leaders

The world of college football may be awash in uncertainty, but the last several weeks have proven one thing beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Nobody runs like Notre Dame.

When the Irish got jobbed by the College Football Playoff committee and insanely were left out of the CFP, they refused to play another game this season.

Notre Dame ran from the Pop Tarts Bowl.

Then came Monday’s announcement that Notre Dame no longer will regularly play USC, essentially ending a 100-year-old rivalry because the Irish didn’t want to change the dates of the game.

Notre Dame ran from the Trojans.

Call them the Fightin’ Chickens, a once-proud Irish program that demands acquiescence or it will take its ball and go home.

The Irish could have played USC at the beginning of the season, but refused. The Irish could have kept the rivalry alive with a scheduling tweak that would have helped both teams, but refused.

Lots of folks are going to blame USC and coach Lincoln Riley for butchering a Knute Rockne-born tradition that accounted for 78 straight games, not counting 2020, the COVID-19 year. That’s wrong. Nobody has been more critical of Riley than this space, but he’s not the bad guy here.

Anybody who felt the buzz around the CFP first-round games last weekend would attest, this is where USC needs to be playing. If the Trojans truly want to return to greatness, being selected for the CFP is the goal. Not beating Notre Dame. Not even beating UCLA. It’s all about the tournament.

USC needs to put itself in the best possible position to be playing on a mid-December weekend, and that means no longer being the only Big Ten school to play a major nonconference game in the middle of the season or later.

The schedule has become tough enough. The Trojans don’t need to make it tougher with the kind of game nobody else in their conference is playing.

They need Notre Dame in August, not in late October or mid-November.

But, as it turns out, Notre Dame believes it doesn’t need USC at all.

The Irish signed a deal with the CFP that stipulates, beginning next year, if they are ranked in the top 12, they are guaranteed a playoff berth. They can get in the playoffs without risking a loss to the Trojans. They can play it safe and schedule easy and back right in.

USC doesn’t have that luxury. USC isn’t guaranteed squat. USC has a 2026 schedule that even without Notre Dame is a nightmare.

USC and Notre Dame prepare to play in a packed Notre Dame Stadium in October 2023.

(Michael Caterina / Associated Press)

Home games against Ohio State and Oregon. Road games at Indiana and Penn State.

USC doesn’t need a midseason game against Notre Dame making that road even harder.

Jennifer Cohen, the USC athletic director, said as much in a recently posted open letter to the Trojans community.

“USC is the only team in the Big Ten to play a nonconference road game after Week 4 in either of the past two seasons,” she wrote. “USC is also the only team to play a nonconference game after Week 4 in both seasons.”

Trojans fans love the rivalry. The college football world loves the rivalry. It’s Anthony Davis, it’s Carson Palmer, it’s the Bush Push, it has won Heismans and cemented championships.

But times have changed. The landscape is evolving. Everything that college football once represented is up for debate. Even the most venerable of traditions is subject to adjustments.

That’s what the Trojans wanted to do. Not eliminate, but adjust. But Notre Dame football adjusts for no one.

It was indeed a travesty that the two-loss Irish, winners of their last 10 games by double digits, did not get a spot in the national tournament. By the end of the season they were arguably one of the four best teams in the country. They easily could have captured the crown.

Tulane? James Madison? Are you kidding me? As the opening games revealed — the two AAA teams were outscored 92-44 — there is no place for Cinderellas in the CFP.

But that was no reason for Notre Dame to back out of the bowls completely, sacrificing the final game in the careers of the Irish players who will not be going to the NFL just to make a whining point that resonated with nobody.

And, besides, there’s another way Notre Dame could have been a lock for the playoffs.

Join a conference, fool!

By keeping the football team out of the otherwise Irish-infected Atlantic Coast Conference, Notre Dame is raking in big TV bucks that it doesn’t have to share. But this means the Irish are subject to the whims of a committee that could, and did, unconscionably leave them out.

Notre Dame always wants it both ways. It wants its independence, but also wants to dictate a schedule filled with conference-affiliated teams.

