million

UN warns hunger crisis affecting almost quarter of Lebanon’s population could escalate without ‘urgent action’.

Nearly a quarter of Lebanon’s population, or more than one million people, is facing acute food shortages due to two consecutive conflicts in less than two years and a dire economic situation, according to the United Nations.

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Food Programme (WFP) and Lebanon’s Ministry of Agriculture warned in a joint statement published on Wednesday that the number is expected to rise to 1.15 million by the middle of next year.

“Employment opportunities remain limited, savings have been depleted, and debt remains high, while the cost of food, fuel and other essentials continues to strain household budgets,” the joint statement said.

“Some households can still draw on savings, borrow, cut expenses or find other ways to put food on the table. For others, those options are being exhausted. When families have nothing left to fall back on, even a small additional shock can push them deeper into crisis,” Allison Oman Lawi, WFP representative and country director in Lebanon, said.

Lebanon’s Agriculture Minister Nizar Hani said: “These findings call for a coordinated national response that addresses urgent food needs while protecting livelihoods and restoring productive capacity.”

Lebanon’s authorities estimate that the cost of two wars between Israel and the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah since October 2023 amounts to about $27bn.

The last war, launched in March, displaced more than one million people in Lebanon. That number has fallen to about 300,000 since violence subsided in June.

Despite a United States-brokered framework deal signed between Israel and Lebanon’s government in June to bring fighting to an end, Israel is still occupying land in Lebanon.

Under the terms, Israeli forces were to withdraw, and Lebanon’s army was to take up positions in vacated territory.

Lebanon was meant to disarm Hezbollah, which is not a party to the agreement.

The fighting broke out as Lebanon struggled to recover from its worst-ever economic crisis, which began in 2019.

Beirut has been seeking a bailout from the International Monetary Fund but has yet to implement reforms demanded by the institution to release the aid.

Press Forward, the nonprofit launched in 2023 to strengthen local news as outlets struggle with economic and technological changes, announced Tuesday that it has completed investing nearly $600 million in journalism organizations, about two years ahead of schedule.

However, Press Forward Executive Director Dale Anglin said the organization’s work is far from complete. Not only will the group continue raising and investing money, it will also expand its range of initiatives to support journalism.

“The industry is going through an incredible transformation,” Anglin told the Associated Press in an interview. “It took 20 years to get to this point — if not longer. It’s going to take us a while to get out of it.”

According to “ The State of Local News 2026 ” from Northwestern University, the number of news deserts – counties that have no locally based professional sources of news – grew by 12% this year to 238, as advertising and audiences continued to decline. Though there were dozens of newsrooms started this year, more than two newspapers closed for each outlet launched.

Anglin said she has had success convincing more funders to support Press Forward, which launched in 2023 through donations from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Democracy Fund and 19 other funders. The nonprofit now has 144 funders and has explained how longer-term support for journalism is necessary, similar to arts or education funding in a community.

Press Forward has established a $21-million impact investing fund to support outlets with small loans they would likely not get elsewhere. It already has 50 local Press Forward chapters that have invested $87 million to strengthen journalism in their communities, including $53 million in the past year.

“The challenges in local news were really kind of universal,” Anglin said. “But it turns out, as we have learned over the last three years, that a lot of the solutions are local.”

Press Forward Chicago sees promise in pooled funds

Tracy Baim, executive director of Press Forward Chicago, said her chapter believes it has developed part of the solution to journalism’s funding problems.

In addition to accepting traditional donations, Press Forward Chicago has established a pooled fund, which uses donations from multiple organizations to support specific initiatives.

“It is a way to tiptoe into journalism funding,” said Baim, adding that many foundations, especially smaller ones, saw supporting individual news outlets as too intimidating. She said the potential pitfalls of being associated with a controversial project or being accused of influencing coverage because of their donations kept some foundations from getting involved.

“A pooled fund mitigates those risks,” Baim said. Chicago’s fund further minimizes risk for donors by distributing the donations to multiple outlets.

Its first pooled fund was used last year to fund increased immigration reporting. Nearly $1 million was collected from 12 donors and distributed to 12 organizations, ranging from national outlets like ProPublica and major local outlets like Chicago Public Media and Block Club Chicago to smaller outlets serving Latino and Chinese communities. The donations allowed the outlets to add reporting, editing and presentation capacity right before the Department of Homeland Security launched the immigration operation “Midway Blitz” in Chicago.

A second pooled fund focused on education and allowed outlets to increase coverage of the Chicago Board of Education elections.

“We are making these outlets stronger,” Baim said. “We’re not just giving an organization a grant to cover stuff. We are amplifying their work so that they can get new subscribers and that’s a pipeline of potential donors.”

Knight Foundation looks to local funding

Supporting that sort of sustainable growth is the next phase of Press Forward’s work. And Knight Foundation President and Chief ExecutiveMaribel Perez Wadsworth said that is more significant than co-founding the organization.

“Announcing half a billion dollars in national funding toward journalism was important in terms of demonstrating the urgency and the importance of supporting local journalism,” Wadsworth said. “But the more important thing, ultimately, is to really catalyze and create deeper awareness at the local level about the essential nature of access to reliable news and information as a public good.”

There are signs that donors, both big and small, are making journalism a priority because it provides an information base that supports other initiatives. Last month, the Ford Foundation, one of the world’s largest grantmakers, said that supporting journalism would become one of its priorities as it overhauls its giving to focus on the building blocks of democracy. The much smaller nonprofit Public Media Co. has made providing trustworthy local information a cornerstone of its work to keep public radio stations operating following ongoing federal funding cuts.

Perez Wadsworth said that having local and regional funders work together to keep local news outlets open in their communities is a more sustainable solution to many journalism outlets’ budgetary problems.

“Philanthropy writ large is not a business model,” she said. “And it’s not sustainable to believe that philanthropy is just going to always support whatever the thing is, no matter how important.”

‘No silver bullet’ for economic woes

Press Forward’s Anglin said there is “no silver bullet” to solve journalism’s economic problems. But philanthropy can help strengthen news outlets until they figure out a new business model that will make them sustainable.

Press Forward plans to promote solutions through public policy changes, encouraging cooperation and resource-sharing between outlets and supplying infrastructure and capacity-building grants. Its chapters, which operate independently, have met a wide spectrum of needs — from helping defray some Minnesota outlets’ cost of covering the surge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Minneapolis earlier this year to training local residents in Kentucky to become reporters.

“You can’t nonprofit your way out of this problem,” Anglin said. “We understand that some things will still close. But we are building for the long term.”

Gamboa writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s new White House chief of staff, Stephen Miller, is behind many of the administration’s signature domestic policy initiatives, especially its sweeping crackdown on immigration.

An outspoken defender of Trump’s most far-reaching goals to remake government going back to his 2016 run for president, Miller is known for his harsh language and unrelenting bombast, attracting outsize attention from supporters and critics alike. His record is likely to be scrutinized by Democrats in his powerful new role as he leads Trump’s White House through a lame-duck period after the Republican Party lost both houses of Congress in overwhelming fashion.

Here are some memorable things Miller has said through the years:

On immigration

During a surge in illegal border crossings during the Biden administration, Miller described migrants as invaders, even though many were escaping poverty and violence in their home countries.

“We are being conquered,” he told Fox News in December 2023. “We have millions of people coming in from different cultures and different ways of living and different belief systems.”

Miller also warned that “a generation from now,” people “will not know the country that they are living in. These consequences are permanent. Unless there’s massive large-scale deportations by the millions, it will be irrevocable.”

On federal agents’ killing of Alex Pretti

After federal agents shot and killed Alex Pretti during protests against the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in January, Miller posted on social media that the 37-year-old Minneapolis resident was a “domestic terrorist” and an “assassin” who had “tried to murder federal agents.”

Later, Miller said in a statement that the federal officers in Minneapolis “may not have been following” protocol.

On Venezuela and Greenland

In January, after a U.S. military invasion captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Miller used a lengthy post on X to decry “reverse colonization” in which he suggested that Western nations were sacrificing too much for the developing world and that such a practice “has been a long self-punishment of the places and peoples that built the modern world.”

