deal

US president Donald Trump’s order to halt fire in Gaza has forced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to ban his ministers from media interviews to avoid confrontation with the US president. Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh breaks it down.

Palestinians are celebrating in Gaza amid a reduction in Israeli military action. The relative quiet followed Donald Trump’s order for Israel to stop bombing the strip. Hani Mahmoud reports from Gaza, where fewer air strikes are being seen as an early sign of progress.

DEIR AL BALAH, Gaza Strip — President Trump said Friday that Hamas must agree to a proposed peace deal by Sunday evening, threatening an even greater military onslaught nearly two years into the war sparked by the Oct. 7, 2023, attack into Israel.

Trump appears keen to deliver on pledges to end the war and return dozens of hostages ahead of the second anniversary of the attack on Tuesday. His peace plan has been accepted by Israel and welcomed internationally, but key mediators Egypt and Qatar, and at least one Hamas official, have said some elements need further negotiation, without elaborating.

“An Agreement must be reached with Hamas by Sunday Evening at SIX (6) P.M., Washington, D.C. time,” Trump wrote Friday on social media. “Every Country has signed on! If this LAST CHANCE agreement is not reached, all HELL, like no one has ever seen before, will break out against Hamas. THERE WILL BE PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.”

Trump’s plan would end the fighting and return hostages

Under the plan, which Trump unveiled earlier this week alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Hamas would immediately release the remaining 48 hostages — around 20 of them believed to be alive. It would also give up power and disarm.

In return, Israel would halt its offensive and withdraw from much of the territory, release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and allow an influx of humanitarian aid and eventual reconstruction. Plans to relocate much of Gaza’s population to other countries would be shelved.

The territory of some 2 million Palestinians would be placed under international governance, with Trump himself and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair overseeing it. The plan provides no path for eventual reunification with the Israeli-occupied West Bank in a future Palestinian state.

A Hamas official told the Associated Press this week that some elements of the plan are unacceptable and need to be amended, without elaborating. Palestinians long for an end to the war, but many view this and previous U.S. proposals as strongly favoring Israel.

U.S. and Israel seek to pressure Hamas

Israel has sought to ramp up pressure on Hamas since ending an earlier ceasefire in March. It sealed the territory off from food, medicine and other goods for 2 1/2 months and has seized, flattened and largely depopulated large areas of the territory.

Experts determined that Gaza City had slid into famine shortly before Israel launched a major offensive aimed at occupying it. An estimated 400,000 people have fled the city in recent weeks, but hundreds of thousands more have stayed behind.

Olga Cherevko, a spokesperson for the U.N. humanitarian office, said she saw several displaced families staying in the parking lot of Shifa Hospital during a visit on Thursday.

“They are not able to move south because they just cannot afford it,” Cherevko told the Associated Press. “One of the families had three children and the woman was pregnant with her fourth. And there were many other vulnerable cases there, including elderly people and people with disabilities.”

Trump wrote that most of Hamas’ fighters are “surrounded and MILITARILY TRAPPED, just waiting for me to give the word, ‘GO,’ for their lives to be quickly extinguished. As for the rest, we know where and who you are, and you will be hunted down, and killed.”

Most of Hamas’ top leaders in Gaza and thousands of its fighters have already been killed, but it still has influence in areas not controlled by the Israeli military and launches sporadic attacks that have killed and wounded Israeli soldiers.

Hamas has held firm to its position that it will only release the remaining hostages — its sole bargaining chip and potential human shields — in exchange for a lasting ceasefire and an Israeli withdrawal. Netanyahu has rejected those terms, saying Hamas must surrender and disarm.

Second anniversary approaches

Thousands of Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, attacking army bases, farming communities and an outdoor music festival, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians. They abducted 251 others, most of them since released in ceasefires or other deals.

Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed more than 66,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which does not say how many were civilians or combatants. It says women and children make up around half the dead.

The ministry is part of the Hamas-run government, and the U.N. and many independent experts consider its figures to be the most reliable estimate of wartime casualties.

The offensive has displaced around 90% of Gaza’s population, often multiple times, and left much of the territory uninhabitable.

Both the Biden and Trump administrations have tried to end the fighting and bring back the hostages while providing extensive military and diplomatic support to Israel.

Shurafa and Khaled write for the Associated Press. Khaled reported from Cairo. AP writer Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.

Hamas has submitted its response to United States President Donald Trump’s Gaza ceasefire deal, agreeing to free all the Israeli captives it holds, but asking to negotiate other aspects of the 20-point plan.

Trump – who had given the Palestinian group a deadline of Sunday to respond positively to the deal – has reacted by demanding Israel immediately stop bombing Gaza.

Is this finally the end of a war that has dragged on for almost two years, killing more than 66,000 Palestinians? Or are there more pitfalls ahead?

Let’s take a closer look.

How did Hamas respond exactly?

Hamas has said that it has agreed to release all Israeli captives held in Gaza, both dead and alive, “in a manner that achieves” an end to Israel’s war and a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

It also said that it would hand over power in Gaza to a body of Palestinian technocrats.

On the rest of Trump’s 20-point plan, which included the disarmament of Hamas, the group said that it should be “discussed within a comprehensive Palestinian national framework, in which Hamas will be included and will contribute with full responsibility”.

Has Trump responded positively?

Trump has welcomed the Hamas response, and wrote on his Truth Social site that he believes the Palestinian group are “ready for a lasting PEACE”.

In a major announcement, he also said that “Israel must immediately stop the bombing of Gaza” so that the captives could be released.

“We are already in discussions on details to be worked out. This is not about Gaza alone, this is about long sought PEACE in the Middle East,” he wrote.

Trump then released a video message reiterating that he considered Hamas’s response a win.

