controversy

Last year the prolific and gifted Zadie Smith stumbled into controversy with the publication of “Shibboleth” in the New Yorker. She purportedly approached the white-hot Gaza demonstrations with the nuance and complexity they deserved and yet derided pro-Palestinian students at Columbia University as “cynical and unworthy,” stirring up a hornets’ nest among her young fans, who expressed their anger on various internet platforms. The controversy gained traction because of Smith’s record of championing the marginalized, citing theorists like Frantz Fanon while targeting empires and the omnipresent patriarchy. That she singled out one group of activists, many Jewish, at the very moment Arab toddlers were being blown apart by U.S.-funded bombs raised doubts about her touted values. Her conclusion was startling, her tone defiant: “Put me wherever you want: misguided socialist, toothless humanist, naïve novelist, useful idiot, apologist, denier, ally, contrarian, collaborator, traitor, inexcusable coward.” The lady doth protest too much?

“Shibboleth” appears in “Dead and Alive,” Smith’s collection of previously published essays, in which she assumes most if not all those roles she attributes to herself. Fanon is here as well, amid an array of artists and authors such as Joan Didion, Toni Morrison, and Philip Roth. Smith is arguing for the necessity of vigorous criticism and often makes her case. The book’s finest pieces wrangle, in elegant prose, with humanity’s contradictions; the weaker ones indulge in name-dropping, footnotes and op-ed invective.

Zadie Smith

(Ben Bailey-Smith)

“The Muse at Her Easel,” in the opening section, probes the relationship between English painter Lucian Freud and his model, Celia Paul, also a painter, via a review of her memoir. (Paul is the mother of one of 12 children he fathered outside of marriage.) Smith’s sly trick here is a bit of Freud-play: Lucian seen through the prism of his grandfather Sigmund, the family romance on steroids. Celia revolves around the artist here much as she did when he was alive, vulnerable and reflective, a moon to his sun. It’s both a restrained and overwrought essay, a cryptic tale of sexual politics, like her fellow Brit Rachel Cusk’s novel, “Second Place,” but one that urges us to think hard about abuses in the service of “museography.”

Smith brings an empathic eye to other artists, from the allegorical Toyin Ojih Odutola to the subversive Kara Walker. And she shines a bright light on numerous writers who have inspired her, particularly in remembrances of Didion (whose influence we sense throughout “Dead and Alive”) and the great Hilary Mantel. Her pieces on two books, “Black England” and “Black Manhattan,” excavate hidden histories of Black resistance and the painful compromises brokered to move forward. Her tone in “Fascinated to Presume: In Defense of Fiction” is elegiac, as though smartphones have killed off the craft; yet it’s also a manifesto of sorts, and a declaration of her own aesthetics. “Belief in a novel is, for me, a by-product of a certain kind of sentence,” Smith observes. “Familiarity, kinship, and compassion will play their part, but if the sentences don’t speak to me, nothing else will.” Amen, sister.

Her forays into social commentary are more problematic. She’s strong on the weird population kink known as Gen X, squeezed between the larger boomers and millennials, and the switchback road we traveled to marriage and parenthood: “We all still dressed like teenagers, though, and in the minds of the popular culture were ‘slackers,’ suffering from some form of delayed development, possibly the sad consequences of missing such key adulting experiences as a good war or a stock market crash,” Smith asserts. “We felt history belonged to other people: that we lived in the time of no time.” She’s persuasive when she remains within her comfort zone, opining on race, gender and, occasionally, class. Not so much when she ventures into technology. In “Some Notes on Mediated Time,” she broods at length on the destabilizing effects of the internet, social media and the algorithm silos that shape our present. It’s tough to parse irony from self-congratulation. “I have to say how immensely grateful I am that the work I have been so fortunate to do these last twenty years — writing books — has also gifted me the opportunity, the privilege, of devoting the time of my one human life to an algorithm. To keep almost all of it, selfishly, outrageously, for myself, my friends, my colleagues, my family,” Smith writes. “There are memes I will never know. Whole Twitter meltdowns I never witnessed. Hashtags I will forever remain ignorant about.” Which raises the question: Why lament a social paradigm shift if you haven’t bothered with it in the first place? Something isn’t right. Elsewhere in the essay she claims that social media is “excellent for building brands and businesses and attracting customers.” Could the same be said of a disingenuous essayist?

She comes across as preaching to her peers rather than seeking converts, a whiff of Oxbridge elitism. Hence references to Derrida, Dickinson, Knausgaard, Borges, shout-outs to Booker laureates “Salman” (Rushdie) and “Ian” (McEwan). This level of self-regard in a writer and thinker as justifiably exalted as Smith may explain why our nation is turning on reading: aristocracies breed resentment among the proles. Then Smith steps into the muck of global conflicts. The moral bothsidesism found in “Shibboleth” splits the baby; she does herself no favors with Solomonic pronouncements and Pontius Pilate-like self-exoneration. (Elsewhere she indicts Trump and Netanyahu while neglecting the money and media that empower them.)

“Dead and Alive” does what it was designed to do: It gathers the author’s criticism, literary obituaries, a university address and an interview with a Spanish journal between two covers. The execution falters. Smith’s provocations are often stunning; her prose is thrillingly strident; but her fiction better captures the messiness of public and private selves at war with each other.

Cain is a book critic and the author of a memoir, “This Boy’s Faith: Notes From a Southern Baptist Upbringing.” He lives in Brooklyn, N.Y.

A popular Australian radio show has been axed following a much-discussed controversy involving Keith Urban, in which he hung up on the programme amid an interview

A popular Australian radio show has been axed following a much-discussed controversy involving Keith Urban. The Aussie musician, 57, made an appearance on Australian Radio Network (ARN)’s Hayley & Max In The Morning, which has been hosted by Max Burford and Hayley Pearson for just under a year.

The interview took place just weeks before it was revealed that he and Nicole Kidman had called time on their near-20 year marriage, and that the Hollywood actress had filed for divorce herself. It all seemed to be going well until he was asked about Nicole’s sex scenes with Zac Efron in their film A Family Affair

He was asked: “What does Keith Urban think when he sees his beautiful wife with beautiful younger men like Zac Efron, having these beautiful love scenes on TV?” Keith’s only response was to end the interview then and there. A member of the crew was heard saying he and his team didn’t like the line of questioning and pulled the chat.

READ MORE: Keith Urban ‘drops Nicole Kidman-inspired song from tour’ amid shock divorceREAD MORE: Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman’s extreme custody plan for children with unique arrangements

Less than six months after the viral moment took place, the radio broadcaster announced that the Mix102.3 show would air for the final time on December 12. A representative said: “In 2026, the station will launch a new live and local breakfast show as part of a refreshed whole station strategy focused on bolder content and bigger moments that really set the station apart.”

It comes just days after the news that Brisbane breakfast show Robin, Kip & Corey Oates had also been axed by the network. The rep also thanked the on-air team for their “hard work, creativity and commitment to the Brisbane audience” during their time in production.

According to an email seen by Mediaweek, the network ‘can’t reveal details just yet’ of what is to come for the broadcaster. Following the controversial moment with Keith, Max Burford, the radio show’s host, then remarked that he thought they were ‘vibing’ with the country music star and wondered if Keith now disliked them.

He added: “I thought we were vibing with Keith. Do we have beef with Keith Urban now?”

His co-host, Hayley Pearson, added that she thought their line of questioning would make Keith “hate” them: “He hates us. I knew that was going to happen.” Keith’s angry response to questions about his wife’s films came just after their 19th wedding anniversary.

The couple, who married in Sydney in 2006 after meeting at a Los Angeles event in 2005, have two daughters, aged 17 and 14. The divorce documents include a detailed parenting plan, with Kidman set to be the primary residential parent for 306 days of the year. Urban will have the remaining 59. The filing states both girls will remain in Nashville, where they’ve lived their whole lives.

“The mother and father will behave with each other and each child so as to provide a loving, stable, consistent and nurturing relationship with the child even though they are divorced,” the agreement reads.

“They will not speak badly of each other or the members of the family of the other parent. They will encourage each child to continue to love the other parent and be comfortable in both families.”

Reports claim that neither will seek child or spousal support, with the filing noting both earn over $100,000 per month. Assets, including royalties and copyrights, will be split equally, with each keeping what is in their name.

The parenting agreement was signed by Urban on August 29 and by Kidman on September 6 – suggesting the split had been planned well before it became public. Under Tennessee law, the divorce will take at least 90 days to be finalised.

This was Urban’s first marriage and Kidman’s second. She was previously married to Tom Cruise, with whom she has two older children. Just last year, at a Netflix premiere, Kidman told the Associated Press, “You’re heading for trouble if you consider yourselves the perfect couple. I’m not a believer in perfect.”

Earlier that year, Urban emotionally paid tribute to Kidman at the AFI Life Achievement Award ceremony, saying, “Four months into our marriage, I’m in rehab for three months. Nic pushed through every negative voice, I’m sure even some of her own, and she chose love. And here we are 18 years later.”

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

POP fans have only just realised that Sombr is secretly a nepo baby, following controversy over his performances.

Horrified fans worked out who his dad is and accused the pop star – real name Shane Michael Boose – of using his father’s connections to launch his music career.

Social media users looking into Sombr, who will be playing three nights at London’s Brixton Academy next March, have clocked that the singer is actually a nepo baby, whose dad counts some of the world’s biggest celeb names, including Elton John and Leonardo DiCaprio, as his clients.

The Back to Friends singer is the son of Andy Boose, 54, who founded luxury events company AAB Productions.

His company produces galas, concerts, fashion shows and charity events including fundraisers internationally.

Andy, who operates his company in cities including Los Angeles, London, Hong Kong and Venice, counts huge names among his client books.

SOMBER MOMENT

Watch Sombr’s awkward reaction to VMAs win as singer asks ‘is this a prank?’

These include UNICEF, Elton John AIDS Foundation, amfAR, the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation and other high-profile organisations.

Social media users were shocked to learn of Sombr’s nepo baby status, and quickly spread the news on X.