In another post, he defended the right of the U.S. to take over Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, writing: “American sweat, ingenuity and toil created the oil industry in Venezuela. Its tyrannical expropriation was the largest recorded theft of American wealth and property. These pillaged assets were then used to fund terrorism and flood our streets with killers, mercenaries and drugs.”

He defended Trump’s assertion that the U.S. was now running Venezuela, by telling CNN’s Jake Tapper: “You can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else. But we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world.”

In the same interview, Miller also argued that the U.S. could seize Greenland by military force from NATO ally Denmark. “Obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States,” he said.

“Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland,” Miller said.

On deportations

In May of 2025, Miller suggested that the Trump administration was looking for ways to expand its power to deport migrants who are in the United States illegally. To achieve that, he said, officials were “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus — the constitutional right for people to legally challenge their detention by the government.

“The Constitution is clear — and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land — that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,” Miller said. “So, I would say that’s an option we’re actively looking at. Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.”

In the nearly 18 months since, the idea has not been publicly pursued by the Trump administration.

On family separation

During Trump’s first term, Miller championed a strict immigration deterrence policy that previous administrations had been hesitant to adopt: family separation. It called for routinely having federal agents separate children from their parents if families were apprehended illegally crossing the border.

Miller defended the policy to the New York Times in 2018, saying it “was a simple decision by the administration to have a zero-tolerance policy for illegal entry, period.”

“The message is that no one is exempt from immigration law,” he added.

The tactic sparked widespread outcry, and the Trump administration did not revive it in its second term. Still, Miller has helped promote mass deportation of people already living illegally in the U.S. that has divided families according to legal status.

On the Statue of Liberty

During Trump’s first term in 2017, Miller appeared in the White House briefing room to detail for reporters plans to cut back on the number of green cards issued, while prioritizing English speakers and skilled workers.

Asked if doing so might violate the spirit of the poem on the Statue of Liberty, that reads in part, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” Miller responded, “I don’t want to get off into a whole thing about history here.” He then did just that.

“The poem that you’re referring to, that was added later, is not actually a part of the original Statue of Liberty,” Miller said.

On birthright citizenship

When the U.S. Supreme Court blocked Trump’s attempt to throw out birthright citizenship — which grants citizenship to any child born on U.S. soil — Miller said immigrants and their children pose an existential threat to the nation.

“This is absolutely a deep knife wound in the heart of the American republic,” he told Fox News in June. “If your ruling requires you to suicide your civilization, your reading of the Constitution is wrong.”

On vaccines

Miller is one of many members of the administration who has expressed skepticism about childhood vaccines. In August, he praised the president for signing an executive order aimed at curtailing the vaccine schedule for children.

“Millions and millions of parents feel they’ve been pressured when their children are just weeks out of the hospital to take five shots, six shots, seven shots all at once,” said Miller, a father of four, including an infant born in June. “Nobody has studied it. Nobody’s looked at it. Nobody’s thought about it.”

His comments contradict what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said, which is that research shows getting several vaccines simultaneously “does not cause any chronic health problems.”

On the Democratic Party

In August 2025, Miller appeared on Fox News to respond to criticism from Democrats over Trump’s deployment of the National Guard in Washington and other U.S. cities — brushing aside concerns that the presence of troops was frightening residents, while having only a questionable impact on crime.

Miller used the occasion to take aim at Democrats more broadly.

“The Democrat Party does not fight for, care about or represent American citizens,” he said. “It is an entity devoted exclusively to the defense of hardened criminals, gang bangers and illegal alien killers and terrorists.”

Miller added: “The Democrat Party is not a political party. It is a domestic extremist organization.”

Weissert and Balingit write for the Associated Press.

Kansas City Chiefs receiver Rashee Rice has filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, claiming nearly $3.5 million in debts to just over $677,000 in assets.

According to a bankruptcy petition filed Wednesday in the Northern District of Texas, much of the money Rice owes stems from civil litigation tied to his role in a 2024 vehicle crash that left multiple people injured and assault allegations made earlier this year by his ex-girlfriend and mother of his two children.

In July 2025, Rice pleaded guilty to third-degree felony charges of collision involving serious bodily injury and racing on a highway causing bodily injury and was sentenced to 30 days in jail. He was suspended for the first six weeks of the 2025 season for violating the NFL’s personal conduct policy.

Rice owes more than $2 million following civil lawsuits by six people who were injured in the accident, according to the bankruptcy petition, with some of that amount coming from settlements and some still being disputed by Rice.

The largest amount he owes in debt is $979,837 to crash victim Kathryn Kuykendall, the remainder of a $1 million settlement from last year that has not yet been garnished from Rice’s wages.

Rice also owes $200,000 to ex-girlfriend Dacoda Jones tied to a civil lawsuit she filed in February, accusing him of physically assaulting her multiple times during their relationship between December 2023 and July 2025. That debt is also listed as disputed by Rice, who was not suspended by the NFL following Jones’ allegations.

The fourth-year player is in the final season of his rookie contract, which has a total value of $6.5 million and a base salary of $1.6 million this season. According to the bankruptcy filing, he receives a total monthly income of $59,512.44 but only nets $3,610.31 a month after payroll deductions and expenses. His total wages and commission since Jan. 1, 2024, adds up to more than $4.7 million, with no listed income source other than the Chiefs.

His assets are valued at $677,054 and include a 2023 Mercedes Benz ($53,800) and his Super Bowl LVIII ring ($160,000), the latter of which is being held as collateral by one of his attorneys, according to the document. Rice caught six passes for 39 yards in that game, a 25-22 overtime win over the San Francisco 49ers on Feb. 11, 2024. Overall, he has 176 receptions for 2,040 yards and 16 touchdowns.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

When it came to which candidate weathered the most overtly racist attacks, in a midterm election full of the most overtly racist campaign attacks in modern memory, there was no contest.

Michigan’s Democratic Senate nominee, Abdul El-Sayed, was called a “jihadist” by the president. Labeled a representative of “terrible evil” by the vice president. Smeared as an “extremist” by his Republican opponent. They all intentionally mispronounced his name as if it was a poison on the tongue that needed to be expelled.

But the hate offensive didn’t work. El-Sayed, 42, stepped up to the mic late Tuesday and delivered his victory speech as the first Muslim elected to the U.S. Senate.

“My name,” he said, pointedly using full, guttural Arabic pronunciation, “is Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed.”

It was a clarifying moment for Muslims and for millions of others appalled by the normalization of bigotry handed down from the White House. There is an Allah, after all.

The son of Egyptian immigrants, El-Sayed prevailed over former Rep. Mike Rogers by seven percentage points in one of the most closely watched races of the midterms.

His victory was one among several historic wins scored by the Democrats as they elected more governors and flipped the House and Senate — including the triumphs of America’s first openly gay senator (Chris Pappas of New Hampshire) and first female Native American governor (Deb Haaland of New Mexico), as well as Texas’ first Latina governor (Gina Hinojosa).

But beyond the political implications, El-Sayed speaks for those of us who have been othered by our “foreign” heritage, the color of our skin, the food we eat, our accents or the way we pray.

He embodies what it means to face blistering attacks on your background and faith, and to come out the other side as more American in your ideals and resolve than your slur-slinging detractors.

If that sounds dramatic, so be it. It’s been a brutal decade for Muslims, Arabs or anyone associated with groups maligned, targeted or in many cases deported by the Trump administration. We needed this win to prove to ourselves, and perhaps the rest of the world, that this is not a nation dominated by narrow-minded exclusionists, despite what MAGA has wrought.

El-Sayed kept his cool on the campaign trail, sticking to Michelle Obama’s motto of “When they go low, we go high.” But he showed Tuesday how to have fun poking at the opposition with one hand while holding an olive branch in the other.

“Donald, I know you struggle with my name, so after JD swears me in in January, you can go on and call me Senator,” he said, rubbing in his victory while calling out President Trump for his brazen, Islamophobic rants.

The senator-elect also indirectly responded to JD Vance’s low blows against him and his campaign, which included the vice president calling him a “psychopath” and claiming he trafficked in “anti-white racial hatred.”

