are down over 97% Can you believe it?”

Trump has yet to offer proof of any attacks inside Venezuela. During their conversation, Catsimatidis didn’t press him on the matter. Anonymous American officials told The New York Times that the president was “referring to a drug facility in Venezuela and that it was eliminated, but provided no details.”

The White House has not responded to requests from The War Zone and many other news organizations for corroboration of an attack inside Venezuela. U.S. Southern Command, which oversees Southern Spear, declined to comment to us. The Pentagon referred us to the White House. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which Trump previously authorized to conduct covert operations inside Venezuela, did not immediately respond to questions about whether it was involved in this claimed attack.

There have been no official comments from Venezuelan authorities about this alleged attack and no independent confirmation from people near the facility. However, videos emerged online suggesting that an explosion and fire at a Primazol chemical plant near Lake Maracaibo may have been the target of a U.S. attack.

While the incident at the chemical plant lines up with the strike timeline proffered by Trump, the company pushed back against suggestions it was attacked.

“We categorically reject the versions circulating on social media that seek to damage the reputation of our founder and the organization,” Primazol explained in a statement. “We responsibly clarify that these claims have no relation whatsoever to the incident and are neither official nor verified.”

The War Zone cannot independently verify any connection, and we reached out to Primazol for more information.

In a post on X, Jhorman Cruz, a local journalist, cautioned against making a connection between Trump’s claim and the fire.

“Residents DID NOT see anything unusual, nor drones, nor cars, nor the presence of foreigners,” he stated. “Be careful with strange hypotheses.”

Trump’s radio interview followed his Christmas Eve phone call to sailors aboard the USS Gerald Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, which is now deployed to the Caribbean. Trump called the region an “interesting place” to be, and said once again that the U.S. would be “going after the land.” He offered no further explanations.

Trump’s claim about the facility strike inside Venezuela was prefaced by a short discussion with the radio station owner about the destruction of alleged drug smuggling vessels. Trump repeated his claim that each drug boat attack saves 25,000 lives in the U.S. To date, SOUTHCOM has hit more than two dozen of these vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, killing more than 100. The strikes have generated a great deal of controversy, with claims they violate the rules of armed conflict and have been carried out without Congressional or judicial approval. The White House and Pentagon have pushed back on those claims. Earlier this month, Congress closed out investigations into the first of these attacks, on Sept. 2, which were called after it was revealed that survivors of the first strike were killed in a follow-on attack.

.

Regardless of Trump’s attack claim, the U.S. continues to grow its military presence in the Caribbean and especially its special operations forces (SOF). Over the weekend, aircraft spotters said they saw at least 10 MC-130J Commando II multi-mission combat transport planes at Rafael Hernandez International Airport (RHIA) in Puerto Rico. That’s double the amount seen at the airport last week. 

At least five of the MC-130Js appear to be outfitted with the full Capability Release 2 (CR-2) set of modifications, which includes Raytheon’s new AN/APQ-187 Silent Knight terrain-following/terrain avoidance radars, a satellite communications system, and other equipment.

In addition, satellite imagery, which you can also see below, now shows at least 11 Air Force Special Operations Command CV-22B Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft there as well. We previously reported the presence of nine or 10 Ospreys at RHIA. U.S. Special Operations Command declined comment and Air Force Special Operations Command has not returned a request for comment. You can read more about the significance of these aircraft and the growing SOF presence in the Caribbean to Southern Spear in our story here.

As we previously noted, the airport also plays host to MQ-9 Reaper drones, images of which first began appearing online in September. MQ-9s have been used in boat attacks as well.

In an apparent effort to keep its assets out of the public eye, personnel have been seen obstructing the fence through which photographers have been capturing images of aircraft gathered at RHIA.

As we previously noted, a compendium of satellite imagery dating back to early October shows a large-scale construction project at the airport

Satellite imagery also shows increasing expansion at the Jose Aponte de la Torre Airport in Puerto Rico. The former Roosevelt Roads Navy base has become a key staging ground for U.S. aircraft and troops deployed for Southern Spear.