“This is a big day. We’ll see how it all turns out. We have to get the final word down in concrete,” he said. “I just want to let you know that this is a very special day… Everyone was unified in wanting this war to end and seeing peace in the Middle East, and we’re very close to achieving that.”

What is Israel’s position?

Trump announced his Gaza peace plan on Monday, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the White House.

Netanyahu said at the time that he supported Trump’s plan, because – he said – it would achieve Israel’s war aims.

“It will bring back to Israel all our hostages, dismantle Hamas’s military capabilities and its political rule, and ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel,” Netanyahu said.

But the prime minister also had some caveats. In the White House, Netanyahu noted that if Hamas rejected the plan, “or if they supposedly accept it and then basically do everything to counter it”, Israel would “finish the job by itself”.

And a few hours later, speaking in Hebrew to a domestic Israeli audience, Netanyahu said that he had not agreed to a Palestinian state, and promised that the Israeli military would stay in most of Gaza.

What will be the main sticking points?

Hamas has made it clear that it is not willing to accept several aspects of Trump’s plan, including an interim administration led by Trump and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

“We will never accept anyone who is not Palestinian to control the Palestinians,” Hamas senior official Mousa Abu Marzouk told Al Jazeera, adding that the appointment of Blair was particularly unwelcome because of his past involvement in the invasion of Iraq.

The topic of disarmament will also be problematic. Trump and Netanyahu say the group must immediately lay down its arms, but Hamas has only said that it is willing to discuss the topic.

“Hamas’s statement says that the future of Gaza – the future of the whole struggle – will be left to Palestinian consensus,” said Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem. “They want a broader Palestinian consensus to reach a final answer. So, what’s clear is that Hamas said, ‘Yes – but …’”

Will Israel really stop bombing Gaza?

The Israeli government is likely to be unhappy with Trump’s positive reaction because Hamas has not simply agreed to all its demands. It is already being reported, according to Axios reporter Barak Ravid, that Netanyahu was “surprised” at Trump’s response, and viewed Hamas’s answer as a “rejection” of the plan.

Netanyahu’s government is dominated by the far-right, who have warned that they will bring down the prime minister if he agrees to a deal that they do not like. For its part, the Israeli opposition has indicated that it supports the deal, but a lack of trust between them and Netanyahu means that a coalition between them will be difficult to achieve.

Much will now come down to how far Trump is willing to twist Netanyahu’s arm and force him to agree to a deal.

“You can imagine the forces gathering here in Washington, DC, right now, attempting to change Donald Trump’s mind,” said Al Jazeera’s Shihab Rattansi, reporting from Washington.

“All of this now depends on how committed he is and how much pressure the mediators … are putting on him to keep to the terms of this agreement [and] not, as in the past, allow Hamas to live up to the agreement and allow Israel to resume the war again,” Rattansi added.

In the meantime, Israel is continuing to bomb Gaza, with a particular focus on Gaza City. At least 72 Palestinians have been killed by Israel since dawn on Friday, according to medical sources.

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday signed into law a deal that will allow hundreds of thousands of rideshare drivers to unionize and bargain collectively while still being classified as independent contractors.

The legislation — a rare compromise between labor groups and Silicon Valley gig economy companies — grants collective bargaining rights to Uber and Lyft drivers, and follows years of political and legal battles over the job status of rideshare and delivery drivers.

The new law does not apply to other types of gig workers, including those who deliver food through apps like DoorDash.

Besides the collective bargaining deal, Newsom is also expected to sign a law backed by Uber and Lyft that would significantly reduce the companies’ insurance requirements.

Newsom, with his signing of the deal, drew a contrast with Trump’s posture towards workers and labor unions, with his administration banning collective bargaining at half a dozen federal agencies earlier this year.

“Donald Trump is holding the government hostage and stripping away worker protections. In California, we’re doing the opposite: proving government can deliver,” Newsom said in a statement. “That’s the difference between chaos and competence.”

Labor leaders from Service Employees International Union California, a powerful union that has been working for years to organize app-based drivers, say the deal is one of the largest expansions of private sector unions in 90 years, allowing hundreds of thousands of California gig drivers to gain a seat at the bargaining table.

It does so by exempting workers from the state and federal antitrust laws that normally prohibit collective action by independent contractors.

“The gig economy isn’t going away, but worker exploitation doesn’t have to be part of it.” David Green, SEIU 721 President and Executive Director.

Ramona Prieto, Uber’s Head of Public Policy for California, said in an emailed statement that the compromise “lowers costs for riders while creating stronger voices for drivers — demonstrating how industry, labor, and lawmakers can work together to deliver real solutions.”

Experts say the prospect of a union gives some gig workers their first-ever outlet to vent frustrations about workplace conditions. But how exactly does it work? And what are rideshare companies getting in return?

Here’s what you need to know:

What would it take for drivers to form a union?

Under federal law, employees in the U.S. can unionize by holding an election or reaching a voluntary agreement with their employers for a specific union to represent them.

The process for California Uber and Lyft drivers under the collective bargaining law, called Assembly Bill 1340, would be somewhat different.

A group can seek to be the bargaining representative for active drivers by collecting signatures from at least 10% of them. At that point, a group would be able to petition for access to names and contact information for all active drivers in California from the state’s Public Employment Relations Board, which is designated to oversee the unionization process.

With that contact list, the process of organizing drivers would in theory become easier. Once a group signs up 30% of active drivers, they could petition the board for union certification. If more than one organization is in the process of gathering signatures, an election would be held to determine which would represent drivers.

Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), who co-authored the bill with Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), said the new process means drivers will be able to”bargain for better pay and protections, and help build a future where the gig economy works for the people behind the wheel.”