In demanding that their game be played in August or not at all, USC finally called Notre Dame’s bluff.

And the Irish did what they recently have done best.

They ran.

The team that initially will replace USC on the Notre Dame schedule?

It’s Brigham Young, the same team that Notre Dame snubbed in the Pop Tarts Bowl.

Put that in your toaster and cook it.

Dec. 18 (UPI) — European leaders have agreed to continue funding Ukraine in its fight against Russia with a two-year, $105 billion loan to provide the embattled nation with munitions and other material in the ongoing war, the latest battle of which has dragged on since 2022.

European leaders failed to agree on the first choice to arm Ukraine, using frozen Russian state assets as backing for the loan.

The plan to use frozen Russian assets to back the loan fell apart in the final moments, a schism that risked making the EU appear indecisive at a critical moment in negotiations.

European leaders announced Thursday that they will instead use money from the EU budget to fund Ukraine’s defense effort. As a result, the backup plan could be more costly and difficult to mobilize than the original plan to leverage the stash of Russian money currently frozen in Europe.

European leaders said since the end result is the same, getting funds to Kyiv, they celebrated it as a victory.

“This will address the urgent financial needs of Ukraine,” Antonio Costa, the president of the European Council, said at a media briefing in Brussels.

Partly because of a cut in funding from the United States, Ukraine is facing a $160 billion shortfall over the next two years, according to forecasts by the International Monetary Fund. The EU sought to fill about $105 billion of that gap.

Costa added that the EU will reserve its right to use frozen Russian assets for continued funding in the future.

Dec. 18 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s largest Buddhist order held a Christmas tree lighting ceremony Thursday at Jogyesa Temple in central Seoul, bringing together religious leaders from multiple faiths in an annual event organizers described as a symbol of interfaith harmony and peace.

The ceremony took place at Jogyesa, the head temple of the Jogye Order of Korean Buddhism, in Seoul’s Jongno district.

Venerable Jinwoo, the Jogye Order’s chief administrator, delivered a Christmas message at the event, saying, “We sincerely celebrate the birth of the baby Jesus, who came to illuminate this dark world.”

“Though we walk different paths, we share the same heart to alleviate human suffering and bring light to the world,” he said, adding that participants were renewing a commitment to “unity in diversity.”

Jinwoo said interfaith harmony is a powerful social force for reducing conflict and building peace and urged religious communities to work together toward mutual prosperity.

Among those attending were Jinwoo, Jogyesa abbot Venerable Damhwa and other Jogye Order monks, along with Choi Jong-soo, president of the Korean Conference of Religious Leaders for Peace, and leaders representing Cheondogyo, Catholic, Won Buddhist and Protestant organizations, according to organizers.

– Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Australia’s government is fending off political attacks from inside and outside the country after the Bondi massacre. Israeli leaders and interest groups have been condemned for trying to politicise the killings, as Soraya Lennie explains.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday announced a new California-led public health initiative, tapping former U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials who publicly clashed with the Trump administration, including the former agency chief who warned that the nation’s public health system was headed to “a very dangerous place.”

Newsom said the initiative will be led by Dr. Susan Monarez, the former CDC director, and Dr. Debra Houry, the CDC’s former chief medical officer. The pair will lead the Public Health Network Innovation Exchange, or PHNIX, which the governor’s office said will “modernize public health infrastructure and maintain trust in science-driven decision-making.”

The initiative was created to improve the systems that detect and investigate public health trends and build a modern public-health backbone that connects data, technology and funding across states.

“The Public Health Network Innovation Exchange is expected to bring together the best science, the best tools, and the best minds to advance public health,” Newsom said in a statement Monday. “By bringing on expert scientific leaders to partner in this launch, we’re strengthening collaboration and laying the groundwork for a modern public health infrastructure that will offer trust and stability in scientific data not just across California, but nationally and globally.”

Monarez will serve as strategic health technology and funding advisor for the initiative, helping advance private sector partnerships to better integrate healthcare data systems and enable faster disease surveillance.