As of Saturday, an E-11A Battlefield Airborne Communications Node, or BACN was tracked by aircraft spotters to Luis Munoz Marine International Airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico’s largest.

BACN07 (22-9047) the U.S. Air Force E-11A (Battlefield Airborne Communications Node) is still located at at Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport in San Juan.

It was tracked on the ground today at 12:35(EST)/17:35(UTC). pic.twitter.com/Rr3xIjp4sv

— FrozenFrequency (@FrozenFrequency) December 27, 2025

Meanwhile, as the Trump administration increases military pressure on Maduro, it is also continuing to take aim at Venezuelan oil shipments in an effort to squeeze him economically as well. As one of the world’s largest oil producers, Venezuela relies heavily on it. Since Trump enacted a blockade on sanctioned ships entering or leaving Venezuela, the U.S. has seized two and has pursued a third.

“The United States hasn’t given up its pursuit of the massive, rusted oil tanker it chased into international waters near Venezuela last weekend, and officials are now contemplating moving additional resources into the area to forcibly board the ship,” CNN reported on Friday, citing people familiar with the matter. 

Last known visual we have of BELLA 1 (9230880) is from five days ago, when it was spotted in satellite imagery. Here’s older footage from the bridge. pic.twitter.com/l7ml2gOyu9

— Christiaan Triebert (@trbrtc) December 24, 2025

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova denounced the blockade and seizures on Sunday.

“In principle, we reject attempts to exert pressure on sovereign countries in general, including in the energy sector,” she said. “We understand that behind such a policy there is only a neo-colonial desire to achieve economic advantages through non-competitive political methods.”

“We trust that the Administration of U.S. President Donald Trump will refrain from sliding further into a large-scale armed conflict, which threatens to have unpredictable consequences for the entire Western Hemisphere,” she added.

Satellite images captured on Dec. 24 show elements of the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) in close proximity to the M/V Ocean Trader, a special operations mothership. It should be noted that most of the ARG’s aviation combat element (ACE) was moved to Roosevelt Roads several weeks ago and remains there. The presence of these ships so close together, and the aircraft, landing equipment and troops embarked on board, is another indication that U.S. is poised for action beyond hitting suspected drug boats.

Most, if not all, of the aviation combat element (ACE) assigned to the 22nd MEU aboard the Iwo Jima ARG was moved to the former NAS Roosevelt Roads, PR several weeks ago, and remain there.

2/https://t.co/FUGtfOW5qZ

— TheIntelFrog (@TheIntelFrog) December 24, 2025

Much about Trump’s claim that the U.S. attacked inside Venezuela remains unknown. Regardless, the large U.S. military presence in the Caribbean seems to be coalescing toward additional kinetic action.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com

ITV viewers took to social media to complain after watching Jamie Redknapp on the Christmas special of Ant & Dec’s Limitless Win on December 27

Viewers of ITV were left divided on Saturday night (December 27) as they settled in to watch the Christmas edition of Ant & Dec’s Limitless Win.

The festive episode saw two unsuspecting members of the audience receive a delightful shock when they were called up to take on the Limitless ladder alongside celebrity partners.

Throughout the programme, mother-of-two Brooke teamed up with Amanda Holden, but her journey ended prematurely after getting stuck on merely five questions.

In contrast, former soldier Nigel was matched with footballing icon Jamie Redknapp, and their partnership proved far more successful. Their performance was so impressive that the pair managed to nail three questions in a row with perfect accuracy.

Among the challenges they tackled was: “How many holes does a standard golf course have?” to which they correctly responded 18.

They also encountered the question: “How many mm wide is a standard Lindt Lindor chocolate truffle?” For this particular challenge, the duo opted to use their advantage card, submitting one response whilst Ant and Dec provided another, with the system removing whichever answer was furthest from the truth, reports the Express.

Jamie and Nigel put forward 32 as their response, whilst the presenting pair underestimated with 28, which turned out to be spot on.

Their third perfectly accurate answer came when asked “How many stripes does Where’s Wally have on his T-shirt?” correctly identifying the number as 10.