The law outlines a formula as to which drivers qualify as “active” based on a median number of rides they completed during the prior six month period, which determines who would be eligible to vote in the election.

It’s unclear at this point how many active drivers California has, as the number fluctuates, and rideshare companies do not release the information. Uber and Lyft will be required to submit data on active drivers to the state labor board on a regular basis under the new law.

That path to collective bargaining mirrors a ballot initiative approved by Massachusetts voters last fall that was also backed by SEIU, which allows drivers to form a union after collecting signatures from at least 25% of active drivers in the state.

Drivers affiliated with SEIU who supported the California bill said they spend long hours on the road, as many as 10 to 12 a day, but are not given the same protections as other workers. They say the law gives them an opportunity to negotiate their pay and other terms of their agreements with the companies.

“Drivers have had no way to fight back against the gig companies taking more and more of the passenger fare, or to challenge unfair deactivations that cost us our livelihoods,” said Ana Barragan, a gig driver from Los Angeles in a statement. “We’ve worked long hours, faced disrespect, and had no voice, just silence on the other end of the app.”

Some driver advocates have worried the law may not be strong enough to ensure that drivers can reach a fair contract.

Veena Dubal, a law professor at UC Irvine who studies the effect of technology on workers, had said the legislation does not clarify whether drivers would be protected if they collectively protested or went on strike, and doesn’t require that the companies provide data about wages.

“These are the crux of what makes a union strong and the very, very bottom line of what members need and want,” Dubal said. “That they couldn’t achieve those things — that’s a win for Uber.”

Michael Reich, a professor of economics and co-chair of the Center on Wage and Employment Dynamics at the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at UC Berkeley who has closely studied the gig economy and advised on driver-related legislation, called a potential driver union “a golden opportunity” and the pair of laws “a good deal for both sides.”

What did gig economy companies get out of the deal?

The insurance bill, backed by Uber and Lyft and introduced by state Sen. Christopher Cabaldon (D-Yolo), would reduce the amount of insurance that companies like Uber and Lyft are required to provide for rides.

Uber said in a blog posted to its website, that the law helps to address “one of the biggest hidden costs impacting rideshare passengers and drivers in California.”

Currently, the companies must carry $1 million in coverage per rideshare driver for accidents caused by other drivers who are uninsured or underinsured. The companies have argued that current insurance requirements are so high that they encourage litigation for insurance payouts and create higher costs for passengers.

But beginning next year, passenger trips will instead be covered by $60,000 in uninsured motorist coverage per rideshare driver and $300,000 per accident.

Uber said it will maintain $1 million in liability insurance to cover injuries or property damage in accidents caused by their rideshare drivers, as well as insurance that covers the cost to repair the driver’s car, regardless of who is at fault for the damage.

The companies are also required to maintain $1 million in occupational accident coverage under gig economy law Proposition 22, which is supposed to help drivers with medical bills if they’re injured while driving, no matter who is at fault, Uber said.

What led to this point and how does Prop. 22 factor in?

After the California Legislature in 2019 rewrote employment law in 2019, clarifying and limiting when businesses can classify workers as independent contractors, Uber and Lyft went to the ballot in California, bankrolling an initiative to exempt their drivers.

When California voters passed Proposition 22, the ballot measure the companies funded in 2020, drivers were classified as independent contractors who, under federal law, do not have the right to organize. Proposition 22 had language that explicitly barred drivers from collectively bargaining over their compensation, benefits and working conditions.

But SEIU California argued that court decisions over Prop. 22 left an opening for the state Legislature to create a process for drivers to unionize, setting the state for lawmakers to introduce the collective bargaining bill. Uber and Lyft initially opposed the bill, until a deal was hammered out and announced in August.

Times staff writer Laura Nelson contributed to this report.

Warren Buffett has long held Occidental Petroleum (OXY -7.16%) and its CEO, Vicki Hollub, in high regard. His trust in Hollub led Buffett’s company to invest heavily in Occidental. Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A -0.14%) (BRK.B -0.40%) now owns over $12.6 billion of Occidental’s stock — almost 27% of its outstanding shares — making it Berkshire’s sixth-largest holding at 4.1% of the investment portfolio.

In addition to Occidental’s leadership, Buffett’s company sees unique value in Occidental’s assets. While Buffett has previously stated that acquiring the entire company was not his goal, he clearly sees strategic value in owning a part of the company: OxyChem. Berkshire is paying $9.7 billion for the chemicals company — a move that will significantly reshape Occidental’s business.

Image source: Getty Images.

Drilling down into the OxyChem deal

Berkshire Hathaway is buying OxyChem for $9.7 billion in cash. OxyChem is a global manufacturer of commodity chemicals essential to water treatment, pharmaceuticals, and other key industries. It operates 23 facilities around the world, producing items such as caustic soda (the second-largest merchant seller in the world) and PVC (the third-largest domestic supplier).

OxyChem is consistently profitable despite the ups and downs of the chemicals sector. The company is about to deliver a step-change in profitability, driven by a major investment phase. Occidental was on track to invest over $1.5 billion into several projects through 2026, including the modernization and expansion of the Battleground plant in Texas. These and other projects will add an incremental $325 million in annualized earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) to OxyChem’s total in 2026 and beyond.

The steady cash flows and growing profitability of OxyChem make it an ideal fit for Berkshire Hathaway, which already has experience operating in the chemicals sector. Berkshire also owns specialty chemical company Lubrizol, which it bought for $9.7 billion in 2011.

How this deal will change things for Occidental

The sale of OxyChem will reshape Occidental Petroleum. The oil company plans to use $6.5 billion of the proceeds to immediately repay debt. That would enable the company to achieve its long-standing target of reducing its principal debt below $15 billion. Occidental plans to put the remaining $1.5 billion in after-tax proceeds on its balance sheet, enhancing its financial flexibility.