“I am deeply excited to bring my experience in health technology and innovation to support PHNIX,” Monarez said in a statement shared by Newsom’s office. “California has an extraordinary concentration of talent, technology, and investment, and this effort is about putting those strengths to work for the public good — modernizing how public health operates, accelerating innovation, and building a healthier, more resilient future for all Californians.”

Houry was named senior regional and global public health medical advisor for PHNIX. Newsom’s office also announced it will work with Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, founder and chief executive of Your Local Epidemiologist. Jetelina will advise the California Department of Public Health on building trust in public health.

Monarez and Houry both described extraordinary turmoil inside the nation’s health agencies during congressional hearings, telling senators in September that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and political advisors rebuffed data supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Monarez was fired after just 29 days on the job. She said Kennedy told her to resign if she did not sign off on new unsupported vaccine recommendations. Kennedy has described Monarez as admitting to him that she is “untrustworthy,” a claim Monarez has denied through her attorney.

“Dramatic and unfounded changes in federal policy, funding, and scientific practice have created uncertainty and instability in public health and health care,” Dr. Erica Pan, CDPH director and state public health officer, said in a statement. “I am thrilled to work with these advisors to catalyze our efforts to lead a sustainable future for public health. California is stepping up to coordinate and build the scaffolding we need to navigate this moment.”

The salaries of the new positions were not immediately known.

Newsom’s office said the California initiative would build on previously announced public health partnerships, such as the West Coast Health Alliance.

Dec. 15 (UPI) — British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz were set to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and U.S. officials in Berlin on Monday in an effort to reach a consensus on what any peace deal with Russia should look like.

The European leaders, along with French President Emmanuel Macron, who has yet to confirm his attendance, will seek to negotiate an alternative to the U.S.-Russia plan currently on the table with a stronger deal for Ukraine with better protections for its security.

The talks will also attempt to keep afloat an EU-brokered agreement to loan Ukraine some of the $246.7 billion of Russia’s assets frozen in European banks and other institutions to help it defend itself and take “forward peace talks from a position of strength,” amid mounting opposition to the plan.

The meeting follows five hours of talks on Sunday between Zelensky and U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump‘s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, at the Federal Chancellery that Witkoff said were productive and would resume on Monday.

“Representatives held in-depth discussions regarding the 20-point plan for peace, economic agendas, and more. A lot of progress was made, and they will meet again tomorrow morning,” Witkoff posted on X on Sunday evening.

Zelensky was reported to have dropped demands for NATO membership, if it was what was required to end the war, in exchange for a bilateral defense agreement with the United States similar to an Article 5-like guarantee, along with other guarantees from Ukraine’s European partners.

Article 5 is a cast-iron guarantee, a collective defense principle enshrined in NATO’s constitution under which an armed attack on one member is considered an attack on all members and triggers an obligation for each member to come to its defense.

Following the initial discussions on Monday, Merz’s spokesman confirmed the group would be widened to include “numerous European heads of state and government, as well as the leaders of the EU and NATO.”

The diplomatic focus will shift to Brussels on Thursday when the leaders of all 27 EU nations converge on the Belgian capital for a meeting of the European Council with Ukraine and European security topping the agenda.

Council President Antonio Costa said the summit would address how best to continue defending Europe’s interests and how to “strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position,” a key element of which necessitated “increased pressure on Russia.”

Costa said that having already committed to providing for Ukraine’s urgent financial needs for 2026-2027, including funding for its military and defense, it was now time to decide how to implement it and that leaders must keep talking on Thursday until an agreement was reached.

Earlier this month, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveiled two options — both controversial — to provide Ukraine with $105.8 billion of the $158.6 it is estimated it will need in the two years through 2027 to keep the country running and being able to continue fighting Russia.

The so-called “reparations loan” option involving using frozen Russian assets only requires a two-thirds majority of EU states to vote for it. The second option under which the EU would use its budget to go borrow on the international capital markets is more problematic because it could be blocked by a single state.

Hungary and Slovakia have indicated they are opposed to either route, while Belgium, home to Euroclear, the clearing house where the majority of Russia’s frozen assets are held, has expressed strong worries that it could be taken to court by Russia were the frozen assets tapped or that it may scare off foreign investors.