However, after the tense scenes aired, viewers took to social media in droves to voice their frustrations over the perceived ease of the show’s questions, with many labelling it a “fix”.

One disgruntled viewer wrote: “P*** easy questions, such a fix” while another echoed the sentiment, saying: “Come on chaps, they have got through with the equivalent of asking what comes after C in the alphabet.”

A third chimed in: “The golf course question was a bit of a gimmie,” and a fourth jested: “Three exact answers in a row! Woahhhhh! [laughing emoji]”.

Meanwhile, another fan quipped: “Happy Christmas, the next question is… what is your house number? [cry-laughing emoji].”

After achieving an impressive hat trick, the amy vet decided to cash out with an impressive £30,000 in the bank, which left the guest almost in tears. He couldn’t help but thank Jamie for his help throughout the nail-biting game, as they walked out arm in arm.

The festive special arrives just weeks before the new series returns next month, as part of a double recommission announced earlier this year. Since launching in 2022, Limitless Win has given away over an astonishing £3.5million and has been streamed 13million times, reaching over 25 million viewers.

Ant & Dec’s Limitless Win is on ITV1 and ITVX

**For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website**

Dec. 26 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) said Thursday it had lodged a strong protest after Coupang unilaterally disclosed what it called investigation results into a customer data breach, stressing that the claims have not been verified by the ongoing joint probe.

In a press release, the ministry said a public-private joint investigation team is still closely examining the type, scale and cause of the data leak. “The assertions made by Coupang have not been confirmed by the joint investigation team,” MSIT said.

Earlier in the day, Coupang posted a notice on its website stating that it had identified the leaker and secured all devices and hard disk drives used in the breach. The company claimed that, based on its investigation to date, the leaker stored customer information limited to about 3,000 accounts and subsequently deleted all of it.

Coupang also said it used forensic evidence, including “digital fingerprints,” to identify a former employee responsible for the leak, adding that the individual confessed to all actions and provided a detailed account of how customer information was accessed.

MSIT reiterated that any conclusions regarding the incident must come from the joint public-private investigation, cautioning against premature disclosures that could mislead the public while the probe remains underway.

–Copyright by Asiatoday

NEW YORK — Two sisters testified at Harvey Weinstein’s most recent criminal trial. Kaja Sokola accused the disgraced movie mogul of sexual assault. Ewa Sokola was called as a witness to boost her claims, but ultimately ended up helping the defense.

Now, Ewa Sokola is suing Kaja on claims of defamation, alleging in a lawsuit filed Tuesday in Manhattan federal court that the psychotherapist and ex-model’s public remarks amount to libel and are damaging Ewa’s reputation and business as a cardiologist in Poland.

Ewa Sokola says that her younger sister has made false statements subjecting her to public hatred, shame, contempt, ridicule, ostracism and disgrace in Wrocław, Poland. She seeks unspecified damages.

Messages seeking comment were left for Kaja Sokola’s lawyers and spokesperson on Thursday and Friday.

In a split verdict in June, Weinstein was convicted of forcibly performing oral sex on film and television production assistant and producer Miriam Haley and acquitted on a charge involving Kaja Sokola’s allegations of similar conduct. Both women said they were assaulted in 2006.

The judge declared a mistrial on the final charge, alleging Weinstein raped former actor Jessica Mann, after the jury foreperson declined to deliberate further.

Weinstein has not yet been sentenced as a judge weighs a defense request to throw out the verdict after two jurors told Weinstein’s lawyers that other jurors had bullied them into convicting him. Judge Curtis Farber is expected to rule on Jan. 8.

Kaja Sokola has said her sister’s testimony at Weinstein’s state court trial in New York earlier this year undermined her own testimony that he forced oral sex at a Manhattan hotel just before her 20th birthday.

Weinstein had arranged for Kaja Sokola to be an extra for a day in the film “The Nanny Diaries,” and separately agreed to meet her and Ewa. After they chatted, she testified, Weinstein told her he had a script to show her in his hotel room, and she went up with him. There, she said, Weinstein pushed her onto a bed and assaulted her.