In doing so, El-Sayed addressed Vance with a widely used Arabic word meaning “my love.” Why? Because when deploying it against a detractor, it’s the equivalent of sarcastically calling them “sweetheart.”

“JD, habibi, there is this delicious irony in the fact that you’re constitutionally obligated to swear me in in January,” said El-Sayed before throwing a college sports rivalry barb at the Ohio native: “Wolverines 1, Buckeyes 0.”

And as he has always done publicly, El-Sayed openly embraced his Muslim faith while addressing the American people.

He reminded us of the times during his campaign when he said “inshallah” (or “God willing”) to describe his hopes for winning the seat.

“Today, tonight, we can turn that ‘inshallah’ into an ‘alhamdulillah,’” meaning “praise be to God.”

It wasn’t long ago when such words uttered by a Muslim might strike fear in Americans who interpreted them as the calling card of terrorists just before they pulled the pin, flipped the switch or lobbed the bomb (thanks, Hollywood). Now, those words are part of a future senator’s speech to the millions of Americans he’s vowed to represent.

El-Sayed may just be making Arabic halal for the masses. And as the midterm results show, we’re ready for it.

Voters sent a message to Washington rebuking MAGA’s war on DEI, immigrants and the LGBTQ+ community. The Trump-era culture war against folks who look like El-Sayed has not quelled inflation, made housing cheaper, caused gas prices to drop or rendered health insurance affordable. But it may have helped us see each other again, as fellow citizens struggling to keep up.

“As I was campaigning, some of you would come up and ask, ‘How come you don’t hit back? How come you don’t call them racist or hateful?’” El-Sayed said during his victory speech. “They weren’t just attacking me. They were targeting and attacking you. They were targeting and attacking the very idea of America.”

It is about all of us, of course. But Muslim Americans who never thought they’d see the day are basking in El-Sayed’s win.

“We knew that the attacks on Abdul’s Muslim background were a big bull’s-eye for Rogers,” said Salam Al-Marayati, president of the Los Angeles-based Muslim Public Affairs Council. “What was heartening was to see it backfire.”

I’m not naive enough to think that the racist sentiment used by some Republicans to energize facets of their electorate is now a thing of the past. It’s always there. But you know what else is always there? People who choose progress instead of fear.

“Thank you. You took a chance on the unlikeliest of candidates,” El-Sayed said during his victory speech.

Mabruk, Abdul. You did it. We did it.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert Luna was leading challenger and former Sheriff Alex Villanueva by a wide margin in his bid for reelection Tuesday, according to early returns, in a rematch of the 2022 race between the two lawmen.

Early returns also showed L.A. County voters favoring Measure A, which would establish binding arbitration for sheriff’s deputies, firefighters and other public safety employees who by law cannot go on strike.

A second county ballot measure, Measure E, was far ahead in early returns. Measure E asks voters to create an independent ethics commission that previously was approved by another measure, and address administrative missteps that invalidated funding approved by voters in 2020 to support jail alternatives.

In the sheriff’s race, Villanueva was seeking to regain the job he lost in 2022 when Luna successfully challenged him for reelection.

This contest was lower profile than the 2022 race, but the stakes are just as high, as the new Los Angeles County sheriff will face a host of challenges, from navigating relationships with federal and local agencies to boosting recruitment and retention.

Luna pitched himself to county voters as a calmly effective operator who has brought down crime while building relationships with local, state and federal leaders that suffered under his predecessor’s tenure. The incumbent highlighted his department’s successful navigation of World Cup security and the Trump administration’s deployment of federal immigration agents and troops to L.A. as examples of the efficacy of his approach.

Villanueva, on the other hand, has sought to depict L.A. County as more dangerous under what he describes as the overly permissive approach of Luna. The former sheriff claimed Luna has presided over a deep decline in department morale and staffing while being too soft on drug users, the homeless and petty criminals.

Representatives of the Luna and Villanueva campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday evening.

Both men guided the department through tumultuous periods for the county. Villanueva was sheriff for nearly two years at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, while Luna was in office during the Eaton and Palisades fires.

The next four years promise further challenges. The Olympic Games are less than two years away, and the sheriff’s department will be expected to play a major role keeping millions of visitors and athletes safe.

The new sheriff also will be expected to rein in the department’s budget, which has experienced ballooning overtime costs as sworn vacancies have risen markedly under both sheriffs.

Villanueva claims Luna is out of touch with deputies and that they are leaving the force en masse in response to his poor leadership skills. Villanueva said he would improve staffing by redirecting overtime spending and serving as a beacon to would-be deputies who’ve been turned off by Luna.

But Luna denies that deputies are fleeing the department and says he’s taken major steps to improve the hiring process. He has hired an outside contractor to speed up applicant background checks and provided an avenue for many new deputies to go from the academy to patrol instead of first requiring a stint in one of the county’s jails.

Among the two countywide ballot measures, Measure A was the highest profile, with unions representing county deputy sheriffs, firefighters and others spending millions of dollars in support.

Measure A would mandate binding arbitration between the county government and negotiators who represent deputies, firefighters, lifeguards and other public safety employees in the event contract talks reach an impasse.

Currently, the county supervisors can impose a final offer that employees must accept because by law, public safety personnel are not allowed to strike.

Supporters say the measure adds balance to the negotiations process and removes the unilateral authority of the county Board of Supervisors. The change is backed by unions representing county firefighters, sheriff’s deputies and other public safety employees.

County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath authored the motion, which has the support of four out of the five supervisors. No formal opposition has been filed. Supervisor Holly Mitchell raised financial concerns about the measure but has not officially opposed it.

Measure E on the county ballot would fix issues with Measure J, which was approved by voters in 2020, and Measure G, which passed in 2024.

Measure J earmarked at least 10% of locally generated, unrestricted revenue to incarceration alternatives. However, some of the ballot language in Measure G unintentionally repealed Measure J — an administrative error that was discovered in June 2025. Amendment E would partly ensure the funding to incarceration alternatives remains in effect.

The amendment also would enshrine in the county charter the seven-member ethics commission and ethics compliance office that was created when Measure G passed.

The amendment has the support of Horvath and other supervisors, as well as the League of Women Voters of L.A. County, who said Measure J shouldn’t be undone by an administrative error.

Paris Jackson, daughter of late pop icon Michael Jackson, seeks more than half a million dollars in a preliminary transfer from her father’s estate to a trust for his three children. Jackson alleged in a recent court filing that the funds are overdue and under the “iron grip” of the estate’s executor.

The actor-singer on Thursday accused the executors of her father’s estate of failing to fulfill the singer’s wishes for Prince, Paris and Bigi to begin receiving income from their family trust.

“Michael Jackson’s family trust remains unfunded,” she said in the petition, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court and reviewed by The Times.

According to Paris, executors said in 2011 they would file a petition to begin funding the trust. Allegedly, no such petition has been filed: “Fifteen years later, Michael’s beneficiaries are still waiting.”

Attorneys for the estate’s executors did not immediately respond on Tuesday to The Times’ request for comment.

Jackson said her father, who died in June 2009, wanted his children to begin receiving money from the estate on each of their 21st birthdays and that each child would also receive “outright principal distributions” from the trust when they each turned 30. Prince and Paris (born to the singer and former wife Debbie Rowe) are 29 and 28, respectively. Bigi is 24 and was born via surrogate.

“They instead receive lesser amounts dictated by the remaining Executor, who uses this power to deter them from checking his abuses,” Paris’ petition alleges.

The executors for Michael Jackson’s estate began generating liquidity in 2011, including the sale of the singer’s Neverland Ranch in 2020 and the $750-million deal with Sony for intellectual property assets. “Executors have claimed the overall value of the Estate is now between $2 billion and $3 billion,” Paris said in her filing.

“Executor continues to keep each beneficiary beholden to him with an iron grip over when and if monies are distributed to them,” the petition added.

The “sirens” and “evermore” singer also accused the executors of meeting her previous legal challenges with “scorched earth litigation, public attacks, and a multimillion reduction” in money to herself and her siblings.

