new york

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Thursday that he plans to nominate Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and a former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, as director of national intelligence.

Trump announced the nomination on social media amid pressure from Congress to name a permanent replacement for Tulsi Gabbard, who resigned last month. Trump faced intense pushback over his decision to name Bill Pulte, head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, as acting director.

The situation has led to a standoff in Congress as Democrats said they would refuse to renew foreign intelligence powers unless Trump pulled Pulte’s nomination and named a permanent nominee.

“Few people anywhere in the Legal Community are respected at the level of Jay,” Trump wrote. “I encourage the United States Senate to confirm Jay as soon as possible.”

DUBAI — The U.S. military said Tuesday it has begun strikes against Iran following the crash of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter off the coast of Oman that President Trump blamed on the Islamic Republic.

In a statement posted to social media, U.S. Central Command said the strikes would be “a proportional response to unjustified Iranian aggression.” It comes after Trump blamed Iran for downing the helicopter and vowed that the U.S. would respond.

Iranian state media reported that explosions were heard on an Iranian island in the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump had blamed Iran for shooting down a helicopter close to the Strait of Hormuz and said the United States must respond. Iran’s top diplomat said foreign military forces near the country’s territory “are at constant risk.”

The Apache helicopter that crashed went down after colliding with an Iranian drone, according to a U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

It wasn’t clear whether the collision was intentional, and official statements only said the crash is under investigation. CNN, CBS News and other outlets earlier reported the Iranian drone collision.

Trump said Iran shot down the aircraft while it was on patrol over the Strait of Hormuz and declared that the U.S. “must, of necessity, respond to this attack,” in a post to social media.

The U.S. military later announced that it had begun strikes against Iran.

In the first known operation of its kind by the American military, a drone boat rescued the two aviators who were aboard the Apache attack helicopter when it went down near the critical shipping lane that Iran has effectively closed during its war with the U.S. and Israel.

Trump said in a social media post that military officials told him “the Iranians shot down one of our highly sophisticated Apache Helicopters.” Both service members “are safe and uninjured,” he added.

“Nevertheless, the United States must, of necessity, respond to this attack,” Trump wrote.

A woman walks past a mural depicting a U.S. aircraft carrier under missile attack in downtown Tehran, Iran on Monday.

(Vahid Salemi / Associated Press)

Soon after Trump made his accusation, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said in a social media post that the strait is “thousands of miles away from U.S. shores.”

“Foreign forces in proximity to our territory are at constant risk on account of their own human errors, plain accidents, or potentially being caught in crossfire,” Araghchi wrote. “To reduce risk, best solution is for them to leave.”

The downing of the helicopter further strained a two-month ceasefire a day after Iran and Israel exchanged fire for the first time since the fragile truce took effect. Iranian state television said Tuesday that the Israeli attacks killed at least two members of the country’s air-defense units.

Since the U.S. and Israel began striking Iran on Feb. 28, the war has shaken the global economy, driven up energy prices around the world and made many basics, including food, more expensive.

Officials have been unable to turn the April ceasefire into a deal to permanently end the conflict, particularly as Israel intensifies and expands its military campaign in Lebanon against the Iranian-backed militia Hezbollah.

Army crew members picked up by drone boat

The Army aviators were rescued at 3:30 a.m. local time Tuesday, about two hours after their helicopter went down during a patrol off the coast of Oman, U.S. Central Command said.

The U.S. service members were spotted and picked up by a drone boat that took them to another location on the water, where they were picked up by a helicopter, said Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command. Hawkins initially said the drone took the two to shore, and he did not elaborate on the updated timeline.

It was the first known drone rescue at sea by the U.S. military, Hawkins said.

AH-64 Apache helicopters have been a key asset for the American military as it enforces a blockade on Iranian crude oil shipments and tankers, seeking to pressure Tehran into a deal. The helicopters have also been used by the United Arab Emirates to shoot down Iranian drones.

The drone used to perform the rescue was a 24-foot vessel called a Corsair, Hawkins said. It’s manufactured by Saronic Technologies.

The drone was assigned to the Navy’s Task Force 59, established in 2021 as the Navy’s first uncrewed and artificial intelligence unit that focuses on maritime security in the Middle East, including the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal.

Trump insists an Iran deal is coming

Before he accused Iran of downing the U.S. helicopter, Trump had expressed renewed optimism over negotiations with Iran.

“We have a good chance” of signing a deal in “two or three days,” Trump said late Monday. But he did not provide any details on why there was reason for new optimism. In the two months since the U.S. and Iran agreed to an initial ceasefire, Trump has repeatedly predicted that a deal is near.