After the trial, Kaja Sokola criticized her sister’s testimony, saying that though she was called as a prosecution witness, she ended up serving Weinstein’s cause by providing his lawyers with a journal in which she wrote about the men who had sexually assaulted her in her life but did not include Weinstein.

According to the lawsuit, Kaja Sokola repeatedly characterized her sister’s testimony as a personal “betrayal” and falsely accused her of omitting journals in which she described what happened with Weinstein.

The lawsuit also said Kaja Sokola had falsely accused Ewa Sokola of homicide, theft, falsification of medical records, sexual impropriety and immoral conduct, and of colluding with Weinstein’s defense team.

The lawsuit said Kaja Sokola’s false claims have cost Ewa Sokola referrals and led to a reduction in patients and employees for her medical practice while damaging her professional reputation and her standing within the medical community.

Sisak and Neumeister write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Tips provided to federal investigators about Donald Trump’s alleged involvement in Jeffrey Epstein’s schemes with young women and girls are “sensationalist” and “untrue,” the Justice Department said on Tuesday, after a new tranche of files released from the probe featured multiple references to the president.

The documents include a limousine driver reportedly overhearing Trump discussing a man named Jeffrey “abusing” a girl, and an alleged victim accusing Trump and Epstein of rape. It is unclear whether the FBI followed up on the tips. The alleged rape victim died from a gunshot wound to the head after reporting the incident.

Nowhere in the newly released files do federal law enforcement agents or prosecutors indicate that Trump was suspected of wrongdoing, or that Trump — whose friendship with Epstein lasted through the mid-2000s — was investigated himself.

But one unidentified federal prosecutor noted in a 2020 email that Trump had flown on Epstein’s private jet “many more times than previously has been reported,” including over a time period when Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s top confidante who would ultimately be convicted on five federal counts of sex trafficking and abuse, was being investigated for criminal activity.

The Justice Department released an unusual statement unequivocally defending the president.

“Some of these documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election,” the Justice Department statement read. “To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already.”

“Nevertheless, out of our commitment to the law and transparency, the DOJ is releasing these documents with the legally required protections for Epstein’s victims,” the department added.

The Justice Department files were released with heavy redactions after bipartisan lawmakers in Congress passed a new law compelling it to do so, despite Trump lobbying Republicans aggressively over the summer and fall to oppose the bill. The president ultimately signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law after the legislation passed with veto-proof majorities in both chambers.

One newly released file containing a letter purportedly from Epstein — a notorious child sex offender who died in jail while awaiting federal trial on sex-trafficking charges — drew widespread attention online, but was held up by the Justice Department as an example of faulty or misleading information contained in the files.

The letter appeared to be sent by Epstein to Larry Nassar, another convicted sex offender, shortly before Epstein’s death. The letter’s author suggested that Nassar would learn after receiving the note that Epstein had “taken the ‘short route’ home,” possibly referring to his suicide. It was postmarked from Virginia on Aug. 13, 2019, despite Epstein’s death in a Manhattan jail three days prior.

“Our president shares our love of young, nubile girls,” the letter reads. “When a young beauty walked by he loved to ‘grab snatch,’ whereas we ended up snatching grub in the mess halls of the system. Life is unfair.”

The Justice Department said that the FBI had confirmed that the letter is “FAKE” after it made the rounds on Tuesday.

“This fake letter serves as a reminder that just because a document is released by the Department of Justice does not make the allegations or claims within the document factual,” the department posted on social media. “Nevertheless, the DOJ will continue to release all material required by law.”

The department has faced bipartisan scrutiny since failing to release all of the Epstein files in its possession by Dec. 19, the legal deadline for it to do so, and for redacting material on the vast majority of the documents.

Justice Department officials said they were following the law by protecting victims with the redactions. The Epstein Files Transparency Act also directs the department not to redact images or references to prominent or political figures, and to provide an explanation for each and every redaction in writing.

The latest release, just days before the Christmas holiday, includes roughly 30,000 documents, the department said. Hundreds of thousands more are expected to be released in the coming weeks.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a statement in response to the Tuesday release accusing the Justice Department of a “cover-up,” writing on social media, “the new DOJ documents raise serious questions about the relationship between Epstein and Donald Trump.”