Paris also noted in her petition that the estate was subject to litigation by the Internal Revenue Service and said that litigation “also appears to be at or nearing its end,” potentially freeing up funds to be transferred to the family trust. The estate said in a statement that it cannot “fully” fund the trust until “several legal matters are resolved” including that case with the IRS, People reported.

“The Estate was able to secure a ruling to significantly reduce that amount, but the matter has not been settled and could still change,” the estate added in its statement to People. It also denied allegations of holding back or reducing payments to the three children.

Jackson asks the court to order the executor of her father’s estate to make a preliminary transfer of $600 million, or another amount it deemed fit, to the Michael Jackson Family Trust. The next hearing for this case is scheduled for Wednesday.

Bengaluru, India — India lifted nearly 500 million out of poverty between 2011 and 2023, with extreme poverty dropping from 27.1 percent to 2.6 percent in the world’s most populous nation during the same period, according to a new report by the World Bank.

The only other parallel in poverty reduction on this scale is China, which lifted more than 800 million people out of extreme poverty — though that was over a period of 40 years.

Yet despite the substantial fall in poverty in India — home to 1.4 billion people — the income and wealth inequality gap has widened significantly since it opened up its economy in the early 1990s.

According to the 2026 World Inequality Report, inequality in India remains among the highest in the world.

We take a look at how India managed to almost eradicate extreme poverty, and at the contrast between that accomplishment and the deep economic inequality that remains in the world’s most populous nation:

What does the World Bank data say?

Based on an extreme poverty threshold of $3 a day, the World Bank said extreme poverty in India declined from 27.1 percent to 2.6 percent between 2011 and 2023.

Extreme poverty is defined as the minimum amount of money needed to afford basic essentials such as food, water, shelter and clothing.

Estimating poverty metrics based on three official household surveys, the Bank also said that an estimated 496 million people have been lifted out of poverty as the share of India’s population living below the lower middle-income poverty threshold of $4.20 a day fell from 57.7 percent to 16.1 percent.

The authors of the report, led by World Bank’s South Asia poverty economist Ayago Wambile, wrote that poverty in India is “projected to continue declining, albeit more gradually with the poverty rate at the $4.20/day line expected to fall from 14.2 percent in 2026 to 12.1 percent by 2028.”

“This progress was mainly driven by strong consumption growth, rising employment, especially among women, and expanded social transfers, including food subsidies,” they added.

How significant is India’s poverty reduction?

India lifting nearly 500 million out of poverty in 12 years has been lauded as “remarkable progress” by the World Bank. It added that the downward trend represents “one of the fastest poverty declines in the world.”

To determine India’s poverty rates, the World Bank used Household Consumption Expenditure Surveys (HCES) which were conducted by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO), an Indian government body.

A 2022 report, jointly produced by the World Bank and the Chinese Finance Ministry, said that China had lifted 800 million people out of poverty, but it took 40 years to achieve.

Last month, the World Bank also raised its economic growth forecast for India to 7.1 percent.

In a post on Instagram on Sunday, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi lauded the country’s progress in tackling poverty. “A historic fall in poverty. A generational rise in opportunity,” he said.

Last November, the southern state of Kerala, which has been ruled either by the centrist Congress party or a coalition of communist parties since independence, became the first in the country to officially declare itself free from extreme poverty. Kerala has the best education and health statistics of major Indian states.

Santosh Mehrotra, a development economist formerly in India’s planning commission, and currently a visiting professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow, noted that India is the only low-middle-income country among G20 nations, which are otherwise upper-middle- or high-income nations.

“The absolute number of the poor in our country is still the highest in the world for sheer size of population. So therefore, if we are going to genuinely reduce the incidence of poverty and more importantly, the absolute number of the poor, then it makes a huge difference globally,” he told Al Jazeera.

Coming from the World Bank, the credibility of the analysis that has concluded India’s success in reducing poverty so majorly is also above question, said Surjit Bhalla, economist an a former executive director at the International Monetary Fund. Any data that comes from the World Bank, he said, is the “gold standard”.

He said the institution carries out a poverty analysis for every country using a per capita consumption level that is normalised globally by invoking purchasing power parity.

How did India dramatically cut poverty?

There are no easy answers.

But economists point to a series of factors and programmes that might have contributed to India’s success in pulling record numbers of people out of poverty.

Overall, poverty in India has, however, been declining since the country opened its economy in the early 1990s, when the Congress party was in power, setting the stage for more than three decades of fast economic growth. Successive governments have launched, continued or reworked a series of social welfare schemes that economists say have helped combat poverty.

Prime Minister Modi’s predecessor Manmohan Singh, for example, launched an employment scheme that guaranteed rural jobs for a minimum of 100 days per year.

Since coming to power in 2014, Modi has launched several other welfare schemes, including direct cash transfers, free rations and housing, to tackle poverty. While the Modi government has significantly diluted the rural job guarantee scheme that Singh had launched, the current administration now provides free food grains to about 800 million Indians.

Under Modi, the government has also significantly expanded the construction of toilets, especially in rural India, where open defecation has historically been common in many villages. Access to piped drinking water has risen from 17 percent of rural homes in August 2019 to more than 80 percent, according to government statistics.

“The reduced sickness from accessing safe water may have helped families earn more income,” economists Surjit Bhalla and Karan Bhasin wrote in a research paper on India’s poverty alleviation efforts for the Brookings Institution in March 2024.

Before the latest World Bank report, Bhalla — a former executive director at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) — and Bhasin had used Indian consumption data in early 2025 to also conclude that the country was making major gains in ending extreme poverty.

Why some economists are concerned

Despite the decline in poverty, Bhalla and Bhasin pointed in their 2025 paper that free food grains supplied by the Indian government to 800 million people only fulfilled their calorific needs. “More balanced food subsidies that are better targeted to the genuine poor will improve nutritional outcomes and would represent a better approach to food insecurity,” they wrote.

It is also unclear whether continuing to provide free food supplies indefinitely to more than half of the country’s population is sustainable for the government — and whether that programme points to deep economic distress mitigated only by state assistance.

Some economists, like Mehrotra, question why the Indian government no longer determines its own poverty level and its own estimates of the numbers of those below it.

Mehrotra said that since 2014 — when Modi came to power — the Indian government has stopped calculating its own poverty levels, instead relying entirely on World Bank estimates.

“We are a strange country in having adopted an international organisation’s poverty line as our own,” he said.

For a country as large, diverse and complex as India, he argued, a standard set by an international agency alone is not enough to capture shifting economic and consumer patterns. “For example, 10 years back everyone didn’t have phones; today even in rural areas people do. So consumption baskets [used to determine price indices and poverty levels] change over time and hence India should have done its own poverty line,” Mehrotra said.

But Bhalla pushed back against criticism of India’s use of World Bank data.

“The methodology that the World Bank uses and the estimates it comes up with are vetted by every country before the final data is published,” he told Al Jazeera. “So in this case India’s poverty analysis has been gone through by Indian scholars and the government of India. So there is no ideological basis for questioning this data.”

Jayati Ghosh, an economist and professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, however said that India’s healthcare and nutrition indices also remained major causes for concern. The country spends just over 1 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on public healthcare, ranking far behind global peers in per capita health investment and leaving public hospitals chronically underfunded and overburdened. Citizens also end up bearing the brunt of total health expenditures, a financial burden that pushes millions of Indians into poverty or debt every year.

Ghosh pointed out that real wages have stagnated in India. According to the World Bank report, while poverty has declined in India, wage disparities remain. “Median earnings among the top 10 percent of workers were about 13 times those of the bottom 10 percent in 2023,” the report said.

“These are not signs of a dynamic economy with falling poverty,” Ghosh said.

Nitin Kumar Bharti, a lecturer at the University of Western Australia, said that the World Bank’s report is encouraging. But he added that the drop in extreme poverty should not be seen as a mission accomplished, as “233 million people still live below” the $4.20 per day poverty line.

Bharti, who co-authored a study by the World Inequality Lab (WIL) on India’s income and wealth disparities published in 2024, also pointed to uneven growth within the country as a major challenge.