One wrote: “I found out today that sombr is a nepo baby, I feel like I just got shot in the chest”.

Another blasted: “well the reason sombr has no stage presence is because he was never meant to be a performer.

“his father is a CEO of some sort of major music company & he’s a mega nepo baby”.

While one posted: “Sombr is a f***ing nepo baby i knew something was fishy about him”.

It’s the latest saga surrounding his music career after a concert goer called out inappropriate jokes and bizarre segments at his concerts.

Sombr played a show in Washington, D.C. earlier this month, which 25-year-old TikTok user Megan Tomasic attended.

She posted a video on Wednesday recapping the whole experience, calling it “genuinely the worst concert” she’d ever seen.

She quickly realised she wasn’t the target audience – describing “thousands of tweens running around like they were at a middle-school dance” at the concert.

She claimed the singer made “a bunch of niche meme references for like the 12-to-16-year-old age range” through large parts of the show.

“It was like brain rot on stage,” she added.

The video, which went viral on the platform, prompted Sombr himself to respond.

“Anyone who knows me knows I’ve never uttered a serious word in my life,” he said.

“And also, I make jokes for five minutes of the concert and the rest is music. Like, live a little, enjoy life.”

COOL OFF

I’ve been to over 50 countries – here are my cheap winter sun hols with £11 hotels

UNMASKED

Chilling unheard tapes reveal how cops tore apart smirking serial killer Ted Bundy

“Every age, sex, sexuality, gender, race, everyone is welcome at my concert, and I mean everyone,” he said. “You guys need to find problematic people to hate on because I am just existing.” 

He ended his video with a “quick tutorial” where he touched grass, a Gen Z reference which essentially means ‘get a life’.

Published on
21/10/2025 – 9:22 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Kenny Loggins has reacted to Donald Trump using his song ‘Danger Zone’ in the president’s “disgusting” AI-generated video showing himself wearing a crown, flying a “KING TRUMP” fighter jet and bombing a crowd of protesters with feces.

The video was published as a response to the historic “No Kings” protests which took place across the US on Saturday.

The American singer-songwriter recorded the hit song for the soundtrack of the 1986 Tom Cruise movie Top Gun. He has now called for Trump’s video to be taken down on copyright grounds.

In a statement to Variety, Loggins said: “This is an unauthorized use of my performance of ‘Danger Zone.’ Nobody asked me for my permission, which I would have denied, and I request that my recording on this video is removed immediately.”

He continued: “I can’t imagine why anybody would want their music used or associated with something created with the sole purpose of dividing us. Too many people are trying to tear us apart, and we need to find new ways to come together.”

“We’re all Americans, and we’re all patriotic. There is no ‘us and them’ — that’s not who we are, nor is it what we should be. It’s all of us. We’re in this together, and it is my hope that we can embrace music as a way of celebrating and uniting each and every one of us.”

Well put – especially considering the video has provoked widespread outrage online, with many expressing dismay over the way it shows Trump’s clear disdain for people exercising their right to protest.

Social media users accused Trump of having “the maturity and decorum of a 12-year-old boy”, while others commented: “Can’t believe that’s a president of a country.”

Many posts also pointed out that Trump’s “childish” and “disgusting” AI post revealed a transparent representation of his genuine feelings toward the American people. “It tells you everything you need to know about what he thinks about the people of America who are, in fact, America,” one person commented, while another added: “Him taking a dump on the country is the most honest thing he’s ever posted.”

This is far from the first time that Trump and his administration have used artists’ work without authorisation.

There is an extensive list of musicians who have objected to Trump’s authorized use of their songs. These include ABBA, The Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, Rihanna, Neil Young, R.E.M., Woodkid, Beyoncé and Semisonic.

Sinead O’Connor’s estate previously issued Trump with cease-and-desist orders, while Isaac Hayes’ estate sued him for 134 counts of copywright infringement.

Céline Dion also condemned the use of her song from the Oscar-winning film Titanic, ‘My Heart Will Go On’, which was used at one of Trump’s rallies. Dion’s team questioned the song choice, writing: “And really, THAT song?”

Another band which added their name to the ever-growing list of artists who have sued Trump over the illegal use of their songs in campaign videos was The White Stripes. Last year, the rock band highlighted the “flagrant misappropriation” of their hit song ‘Seven Nation Army’. Jack White captioned a copy of the legal complaint in an Instagram post with: “This machine sues fascists.”

The most recent example to date is Metallica, who forced the US government to withdraw a social media video that used their song ‘Enter Sandman’ without authorisation.

This weekend’s “No Kings” protests saw millions of Americans marching against Trump’s administration, opposing the president’s “authoritarian power grab.”

The 18 October protest, the third mass mobilisation since Trump’s return to the White House, drew nearly 7 million people across all 50 states according to organisers. This figure would make it the largest single-day mobilisation against a US president in modern history.

WASHINGTON — Democrats are ramping up the pressure on House Speaker Mike Johnson to swear in Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat who won a special election last month to succeed her late father.

The delay has attracted mounting attention this week, with Johnson challenged by lawmakers, reporters and even C-SPAN viewers about why Grijalva hasn’t been given the oath of office. Johnson has said repeatedly that she will be sworn in when the House returns to session. He blames the government shutdown for the delay.

Here’s a look at where the situation stands:

Who is Adelita Grijalva?

She is the daughter of Rep. Raul Grijalva, a staunch progressive who died in March. He served more than two decades in the House, rising to chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, where he helped shape the nation’s environmental policies.

Adelita Grijalva has been active in local politics, first serving at the school board level and subsequently on the Pima County Board of Supervisors, becoming just the second woman to serve as chair.

She easily won a special election Sept. 23 to serve out the remainder of her father’s term. She will represent a mostly Hispanic district in which Democrats enjoy a nearly 2-1 ratio voter registration advantage over Republicans.

How Grijalva views the delay

Grijalva was gracious to her soon-to-be Democratic colleagues as they welcomed her to the U.S. Capitol last month, even as she and her future staff were officially considered visitors to the building.

“I think it’s great to be able to be in a room with those who will be my colleagues, but then you very quickly realize that you are not part of the club yet,” Grijalva said Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press. “If I had big money to bet, I would bet that if I were a Republican representative waiting in the wings, I would have already been sworn in by now.”

She said she’s worried about the precedent that is being set by her delayed swearing-in.

“The bedrock of our democracy is free, fair, unobstructed elections,” she said. “And if Speaker Johnson believes this is, as I do, then he will quit toying with our democratic process and swear me in.”

Why the House is empty during the shutdown

Members of the House have been mostly back in their home districts since Sept. 19. That’s when Republicans passed a continuing resolution to fund the government through Nov. 21. Johnson’s decision to send lawmakers home was intended to pressure the Senate into passing that funding measure — a tactic that so far hasn’t worked.

Johnson has yet to schedule any floor votes since then, though the House has occasionally met in pro forma sessions, which are generally short affairs lasting just a few minutes during which no votes are taken.

“We will swear her in when everybody gets back,” Johnson told reporters this week.

Lawmakers who win special elections generally take the oath of office on days in which legislative business is conducted, and they are welcomed with warm applause from members on both sides of the aisle. They give a short speech as family and friends watch from the galleries.

Yet there is precedent for doing it differently. On April 2, Johnson swore in Republican Reps. Jimmy Patronis and Randy Fine, both of Florida, less than 24 hours after they won their special elections, during a pro forma session.

Johnson says the circumstances were unique because the House had unexpectedly gone out of session that day. Patronis and Fine had already arranged for their families, friends and supporters to be in Washington.

“As a courtesy to them and their families, we went ahead and administered the oath to an empty chamber. It was no fun. They didn’t get the same pomp and circumstance everybody else gets,” Johnson said Thursday on C-SPAN when asked by a caller about Grijalva. “We’re going to administer the oath as soon as she gets back.”

How are Democrats responding?

Democrats have little leverage to force Johnson to seat Grijalva so long as the House is in recess. But they are keeping up the pressure.

In an unusual scene Wednesday, Arizona’s two Democratic senators — Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego — confronted Johnson outside his office about Grijalva’s situation.

“You just keep coming up with excuses,” Gallego said to Johnson. The speaker called it a publicity stunt.

Democrats have also taken to the floor during pro forma sessions to try to have Grijalva sworn in. The presiding officer has ignored them every time.

“Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva should be sworn in now. It should have happened this week, should have happened last week. It needs to happen next week,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters Thursday.

What does her swearing-in have to do with the Epstein files?

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, defying GOP leadership, has been gathering signatures on a petition to trigger a vote on legislation that would force the release of federal files on Jeffrey Epstein. And he’s just one name away from succeeding.

Grijalva has said she’ll sign the petition once she takes office, providing Massie the 218 signatures needed to trigger a vote.

Democrats say Johnson is stalling on Grijalva’s swearing-in, as well as on bringing the House back to Washington, because he wants to push off any Epstein vote.

Johnson rejected that accusation during his appearance on C-SPAN. “This has zero to do with Epstein.”

Grijalva said she tries to not be a “conspiracy theorist” and initially disagreed with supporters and allies who warned her that she wouldn’t be seated in Congress because of the Epstein bill.

“I thought, no way, he’s gonna swear me in. It’ll be fine,” she said. “Here we are two weeks later.”

Brown and Freking write for the Associated Press.

Sig Sauer says it has been able to trim the weight of the Army’s new 6.8x51mm M7 service rifle by nearly a pound, or just over 10 percent, in response to feedback from servicemembers. The M7’s weight compared to the gun it is set to replace, the 5.56x45mm M4A1, was among the criticisms that an Army captain very publicly leveled against the gun earlier this year. Sig had subsequently issued a vehement rebuttal, but acknowledged that the design was still evolving.