Documents from Epstein’s private estate released by the oversight committee earlier this fall had already cast a spotlight on that relationship, revealing Epstein had written in emails to associates that Trump “knew about the girls.”

The latest documents release also includes an email from an individual identified as “A,” claiming to stay at Balmoral Castle, a royal residence in Scotland, asking Maxwell if she had found him “some new inappropriate friends.” Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, has come under intense scrutiny over his ties to Epstein in recent years.

Speaking at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida on Monday, Trump said the continuing Epstein scandal amounts to a “distraction” from Republican successes, and expressed disapproval over the release of images in the files that reveal associates of Epstein.

“I believe they gave over 100,000 pages of documents, and there’s tremendous backlash,” Trump told reporters. “It’s an interesting question, because a lot of people are very angry that pictures are being released of other people that really had nothing to do with Epstein. But they’re in a picture with him because he was at a party, and you ruin a reputation of somebody. So a lot of people are very angry that this continues.”

WASHINGTON — Attorneys for President Trump urged a federal judge on Friday to rule that Trump is entitled to presidential immunity from civil claims that he instigated a mob’s attack on the U.S. Capitol to stop Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 election.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta didn’t rule from the bench after hearing arguments from Trump attorneys and lawyers for Democratic members of Congress who sued the Republican president and allies over the Jan. 6. 2021, attack.

Trump spoke to a crowd of his supporters at the “Stop the Steal” rally near the White House before the mob’s attack disrupted the joint session of Congress for certifying Democratic President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

Trump’s attorneys argue that his conduct leading up to Jan. 6 and on the day of the riot is protected by presidential immunity because he was acting in his official capacity.

“The entire point of immunity is to give the president clarity to speak in the moment as the commander-in-chief,” Trump attorney Joshua Halpern told the judge.

The lawmakers’ lawyers argue Trump can’t prove he was acting entirely in his official capacity rather than as an office-seeking private individual. And the U.S. Supreme Court has held that office-seeking conduct falls outside the scope of presidential immunity, they contend.

“President Trump has the burden of proof here,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Joseph Sellers. “We submit that he hasn’t come anywhere close to satisfying that burden.”

At the end of Friday’s hearing, Mehta said the arguments gave him “a lot to think about” and he would rule “as soon as we can.”

Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who chaired the House Homeland Security Committee, sued Trump, his personal attorney Rudolph Giuliani and members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers extremist groups over the Jan. 6 riot. Other Democratic members of Congress later joined the litigation.

The civil claims survived Trump’s sweeping act of clemency on the first day of his second term, when he pardoned, commuted prison sentences and ordered the dismissal of all 1,500-plus criminal cases stemming from the Capitol siege. Over 100 police officers were injured while defending the Capitol from rioters.

Halpern said immunity enables the president to act “boldly and fearlessly.”

“Immunity exists to protect the president’s prerogatives,” he said.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers argue that the context and circumstances of the president’s remarks on Jan. 6 — not just the content of his words — are key to establishing whether he is immune from liability.

“You have to look at what happened leading up to January 6th,” Sellers said.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

New documents in a lawsuit against Priscilla Presley’s son include claims that Elvis Presley’s granddaughter Riley Keough is the biological parent of John Travolta and the late Kelly Preston’s youngest child, Benjamin.

Priscilla Presley’s former business partner Brigitte Kruse and associate Kevin Fialko filed an amended complaint against Navarone Garcia in Los Angeles County Superior Court on Tuesday. Included in the allegations are claims that the “Daisy Jones & the Six” actor, daughter of the late Lisa Marie Presley, gave her eggs to Travolta and Preston in exchange for “an old Jaguar” and “between $10,000 – $20,000.”

According to the complaint, “the entire Presley family clamored for control of the estate and for pay-outs” immediately after Lisa Marie Presley’s death in 2023. Among those who allegedly approached Kruse was Lisa Marie’s ex-husband Michael Lockwood, with whom she shared twin daughters Harper and Finley Lockwood. Kruse and Fialko were allegedly tasked with acting as negotiators and mediators amid the “family chaos.”