“Even if extreme poverty has declined, the extent of improvement in people’s overall wellbeing remains an important question,” he said.

Why is income inequality growing in India?

Bharti said that inequality is growing because gains from economic growth are distributed unevenly, with those at the top capturing a growing share of national income.

According to the 2026 World Inequality Report, India is among the world’s most unequal countries, with the top 10 percent of earners capturing about 58 percent of national income, while the bottom 50 percent receives only 15 percent.

“This is reinforced by longstanding structural inequalities — the historical caste system, unequal ownership of assets, and decades of inadequate attention to primary education have limited opportunities for disadvantaged groups,” he said.

“Insufficient public investment in quality education and healthcare — both important equalisers — means that family resources continue to shape access to skills, good jobs and economic security.”

Growing income inequality and a lack of job opportunities have triggered discontent among India’s youth, who have staged a series of nationwide protests in recent months.

According to government data released earlier this year, youth unemployment in the country stood at 13.8 percent in April 2025 and rose to 15.2 percent in March 2026.

The State of Working India 2026 report, from the Bengaluru-based Azim Premji University, noted that nearly 40 percent of young graduates aged 15–25 and roughly 20 percent of those aged 25–29 are unemployed. Among those who have a diploma or postgraduate degrees, the unemployment rate has climbed to 29.4 percent.

Does inequality matter if poverty is falling?

Yes, say economists.

“One reason is that the distribution of growth influences how effectively growth improves ordinary households’ lives. For a given level of average income, a more equal distribution generally leaves fewer people below a poverty line,” Bharti said.

“A second concern is inequality of opportunity. With rising inequality, families differ enormously in their ability to pay for education, healthcare, housing, capital to start a business or searching for a better job,” he added.

“A third concern is the concentration of economic and political influence. Large concentrations of wealth can create opportunities for a small group to shape policies and institutions in their favour.”

How can India tackle poverty and income inequality at the same time?

Dipa Sinha, a development economist at Azim Premji University, said that in order to tackle poverty and widespread inequality, India would need to prioritise some redistribution of wealth.

“India talks about poverty eradication only. But government policies need to implement a more progressive taxation policy that actually tackles inequality head-on,” she said.

“The second thing I think is very important is that the government should begin investing in universal public services like health and education. This can reduce both poverty and inequality,” she added.

Bharti said that one strong lesson for India is that sustained poverty reduction requires several policies working together.

He said China offers important lessons in economic transformation and rural income growth, pointing to its success in improving agricultural productivity, accelerating industrialisation, facilitating rural-to-urban migration, and investing heavily in both physical and human capital.

“In contrast, India’s current policy focus is more heavily tilted towards physical infrastructure, often addressing the needs of the top 10 percent rather than the bottom 90 percent,” Bharti said.

“Roads, transport, and basic infrastructure matter because they connect people to economic opportunities. But equally important are good government schools and hospitals that enable people to benefit from these opportunities.”

Bharti suggested that India’s government should pursue poverty reduction and broader economic inclusion together.

“Progressive taxation can help finance these investments while ensuring that the costs are distributed according to the ability to pay,” he added.

The Chase host Bradley Walsh returned to screens with a brand-new show on Sunday

Channel 4 viewers were left divided as they watched Bradley Walsh‘s new show.

The pilot for the host’s new show, Bradley Walsh’s Million Pount Shot, aired on Sunday night (November 1). During the episode, three contestants stepped up in front of a live studio audience for the chance to win up to £1 million.

However, the contestants had to put their own money on the line for the chance to win the jackpot. This is something that no previous UK quiz show has done before.

The contestants brought their own bank cards and bet money, depending on how confident they were in answering general knowledge questions. Correct answers won bet balls that carried monetary value, which players could either cash out or risk by firing them into the Million Pound Shot machine in an attempt to win £1 million.

Viewers were introduced to Helen, Reece, and Mark, who had chosen to risk £1,500, £1,700 and £1,000 of their own money, respectively. As Reece later found himself £6,000 down, an angry audience member was heard shouting: “The concept of this is disgusting.”

The footage cut out, before Bradley returned to the studio to explain: “What you’ve just witnessed wasn’t all that it seemed. The whole thing was a performance… Everything you’ve seen tonight draws on the techniques used by the gambling industry to manipulate its customers.”

Ensure our latest TV stories always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as Preferred Source in your Google search settings

The character of Reece was inspired by a real man called Patrick, who later shared his story. Bradley issued a warning to viewers, saying: “I should warn you that what we’re about to explore may be difficult and upsetting for some viewers. Because, like any addiction, gambling can cause serious harm.”

The programme quickly left viewers divided. “The most obvious fake show I’ve ever seen,” one person wrote on X. Another added: “This makes zero sense at all.” A third said: “How absolutely ridiculous.” Someone else commented: “Bradley Walsh and Channel 4 presenting an anti-gambling stunt is prob the strangest TV ep I’ve ever seen.”

Meanwhile, other viewers praised the show for raising awareness of gambling. “Well played C4. A subject that needs airtime,” someone wrote.

Another added: “#MillionPoundShot had me frighteningly uncomfortable with the idea of a national broadcaster normalising people gambling/losing huge, unaffordable, life-changing money. It seemed so stupidly irresponsible. Thank god for that twist. A hugely important message.” A third said: “Kudos to Brad and those involved for highlighting the seriousness of gambling advertising and addiction.”

Sharing his thoughts on the programme, Bradley previously said: “This programme is unlike anything we’ve seen on British TV before. And when I heard about this format, I thought it was one of the most original and surprising quiz shows I’d ever encountered. Alongside playing with their own money, there are more twists and turns along the way. I’m excited for everyone to see how it plays out.”

Bradley Walsh’s Million Pound Shot is available to stream on Channel 4

The National Gambling Helpline offers free, confidential help for anyone who is worried about their gambling, or someone else’s gambling

A parade of short-priced winners opened the Breeders’ Cup on Friday, with the afternoon’s heaviest favorite capturing the headline race as Hughes won the $2 million Juvenile.

Hughes, named for New Jersey Devils forward and U.S. Olympic hockey hero Jack Hughes, held off American History and Salahudin in the 1 1/16-mile race at Keeneland Racecourse in Lexington, Ky., to remain undefeated in five starts and clinch the 2-year-old championship.

The son of Into Mischief, ridden by Flavien Prat for trainer Bob Baffert, went off at odds of 4-5 and returned $3.64 after covering the distance in 1 minute 42.27 seconds.

The winner of the Juvenile normally is anointed the early favorite for next spring’s Kentucky Derby, but Hughes will have to vie for that label with U.S.S. Valor, who skipped the Juvenile after a very impressive win in the Champagne Stakes last month at Belmont Park.

Friday’s win was the third in a Grade 1 race for Hughes, following victories in the American Pharoah at Santa Anita and the Del Mar Futurity.

Baffert also had the favorite in the Juvenile Fillies, but Miss Monica was runner-up behind second choice Emphatic ($7.92). The other losing favorite was Folsom Blues, who was second in the Juvenile Turf behind third choice Haffner ($9.46).

The other races were won by favorites — Libertango ($5.74) in the Turf Sprint and Sun Goddess ($3.70) in the Juvenile Fillies Turf.

Ryan Moore rode Sun Goddess and Haffner for trainer Aidan O’Brien, who broke a tie with Baffert for most Breeders’ Cup wins (23-22).

There are nine more races Saturday beginning at 10:10 a.m. PDT. The final race, the $7 million Classic, is scheduled for 3:16 p.m.

More than $351 million in political donations has been poured into a high-stakes contest about a proposed wealth tax on the November ballot, making it one of the most costly campaigns in California history.

About 90% of the money is being spent to defeat a statewide initiative to impose a new tax on the assets of billionaires, a multifaceted opposition effort bankrolled primarily by ultra-rich Californians being targeted by a measure that supporters call an economic reckoning.

The billionaire tax, Proposition 40, would levy a one-time, 5% tax on many assets of California billionaires who lived in the state as of Jan. 1.