Debt has been an issue for Occidental Petroleum over the years. The oil giant bought rival Anadarko Petroleum in a cash-heavy $55 billion deal in 2019. Berkshire Hathaway assisted the company with funding for the acquisition by making a $10 billion preferred stock investment in Occidental. That deal turned out to be poorly timed as oil prices crashed early in 2020 when the pandemic hit. Lower crude prices and issues with selling assets significantly impacted the company’s ability to achieve its initial debt reduction targets.

However, Occidental slowly dug out of that hole as oil prices improved. That enabled it to make another debt-heavy deal in late 2023 when it agreed to buy CrownRock for $12 billion. The company set goals at that time to repay at least $4.5 billion of debt within a year of closing the deal and eventually reduce its principal debt to below $15 billion.

Occidental quickly achieved its initial goal by using free cash flow and asset sales. Now it will reach the $15 billion target by selling OxyChem.

Achieving that lower debt level will improve Occidental Petroleum’s credit metrics and financial flexibility. It will also save the oil company over $350 million annually in interest expenses, boosting its free cash flow. The increased financial flexibility will enable Occidental Petroleum to opportunistically repurchase shares and repay additional debt as it matures. The oil company can also continue growing its dividend. Additionally, Occidental plans to resume the redemption of Berkshire’s preferred equity investment, which it anticipates beginning in August 2029 after it builds a bigger cash balance.

In addition to significantly reshaping the company’s financial profile, the deal will sharpen Occidental’s focus on oil and gas production. The company will have greater financial flexibility to invest in unlocking the treasure trove of low-cost oil and gas resources it has around the world. As Hollub put it in the press release unveiling the sale, the transaction will “create this strategic opportunity that will unlock 20+ years of low-cost resource runway and deliver meaningful near and long-term value.”

A financially stronger, more focused oil and gas company

The sale of OxyChem is a transformational event for Occidental Petroleum. The oil company will achieve its long-term debt reduction target, significantly enhancing its financial flexibility while reducing interest expenses. It will also narrow the company’s focus on growing its oil and gas business. As a result, Occidental will become a significantly lower-risk oil company with substantial long-term growth potential as it focuses on developing its vast, low-cost oil and gas resources.

Defenseman Jackson LaCombe signed an eight-year, $72-million contract extension with the Ducks on Thursday, keeping the rising young star with the club through the 2033-34 season.

LaCombe’s deal is the richest ever given out by the team, although other contracts had larger average annual values.

“We are excited to sign Jackson to a long-term contract and lock up a core player for our future,” Ducks general manager Pat Verbeek said in a statement. “Getting this deal done early was a priority for us. Jackson has all of the tools to be an anchor on our back end for many years to come.”

After just two full NHL seasons, the 24-year-old LaCombe has emerged as an elite two-way defenseman who is under consideration for the U.S. Olympic team roster.

LaCombe went straight to the NHL from the University of Minnesota in 2023, and he has recorded 16 goals and 44 assists over 148 games. He quickly emerged as the Ducks’ most dependable defenseman, leading the roster in ice time last season and filling a major role on their power play.

He even stepped into a leadership role after longtime Ducks defenseman Cam Fowler was traded to St. Louis last December. LaCombe’s 14 goals last season were the most by a Ducks blueliner since Lubomir Visnovsky had 18 in the 2010-11 season.

“I am grateful to the organization for their belief in me,” LaCombe said. “It was an easy decision for me to commit my future to the Ducks and Orange County. We are building something special here, and I am excited to do everything I can to help this team win.”

LaCombe also stood out at the world championships in Stockholm last May, recording two goals and three assists for the gold medal-winning U.S. team.

The Ducks chose the Minnesota native with the 39th overall pick in the 2019 draft. He became a star for the Golden Gophers after being drafted, growing into a top prospect who then adjusted quickly to the NHL game.

LaCombe is the first player to re-sign in the Ducks’ large class of restricted free agents coming up next summer. LaCombe was slated to be an RFA alongside center Leo Carlsson, left wing Cutter Gauthier and defensemen Owen Zellweger and Pavel Mintyukov.

Verbeek locked up LaCombe five days after re-signing holdout center Mason McTavish to a six-year, $42 million deal.

Beacham writes for the Associated Press.

Oct. 1 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said the Department of Education has reached a potential deal to settle a months-long battle with Harvard University over federal funding.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon “is finishing up the final details” of the plan, Trump said during an unrelated executive order signing Tuesday in the Oval Office.

She has “a good chance of getting that closed,” he said.

The plan would have Harvard University pay $500 million and require the school to open trade schools and teach artificial intelligence.

“They’ll be teaching people how to do AI and lots of other things, engines, lots of things,” Trump said, adding that the school would run a “series of trade schools.”

Harvard did not immediately respond to Politico and CNN‘s requests for a comment on the matter.

Trump and Harvard have been locked in a legal battle after the president attempted to withhold more than $2 billion in funding and block Harvard from admitting international students after taking issue with students’ anti-Israel protests over the war in Gaza. The administration accused Harvard of failing to crack down on anti-Semitism.

Earlier this month, U.S. Judge Allison Burroughs of the District of Massachusetts restored the funding — in the form of grants and contracts — in response to a lawsuit brought by the university and employee groups. The lawsuit accused Trump of leveraging the funding “to gain control of academic decision-making at Harvard.”

Among the programs affected by the block in funding were research in science and medicine, including on radiation exposure, ALS diagnostics and tuberculosis treatment.