Jason St. John, senior director of strategic products for the Defense Strategies Group at Sig Sauer, gave an update on the M7 rifle, as well as the companion 6.8x51mm M250 machine gun, to TWZ‘s Howard Altman on the show floor at the Association of the U.S. Army’s (AUSA) main annual symposium today. Sig Sauer has also been working on a shorter and lighter carbine variation of the M7 for the Army. Sig Sauer did show the lightened “product-improved” M7, also known as the PIE M7, at the biennial Defense and Security Equipment International (DSEI) exhibition in London earlier this year, but does not appear to have had the carbine on display at that event.

The M7 and M250 (previously designated the XM7 and XM250), together with the associated family of 6.8x51mm rounds and the computerized XM157 optic, form the Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) ‘system.’ The service selected Sig Sauer as the winner of its NGSW competition in 2022 and now plans to replace a substantial portion of its M4A1s and M249 Squad Automatic Weapons (SAW) with M7s and M250s, respectively. Sig is also supplying the ammunition, but the XM157s are being procured separately from Vortex Optics.

“So, we’re talking about the Army’s and our continued teaming effort to improve the M7 and the M250, based on our recommendations, and their suggestions, and feedback from the field,” Sig Sauer’s St. John said.

“There’s basically two combined efforts going on within the M7,” he continued. “We have a carbine version, and then we have a lighten, improved version of the M7. And so when you look at the standard M7 that’s been issued to the troops, the overall weight of the firearm was 8.3 pounds. Now, the improved M7 is 7.6 pounds, and the carbine version weighs 7.3 pounds. So we’re getting closer and closer to [a] rifle weight system similar to the M4.”

The PIE M7 also has a 13.5-inch barrel, while the one on the carbine version is 10 inches long. A standard M4A1 with its 14.5-inch barrel, as well as just a sling and a loaded magazine, weighs in at 7.62 pounds, according to the Army. It is important to note that optics and other accessories add appreciable weight to both the M7 and M4A1. The XM157 optic is notably larger and heavier than the ones the Army typically issues for use on M4A1s.

In terms of how the PIE M7 was lightened, “there’s the upper receiver, we’ve redesigned and taken some weight out of it. We’ve lessened the barrel profile slightly to get some weight out of it,” according to Sig’s St. John. “We’ve done some lightening efforts within the operating system, as well as remove the folding stock hinge. By removing that hinge, we save some weight.”

The original M7 featured a stock that was both adjustable in length and could be folded to one side. The M4A1’s stock is only adjustable in length.

“What we just found is really that the Army and the soldiers have fed back … [that] they’d rather have the weight savings than the folding stock,” St. John added. “They aren’t using the folding stock enough to justify that additional weight.”

The video in the Tweet below shows a placard with additional details about the PIE M7 and the carbine version at around 0:41 in the runtime.

Sig Sauer has also made important changes to the M250’s design based on discussions with the Army and feedback from soldiers.

“You’re going to see, instead of having a removable front handguard, now you have a hinged captured handguard, so it stays on the weapon system – rotates forward and away,” St. John explained. “The feed tray cover is extended with the big rail, so that now I have more adjustability for the optics that I put on there, and eye relief to the individual soldiers, and now I can move my optic further back or forward depending on what’s wanted.”

“I’ve got improved bipods. I’ve got [an] improved gas valve,” he continued, also highlighting improvements to how the M250 can be fitted to a tripod and how ammunition is carried on the gun. “Basically the feedback from everyone is, what can we do to improve this weapon system, make it more easy [sic] to use, and more robust and reliable.”

Work has also been done to improve the common sound suppressor for the M7 and M250.

“We’ve also redesigned our suppressor to make it shorter,” per St. John. “We’ve added a titanium heat shield on it that does two-fold [things].”

The heat shield helps reduce the chance of contact burns as the suppressor heats up during use. It also reduces thermal bloom, which could make it easier for enemies to spot friendly forces from their heat signature. St. John cautioned that no one should be rushing to grab the suppressor, especially with bare hands, after sustained use, even with the new heat shield.

When it comes to the M7, St. John said that the Army is now in the process of deciding how to proceed in fielding the PIE and/or carbine versions.

“You could see there’s probably a couple of decision points. Do they stick with the standard length M7 that’s been lightened by 0.7 pounds? Or do they and or do they move to the carbine completely?” he said. “Do they keep the carbine for specialty troops and still issue the M7, or do they take the carbine and utilize that as the new rifle across the board? So they’re trying to make those decisions.”

St. John pointed out that the Army had gone through a similar evolution in thinking in the decades that followed the fielding of the A1 variant of the M16 in the 1960s. The service adopted a succession of full-size rifle versions before transitioning to the shorter and lighter M4A1 as its standard service weapon.

That the Army is looking at lighter variations of the M7 at all is significant. The weight of the rifle was among the criticisms that Army Capt. Braden Trent had highlighted in an unclassified report he wrote while he was a student at the Expeditionary Warfare School, which is part of the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia. Trent also called attention to the comparative size and weight of the 5.56x45mm and 6.8x51mm rounds, as well as the shorter barrel on the M7 compared to the M4A1. Trent’s findings, which raised safety concerns about the rifle and cited other issues that called its operational utility into question, came to more widespread attention after he presented them at the annual Modern Day Marine conference earlier this year.

There is one particular “major fault in the XM7, and that’s the UBL … or universal basic load. It’s a metric that can be applied to almost any weapon system, and it essentially means the amount of magazines and associated ammunition that a system uses and is expected to be carried into battle,” Trent said at Modern Day Marine. “So the XM7 [and] the M4A1 actually have the same number of magazines in their UBL seven, but remember, we’re talking about that capacity difference. The total round count a soldier carries into battle with the XM7 is 140 rounds compared to the 210 rounds of the M4A1. Now again, a 70-round difference may not seem significant, but to the soldier in the fight, it absolutely is a difference. Not to mention that every magazine added to the XM7, each 20-round loaded magazine adds another 1.25 pounds to the soldier’s load, meaning that if troops equipped with the XM7 tried to match their old UBLs [in terms of round count], they’re going to have even more weight being carried.”

“The final thing I’d like to mention is the Chief of Army Infantry’s stated goal of a 55-pound total soldier load,” he added. “If we just take the XM7 and its seven UBL magazine load, we’re almost at half that weight, and that’s before the soldier is put on body armor, water, a rucksack, or anything else that they’ll need in the fight.”

The Army’s position has been that the M7 and its new cartridge offer improved accuracy, range, and terminal effectiveness that are worth the added bulk. Concerns about soldiers being outranged, as well as improvements in adversary body armor, were key drivers behind the NGSW program. Trent’s report also calls this into question based on data he collected regarding expected infantry combat engagement distances.

Sig Sauer had also provided a lengthy rebuttal to the technical issues that Trent raised. You can read more about all of this in TWZ‘s in-depth report on the ensuing controversy following his presentation.

“I think that soldiers and citizens should want Sig Sauer, the U.S. [Army] program office to continue that practice of continually evolving and developing and improving their soldiers’ weapons systems. And I think we anticipate that we’re going to undergo those improvement processes for the next 25 to 30 years,” the company’s St. John had told TWZ at the time. “There’s going to be improvements in manufacturing [and] materials processes. The soldiers on the ground and the U.S. Army are going to dictate different operational requirements and standards for the weapons systems, and we’re going to have to react to those modifications that are going to optimize that weapon system as that evolves through time and history.”

“It should be no surprise, in my opinion, that specifically in the infancy of a weapons program that there’s a very aggressive improvement effort to ensure that the Army and the soldiers get the weapon system that they deserve,” he added.

From what we know now, the Army’s plans for the M7 are already evolving significantly, with criticisms about the rifle’s weight, in particular, having been taken to heart.

Howard Altman contributed to this story.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Jimmy Kimmel figured his ABC late-night show was toast during last month’s firestorm over his comments following conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s shooting.

“I said to my wife: ‘That’s it. It’s over,’” Kimmel recalled Wednesday night at the Bloomberg Screentime media conference in Hollywood in a lengthy sit-down interview three weeks after the controversy.

The 57-year-old comedian has all along felt his statements about the Kirk shooting were misconstrued. But he recognized his show was in deep trouble on Sept. 17 when his bosses benched him and two ABC affiliate station owners, Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group, initially refused to air the program.

Kimmel provided fresh details about his dealings with Walt Disney Co. brass, his emotional hiatus and the late night television business in the wake of rival CBS announcing it was canceling “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” next spring.

Kimmel declined to say whether he would extend his long ABC run when his contract is up in May, but he acknowledged an interest in producing other projects.

Kimmel’s future was in doubt last month after his comments and the political backlash spawned boisterous protests that shined a light on 1st Amendment freedoms, the role of the Federal Communications Commission and the challenges facing Disney as it looks for a new leader to replace Chief Executive Bob Iger next year.

The controversy began with his Sept. 15 monologue when Kimmel said Trump supporters “are desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.” Right-wing influencers howled; FCC Chairman Brendan Carr called Kimmel’s actions “the sickest conduct possible.”

The sentiment he was trying to convey “was intentionally, and I think maliciously, mischaracterized,” Kimmel said.

He didn’t sense the initial fallout was “a big problem,” but rather a “distortion on the part of some of the right-wing media networks,” he said.

Kimmel had planned to clarify his remarks Sept. 17, but Disney executives feared the comedian was dug in and would only inflame the tense situation. That night, about an hour before showtime, Disney hit pause and released a statement saying the show had been pre-empted “indefinitely.”

He was off the air for four days.

“I can sometimes be aggressive. I can sometimes be unpleasant,” he said.

A protester calls for the return of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after Walt Disney Co. yanked the ABC comedian in September over comments he made about the shooting of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

He recognized the show’s precarious position when Sinclair and Nexstar bailed. He recalled an episode from early in his career when he made a joke about boisterous Detroit basketball fans, saying “They’re gonna burn the city of Detroit down if the Pistons win,” so he hoped the Lakers would prevail.

The comment riled up the Motor City, prompting the local ABC affiliate to briefly shelve Kimmel’s show.

An ABC executive at the time told Kimmel the loss of the Detroit market could be catastrophic. That pales in comparison to the threatened loss of Nexstar and Sinclair, which own dozens of stations, including in such large markets as Seattle, St. Louis and Washington, D.C.