Millions of dollars continue to flow into the campaigns of three intertwined ballot initiatives at the center of the debate: Proposition 40, and Propositions 41 and Proposition 42, which would neuter the Proposition 40 through strategic, esoteric tax law changes.

“The pro-40 campaign picked a fight and then came to that fight with a butter knife against a nuclear arsenal,” said GOP strategist Rob Stutzman, who is not involved in any of the wealth-tax-related ballot measures. “Because they’re so well funded, in today’s multifaceted media world, they are able to show up everywhere from network TV to inside video games. That is a very, very large advantage few campaigns ever get to have.”

But, Stutzman warned, money does not guarantee a win.

In the most expensive ballot measure fights in California history, $463 million was spent on two gambling proposals 2022. The initiatives pitted some of California’s most successful Native American tribes with gaming interests against gambling corporations, including online sports gaming companies DraftKings and FanDuel. Both side’s measure failed.

People attend a rally against Proposition 40 at the Iron Workers Apprenticeship Training Center on Oct. 5 in La Palma.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

The tax measure was crafted by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West in response to federal healthcare funding cuts signed by President Trump last year that are expected to reduce California’s healthcare budget by $100 billion, burdening the state’s most vulnerable residents.

“Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ slashes healthcare funding, with major coverage cuts scheduled to hit after the midterms,” said Suzanne Jimenez, the union’s chief of staff. “More than 3 million Californians could lose their health insurance. Hospitals and emergency rooms face closure. Patients will die unnecessarily when the care they need is no longer there. Proposition 40 is an emergency response to that looming disaster.”

The proposition’s supporters raised $34.3 million, nearly all of it from Jimenez’s union.

The two other measures, Propositions 41 and 42, would nullify the billionaire tax if either receives more votes.

Proposition 41 supporters say the measure aims to cut wasteful government spending by requiring audits for new state special taxes and would bar new state taxes that exempt their revenue from a state spending limit. Backers of Proposition 42 argue it would prohibit new taxes on retirement holdings, individually owned assets and other forms of personal savings.

Advocates for the billionaire tax say both are well-financed smokescreens to undercut Proposition 40.

Opposition campaigns to the wealth tax as well as the two countermeasures have received enormous donations from several of the state’s billionaires. But Building a Better California, the main funder of efforts to defeat the wealth tax, noted that its allies included Democratic and Republican politicians, prominent labor groups and business leaders.

“It’s rare for such a broad coalition to unite around any single cause in California, but it reflects the potentially devastating impact of this measure on healthcare, education, and our state’s economy,” the group said in a statement.

Among the largest donors opposing the wealth tax are billionaires Sergey Brin, a co-founder of Google who has donated more than $100 million to anti-wealth-tax efforts, and former Google leader Eric Schmidt and venture capitalist L. John Doerr, who each kicked in $40 million.

Brin, Schmidt and Doerr did not respond to requests for comment.

US tech entrepreneur Sergey Brin and Gerelyn Gilbert-Soto arrive for the 2026 Met Gala celebrating “Costume Art” at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in May.

(ANGELA WEISS/AFP via Getty Images)

The spending disparity also reflects a divide among Democrats and their allies, many of whom support wealth taxes, but argue that the way Proposition 40 was written is disastrous to California’s volatile budget, which is dependent on the state’s wealthiest residents.

Jodi Hicks, chief executive and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said that while her organization would support a nationwide or a California wealth tax, their primary concerns are about 40’s impacts on the state budget and healthcare in the state.

“We are opposed to this particular proposal because we think it does more harm than good,” she said, adding that after what her organization “faced last year having to scramble for dollars because of [federal funding cuts] we are committed to work with the stakeholders facing cuts and not harming the budget and finding revenue in a smart way.”

The cash imbalance between supporters and opponents of the billionaire tax is vast. Those opposed to the measure raised $316.7 million, while proponents raised nearly $34.3 million.

The Fair Games Coalition, made up of community leaders, labor organizations and advocates, announce the launch of the Overpaid CEO Tax Initiative in front of the Tesla Diner in West Hollywood in January.

(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)

The supporters of the wealth tax spent nearly all of their money gathering signatures to place the measure on the ballot. They had $1.6 million on hand as of Oct. 17.

Now, as voters cast ballots, their campaign appears reliant on public events and media coverage, such as of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-Vt.) recent rally in support of Proposition 40 in downtown Los Angeles.

“What you are showing people from coast to coast and all over is that, yes, we can take on the greed of the oligarchs,” he said, calling it the most important ballot measure in the country. “Yes, we can create an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent.”

Facebook creator and Meta chief Mark Zuckerberg was among the California billionaires Sanders name-checked in his remarks. After Zuckerberg told company leaders that he planned to leave the state to avoid his control over the company substantially reduced by being forced to sell enough of his stock in the social media giant to pay the proposed levy, the company on Wednesday announced the creation of a new, non-voting type of stock that would allow Zuckerberg to sell enough shares to pay the proposed tax while retaining his voting power in exchange for him agreeing to remain in the state for eight years.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg listens as President Trump speaks to reporters at the White House on Sept. 29.

(Jacquelyn Martin / Ap Photo/jacquelyn Martin)

The pro-wealth-tax campaign is sending voters emails and texts and has an online presence.

“Remember: it’s not enough to vote YES on 40. You also need to vote NO on 41 + 42,” read an email sent to voters on Tuesday. “Don’t be fooled: Props 41 and 42 are billionaire-funded initiatives designed specifically to undermine Prop 40, the California Billionaire Tax.”

Meanwhile, the anti-40 and pro-42 campaigns are inundating voters on television, streaming services, in mailboxes, through online influencers and even in digital video games such as Sim City.

Jimenez said voters will see through the blizzard of campaign messaging.

“The billionaires think voters are stupid. They think they can bury the facts under millions of dollars in advertising and disguise Prop. 42 … as protection for ordinary taxpayers,” she said. “Their spending also makes our case for us. When billionaires can afford to spend millions a day protecting their fortunes, voters can see that billionaires have plenty of money to spare.”

Sheri Sadler, a veteran Democratic media buyer, questioned how much voters were hearing about the rationale for the proposed billionaire tax.

“The yes side is severely lacking in getting their message through while the no side is dipping into different kinds of pockets,” she said.

Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School, said that beyond voter confusion about the competing ballot measures, it is certain to face legal challenges, notably about the retroactive nature of the tax, which would apply to any billionaire who lived in California as of Jan. 1. She described that as “the biggest legal pressure point.”

“It’s kind of a mess,” she said.

Times staff writer Gabrielle LaMarr LeMee contributed to this report.

Foes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is widely viewed as a likely 2028 presidential candidate, are launching television and digital ads this weekend in early primary states that criticize the governor’s opposition to the proposed billionaire tax on California’s November ballot.

The ad, funded by backers of the wealth tax, castigates Newsom for opposing Proposition 40, the ballot measure that would impose a 5% tax on California billionaires’ assets to offset federal healthcare funding cuts approved by congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump last year.

“We’re all struggling with the high cost of healthcare. In California, Democrats are championing a one-time tax on billionaires that would save coverage for millions,” a narrator says in the 30-second ad. “So why [has] presidential hopeful Gavin Newsom betrayed his own supporters by trying to sabotage the billionaire tax? Maybe it’s because the same billionaires who oppose Prop. 40 also gave millions of dollars to Newsom. Gavin Newsom turned his back on working Californians. Will he do the same to you?”

The ad specifically calls out billionaires Stewart Resnick, who owns several businesses including Pom Wonderful, Fiji Water and Justin Wines; crypto executive Chris Larsen; former Google leader Eric Schmidt; and venture capitalist Michael Moritz, all of whom have backed Newsom’s political ambitions.

Newsom has argued that, although he supports wealth taxes, they ought to be enacted at the national level, rather than a state-by-state patchwork that could drive the rich to leave California, a state with a volatile budget heavily dependent on the state’s wealthiest residents.

The primary funders of the ad are the Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers West, which crafted Proposition 40; Saikat Chakrabarti, a climate change warrior and political advisor who made his wealth in part as a founding engineer at Stripe; and Ross Boucher, an early engineer at Stripe.