On Monday, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights launched a process that could see Harvard ineligible for federal funding on Title VI grounds.

Kawhi Leonard mumbled his way through a few answers to questions Monday about his endorsement deal with Aspiration Partners that has triggered an NBA investigation into whether the Clippers circumvented the league salary cap.

The Clippers allowed only two reporters to ask about the deal during media day at Intuit Dome, refusing to give the microphone to additional reporters — including one from The Times — who raised their hands to ask questions. Leonard was ushered off the dais and out of sight.

“The NBA is going to do their job,” Leonard said. “None of us did no wrongdoing and, yeah, that’s it. We invite the investigation.”

Asked about his understanding of the endorsement deal and whether he performed any services, Leonard replied, “I understand the full contract and services that I had to do. Like I said, I don’t deal with conspiracies or the click-bait analysts or journalism that’s going on.

“I don’t think it’s accurate” that he provided no endorsement services to Aspiration, he said. “It’s old. This is all new to you guys. But the company went bankrupt a while ago, so we already knew this was going to happen.”

He added that he wasn’t paid all the money due to him, saying “I’m not sure [how much I’m owed]. I’ve got to go back and look at the books. … The company went belly up and it was fine.”

Clippers forward Kawhi Leonard speaks during media day at the Intuit Dome on Monday.

(Eric Thayer / Associated Press)

Lawrence Frank, Clippers president of basketball operations, was insistent that the investigation will exonerate owner Steve Ballmer and the franchise.

“We appreciate that there will be a clear-eyed look at these allegations,” Frank said. “And we are eager for the truth to come out.

“The assumptions and conclusions that have been made are disappointing and upsetting. And we expect the investigation will show that these allegations are wrong.”

The salary cap limits what teams can spend on player payroll to ensure parity and prevent the wealthiest teams from outspending smaller-market teams to acquire the best player. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver has called attempts to circumvent it a “cardinal sin.”

In this case, Leonard agreed to a $28-million contract for endorsement and marketing work for Aspiration, which went out of business in March. Players are allowed to have separate endorsement and other business deals. At issue in this case is whether the Clippers participated in arranging the side deal beyond simply introducing Aspiration executives to Leonard.

The most painful penalties the NBA could impose would be suspending Ballmer for a maximum of one year and docking the Clippers their first-round draft picks for up to five years. The team already is without a first-round pick in 2026 and 2028, having traded them away. Forfeiting the remaining picks through 2032 would make it harder for the Clippers to compete for their first-ever NBA championship.

“I hurt for Steve,” Frank said. “He’s one of the best people, most honorable people I’ve met. He does things the right way for the right reasons. And he constantly reminds us to stay on the right side of the rules.

“I also hurt for our players, our staff and fans. And, on a larger level, as I’ve learned about this over the past month, I feel bad for all the people defrauded by [Aspiration].”

Frank said a partition exists between team executives and companies that signed players for endorsements.

“Endorsement contracts are completely separate from player contracts,” he said. “So what a player makes, Kawhi, or any of our other players, in endorsement contracts, I have no idea.”

Ballmer, however, had a 2-3% ownership share in Aspiration and made separate investments of $50 million and $10 million in the company. Whether that same partition applied to him is something NBA investigators will examine, according to Michael McCann, a visiting professor of law at Harvard who has followed the situation closely.

Frank emphasized that the Clippers front office takes the salary cap rules seriously.

“The salary cap governs everything we do,” he said. “Our mission every day is to build the best team we can under the constraints of the cap. There is no gray area. There are no secret shortcuts. It’s clear what we are and are not allowed to do.”

Whether Leonard was as clear about the rules remains unknown. The forward who is under contract for two more seasons and $100 million said the upcoming season is all he’s thinking about.

“I’m not getting into any conspiracy theories or anything like that,” he said. “It’s about the season and what we’ve got ahead of us right now.”

Sept. 29 (UPI) — Electronic Arts has been sold to private investors in the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia, Silver Lake and Affinity Partners in an all-cash deal worth $55 billion.

Stockholders will be paid $210 per share.

EA stock rose about 15% Friday, closing at $193.35, after the Wall Street Journal said the company was about to go private. This morning, the stock was at $202.80.

The all-cash purchase is valued at about $55 billion.

“The transaction positions EA to accelerate innovation and growth to build the future of entertainment,” a press release said.

“Electronic Arts ​is ​an ​extraordinary ​company with a ​world-class ​management ​team and a bold vision ​for ​the ​future. ​I’ve admired their ​ability to create iconic, lasting experiences, ​and ​as ​someone ​who ​grew up playing their ​games — and now enjoys them with his ​kids — I couldn’t be ​more ​excited about ​what’s ​ahead,” said Jared Kushner, Affinity Partners CEO and son-in-law of President Donald Trump, in a statement.

Under the terms of the agreement, the consortium of investors will acquire EA, with PIF rolling over its existing 9.9% stake in the company. The $210 per share purchase price represents a 25% premium to EA’s unaffected share price of $168.32 at market close on Friday, the last fully unaffected trading day, and a premium to EA’s unaffected all-time high of $179.01 at market close on Aug. 14, the press release said.

EA will remain headquartered in Redwood City, Calif., and Andrew Wilson will stay on as CEO. The deal is set to close in the first quarter of fiscal year 2027.

EA makes games such as Battlefield, The Sims and Madden NFL games. It will be the largest leveraged buyout in Wall Street history, CNBC reported

In a note to employees, Wilson said he is “excited to continue as CEO.”

“Our new partners bring deep experience across sports, gaming, and entertainment,” CNBC reported he wrote. “They are committed with conviction to EA — they believe in our people, our leadership, and the long-term vision we are now building together.”