“The idea that I would not have …. 40 affiliates [stations] … I was like, ‘Well, that’s it,’” Kimmel said.

But he said he “was not going to go along” with demands made by station broadcasters.

Sinclair, a right-leaning broadcaster, said in a statement it would not air Kimmel until he issued “a direct apology to the Kirk family” and “make a meaningful personal donation to the Kirk Family and Turning Point USA,” the right-wing group Kirk founded.

Both Sinclair and Nexstar resumed airing the show Sept. 26. ABC offered no concessions.

Kimmel complimented Disney’s co-chair of entertainment Dana Walden’s handling of the crisis, saying she was instrumental in helping him sort through his emotions.

“I ruined Dana’s weekend. It was just nonstop phone calls all weekend,” Kimmel said, saying he doubted the situation would have turned out so well “if I hadn’t talked to Dana as much as I did, because it helped me think everything through, and it helped me just kind of understand where everyone was coming from.”

When asked who might become the next CEO of Disney, Kimmel said it would be “foolish” to answer that question.

“But I happen to love Dana Walden very much, and I think she’s done a great job,” Kimmel said.

Throughout the controversy, Walden and Iger were skewered by critics who asserted the company was caving to President Trump, who has made it clear that he’s no Kimmel fan. The Disney leaders were accused of “corporate capitulation.”

“What has happened over the last three weeks … was very unfair to my bosses at Disney,” Kimmel said. “It [was] insane, and I hope that we drew a really bold red line as Americans about what we will and will not accept.”

Kimmel returned Sept. 23 with an emotional monologue that championed the 1st Amendment.

Ratings soared.

The controversy — and CBS’ upcoming cancellation of Colbert — has focused new attention on the cultural clout of late night hosts, despite the industry’s falling ratings.

Millions of viewers now watch monologues and other late night gags the following day on YouTube, which means networks that produce the shows have lost valuable revenue because Google controls much of that advertising.

Networks acknowledge the late night block is challenged, but Kimmel said such shows still matter.

He scoffed at reports that cite unnamed sources suggesting Colbert’s show was on track to lose $40 million this year.

“If [CBS] lost $40 million, they would have canceled it already,” Kimmel said. “I know what the budgets for these shows are,” alluding to the ABC, CBS and NBC shows.

“If we’re losing so much money, none of us would be on,” he said. “That’s kind of all you need to know.”

Perhaps the biggest talking point came from an incident early in Pakistan’s innings when opener Muneeba Ali was controversially run out.

The left-hander was struck on the pad by Goud and as the India bowler appealed unsuccessfully for lbw, Deepti Sharma collected the loose ball and threw at the stumps.

She hit but replays showed Muneeba had grounded her bat before the ball was even in the picture and a ‘not out’ decision from the third umpire Kerrin Klaaste went up on the big screen in the ground.

However, before the game restarted, the decision was looked at again and it transpired that when the ball hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, Muneeba had lifted her bat and was still stood out of her crease.

While the batter had already grounded her bat and was not trying to sneak a single, the third umpire changed her decision to ‘out’ and despite Pakistan protests, which saw captain Fatima Sana tell her batter not to leave the field for a short time, Muneeba had to go.

In a further twist, had India simply reviewed the lbw decision, the whole controversy would have been avoided because ball-tracking showed Muneeba was plumb lbw.

Nobody knows why cramps really happen, but Friday night’s Gardena Serra-Sierra Canyon high school football game took the issue to an unprecedented level.

Serra players kept cramping on defense, repeatedly slowing down Sierra Canyon’s up-tempo offense. By the end of the third quarter, Sierra Canyon coach Jon Ellinghouse had seen enough. His 11 offensive players, at his direction, simultaneously went to the ground and engaged in fake cramping.

That caused an enraged Serra coach Scott Altenberg to go on the field and be held back by others. Officials halted the game briefly and called 15-yard penalties on Sierra Canyon and Serra.

Ellinghouse said after his team’s 30-0 victory that he was frustrated with the repeated game stoppages and in hindsight, regrets having his players engage in the fake cramps.

Altenberg said he was never angrier in 27 years of coaching. He denied his team was faking cramps to influence the game. “I’m not that kind of coach,” he said.

It wasn’t the only controversy on Friday night. Salesian scored 91 points to beat Cantwell-Sacred Heart 91-13. It was 84-7 at halftime.

Salesian coach Anthony Atkins said he started substituting in the first quarter. There was no running clock until the third quarter. Cantwell-Sacred Heart apparently didn’t ask for a running clock in the first half.

In a text message, Atkins said, “I went back and watched the film just to make sure there wasn’t any malice or that it didn’t look like we were trying to run up the score. Honestly, there was nothing more we could have done short of sitting our guys for the entire game.”

The Mira Costa-Lawndale game was halted with Mira Costa ahead 14-0 in the first quarter because of a security threat at Mira Costa after a bullet was discovered on campus. Also canceled was a girls’ volleyball tournament.

In a developing story, standout quarterback Brady Smigiel of Newbury Park was injured in a game against Santa Barbara and left in the second half. Smigiel, who has committed to Michigan, was expected to get an MRI exam on a knee on Saturday.

India and Pakistan are keen to avoid controversy ahead of their crucial Super Fours fixture at the Asia Cup 2025, as the political fallout of their previous match continues to overshadow the cricket tournament in Dubai.

Pakistan cancelled their pre-match news conference one hour before its scheduled time on Saturday, while India’s captain Suryakumar Yadav evaded questions on the “no handshake” row when he spoke to the media after his team’s win over Oman on Friday.

Sunday’s match between the South Asian archrivals will be their second meeting in eight days, with the winner taking a step closer to the tournament’s final on September 28.

While the political statements and off-field actions following the September 14 clash continue to impact preparations for the upcoming Super Fours match, both camps have taken steps to avoid further repercussions and protect the players from controversy.

When Yadav was asked to comment on the handshake row after his team’s last group-stage fixture on Friday evening, he responded by saying: “It [the match] will be a good contest between the ball and the bat.”

He went on to add that he’s asked his players to “shut the noise” ahead of the match against Pakistan.

“Close your room, switch off your phone and sleep,” the India captain said.

“It’s easy to say, but sometimes it is difficult.”

Having made pointedly political statements after his team’s win over Pakistan on Sunday, the 35-year-old chose to steer clear of similar comments a day before their second match.

“We stand with all the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack and with their families, and dedicate this win to our brave armed forces who took part in Operation Sindoor,” the 35-year-old said when asked if his team’s decision to not shake hands with Pakistani players was against the spirit of cricket.

Yadav was referring to the Indian armed forces’ multiple missile attacks on six locations inside Pakistan.

India said the missiles were in response to the April 22 attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in Pahalgam, in which 26 men were killed. An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF), which demands independence for Kashmir, claimed responsibility for the attack, but India had alleged Pakistani involvement.

Pakistan denied any role in the attacks and asked for an independent investigation to be carried out.

Two days later, Pakistan responded to the missile strikes by attacking military installations across its frontier with India and Indian-administered Kashmir, striking at least four facilities.

The conflict ended four days later, thanks to an internationally-brokered ceasefire.

While the exchange of aerial fire came to a halt, the diplomatic ties between the neighbours remained suspended, and the political tension spilled over into cricket as India’s players walked off the field without shaking hands with their opposition.

A few moments later, Pakistan’s players trudged off in a group and waited for the Indian squad and support staff to come out and shake hands, as is the norm at the end of cricket matches.

However, the Indian contingent only shook hands with each other before walking into their dressing room and shutting the door as the waiting Pakistan players looked on.

Shortly after the events unfolded, Pakistan’s manager Naveed Akram Cheema lodged a protest against the Indian cricket team’s actions with Andy Pycroft, who is an International Cricket Council (ICC) accredited match referee.

Pakistan alleged that Pycroft did not clearly communicate the Indian team’s decision to not partake in the handshake, an act they termed in contravention of the spirit of cricket.

Pakistan demanded Pycroft’s removal as match referee for their remaining fixtures in the tournament, but later reached an agreement with the ICC and Pycroft went on to officiate Pakistan’s last group game against the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Wednesday.

The Pakistan-UAE match was delayed by an hour as officials from the ICC and Pakistan’s team management held a meeting at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium before the match.

“The ICC’s match referee, Andy Pycroft, has apologised to the manager and captain of the Pakistan cricket team,” the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) said in a statement.

“Andy Pycroft termed the September 14 incident a result of miscommunication.”

The PCB also said that the ICC “expressed its willingness to conduct an inquiry into the code of conduct violation that occurred during the September 14 match”, referring to Pycroft’s request to Pakistan and India captains to avoid the customary handshake at the toss, which the PCB alleges contravened the laws of the game.

However, a source within the ICC told Al Jazeera that Pycroft did not apologise to Pakistan and only clarified his position.

The source also said that the ICC had investigated the issue and concluded that it did not warrant action against the Zimbabwean match referee.

The Zimbabwean match official will be in charge of Sunday’s India-Pakistan fixture as well.

In the queer enclave of West Hollywood, some residents were furious at the sight of a Pride flag and a transgender flag lowered to half-staff to mourn Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

In the city of Los Angeles, an internal Fire Department memo saying flags should stay raised sparked conservative anger at Mayor Karen Bass.

And in Huntington Beach, where MAGA politics are warmly received, officials pledged to honor Kirk’s memory by keeping flags lowered for an additional week past the mourning period set by President Trump.

The controversial right-wing commentator’s slaying last Wednesday ruptured cultural fault lines across the country, exacerbating fears of political violence, triggering campaigns to punish those who responded crudely and prompting the president to escalate attacks on his foes.

Amid the national maelstrom, Trump’s unusual decision to order flags lowered to half-staff at public buildings to memorialize a private citizen has been a flash point at the municipal level.

The fallout has exacerbated tensions in major cities and small towns, including in Southern California, as local officials chose whether to comply — and found wrath on either end of the decision.