The ad buy is six figures but could grow, according to its backers. Among the states where the ad is expected to air are South Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia and New Hampshire.

Earlier this month, Newsom stumped for candidates in New Hampshire, his latest foray to early presidential primary states.

The ad launch comes amid a contentious, expensive battle over the proposed wealth tax, which has divided Democrats and their allies. Although Newsom is among Democrats who oppose it, the ballot measure was endorsed by the state Democratic Party and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Voters are closely divided about the measure.

DRAKE is throwing himself a $1 million 40th birthday party in New York City, and he’s sparing no expensive, The U.S. Sun has learned.

The rapper – whose OVO record label and clothing line are a nod to his birthday month – has pulled out all the stops for his big day on Friday.

“Drake is having a massive birthday weekend in the city for his 40th,” a source told The U.S. Sun.

“He has rented out Cipriani 42nd St., which in itself is a fortune.”

It sounds like Drake is going all-out for the guests inside the iconic venuel, too.

“He has a massive, concert-level stage set up in there for special guest performances throughout the night,” the insider claimed.

And it’s not just a one-night event either.

Another insider claimed the party will continue at not-yet-open Chelsea hot spot, Lady Delilah.

Pricing for a full house at Cipriani’s 42nd St, with its capacity of 1,800 people and a cocktail-style buy-out runs approximately $1.1 million for the night.

The U.S. Sun reached out to a rep for Drake for comment.

The Canadian rapper is known for going all out for his parties.

As The U.S. Sun exclusively reported last year, a source said, “He hired out Mr Porter in Mayfair and was seen arriving around midnight,” for a monster bash after a set of London shows.

“There were loads of celebs there like Casey Affleck and Sacha Baron Cohen. Weirdly, Lily Phillips — the X-rated adult performer — was also on the guest list.

“The party went on all through the early hours of Sunday morning, with Drake finally heading home not long before 6am.

“It was a great bash and everyone who came out looked like they’d had a really good time,” the source said of the party after his set of July shows.

When he’s not throwing a rager, he’s putting out albums and digging up his ongoing beef with fellow rapper Kendrick Lamar.

Earlier this year, Drake dropped three albums, and fans believe some of the tracks were taking aim at his longtime enemy Kendrick.

On the song Make Them Pay from his album Iceman, he delivered lines that listeners quickly connected to his rival.

“Damn, who is this guy for real/ I guess a magician/ 100 million streams vanished; no one got questions,” Drake rapped.

NATO member Finland is preparing to reintroduce anti-personnel landmines into its military arsenal, with a contract for around one million examples due to be signed soon, following the country’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention that aims to eliminate these weapons. The move comes as Helsinki looks to strengthen its territorial defenses against a longstanding Russian threat and the prospect of a larger Russian military presence along its eastern border in the years ahead.

Finland’s withdrawal from the treaty, which prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of anti-personnel mines, took effect on January 10 of this year. Reflecting growing concern among NATO’s eastern-flank members about Russia’s military posture and the lessons of the war in Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have also moved to leave the convention.

Mines have, for many centuries, been used to complicate an attacker’s movement, slow operations, and force troops to devote time and resources to clearing obstacles. Anti-personnel mines, in particular, have long been employed in defensive campaigns, but they come with significant humanitarian risks. They can kill or maim civilians long after hostilities end, which has seen them fall foul of international humanitarian law in many countries — at least when those nations don’t see a realistic risk of invasion.

It is a measure of how badly the European security environment has deteriorated that anti-personnel mines are back on the agenda.

The Finnish Defense Forces previously said that discussions with the domestic defense industry and preparations to train military personnel would begin early this year. It has now announced that the project seeks two different types of anti-personnel mines, of Finnish manufacture.

The two weapons will comprise a modern tube mine activated by a tripwire trigger, and a pressure-activated step mine. In the future, more technically advanced mines may also be procured, including cluster-type mines of the kind deployed by Russia in Ukraine. In general, anti-personnel mines have been very widely used by both sides in that conflict, with Kyiv notably receiving them as part of U.S. air packages, as you can read about here. Neither the United States nor Russia are signatories of the Ottawa Convention.

“The aim is for production of the new anti-personnel mines to begin in Finland in 2028,” said Col. Riku Mikkonen, inspector of engineers for the Finnish Army Command.

“We have a materials procurement project underway, which is currently in the preparatory and market review phase. At the same time, we are drawing up the technical specifications for the mines,” Mikkonen added. “We will soon move on to the stage where we issue requests for tenders, so that we can eventually proceed to a competitive tendering process and conclude contracts.”

At this point, no contracts have been signed. However, once the procurement effort is underway, the Finnish Defense Forces are set to return their anti-personnel mine stockpile to what it was before acceding to the Ottawa Convention in 2012.

The first new mines and associated training equipment are expected to become available during 2027. Ultimately, all conscripts will be trained to employ anti-personnel mines. The total cost of the project is around $110 million, with the last of the mines scheduled to be delivered in the 2030s.

Helsinki has stressed that it does not intend to lay anti-personnel mines during peacetime. Mikkonen said the weapons would be used only under emergency conditions.

Finland’s decision reflects a national defense philosophy that has long been shaped by direct experience with Soviet aggression. The Soviet Union invaded Finland in 1939, beginning the Winter War, and fought another conflict with the country from 1941 to 1944. Finland lost territory but preserved its independence, subsequently maintaining conscription, a large trained reserve, and a defense strategy built around making any invasion costly.

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 reinforced Finnish concerns that major conventional warfare in Europe remained a realistic possibility. Finland joined NATO in April 2023, and the country shares a little over 800 miles of border with Russia.

Finland’s defensive approach traditionally emphasizes rapid mobilization to defend national territory and delay a much larger attacking force until reinforcements can arrive. The role of anti-personnel mines in that scenario is clear, being sown to slow down infantry movements and hamper advances through vulnerable areas. Their disproportionate effect, at least in theory, is especially relevant for a country with a relatively tiny population compared to the length of its border.

At the same time, anti-personnel mines would form only one part of a much broader defensive system incorporating artillery, airstrikes, engineering obstacles, fortifications, and reserve forces. It should be noted that Finland also has a considerable armory of anti-tank and anti-vehicle mines, most of which are of local manufacture.

In general, Moscow has been restructuring its military command arrangements and starting to establish the foundations for a larger conventional presence across northern Europe.

In 2024, Russia reestablished the Leningrad Military District, an apparent response to Finland’s and Sweden’s subsequent entry into NATO.

The Leningrad Military District is responsible for a strategically important region that covers the approaches to St. Petersburg, areas bordering Finland, and territory extending toward the Arctic. Its reestablishment gives Russia a dedicated command structure for managing forces facing NATO across this northern sector.

While significant, the creation of a military district does not necessarily generate additional combat power.

Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to drain resources in terms of personnel, equipment, logistics, and more.

Nevertheless, Moscow’s longer-term plans point toward a substantial expansion of its ground forces and military infrastructure in areas facing Finland and the wider NATO alliance.

A central element of Russia’s reorganization is the formation of the 44th Army Corps in the Republic of Karelia, near Finland’s eastern border. The corps was established in 2024 as part of the wider effort to strengthen Russia’s military presence in the northwest.

Russia’s wider military development also encompasses the Kola Peninsula and approaches to the Arctic, where facilities support the Northern Fleet and its strategic nuclear submarine force.

Satellite imagery last year showed construction at the Lupche-Savino garrison near Kandalaksha, including facilities intended to accommodate an artillery brigade and at least part of an engineering brigade. The location is approximately 70 miles east of Finland’s border.

Earlier this year, a separate report by the Finnish Yle media outlet found that the Russian military was expanding a base in the town of Novaya Vilga to hold as many as 6,000 Russian troops. It is located about 100 miles from the Finnish border.

For Finland, the situation could change dramatically if the war in Ukraine winds down, and the Russian military assembles in greater strength closer to its borders.