MAGNOLIA, Ky. — The leafy soybean plants reach Caleb Ragland’s thighs and are ripe for harvest, but the Kentucky farmer is deeply worried. He doesn’t know where he and others like him will sell their crop because China has stopped buying.

Beijing, which traditionally has snapped up at least a quarter of all soybeans grown in the U.S., is in effect boycotting them in retaliation for the high tariffs President Trump has imposed on Chinese goods and to strengthen its hand in negotiations over a new overall trade deal.

It has left American soybean farmers fretting over not only this year’s crop but the long-term viability of their businesses, built in part on China’s once-insatiable appetite for U.S. beans.

“This is a five-alarm fire for our industry,” said Ragland, who leads the American Soybean Assn. trade group.

The situation might even be enough to test farmers’ loyalty to Trump, although the president still enjoys strong support throughout rural America. If no deal is reached soon, farmers hope the government will come through with aid as it did during Trump’s first term, but they see that as only a temporary solution. Trump said Thursday he was considering an aid package.

U.S. and Chinese officials have held four rounds of trade talks between May and September, with another likely in the coming weeks. No progress on soybeans has been reported.

Getting closer to harvest, “I’m honestly getting worried that the time is running out,” said Jim Sutter, chief executive of the U.S. Soybean Export Council.

Political pressure is growing

After Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese goods, China responded with tariffs of its own, which now total up to 34% on U.S. soybeans. That makes soybeans from other countries cheaper.

China’s retaliatory tariffs also hit U.S. growers of sorghum, corn and cotton; and even geoduck divers have been affected. But soybeans stand out because of the crop’s outsize importance to U.S. agricultural exports. Soybeans are the top U.S. food export, accounting for about 14% of all farm goods sent overseas.

And China has been by far the largest foreign buyer. Last year, the U.S. exported nearly $24.5 billion worth of soybeans, and China accounted for more than $12.5 billion. That compared with $2.45 billion by the European Union, the second-largest buyer. This year, China hasn’t bought beans since May.

With U.S. farmers hurting, the Trump administration is under growing pressure to reach a deal with China. As talks drag on, Trump appears ready to help.

“We’re going to take some of the tariff money — relatively small amount, but a lot for the farmers — and we’re going to help the farmers out a little bit,” Trump said, during what he called a transition period.

The only way most farmers survived Trump’s trade war in his first term was with tens of billions of dollars in government payments. But that’s not what most farmers want.

What farmers expect from Trump

“The American farmer, especially myself included, we don’t want aid payments,” said Brian Warpup, 52, a fourth-generation farmer from Warren, Ind. “We want to work. We work the land, we harvest the land, the crop off the land. And the worst thing that we could ever want is a handout.”

Farmers are looking to Trump for a long-term solution.

“Overwhelmingly, farmers have been in President Trump’s corner,” said Ragland, the president of the soybean association. “And I think the message that our soybean farmers as a whole want to deliver is: ‘President Trump, we’ve had your back. We need you to have ours now.’”

He said farmers appreciate the willingness to provide some short-term relief, but what they ultimately need are strong, reliable markets. “Our priority remains seeing the United States secure lasting trade agreements — particularly with China — that allow farmers to sell their crops and build a sustainable future with long-term customers,” he said.

Ragland, 39, hopes his three sons will become the 10th generation to till his 4,500 acres in Magnolia, Ky. Unless something changes soon, he worries that thousands of farmers may not survive.

Coming into this year, many farmers were just hoping to break even because crop prices were weak while their costs had only increased. Trump’s tariffs, which helped make their crops uncompetitive around the world, drove prices down further. And tariffs on steel and fertilizer sent costs up even more.

Darin Johnson, president of the Minnesota Soybean Growers Assn., said he still has faith in the Trump administration to reach a good trade deal with China.

“I think where the patience is probably wearing thin is the time,” said Johnson, a fourth-generation farmer. “I don’t think anybody thought that we were going to take this much time, because we were told 90 deals — 90 deals in 90 days.”

China’s negotiating strategy

The U.S. soybean industry grew in response to Chinese demand starting back in the 1990s, when China began its rapid economic rise and turned to foreign producers to help feed its people. Protein-rich soybeans are an essential part of the diet.

While China relies on domestic crops for steamed beans and tofu, it needs far more soybeans for oil extraction and animal feed. In 2024, China produced 20 million metric tons of soybeans, while importing more than 105 million metric tons.

American farmers have come to count on China as their biggest customer, and this has “given the Chinese a point of leverage,” Sutter said. By holding off on buying U.S. soybeans, China is seen as trying to leverage that purchasing power in the trade talks.

“I think that’s the strategy,” said Sutter of the U.S. Soybean Export Council. “I think that’s why China is targeting soybeans and other agricultural products, because they know that farmers have a strong lobby and farmers are important to the U.S. government.”

Liu Pengyu, spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, didn’t answer specific questions on soybean purchases but urged the U.S. to work with Beijing.

“The essence of China-U.S. economic and trade cooperation is mutual benefit and win-win,” Liu said.

China turned to Brazil when Trump launched his first trade war in 2018. Last year, Brazilian beans accounted for more than 70% of China’s imports, while the U.S. share was down to 21%, World Bank data show. Argentina and other South American countries also are selling more to China, which has diversified to boost food security.

What American farmers are doing in response

U.S. farmers also are broadening their customer base, said Sutter, who recently traveled to Japan and Indonesia in search of new markets. Taiwan pledged to purchase $10 billion worth of soybeans, corn, wheat and beef in the next four years.

“There’s strong diversification efforts underway,” Sutter said. But “China is so big, it’s hard to replace them overnight.”