Kirk, 31, founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA and a close Trump ally, was an incendiary figure. In life, he was lionized by the far right and castigated by many others for anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-Black remarks, among other offensive rhetoric. He galvanized a generation of young Americans to turn toward the GOP, with even critics acknowledging his organizing skills and impact.

It’s not unprecedented for a president to order flags lowered to half-staff for a civilian, according to James Ferrigan, a flag expert who previously served as protocol officer at the North American Vexillological Assn.

Trump called for flags to be lowered in August after two children were shot to death at a Minneapolis Catholic school, but not after Democratic Minnesota lawmaker Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed in June.

Two days after Kirk’s death, a screenshot of an internal Los Angeles Fire Department memo that said city flags should remain raised “unless directed by the mayor” began to go viral on social media. Many lambasted Bass for not ordering the flags lowered, with some accusing her of defying the president.

Fire Department spokesperson Margaret Stewart said the department follows city flag directives and had not been instructed to lower its flags. The internal memo was not sent at the request of the mayor or anyone in her office, according to someone with knowledge of the situation who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Bass spokesperson Zach Seidl declined to comment on the memo but noted that during Bass’ tenure, flags have been lowered to mourn the deaths of elected officials and first responders.

Ferrigan said that a local official’s choice not to lower flags after a president’s executive directive might be seen as somewhat ill-mannered but wouldn’t be breaking any rules.

“Is it a breach of protocol? Probably not,” Ferrigan explained. “Is it a breach of etiquette? Well, maybe.”

Fox 11, which first published the Fire Department memo, reported that several firehouses lowered their flags to half-staff anyway.

In fiercely progressive West Hollywood, a local news outlet posted an Instagram video of the city’s rainbow Pride flag and a blue-white-and-pink transgender flag lowered to half-staff, blowing in a light breeze.

Thousands of people commented, with most irate or confused that the city was memorializing one of the nation’s most prominent anti-transgender voices — especially with the Pride and transgender flags. Some asked whether it was meant as satire. The flag was located in Matthew Shepard Square, which honors a gay teen who was viciously slain in 1998.

Weho Times, the local outlet in question, reported that a sign was placed Sunday in the square reading: “Shame on West Hollywood for lowering our flags in honor of a racist, transphobic, homophobic, Nazi-loving monster.”

“In particular, there has been significant outrage regarding the lowering of the LGBTQ+ flags, which are prominently flown in our city as a symbol of pride, inclusion, and community identity,” West Hollywood City Manager David Wilson said during Monday’s City Council meeting, according to written comments provided by the city.

The decision to lower the flags “should not be interpreted as an expression of alignment with, or endorsement of, Mr. Kirk’s political views or actions,” Wilson said, adding that city protocol has long been to follow presidential flag lowering directives.

But, he continued, the city’s flag policy will be taken up at a council meeting next month, and potentially reconsidered.

Ferrigan, the flag expert, wasn’t entirely surprised by the battles flaring up in municipalities across the American map.

“Remember, this might be a little $10 worth of cloth,” he said. “But these are bits of cloth that people will kill for or die for.”

Dubai, UAE – The wide-ranging ramifications of an ongoing political standoff between India and Pakistan have led to a controversial conclusion of the archrivals’ cricket match at the Asia Cup 2025 in Dubai, where India’s captain Suryakumar Yadav confirmed that his squad opted against shaking hands with their opponents as a mark of protest.

When Sunday’s Group A fixture between the South Asian archrivals was confirmed after long deliberations from the Indian government, fans and experts had hoped that the on-field action could help cool the off-field heat.

Yadav, though, crushed all expectations by saying his team’s thumping seven-wicket win in the T20 match was a “perfect reply” to Pakistan in the wake of the intense four-day cross-border conflict that brought both countries to the brink of an all-out war in May.

“Our [Indian] government and the BCCI [Board of Control for Cricket in India] were aligned on the decision to play this match. We came here just to play the match and gave them [Pakistan] a perfect reply,” Yadav told the media shortly after the match.

What happened at the end of the India vs Pakistan match?

Yadav, who hit the winning runs for India, walked off the field alongside his batting partner, Shivam Dube, without approaching the Pakistani captain and team for the traditional post-match handshakes.

Pakistan’s players trudged off in a group and waited for the Indian squad and support staff to come out and shake hands, as is the norm at the end of cricket matches.

However, the Indian contingent only shook hands with each other before walking into their dressing room and shutting the door as the waiting Pakistan players looked on.

No handshakes between the teams. Salman Agha looked to lead Pakistan over to the India dressing room, but nothing doing. They all headed straight in #INDvPAK pic.twitter.com/0BbJtYdkAf

— Paul Radley (@PaulRadley) September 14, 2025

Why did Indian team refuse to shake hands with Pakistani players?

The Indian captain was asked to clarify his team’s actions and whether they were in contradiction with the spirit of the sport.

“A few things in life are above sportsman’s spirit,” the 35-year-old swiftly responded.

“We stand with all the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack and with their families, and dedicate this win to our brave armed forces who took part in Operation Sindoor.”

Yadav was referring to the Indian armed forces’ multiple missile attacks on six locations inside Pakistan.

India said the missiles were in response to the April 22 attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in Pahalgam, in which 26 men were killed. An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF), which demands independence for Kashmir, claimed responsibility for the attack, but India had alleged Pakistani involvement.

Two days later, Pakistan responded to the missile strikes by attacking military installations across its frontier with India and Indian-administered Kashmir, striking at least four facilities.

The conflict ended four days later, thanks to an internationally-brokered ceasefire.

While the exchange of aerial fire came to a halt, the diplomatic ties between the neighbours remained suspended, and the political tension spilled over into cricket when the fixture between India and Pakistan was announced by the Asian Cricket Council (ACC).

Did India break any rules by not shaking hands?

As a result, the match was played under a highly charged political climate, and when both captains did not indulge in the customary handshake at the pre-match toss, the focus swiftly shifted to the interactions between the teams.

However, Al Jazeera has learned that the match referee, Andy Pycroft, had asked Yadav and his counterpart, Agha, to skip the pre-toss ritual.

“The match referee requested both captains to not shake hands at the toss,” an official of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), requesting anonymity, told Al Jazeera after the match.

Match officials also granted India permission to skip the post-match handshakes with Pakistan, but did not inform Agha or his team, according to the source.

This resulted in an awkward-looking post-match scenario, where the Pakistani players followed Yadav off the pitch and waited for the Indians to emerge, only to watch them shut the dressing room door.

How did Pakistan respond?

Pakistan’s manager Naveed Akram Cheema lodged a protest against the Indian cricket team’s actions with Pycroft, who is an International Cricket Council (ICC) accredited match referee.

“The umpires had allowed the Indians to walk off the field without shaking hands for which the match referee apologised after the protest of our team manager,” the official said.

Additionally, Pakistan captain Agha did not speak at the post-match captain’s chat with the host broadcaster in a mark of protest.

Mike Hesson, Pakistan’s head coach, confirmed that Agha’s refusal to show up for the talk and the media briefing was a “follow-on effect” of the Indian team’s actions.

“We were ready to shake hands at the end of the game, but our opposition did not do that,” Hesson said.

“We sort of went over there to shake hands, and they had already gone into the changing room.”

Why are handshakes important in cricket, and what’s the protocol?

As per the norm in cricket, the two on-field players of the team batting second shake hands with the fielding team and the umpires before walking off.

And in what is now a common practice in all international cricket matches, the batting team then enters the ground to shake hands with their opponents.

It offers both sides to end the match on a friendly note and exchange words of encouragement.

In the same manner, both teams’ captains shake hands before the toss, which takes place 30 minutes before the start of play.

The toss is conducted by the match referee on the pitch and usually broadcast live.

Both captains and the match referee can also indulge in a pre-match chat regarding team lineups or any other matters of mutual interest for both teams.

The match referee can also meet a captain, head coach or manager of either team before the match.

What have the tournament officials said about the incident?

The move was lamented by the ACC chairman, Mohsin Naqvi, who is also the chairman of the PCB.

“Utterly disappointing to witness the lack of sportsmanship today,” Naqvi said in a post on X.

“Dragging politics into the game goes against the very spirit of sports.”

Utterly disappointing to witness the lack of sportsmanship today. Dragging politics into the game goes against the very spirit of sports. Lets hope future victories are celebrated by all teams with grace

— Mohsin Naqvi (@MohsinnaqviC42) September 14, 2025

Al Jazeera has reached out to the ACC for a comment on the revelation that both captains were asked not to shake hands at the toss.

The ACC has not yet responded to the request.

Pakistan and India are likely to meet again in the Asia Cup if both teams qualify for the Super Four stage.

India have all but qualified after two wins in two games, while Pakistan face the UAE in a must-win fixture on Wednesday.

Should both teams win their respective games, their Super Fours match will take place on Sunday in Dubai.

For about two months when she was a kid, Jessie Murph wanted to go to Harvard.

“I watched ‘Legally Blonde,’ and I was like, ‘This is lit,’” the 20-year-old singer and songwriter says of the Reese Witherspoon law-school comedy that came out three years before she was born. But wait: Growing up in small-town Alabama, Murph was a talented and dedicated cheerleader. Does Harvard even have cheerleaders?

“They probably do,” she says, tilting her head as she considers the question. “I don’t know if it’s like the main thing, though. It’s true you don’t really hear about it. They have all the expensive sports: lacrosse, polo, horse riding.” She laughs. “Horse riding would be lit too.”

Whatever the case, Murph soon cast aside her Ivy League aspirations — not to mention her devotion to cheer, though that’s come back more recently — and refocused on her first love of music. Now, instead of preparing for sophomore year, she’s just released her second major-label album, “Sex Hysteria,” which includes the top 20 pop hit “Blue Strips” and which — true to the LP’s title — has set off a minor internet controversy with the racy music video for her song “1965.”