The document details how Lockwood said Travolta and Preston had “previously used Lisa Marie’s eggs to get pregnant” because Preston “had been unable to bear her own children.” It was unclear whether Presley’s eggs produced a child. Preston died in 2020 at age 57 after a two-year battle with breast cancer.

Lockwood also allegedly said the couple had approached the Presley family again “in or around 2010” but Travolta “no longer wanted to use Lisa Marie’s eggs because they did not want ‘eggs with heroin’ on them.” According to the filing, a deal was “orchestrated” in which “Riley Keough gave her eggs to Travolta so that Kelly could give birth to their son, Ben Travolta” and “Riley was given an old Jaguar and paid between $10,000 – $20,000 for the deal.”

Included in the filing is an image of a handwritten note that features the words “Kelly Preston carried baby,” “medical bills paid” and “old Jaguar 1990s-ish,” as well as a screenshot of messages presumably exchanged with Priscilla Presley that describe Ben Travolta as her “beautiful great-grandson.”

Lockwood further allegedly claimed that “the entire arrangement required a ‘sign off’ from the Church of Scientology, which heavily involved Priscilla’s oversight.” According to the document, Lockwood “demanded” the information be used “to orchestrate a settlement for him and his daughters,” whom he said were “financially destitute.”

Kruse and Fialko’s amended complaint against Garcia alleges that he “threw a tantrum, demanding [they] keep Riley’s and Travolta’s son out of the press, since Priscilla [had] promised him that he would be the only male musician in the family and would now be the ‘king.’” The document also claims “Priscilla’s love for Navarone was, and always has been, incestuous.”

The filing is the latest in the legal feud involving Presley and her former business partner. Presley previously filed a lawsuit against Kruse and her associates alleging fraud and elder abuse. Kruse and Fialko, meanwhile, are suing Presley for fraud and breach of contract.

“After losing motion after motion in this case, and unsuccessfully seeking to have Presley’s counsel of record, Marty Singer, disqualified from representing her in this matter, Brigitte Kruse, Kevin Fialko, and their co-conspirators have demonstrated that there is no bar too low, no ethical line that they are unwilling to cross in an effort to cause further pain to Priscilla Presley and her family,” Presley’s attorneys Singer and Wayne Harman said in a statement to TMZ.

“In a completely improper effort to exert undue pressure on Presley to retract her legitimate, truthful claims, Kruse and her co-conspirators have also sued Presley’s son, cousin, and assistant,” the statement continued. “These recent outrageous allegations have absolutely nothing to do with the claims in this case. The conduct of Kruse, Fialko, and their new lawyers (they are on their fourth set of attorneys) is shameful, and it absolutely will be addressed in court.”

Representatives for Keough did not respond immediately Thursday to The Times’ request for comment.

The FTC had accused the grocery delivery giant of charging fees to consumers after promising ‘free delivery’.

Instacart has agreed to pay $60m in refunds to settle allegations brought by the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that the online grocery delivery platform deceived consumers about its membership programme and free delivery offers.

According to court documents filed in San Francisco on Thursday, Instacart’s offer of “free delivery” for first orders was illusory because shoppers were charged other fees, the FTC alleged.

The agency also accused Instacart of failing to adequately notify shoppers that their free trials of its Instacart+ subscription service would convert to paid memberships and of misleading consumers about its refund policy.

“The FTC is focused on monitoring online delivery services to ensure that competitors are transparently competing on price and delivery terms,” said Christopher Mufarrige, who leads the FTC’s consumer protection work.

An Instacart spokesperson said the company flatly denies any allegations of wrongdoing, but that the settlement allows the company to focus on shoppers and retailers.

“We provide straightforward marketing, transparent pricing and fees, clear terms, easy cancellation, and generous refund policies — all in full compliance with the law and exceeding industry norms,” the spokesperson said.

The shopping platform is currently under scrutiny after a recent study by nonprofit groups found that individual shoppers simultaneously received different prices for the same items at the same stores.

The FTC is investigating the company and has demanded information about Instacart’s Eversight pricing tool, the news agency Reuters reported on Wednesday.