Farmers are working to boost consumption at home, too. Growth in biodiesel production has taken in some of the soybeans that were once exported. Other beans are crushed to produce soybean oil and soybean meal. The United Soybean Board is investing in research into the benefits of using soybeans to feed dairy cows and hogs.

But Iowa farmer Robb Ewoldt, a director with the Soybean Board, knows that such domestic uses are growing only gradually.

“We cannot replace a China in one shot,” Ewoldt said. “It’s not going to happen. We need to be realistic in that.”

Tang and Funk write for the Associated Press. Tang reported from Washington and Funk from Omaha. AP journalists Dylan Lovan in Magnolia, Obed Lamy in Warren and Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis contributed to this report.

FROM competitiveness to narcissism – if Noel and Liam have what it takes to patch things up, you have no excuse!

WITH the whole world watching, the Gallagher brothers have been taking to the stage for the Oasis reunion tour – and off the back of their 16-year feud, have proven sibling reconciliation is possible for anyone (though the jury is still out on Princes William and Harry. . .).

1

One of the most impactful relationships you will ever have is with a sibling, who can be a best friend and confidante from day one to the end.

But the dynamic is complex.

Just because you have the same parents, it doesn’t mean you had the same experience growing up.

Likewise, you can share DNA, but not the same outlook on life or values.

Fallouts will occur, and that can lead to long-held feuds.

In fact, one study found 28% of people had experienced at least one estrangement episode with a sibling.*

“Our siblings have known us in our formative years in deeply intimate ways, sharing baths, bedrooms, road trips and battles over broccoli,” says Ali Ross from the UK Council for Psychotherapy.

“During this time, there’s a tension between them being your closest allies and greatest threats.”

How do you navigate tensions when they reach boiling point, or bring up long-standing resentments that are now having a big impact?

“Those conversations can be painful and difficult, especially if this is unprecedented for you in your relationship,” says Ali.

“But they can also be helpful to establish a new way of relating as siblings. It can also be a relief to name the elephant in the room, or to expose that you’ve been misinterpreting something and dispel long-held assumptions.”

But sometimes forgiveness feels impossible, and the healthiest thing to do is to walk away.

Here, Ali explains how to cope with each type of sibling and their typical traits.

The Competitive Sibling

Whether it be over board games or job salaries, sibling competitiveness can seep into every crevice of your life.

Exhausting, right? Often it’s just light-hearted banter, but if micro-aggressions are thrown around by your sibling, it can put a strain on your relationship.

“The truth is, people like to be in charge of their narrative and identity – and the way people see themselves within the family, or when compared to siblings, can challenge both those things,” says Ali.

“It is how much you want to buy into that game.”

WHAT NEXT?

When you feel the competitive urge, acknowledge it’s just a reflex, then redirect your energy.

“If you’re casting judgements about a sibling without attempting to understand what it’s like to live their life, challenge yourself to genuinely, compassionately understand them better, then do this for yourself,” says Ali.

He suggests imagining a version of yourself that doesn’t have a sibling to compete with. What would you care about?

“Once you understand the context, the desire to compare and compete diminishes,” he says.

Fallouts will occur, and that can lead to long-held feuds

The Narcissistic Sibling

However much you want to forge a stronger relationship with your sibling, the reality is that sometimes it’s near-impossible.

Does it feel like they won’t take any responsibility for their actions, and don’t seem to be capable of any empathy for you or your viewpoint?

“These are signs of narcissistic behaviour,” says Ali.

“But rather than writing your sibling off as a narcissist and trying to change this other person’s way of being, it is more empowering to understand what you are encountering, what that means for you, and to consider how you are going to navigate that.”

WHAT NEXT?

Ask yourself if your sibling shows any signs of understanding you or caring for you.

“If they don’t, do you really want to have a relationship with them?

“The answer may be hard and upsetting, but it means you can move forward from a more informed position,” says Ali.

There’s a tension between them being your closest allies and greatest threats

Ali Ross

The Peter Pan Sibling

Some people might describe your sibling as a “free spirit”, but you only see them as a big kid.

Ali suggests thinking about why your sibling’s Peter Pan energy irritates you so much.

“Do you feel like you got too old, too soon, or took on more responsibility and feel resentment?” says Ali.

Perhaps you took on caring responsibilities for other family members.

“Ask yourself honestly if there are feelings of being a martyr on your part,” says Ali.

“Have you rushed straight in to put out the fire before anybody else smelled something was burning?”

WHAT NEXT?

Try telling your sibling how much you are struggling.

“Say something like: ‘This is the burden I’m carrying, and you’re not helping,’ and follow it up with some actual strategising to prompt a practical shift,” Ali says.

Our siblings have known us in our formative years in deeply intimate ways, sharing baths, bedrooms, road trips and battles over broccoli

Ali Ross

The Controlling Sibling

Is your sibling overbearing or dictatorial? It’s likely to come from a fear of being vulnerable, says Ali.

“They’re taking power in a situation because they can’t bear the idea of not being in control. However, this feeling is often buried so deep that your sibling won’t recognise it for what it is.”

People under control can end up feeling resentment, but may be too oppressed to express their true feelings.

WHAT NEXT?

“Be aware that calling it out is a threat to their control in itself,” Ali warns.

“It is why they are likely to double-down on their control, or find another insidious way to try to resume or re-establish control.

“It is much better if the controlling person is left to try to figure it out for themselves, and you spend as little time as you can in their orbit.”

It can also be a relief to name the elephant in the room, or to expose that you’ve been misinterpreting something and dispel long-held assumptions

Ali Ross

The Disengaged Sibling

Of course, not all siblings are close.

Or perhaps you once were, but can’t make sense of how your friendship fizzled out.