An Amy Winehouse-ish retro-soul number with a ringing malt-shop piano lick, “1965” is about longing for romance the way they did it in the old days: “We’d go to diners and movies and such,” Murph sings in her scratchy Southern drawl, “We’d just hold hands and I’d love every touch.” Elsewhere in the song, the nostalgia darkens as Murph acknowledges that “I might get a little slap-slap” from her man and that “I would be 20, and it’d be acceptable for you to be 40.” (“That is f— up, I know,” she adds of the age gap.)

The song’s NSFW video goes even further, with traces of pornography and suggestions of domestic violence that have invited criticism that Murph is advocating (or at least aestheticizing) a kind of tradwife oppression at a precarious moment for women’s rights. Murph addressed the blowback in a video on TikTok, where she has 11 million followers, writing, “This entire song is satire r yall stupid” — proof, perhaps, that her point didn’t quite land as she’d hoped.

Yet this week, “Sex Hysteria” debuted on Billboard’s album chart at No. 8, not long after Lana Del Rey — a key influence on Murph with a long history of online outrage — posted a video of herself pole dancing to “Blue Strips,” whose title refers to the security marking on a $100 bill that might be tossed at an exotic dancer. All the attention has combined to put Murph in the conversation for a best new artist nod at February’s Grammy Awards.

“Writing this album, I was in the studio every day for like six months straight,” she says on a recent afternoon near Venice Beach. “Didn’t go out, didn’t do anything — was just grinding.” We’re talking at the end of a long day of promo for “Sex Hysteria”; she’s wearing jeans and a Hysteric Glamour T-shirt, her inky-black hair hanging loose around her face. “But it’s so cool because you go in there with nothing and you make something out of thin air,” she says. “Then you get to listen to it, and it’s therapeutic for what you’re feeling.”

Though it opens with a track in which she attributes her becoming a songwriter to “my father and the f— up s— he did,” “Sex Hysteria” is a more playful record than last year’s “That Ain’t No Man That’s the Devil,” which Murph says exorcised “a lot of anger and hurt that I needed to get out, even just for myself, before I could move on to the next phase.” (A representative lyric from “Dirty”: “I woke up this morning kind of mad / Flipped the switch, I had the urge to beat your ass.”)

Here, in contrast, she’s singing about her interest in “whips and chains” in the sock-hoppy “Touch Me Like a Gangster” and bragging about the Malibu mansion she just bought in “Blue Strips” — a mansion, she clarifies, she does not actually own.

“Not yet,” she adds. “That line was just the first thing that came out of my mouth when I was writing the song. It feels so glittery, the thought of living in Malibu. It’s always been something I’ve wanted to do.” What shaped her ideas about the storied coastal enclave as a child in the Deep South? “I’m a really big fan of ‘Property Brothers’ — I’m sure I saw it on there.”

Murph moved to L.A. about a year and a half ago from Nashville, where she established a foothold in the music industry with collaborations like “Wild Ones,” a duet with Jelly Roll that has more than 300 million streams on Spotify, and “High Road,” a No. 1 country-radio hit by her and Koe Wetzel that led to a nomination for new female artist of the year at May’s ACM Awards.

“Sex Hysteria” dials down the explicit country trappings in favor of thumping bass lines and woozy trap beats; her guests on the album are Gucci Mane and Lil Baby. Yet the album demonstrates a certain stylistic blurriness that’s comes to define country music no less than any other genre in the streaming era.

“Whether it’s country or pop or whatever, I think Jessie Murph is just Jessie Murph,” says Bailey Zimmerman, the Nashville up-and-comer who teamed with Murph last year for the rootsy “Someone in This Room” and whose own music shares a casually hybridized quality with Murph’s. “It may not sound country, but what she’s talking about usually is.”

Like many in her generation, Murph found her voice posting covers of popular songs online. The oldest video on her YouTube is titled “11 year old sings titanium” and, sure enough, shows a young Murph squinting into the camera as she performs Sia and David Guetta’s 2011 stadium-rave jam. At 16, having built a following on Instagram and TikTok while in high school in Athens, Ala., she signed to Columbia Records and started releasing singles; by 2023 she’d dropped a mixtape called “Drowning” and recorded songs with Diplo and Maren Morris.

Jessie Murph

(Annie Noelker / For The Times)

For “Sex Hysteria,” she drew inspiration from Patsy Cline, Wanda Jackson and both Presleys — Elvis and Priscilla. Murph says her mother told her that when Jessie was 3, she came into the kitchen and announced that she’d been Elvis in a past life. Has Jessie been to Graceland?

“No, but my mom went there when she was pregnant with me,” she says, widening her kohl-rimmed eyes.

She titled the album in reference to the dismissive way women were described as “hysterical” in the 1950s and ’60s — “women who were depressed or anxious or just feeling normal emotions,” she says. Does she think women are more free to express themselves half a century later?

“I definitely feel free if I’m feeling some type of way — obviously I’m saying it in songs and not holding anything back. But I think everyone’s experience is very different. I’m sitting in a different spot than somebody three doors down is, you know? And different countries and different political settings — I’m sure it’s something that’s a problem in places.”

To a degree, the backlash to Murph’s “1965” has overlapped with the criticism Sabrina Carpenter drew when she revealed the cover of her upcoming “Man’s Best Friend” album, which depicts Carpenter kneeling before a man who’s pulling her hair.

“The weirdest part about it is that it’s a lot of women who are hating,” Murph says. “But I think some people are weirded out by my age. A lot of people met me when I was 16 or 17 and a much different person — which, thank God I’m a different person.” She sighs. “I don’t know. When people find you at a certain age, it’s like you need to be frozen in time. Let me live.”

This week, Murph launched a world tour behind “Sex Hysteria” that she previewed with a buzzy performance at April’s Coachella festival in which she brought some of her old cheerleading moves into the choreography she’s emphasizing for the first time. (She’ll circle back to Southern California for a Sept. 27 stop at the Shrine Expo Hall.)

“Certain things come naturally to me and certain things don’t,” she says. “The dance stuff is one of the things I’m grilling myself on.”

Another of her goals this year: spending less time on social media. “That s— is terrible for your mental health,” she says even as she admits that YouTube and TikTok have been crucial to her ascent. “I’m on World War III TikTok right now, where they’re talking about World War III. And I just keep scrolling, because now I’m nervous about World War III.

“I think it’s scary how young kids are getting phones,” she adds. “That YouTube video you brought up — I could have posted something crazy at that age, right? Even being 16 and having TikTok — I look back at some of the things I posted, and I’m like, Why would you post that, bro?”

WASHINGTON — Despite the sun bearing down on him and the sweat beading across his face, President Trump still lingered with reporters lined up outside the White House on Friday. He was leaving on a trip to Scotland, where he would visit his golf courses, and he wanted to talk about how his administration just finished “the best six months ever.”

But over and over, the journalists kept asking Trump about the Jeffrey Epstein case and whether he would pardon the disgraced financier’s imprisoned accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.

“People should really focus on how well the country is doing,” Trump insisted. He shut down another question by saying, “I don’t want to talk about that.”

It was another example of how the Epstein saga — and his administration’s disjointed approach to it — has shadowed Trump when he’s otherwise at the height of his influence. He’s enacted a vast legislative agenda, reached trade deals with key countries and tightened his grip across the federal government. Yet he’s struggled to stamp out the embers of a political crisis that could become a full-on conflagration.

Trump faces pressure from his own supporters

The Republican president’s supporters want the government to release secret files about Epstein, who authorities say killed himself in his New York jail cell six years ago while awaiting trial for sex trafficking. They believe him to be the nexus of a dark web of powerful people who abused underage girls. Administration officials who once stoked conspiracy theories now insist there’s nothing more to disclose, a stance that has stirred skepticism because of Trump’s former friendship with Epstein.

Trump has repeatedly denied prior knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and claimed he cut off their relationship long ago. For a president skilled at manipulating the media and controlling the Republican Party, it has been the most challenging test of his ability to shift the conversation in his second term.

“This is a treadmill to nowhere. How do you get off of it?” said Kevin Madden, a Republican strategist. “I genuinely don’t know the answer to that.”

Trump has demanded his supporters drop the matter and urged Republicans to block Democratic requests for documents on Capitol Hill. But he has also directed the Justice Department to divulge some additional information in hopes of satisfying his supporters.

A White House official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal strategy, said Trump is trying to stay focused on his agenda while also demonstrating some transparency. After facing countless scandals and investigations, the official said, Trump is on guard against the typical playbook of drip-drip disclosures that have plagued him in the past.

It’s clear Trump sees the Epstein case as a continuation of the “witch hunts” he’s faced over the years, starting with the investigation into Russian interference during his election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton nearly a decade ago. The sprawling inquiry led to convictions against some top advisors but did not substantiate allegations Trump conspired with Moscow.

Trump’s opponents, he wrote on social media on Thursday, “have gone absolutely CRAZY, and are playing another Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax but, this time, under the guise of what we will call the Jeffrey Epstein SCAM.”

During the Russia investigation, special counsel Robert Mueller and his team of prosecutors were a straightforward foil for Trump to rail against. Ty Cobb, the lawyer who served as the White House’s point person, said the president “never felt exposed” because “he thought he had a legitimate gripe.”

The situation is different this time now that the Justice Department has been stocked with loyalists. “The people that he has to get mad at are basically his people as opposed to his inquisitors and adversaries,” Cobb said.

It was Trump’s allies who excavated the Epstein debacle

In fact, Trump’s own officials are the most responsible for bringing the Epstein case back to the forefront.

FBI Director Kash Patel and his deputy, Dan Bongino, regularly stoked conspiracy theories about Epstein before assuming their current jobs, floating the idea the government had covered up incriminating and compelling information that needed to be brought to light. “Put on your big-boy pants and let us know who the pedophiles are,” Patel said in a 2023 podcast.

Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi played a key role too. She intimated in a Fox News Channel interview in February that an Epstein “client list” was sitting on her desk for review — she would later say she was referring to the Epstein files more generally — and greeted far-right influencers with binders of records from the case that consisted largely of information already in the public domain.