Instacart has said that retailers are responsible for setting prices, and that pricing tests run through Eversight are random and not based on user data.

Lindsay Owens, the executive director of the Groundwork Collaborative, an economic think tank, criticised the grocery platform for using artificial intelligence (AI) to tweak its prices.

“At a time when families are being squeezed by the highest grocery costs in a generation, Instacart chose to run AI experiments that are quietly driving prices higher,” Owens said in written remarks provided to Al Jazeera.

She also called on the administration of US President Donald Trump to take action to prevent such price manipulation from continuing into the future.

“While the FTC’s investigation is welcome news, it must be followed with meaningful action that ends these exploitative pricing schemes and protects consumers,” Owens said. “Instacart must face consequences for their algorithmic price gouging, not just a slap on the wrist.”

On Wall Street, Instacart’s stock is taking a hit on the heels of the settlement, finishing out the day down 1.5 percent.

Dozens of California National Guard troops under President Trump’s command apparently slipped out of Los Angeles under cover of darkness early Sunday morning, ahead of an appellate court’s order to be gone by noon Monday.

Administration officials would not immediately confirm whether the troops had decamped. But video taken outside the Roybal Federal Building downtown just after midnight on Sunday and reviewed by The Times shows a large tactical truck and four white passenger vans leaving the facility, which has been patrolled by armed soldiers since June.

About 300 California troops remain under federal control, some 100 of whom were still active in Los Angeles as of last week, court records show.

“There were more than usual, and all of them left — there was not a single one that stayed,” said protester Rosa Martinez, who has demonstrated outside the federal building for months and was there Sunday.

Troops were spotted briefly later that day, but had not been seen again as of Monday afternoon, Martinez said.

The development that forced the troops to leave was part of a sprawling legal fight for control of federalized soldiers nationwide that remains ongoing.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued the order late Friday but softened an even more stringent edict from a lower court judge last week that would have forced the president to relinquish command of the state’s forces. Trump federalized thousands of California National Guard troops in June troops to quell unrest over immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.

“For the first time in six months, there will be no military deployed on the streets of Los Angeles,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in a statement. “While this decision is not final, it is a gratifying and hard-fought step in the right direction.”

The ruling Friday came from the same three-judge panel that handed the president one of his most sweeping second-term victories this summer, after it found that the California deployment could go forward under an obscure and virtually untested subsection of the law.

That precedent set a “great level of deference” as the standard of review for deployments that have since mushroomed across the country, circumscribing debate even in courts where it is not legally binding.

But the so-called Newsom standard — California Gov. Gavin Newsom was the lead plaintiff on the lawsuit — has drawn intense scrutiny and increasingly public rebuke in recent weeks, even as the Trump administration argues it affords the administration new and greater powers.

In October, the 7th Circuit — the appellate court that covers Illinois — found the president’s claims had “insufficient evidence,” upholding a block on a troop deployment in and around Chicago.

“Even applying great deference to the administration’s view of the facts … there is insufficient evidence that protest activity in Illinois has significantly impeded the ability of federal officers to execute federal immigration laws,” the panel wrote.

That ruling is now under review at the Supreme Court.

In November, the 9th Circuit vacated its earlier decision allowing Trump’s Oregon federalization to go forward amid claims the Justice Department misrepresented important facts in its filings. That case is under review by a larger panel of the appellate division, with a decision expected early next year.

Despite mounting pressure, Justice Department lawyers have doubled down on their claims of near-total power, arguing that federalized troops remain under the president’s command in perpetuity, and that courts have no role in reviewing their deployment.

When Judge Mark J. Bennett asked the Department of Justice whether federalized troops could “stay called up forever” under the government’s reading of the statute at a hearing in October, the answer was an unequivocal yes.

“There’s not a word in the statute that talks about how long they can remain in federal service,” Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Eric McArthur said.

For now, the fate of 300 federalized California soldiers remains in limbo, though troops are currently barred by court orders from deployment in California and Oregon.

Times staff writers David Zahniser and Kevin Rector contributed to this report.