“Too often, we draw conclusions too early, then base our response on that,” says Ali. There can be a multitude of reasons why your sibling is being elusive.

“Let’s say someone has been abused or neglected in some way [by the family], and they just want out. You cannot force someone to confront something if they do not want to, and you need to respect their space.”

Maybe you’re their problem, in which case, are you ready for some criticism?

“It might be that you are both very different people, and they’re just not that interested in having a relationship with you.

“This will hurt, but at least you’ll hear it for what it is and know what you are dealing with.”

WHAT NEXT?

It’s a tricky conversation, especially if it comes after years of distance.

“Say to them: ‘I feel sad that we don’t have much of a relationship, as far as I see it, and I don’t know why that is. Do you want to feel closer, because I do?’” says Ali.

“You can then try to suggest ways you can bridge that gap or, even better, leave it with them.”

Sept. 26 (UPI) — President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday to complete a deal to keep TikTok active for 170 million U.S. users with U.S. investors owning 80% of the company.

The deal creates a U.S. entity to control TikTok while ByteDance will maintain less than a 20% stake. A board of directors composed chiefly of Americans will oversee the operation of TikTok, including its highly sought-after algorithm.

Data on U.S. users will be stored and managed by Oracle, a technology company based in Nashville. ByteDance partnered with Oracle in 2020 to house U.S. user data in the United States due to concerns about data security from the U.S. government.

During the signing of the executive order at the White House, Trump said the deal was approved by Chinese President Xi Jinping during a phone conversation last week.

“He gave us the go ahead,” Trump said. “I told him what we’re doing and he said go ahead with it.”

Speaking to the details of the deal, Trump named some of the investors, including Rupert Murdoch and Mike Lindell. Vice President J.D. Vance said more information about the other investors will be announced in the coming days.

Vance added that TikTok will be valued at $14 billion.

Asked if TikTok will begin to favor “MAGA” content, Trump said it will be fair.

“If I could make it 100% MAGA I would but it’s not going to work out that way unfortunately,” Trump said. “Everyone is going to be treated fairly. Every group, every philosophy will be treated fairly.”

The executive order says the president will have the authority to determine that TikTok has undergone a “qualified divestiture” through an interagency process. If the president makes this determination, the act’s prohibitions can be removed.

The deal will bring TikTok into compliance with the law passed by U.S. Congress last year requiring it to be owned and operated by a U.S. company. Congress passed the law out of concern that the application posed a national security threat, due to ByteDance being based in China.

There is still more information to come about the agreement between the United States, ByteDance and China. The executive order has been signed but it will take weeks to months for the divestiture and formation of the new TikTok corporate structure to be complete, said Norman Bishara, professor of business law and ethics in the Stephen M. Ross School of Business at Michigan.

“The devil is in the details,” Bishara said. “Until we really see this in writing and have all the details it’s hard to fully assess if they are complying with the letter of the law and the spirit of what Congress wanted in the first place.”

The White House stated the federal government will not play a role in selecting members for TikTok’s board, but the president’s role in brokering the agreement is “extraordinary,” Bishara said.

“Even without the direct control of the U.S. government or the ‘golden share’ that’s been discussed, it still seems a safe bet that the folks on the U.S. side like Silver Lake [Technology Management] and Oracle are aligned with the interest of the government and the Trump administration,” he said.

Andrew Verstein, professor of law at UCLA, told UPI the TikTok deal responds to concerns expressed by Congress, localizing operations in the United States. However, the inherent nature of its algorithm will still require data to cross borders.

“We were worried that a Chinese-owned and Chinese-controlled company with a pretty complicated technical architecture was up to bad things. So we passed a law,” Verstein said. “What we got was a compromise. The company is going to be largely owned by Americans and partially controlled by Americans, but not fully owned and controlled by Americans. So this is a compromise between those two visions and in some ways it’s worse than both things.”

Verstein said the new concern that the deal creates is that the perceived “bad things” that Congress and national security experts worried about China doing — surveillance, propaganda campaigns and misinformation — will be continued under American control.

“Granting Americans equity in the company gives them a greater incentive to do whatever is most profitable, including whatever was happening before,” he said. “It tempts them but you’re happy with that if you’re handing money out to your friends.”

TikTok creators, business owners and advertising firms have watched the ongoing saga closely as threats of the application shutting down in America have persisted for five years.

“Everybody will be very happy that the deal is done and things are settling in a final state,” Evan Horowitz, co-founder and CEO of Movers+Shakers, a marketing agency focused on social media, told UPI. “It’s been five years now that TikTok has been in this state of uncertainty and that’s been stressful for people. That’s been stressful for brand assessment, stressful for creators, stressful for consumers, because there’s this constant threat of TikTok going away.”

As Horowitz expresses relief, he remains concerned about whether the application will remain largely as it is.

“The algorithm is the number one key to TikTok’s success,” he said. “So what happens to the algorithm and how they’re able to port that or share that is going to be critical for the long-term viability of TikTok.”

The makeup of the new board also raises questions.

“One of the keys to TikTok’s success is that it’s an open and inclusive platform and that has attracted a very wide and diverse audience over the years,” Horowitz said. “If in the future it seems like TikTok will not be inclusive and open to all people and viewpoints that would present a major challenge for the community.”

As Horowitz’s company has navigated the years of uncertainty around TikTok, he said he has encouraged clients to stay focused on what is known rather than unknown. In the meantime he has monitored alternatives to the platform as social media platforms tend to come and go over time.

“Our expectation is if TikTok were either to vanish or dwindle gradually, the winners are going to be Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts,” he said. “They’re still not quite as good and the audience is not as robust but if people start being dissatisfied with TikTok for any reason, they’re going to be moving to Reels and Shorts.”