Tensions spiked earlier this month when the FBI and the Justice Department, in an unsigned two-page letter, said that no client list existed, that the evidence was clear Epstein had killed himself and that no additional records from the case would be released to the public. It was a seeming backtrack on the administration’s stated commitment to transparency. Amid a fierce backlash from Trump’s base and influential conservative personalities, Bongino and Bondi squabbled openly in a tense White House meeting.

Since then, the Trump administration has scrambled to appear transparent, including by seeking the unsealing of grand jury transcripts in the case — though it’s hardly clear that courts would grant that request or that those records include any eye-catching details anyway. Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has taken the unusual step of interviewing the imprisoned Maxwell over the course of two days at a courthouse in Tallahassee, Fla., where her lawyer said she would “always testify truthfully.”

All the while, Trump and his allies have resurfaced the Russia investigation as a rallying cry for a political base that has otherwise been frustrated by the Epstein saga.

Trump’s director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who just weeks ago appeared on the outs with Trump over comments on Iran’s nuclear ambitions, seemed to return to the president’s good graces this week following the declassification and release of years-old documents she hoped would discredit long-settled conclusions about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The developments allowed Trump to rehash long-standing grievances against President Obama and his Democratic advisors. Trump’s talk of investigations into perceived adversaries from years ago let him, in effect, go back in time to deflect attention from a very current crisis.

“Whether it’s right or wrong,” Trump said, “it’s time to go after people.”

Megerian and Tucker write for the Associated Press.

July 19 (UPI) — Software developer Astronomer says former Chief Executive Officer Andy Byron resigned amid controversy following his attendance at a recent Coldplay concert.

New York-based Astronomer confirmed Byron’s resignation on Saturday and said co-founder and Chief Product Officer Pete DeJoy is its interim chief executive officer while its board of directors seeks a permanent replacement for Byron.

“Astronomer is committed to the values and culture that have guided us since our founding,” Astronomer officials said Saturday in a post on X.

“Our leaders are expected to set the standard in both conduct and accountability, and recently, that standard was not met.”

Byron is married but was caught attending a Coldplay concert with another woman on Wednesday night at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass.

The stadium’s “kiss cam” zeroed in on Byron with his arms wrapped around a woman standing in front of him during the concert, NBC News reported.

When they realized they were on the kiss cam, Byron ducked out of the camera shot, while the unidentified woman covered her face.

Coldplay’s lead singer Chris Martin noticed the pair’s reaction during the concert and opined: “Either they’re having an affair or they’re just very shy.”

The video of the moment went viral, and social media sleuths identified the man as Byron.

Astronomer placed him on leave on Friday before accepting his resignation a day later, according to NBC News.

The tech firm is a relatively small company with fewer than 500 employees and noted the viral incident’s impact on its operations.

“While awareness of our company may have changed overnight, our product and our work for our customers have not,” Astronomer said in its X post.

“We’re continuing to do what we do best: helping our customers with their toughest data and AI problems.”

July 15 (UPI) — U.N. ambassador nominee Mike Waltz denied any sensitive information was shared during a controversial mobile app chat in March while undergoing a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.

The hearing was the first Congressional appearance by Waltz since his controversial participation in a Signal app chat that inadvertently included a journalist while discussing a pending military operation in March against Houthi targets in Yemen.

Waltz was the Trump administration’s national security adviser when the chat occurred, but no mention of the Signal chat occurred until past the hearing’s first hour.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., raised using the Signal app to discuss classified matters, which since has been dubbed “Signalgate.”

Waltz said no classified information was shared during the discussion that accidentally included The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg.

“That engagement was driven by and recommended by the CyberSecurity Infrastructure Security Agency [and] by the Biden administration,” Waltz said, as reported by ABC News.

Waltz said Signal is an encrypted app that was authorized by the CSISA and recommended by the Biden administration.

“We followed the recommendation,” Waltz said. “But there was not classified information shared.”

Coons responded by saying he had hoped Waltz would express “some sense of regret” over the matter that he said included “very sensitive, timely information about a military strike on a commercially available app.”

Waltz told Coons they have a “fundamental disagreement” because no classified information was shared during the Signal chat.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said the Defense Department’s inspector general and the Air Force have separate investigations ongoing in the matter and have not drawn any conclusions.

“There are two investigations going on at the Pentagon precisely to determine in an objective and independent way whether classified information was shared,” Kaine said.

Waltz declined to comment because the investigations are ongoing.

The U.N. ambassadorship is the last vacancy to be filled by the Trump administration, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, called Waltz one of the nation’s “most well-qualified” U.N. ambassador nominees when introducing him to the committee members, CBS News reported.

Lee said Waltz is skilled at negotiations and has a lot of policy experience to guide him while dealing with the United Nations and representatives of its member nations.

“With Waltz at the helm, the U.N. will have what I regard as what could and should be its last chance to demonstrate its actual value to the United States,” Lee told the committee.

Former Wimbledon champion Pat Cash says it is “ridiculous” that the chair umpire could not call the ball out when the automated line call system failed due to “human error” during Anastasia Pavlychenkova’s win over Sonay Kartal.

WATCH MORE: ‘You took the game from me’ – Line call system fails on game point

Available to UK users only.

SONAY KARTAL bowed out of Wimbledon – amid more Centre Court line-calling controversy.

Kartal, the last British player in the women’s singles and making her Centre Court bow under a roof closed for daylight play for the first time this Championships gave her all in a topsy-turvy roller-coaster of a match against Russia’s Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova.

3

3

Despite earning a set point in the opener, the 23-year-old Kartal was eventually out-hit as she lost 7-6 6-3 in a two hours and two minutes.

But the BIG talking point was the latest malfunction of the new automatic line-judging system in operation in SW19 for the first time this year.

Just two days after Emma Raducanu publicly called out the AI judging on the All England Club’s showpiece venue, the last British woman left standing was involved in another bizarre incident.

Kartal’s forehand at game point to Pavluchenkova in the ninth game of the opener was clearly out but there was no call from the electronic officials.

With both players perplexed, German umpire Nico Helwerth halted play for three minutes as TV replays showed the non-call was totally wrong.

Eventually, Helwerth announced: “The electronic system was unable to track the last point”, ordering a replay, which saw Pavlyluchenkova volley wildly and eventually lose serve again.

It was a bizarre moment in a strange match, which saw neither player able to dominate on their serve.

Getting her third break – in those circumstances – could have been the springboard to a victory which would have seen her tournament earnings reach £400,000 – compared to her previous CAREER prize money of £333,000.

BEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UK

But despite a set point, Kartal was unable to serve out before being swept aside in the tie break.

And while the Brighton star bounced back from losing her opening service game in the second set she was crucially broken once more at 2-2, a missed forehand starting to put the writing on the wall.

Kartal refused to give up, asking the ultimate question of her opponent as she made the Russian serve out for the victory.

But Pavlyuchenkova, who matched her 2016 feat of reaching the last eight here in SW19, did not fold. 

Kartal, though, can be proud of her run and she deserved the standing ovation that accompanied her exit.

Pavlyuchenkova, 34, apologised to the home fans after her victory ended Kartal’s dream run.

She said: “Sorry guys. I’d like to thank you for the great energy.

“I understand that she was local and that’s it. But it’s nice to play in a full stadium.”

The Russian added: “I was so impressed with her – but also myself, too.

“I was getting out of breath at one stage but to keep up with these young guys at this age and for me to play at this level is incredible.”

3

WASHINGTON — By outward appearances, Arief and Soraya Wiriadinata led a modest life. He was a landscape architect, she was a homemaker. They lived in a wood-shingle townhouse in a suburban Virginia working-class neighborhood favored by taxi drivers and government workers.

“I considered them a quiet, reserved couple,” said a former neighbor who could recall no signs of wealth or elite connections.

In particular, they had not been politically active and, according to government campaign-finance reports, had not contributed money to a political campaign until November. But in that month, the Wiriadinatas each wrote a $15,000 check to the Democratic National Committee. The next month they wrote six more checks, totaling $100,000.

Then they disappeared from the United States, returning to their homeland of Indonesia. But that didn’t stop their political largess. The checks kept coming to the DNC. By June they had contributed $425,000–a huge individual sum–more than movie-maker Steven Spielberg, more than AT&T;, more even than the Assn. of Trial Lawyers of America.

And they left behind a mystery that is now at the center of a mushrooming controversy that has spilled into the U.S. presidential race.

Are the Wiriadinatas, as the DNC maintains, an extraordinary embodiment of political philanthropy, motivated solely by President Clinton’s concern for an ailing relative and their desire to see the incumbent reelected?

Or, as the president’s critics suggest, might the couple be a deceptive front for wealthy foreigners–such as Soraya’s now-deceased father, Hashim Ning–who sought to buy influence in American politics but who were prohibited by law from contributing money to U.S. election campaigns?

DNC officials insist that the contributions from the Wiriadinatas, who were legal immigrants in the United States, were legal and proper.

Republicans are asking: Where did they get all that money?

Clinton Links

At this point the questions far outnumber the answers, with the Wiriadinatas silent and out of touch overseas and with the DNC fund-raiser who solicited their money declining all interviews, responding only through intermediaries with specific written answers to written questions.

But several intriguing elements are feeding the tempest, which swirls in the hyper-charged atmosphere of the nearing presidential election.

They include Clinton’s ties to Indonesian business people. Soraya Wiriadinata’s father was a partner of one of Indonesia’s wealthiest men, Mochtar Riady. Riady’s banking, real estate and insurance interests have stretched from Jakarta to Little Rock, Ark., and his family has enjoyed an unusually close relationship to Clinton.

Also, there is the fact that the DNC fund-raiser involved, John Huang, is the same one who brought in an illegal $250,000 contribution from a company in South Korea. When the foreign source of the donation was identified, the DNC returned the money.

And there is the hiring of Clinton confidant Webster L. Hubbell by one of Riady’s enterprises after Hubbell resigned as the No. 3 official in the Justice Department and before he went to jail for defrauding his Arkansas law firm.

Seeking to raise the political stakes, House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) called Sunday for congressional inquiries and maintained that a special counsel would have to be appointed to investigate the affair.