Russia has protested that appropriating its assets amounts to theft but the EU says that is not the case because there was nothing to preclude Russia from reclaiming the funds in future — after it has paid war reparations to Ukraine.

Ukraine is set to run out of money early in the New Year.

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress clashed Thursday over President Trump’s use of the National Guard in American cities, with Republicans saying the deployments were needed to fight lawlessness while Democrats called his move an extraordinary abuse of military power that violated states’ rights.

Top military officials faced questioning over the deployments for the first time at the hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. They were pressed by Democrats over the legality of sending in troops, which in some places were done over the objections of mayors and governors, while Trump’s Republican allies offered a robust defense of the policy.

It was the highest level of scrutiny, outside a courtroom, of Trump’s use of the National Guard in U.S. cities since the deployments began and came a day after the president faced another legal setback over efforts to send troops to support federal law enforcement, protect federal facilities and combat crime.

“In recent years, violent crime, rioting, drug trafficking and heinous gang activity have steadily escalated,” said Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker, the committee chairman. The deployments, he said, are “not only appropriate, but essential.”

Democrats argued they are illegal and contrary to historic prohibitions about the use of military force on U.S. soil.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., had pushed for the hearing, saying domestic deployments traditionally have involved responding to major floods and tornadoes, not assisting immigration agents who are detaining people in aggressive raids.

“Trump is forcing our military men and women to make a horrible choice: uphold their loyalty to the Constitution and protect peaceful protesters, or execute questionable orders from the president,” said Duckworth, a combat veteran who served in the Illinois National Guard.

Military leaders point to training

During questioning, military leaders highlighted the duties that National Guard units have carried out. Troops are trained in community policing, they said, and are prohibited from using force unless in self-defense.

Since the deployments began, only one civilian — in California — has been detained by National Guard personnel, according to Air Force Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, commander of U.S. troops in North America. Guillot said the troops are trained to de-escalate tense interactions with people, but do not receive any specific training on mental health episodes.

“They can very quickly be trained to conduct any mission that we task of them,” Guillot said.

Republicans and Democrats see the deployments much differently

In one exchange, Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, noted how former Defense Secretary Mark Esper alleged that Trump inquired about shooting protesters during the George Floyd demonstrations. She asked whether a presidential order to shoot protesters would be lawful.

Charles L. Young III, principal deputy general counsel at the Defense Department, said he was unaware of Trump’s previous comments and that “orders to that effect would depend on the circumstances.”

“We have a president who doesn’t think the rule of law applies to him,” Hirono said in response.

Republicans countered that Trump was within his rights — and his duty — to send in the troops.

Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana, a former Navy SEAL officer, argued during the hearing that transnational crimes present enough of a risk to national security to justify military action, including on U.S. soil.

Sheehy claimed there are foreign powers “actively attacking this country, using illegal immigration, using transnational crime, using drugs to do so.”

Senators also offered their sympathies after two West Virginia National Guard members deployed to Washington were shot just blocks from the White House in what the city’s mayor described as a targeted attack. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom died a day after the Nov. 26 shooting, and her funeral took place Tuesday. Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe is hospitalized in Washington.

Hearing follows court setback for Trump

A federal judge in California on Wednesday ruled that the administration must stop deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles and return control of the troops to the state.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer granted a preliminary injunction sought by California officials, but also put the decision on hold until Monday. The White House said it plans to appeal.

Trump called up more than 4,000 California National Guard troops in June without Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s approval to further the administration’s immigration enforcement efforts.

The move was the first time in decades that a state’s National Guard was activated without a request from its governor and marked a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to carry out its mass deportation policy. The troops were stationed outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles where protesters gathered and were later sent on the streets to protect immigration officers as they made arrests.

Trump also had announced National Guard members would be sent to Illinois, Oregon, Louisiana and Tennessee. Other judges have blocked or limited the deployment of troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago, while Guard members have not yet been sent to New Orleans.

Klepper, Finley and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writer Konstantin Toropin contributed to this report.