Finland’s Military Intelligence Review 2026 assesses that Russia’s military reforms have not yet significantly increased its capabilities in its immediate vicinity. But it still anticipates a substantial increase in Russian military capabilities as circumstances permit and identifies Finland as a major direction for future force development after the war.

A ceasefire or settlement in Ukraine would not automatically enable Russia to launch a major offensive against Finland. A ceasefire could ease the immediate military pressure on Russia while still creating a serious economic and political challenge for the Kremlin. Russia’s wartime spending has sustained defense-sector production and employment, but winding that spending down risks exposing structural weaknesses.

With a ceasefire or settlement, Moscow would still need to rebuild units, replace equipment, replenish personnel, and establish the logistical capacity to sustain large-scale operations. However, there are indications that this is already happening, at least to a degree.

Recent imagery analysis indicates, for example, a significant buildup of newly delivered Russian armor, including new T-90M tanks, at the 22nd Central Tank Reserve Base, located around 450 miles from the Finnish border.

Finland’s planned acquisition of anti-personnel mines fits into a broader effort to prepare for a potential future conflict. Prominent in the minds of Finnish — and other Nordic — defense planners is the fact that Russia is rebuilding the command structures and infrastructure needed to support a larger military presence near NATO’s northern frontier, even as the war in Ukraine limits its immediate ability to do so.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Maurisio “Mauri” Tapia, the frontman of the popular SoCal indie rock act Los Retros, has been charged with four felony counts of unlawful acts with a child under the age of 10.

Tapia, a 26-year-old Moorpark resident was arrested on Oct. 8 and booked with bail set at $3 million. He was charged in Ventura County Superior Court on Monday, according to court records, and did not enter a plea.

The charges come with additional special allegations, around the victim’s vulnerability and that Tapia abused a trustworthy position. His next court date is Thursday.

Los Retros became an influential act in a wave of Latino bands drawing from vintage Mexican balladeers, American oldies and modern indie rock. Tapia played the Coachella Valley Music & Arts Festival this year, and singles like “Someone to Spend Time With” and “Amtrak” have millions of streams and monthly listeners.

The project was a prominent act on Stones Throw Records, which had initially booked Los Retros to co-headline its 30th anniversary festival.

In a statement posted to social media, Stones Throw said that “Yesterday we learned of extremely serious and disturbing allegations against Mauri Tapia, professionally known as Los Retros. We had previously announced the cancellation of his scheduled performance at Stones Throw 30 before we were aware of these circumstances. In light of this information, we are taking steps to disassociate ourselves from Tapia and his work. We take these allegations extremely seriously and will continue to assess the situation as more information becomes available.”

The Kelly Clarkson wooden bird feud continues to soar as the New York City novelty shop accused of disrespecting the “Voice” star sets a whopping $15 million price for the hand-cranked singing automata bird.

The one-of-a-kind chirping bird, known as Molly, is at the center of a media frenzy after shop owners at Art of Play — a high-end “curiosity shop” in Brooklyn that sells luxury playing cards, puzzles and other amusements — refused to part ways with the permanent fixture after a sale inquiry from Clarkson led to an alleged un-pheasant interaction she later called out online.

Now it appears that shop owners are changing their perch — and price point — with shop co-owner Adam Rubin confirming to NBC News that Molly is now valued at $15 million.

Rubin told the news outlet that if the business parts ways with the wooden puppet, store employees will receive a $15,000 bonus and the bird’s artist, Bliss Kolb of Seattle, will receive $1 million. The store would also use the profits to build a display dedicated to Molly.

But it appears that the bickering feud is not over yet.

Rubin was seen speaking to an unnamed individual about the incident in a video obtained by the California Post, originally published Tuesday.

“If it is this intense to be mentioned by Kelly Clarkson, imagine how intense it is to be Kelly Clarkson every single day,” Rubin said of the music artist. “I have sympathy for her … but it’s so hard to forgive her actions after she walked out the door.”

Clarkson did not respond to The Times’ request for comment.

Ruffled feathers

The interaction involving Clarkson first came to light on Saturday after the “Because of You” singer took to social media to call out a distasteful experience she had at Art of Play, which she compared to the scene in the 1990 film “Pretty Woman” where Julia Roberts’ character is treated poorly by retail workers.

“Just drove all the way to Brooklyn to check out this store I thought looked really rad and had a few things in mind to buy and literally was looked at as if I couldn’t afford it and was told he could find something comparable for me,” Clarkson wrote on X. “Wow, dude. You’re an idiot and just lost a huge sale. But y’all should go check out Art of Play in Brooklyn if you enjoy being treated like Julia Roberts character in Pretty Woman. For sure, check it out.”

Many fans sympathized with Clarkson’s shopping experience and took to social media to denounce the actions taken by the shop.

In response, Art of Play later shared in a Sunday Instagram post that the item the “Since U Been Gone” singer had expressed interest in was Molly, a singing and dancing bird which plays an important role in the magic shows hosted at the shop.

“Molly is permanently attached to the wall and isn’t for sale,” the Sunday post on Instagram read. “Imagine our surprise when our small local business was suddenly attacked by 8 million people who have never visited our store. It’s been a surreal experience to be the focus of such widespread outrage after just one mention by a celebrity.”

After the boutique’s statement, Clarkson doubled down on her claims on her Instagram stories with photos featuring a price tag on the bird that contradicted the shop’s first statement.

“Cool, cool. Sure, it wasn’t for sale. That’s the narrative Art of Play is gonna go with,” Clarkson wrote in a post shared to her Instagram Stories Sunday. “[S]o the whole conversation we had when I asked you if it was for sale whilst pointing to the price tag hanging on the wall with the title Singing Bird didn’t happen as you elevator eyed me saying in a condescending tone ‘yes, it’s for sale but it costs 15,000 dollars so if you’d like me to find something comparable for you I can.’ That all never happened and now it’s not for sale.”

“Okay, cool,” the post continued. “So you’re not only rude, you’re also a liar. Got it.”

Although there are some online social media photos that show no visible price tag next to Molly, internet sleuths were able to locate other images with a visible sticker price to the side.

While the singer said that she loves and supports small businesses, she added “but you don’t get a free pass to treat people less than in your store just because you are a small business.”

“It’s not that hard to be kind,” Clarkson wrote. “I never blast people but you my friend were an exception. Your store is really cool. Unfortunately, you aren’t.”

Art of Play responded to the former talk show host by issuing another statement on Instagram Sunday, which included additional details about “the 5 minutes [Clarkson] spent in the store.”

According to Art of Play, it had explained to Clarkson that Molly “is permanently attached to the wall and serves as a de facto mascot” for the shop and while the piece is not for sale, “a nearly identical automaton is owned by the creator of the machines.” Its artist, Kolb, told owners that “he would be willing to part with Molly’s twin for $15,000.”

The shop also claims they offered to show Clarkson another model made by a Germany clockmaking shop that was available to take home the same day for about $2,000 but “[s]he did not stick around long enough to see it.”

“We’ve reached out to Kelly directly to try and clear the air,” the post added. “We really do wish her the best and hope that someday we can all laugh about this misunderstanding.”

Fowl play

Clarkson knew her millions of fans would “weaponize themselves” and “debase themselves on behalf of a millionaire they’d never met,” Rubin said in the video clip published Tuesday.

According to Rubin, online criticisms against the store emerged 15 minutes after Clarkson left the store.

“People way more famous than Kelly Clarkson have come in here and been treated just the same as everybody else,” he added.

The incident is “a perverse distortion of reality” after the store received thousands of hateful online comments and phone calls calling for an apology, Rubin said, who added that the singer’s actions have resulted in online attacks to store employees’ personal social media accounts and the doxxing of neighboring businesses.

“We didn’t know this was going to happen but Kelly Clarkson did it,” said Rubin. “And she needs to be held accountable for her actions.”

Rubin also added that what upset Clarkson was that “she didn’t get special treatment,” and that every person who enters the store is treated equally, even if they are a celebrity.

“The fact that anyone thinks we owe her an apology,” Rubin said, “when she threw a Molotov cocktail into our store and wallets on fire — they’re saying we owe her an apology? This is asymmetrical social warfare.”