“This is a potential abuse of the American system on behalf of an Indonesia billionaire in a way that we have never seen in American history,” Gingrich said on CBS-TV’s “Face the Nation.” “It’s almost unthinkable.”

Vice President Al Gore, asked to respond to these issues on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press,” said: “There have been absolutely no violations of any law or regulations. . . . There is nothing that has been done that’s wrong.”

Influence-Buying?

Regardless of who is right, the Indonesian connection strikes a particularly sensitive nerve in the American body politic–the concern that foreigners will find ways to buy influence in domestic U.S. politics. The same fears were triggered two decades ago with the investigation of South Korean government influence-buying in Congress by flamboyant businessman Tongsun Park.

In recent years, Riady family members and the U.S. subsidiaries and executives of the family’s company, the Lippo Group, which includes Los Angeles-based Lippo Bank, have contributed lavishly to the Democratic Party. The Lippo Group’s clout is such that some Washington-based diplomats have questioned whether it has tried to use its connections to influence American policies toward Asia to benefit its financial interests.

Since Clinton embarked on his initial presidential bid in 1991, members of the Riady family and Lippo Group’s American subsidiaries and executives have contributed more than $475,000 to the Democratic Party and its candidates, according to a study of Federal Election Commission records done for The Times by the Campaign Study Group of Springfield, Va.

Mochtar Riady is barred by law from giving to U.S. campaigns because he is not a U.S. resident. But his son, James Riady, a longtime friend of Clinton, lived in the United States legally in 1991 and 1992, when he and his family gave $100,525 to the Democrats. James Riady has since returned to Indonesia.

At the nexus of the relationship between the Clinton administration, the Democratic Party, the Wiriadinatas and the Riadys is Huang, a former president of Lippo Group U.S.A.

Huang left Lippo Group in 1994 to serve as the Commerce Department’s deputy assistant secretary for international economic policy for 18 months. He then joined the DNC, where he is vice chairman of the national finance committee. Huang specializes in raising money from Asian American donors–and he handled the Wiriadinatas contributions.

He has raised several million dollars this election cycle, according to Democratic sources.

Huang also was responsible for a $250,000 contribution from the American subsidiary of a South Korean company–a contribution that proved to be illegal because the subsidiary had not done any business in the United States. The DNC returned the contribution after The Times raised questions about it.

Huang’s most stunning fund-raising success may have been the Wiriadinatas.

Origin of Donations

Huang, in his written responses to questions from The Times, said he met the Wiriadinatas when he visited Ning–who had suffered a heart attack during a visit here–at a Virginia hospital in June 1995. Huang had known Ning, founder of his own group of Indonesian companies, from their mutual association with Riady and Lippo.

Huang said the Wiriadinatas subsequently “expressed an interest in supporting the Democratic Party and the president, and I suggested that they contribute to the DNC.”

In November, the couple attended a dinner at which Gore spoke, and gave their $15,000 donations. In December, Arief Wiriadinata participated in a DNC breakfast at the White House with Clinton, apparently at Huang’s invitation, said DNC spokeswoman Amy Weiss Tobe.

In a Feb. 21 form letter on DNC stationery, Clinton thanked Wiriadinata for “recently meeting with me at the White House. I enjoyed having the chance to talk to you.”

Asked about the Wiriadinatas’ generosity, Huang wrote he had “absolutely no reason to question whether the money they were contributing belonged to them” because they resided in Virginia and were legal U.S. residents.

In addition, he said, Arief Wiriadinata had a master’s degree in engineering from an Ivy League university (the University of Pennsylvania) and worked as a landscape architect, and Soraya was the daughter of the founder of a major enterprise and “to my knowledge has very substantial resources of her own.”

Under federal law, foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to a U.S. election campaign unless they are legal residents here.

Gordon M. Bava, principal attorney for Lippo Bank of California, said Huang “certainly knew potential donors in the Asian community,” but that he would never violate campaign fund-raising laws.

“I never saw any evidence of that,” Bava said. “Based on my personal knowledge of him and his ethics, I would be very surprised if he was engaged in any such activity.”

Ning initially recuperated from his heart attack and returned to Indonesia, where he died in December. The Wiriadinatas returned home shortly after to be with their family, Huang said. A neighbor recalled that Arief Wiriadinata told him he was “going back home to work for his family.”

But they continued their contributions to the campaign in the United States. Following their departure, the Wiriadinatas made another 15 donations totaling $295,000, according to reports filed by the DNC with the FEC.

All told, the couple wrote 23 separate checks of $5,000 to $25,000 between Nov. 9, 1995, and June 7, 1996. Fifteen were signed by Arief Wiriadinata and eight by his wife.

Seen as Gratitude

DNC and White House officials described the donations as expressions of gratitude for get-well letters the White House sent to Ning when he was hospitalized.

Mark D. Fabiani, special associate White House counsel, said two form letters were sent on behalf of Clinton, both signed by an auto-pen rather than by the president personally. The first, a brief note on June 19, 1995, expressed regret about Ning’s health problems and wished him well. When Ning replied with encouraging news about his recovery, the White House sent a second letter on Clinton’s behalf to Jakarta on Nov. 8.

National DNC Chairman Don Fowler said in an interview last month that the Wiriadinatas were so touched that they made their six-figure contributions.

“It seemed to them a significant courtesy,” Fowler said. “That’s the only linkage we could find.”

Even though many of the contributions apparently came from Indonesia, all of the DNC contribution reports filed with the elections commission indicate the Wiriadinatas were residing in Virginia at the time–heightening suspicions about the money’s true origin.

Tobe said the addresses, however, were apparently taken from the couple’s checks and party donor card. Donors may send contributions from overseas if they maintain their legal-resident status.

The Riadys’ relationship with Clinton, meanwhile, goes back to the late 1970s, when patriarch Mochtar Riady’s son, James, did an internship with an investment bank in Little Rock. James later moved to Arkansas in the mid-1980s to help run an institution named Worthen Bank, which was then partly owned by his family.

White House Meetings

The Riadys and Clinton have maintained the relationship since the president’s move to Washington. Three months after Clinton’s inauguration, James Riady and two other associates, including Huang, met with Clinton briefly at the White House, according to Fabiani. And, in September 1995, Clinton met at the White House for about 20 minutes with James Riady, Huang and Little Rock attorney C. Joseph Giroir Jr., whose development company does joint ventures with Lippo. Just last month, James Riady met with Clinton and others at the White House. Fabiani described the three Oval Office sessions as “meet and greet” social visits.

In November 1994, during a Clinton trip to Jakarta for a summit meeting, the president visited for about 15 minutes with Mochtar and James Riady at a reception they were hosting, Fabiani said.

Meanwhile, the Lippo Group had a relationship with the administration. A business partner was included in a trade mission led by the late Commerce Secretary Ronald H. Brown; during the trip, the company’s Hong Kong affiliate and the New Orleans-based Entergy Corp. signed a $1-billion business deal to build a power plant in China.

Fabiani said the Riadys “have been longtime supporters of the president.” He added that “we have no indication that the White House was lobbied” on banking, trade or any other matters by the Riadys or their representatives.

Lippo Bank, formerly known as the Bank of Trade, was acquired by the Riady family of Indonesia in 1984. The Los Angeles-based bank also has branches in San Jose, Westminster and San Francisco. In the early 1990s, Lippo Bank was primarily engaged in assisting the shipment of goods from Indonesia to the United States.

The bank is a unit of Lippo Group, one of the top five Indonesian conglomerates with interests in financial services, urban development, manufacturing and retail. It has estimated assets of $5 billion to $6 billion and businesses located in Indonesia, Hong Kong, China, Singapore, Australia and North America. The conglomerate employs more than 30,000 people.

The Lippo Bank came under investigation in 1994 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which completed a money-laundering examination by gaining the bank’s agreement to keep precise track of the origin and destination of cash deposits at the institution.

Bava, the Lippo Bank of California attorney, said he was prohibited by law from speaking about the FDIC action, but he criticized various reports that the bank had laundered money.

“Those allegations are totally, completely false,” he said. “The bank was never accused of or involved in any money-laundering activities. Nor were any of its officers, directors or employees. If there were that kind of allegation made, it would most likely have been based on deficiencies in record-keeping–that is, filing reports with the Treasury Department.”

Bava said the nature of Lippo Bank’s business could lead to lapses in record-keeping. He said the bank handled many small retail accounts that operate on a cash basis.

“They have a large number of deposits,” he said. “As the bank was expanding, it is certainly possible if there were any deficiencies, the large number of cash transactions perhaps got a little ahead of their [administrative] controls.”

In September, Lippo Group won shareholder approval for a controversial $364-million restructuring in which Lippo Life will buy 40% of Lippo Bank from the Riady family, which controls both companies. Investors initially protested that the purchase price for the Lippo Bank stake was excessive, saying they were being forced to buy out the Riadys at a premium to market prices. Analysts saw the transaction as an attempt by the Riadys to raise cash for their personal use from the listed companies they control.

Numerous players associated with the Lippo Group have been major donors to the Democrats and Democratic candidates since Jan. 1, 1991, according to the analysis for The Times.

In addition to James Riady and the Wiriadinatas, Huang and his wife, Jane, gave $162,494 and Lippo Securities President Charles Dequeljoe and his wife, Susan, $70,500. Other individuals and companies associated with Lippo contributed another $74,500. Giroir, who was instrumental in the Entergy deal, and his wife and company gave $83,250. And Entergy and its employees donated $283,463.

Times staff writers Sara Fritz, Jim Mann and Josh Greenberg in Washington and Duke Helfand and Sonia Nazario in Los Angeles contributed to this story.

* GINGRICH QUESTIONS FUNDS: House speaker criticizes donations to Democratic Party. A23

Temba Bavuma avoids being dismissed lbw by Josh Hazlewood after a review shows a surprising spike on the Ultra-edge, with South Africa 66-4 in their first innings in the Test Championship final against Australia at Lord’s.

FOLLOW LIVE: ICC Test Championship final – South Africa vs Australia day two

Available to UK users only.