“We’re very close to having a very, very good, strong, powerful deal,” the president said.

Mediators, led predominantly by Pakistan, have been trying for weeks to get a deal across the line. However, both Iran and the U.S. have taken hard-line positions.

The U.S. wants to see Iran give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which is believed to be entombed in the aftermath of American airstrikes that happened during the 12-day war in 2025. But Iran is refusing that and demanding relief from sanctions. It also wants the release of frozen assets even before a final agreement is in place, something rejected by Trump.

Before Trump’s comments on negotiations, Qalibaf said Monday that Trump’s remarks so far on a possible deal “contradicted the agreed-upon sections,” showing that the U.S. is “neither seeking a ceasefire nor dialogue.”

The continued fighting between Israel and Hezbollah is still a top Iranian priority as well. Lebanon’s army chief, Gen. Rodolphe Haykal, traveled to Pakistan on Tuesday. There, he met Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, who has been a key figure in the Iran-U.S. talks.

Haykal’s visit comes as Lebanon’s government takes an increasingly hard line on Hezbollah but remains unable to disarm the powerful militia. Hezbollah thanked Iran on Tuesday for attacking Israel “in defense of our Lebanese people,” suggesting that Lebanon’s government should take this opportunity to improve relations with Tehran.

Israel issues a warning for Tyre, Lebanon

Meanwhile, the Israeli military issued an evacuation warning for Lebanon’s southern port city of Tyre, including the Christian quarter, which has so far been spared from airstrikes on the city.

Last week, Israel warned the Christian neighborhoods in Tyre that it believed Hezbollah members were among them. Many Lebanese Shiite Muslims fled to those areas as Israeli strikes hammered the Mediterranean coastal area over the past two weeks.

After last week’s warning, the Lebanese army deployed to the Christian district of Tyre in an effort to prevent Israeli attacks there and to show that Hezbollah has no armed presence in the area. But Avichay Adraee, the Israeli military’s Arabic-language spokesperson, posted on X on Monday that the Israeli military “will have to act against their terrorist activities in the neighborhood soon.”

Gambrell, Superville and Toropin write for the Associated Press. Superville and Toropin reported from Washington. AP writers Michelle L. Price in New York, Will Weissert in Washington, Bassem Mroue in Beirut, Munir Ahmed in Islamabad and Russ Bynum in Savannah, Ga., contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — Donald Trump is set to be the first sitting U.S. president to attend an NBA Finals game, bringing strict security measures that will require New York Knicks fans to navigate an extensive safety perimeter around Madison Square Garden and an expected lengthy wait to get inside the building.

The security for Game 3 between the Knicks and San Antonio Spurs and the scene around the arena more closely resembled New Year’s Eve in Times Square, and for fans, it might seem more akin to a trip to the airport. They were asked to get to the game two hours early and will be required to provide a ticket to get past various checkpoints along with passing through a TSA-style magnetometer.

Trump’s appearance led the New York Police Department and Secret Service to establish a multi-block security perimeter around the arena, cancel a watch party outside and institute a no-bag policy for ticket-holders. Fans had gathered around the Garden to watch games during this playoff run, during which the Knicks have won 13 games in a row to reach the final for the first time since 1999 and move two victories from their first NBA title since 1973.

“The NYPD in coordination with the Secret Service made the decision for Game 3, where we have a presidential visit, that we could not support watch parties right outside of the Garden,” Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said at a news conference Monday. “We are looking forward to bringing back watch parties for Game 4. But I think New Yorkers are used to presidents coming to town, and they understand that that generally means lockdowns of areas and that’s what you’re going to see tonight at the Garden.”

Trump has attended several major sporting events in his time as president, and the security measures have created major hassles for fans.

Thousands of fans missed the start of last year’s U.S. Open men’s singles final between Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner because of lengthy security lines. Even though the U.S. Tennis Association pushed back the start of the match by a half-hour, many fans still couldn’t get in because added measures meant that they had to go through screening not only when they arrived at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center but again in front of the steps into Arthur Ashe Stadium, where Trump watched from a suite.

Asked his thoughts on Trump attending, Knicks center Mitchell Robinson said: “Cool, I guess. We can still get out there and play (no matter) who’s here and who’s not.”

Mayor Zohran Mamdani and other dignitaries are also expected to be at the game Monday night.

It was already hard enough for Knicks fans to get inside Madison Square Garden because of astronomical ticket prices. The get-in price for a ticket is higher than the average cost of monthly rent in New York, surging over $6,000. The best seats are tens of thousands of dollars. Mamdani said he bought his ticket for about $1,000 directly from Madison Square Garden.

The difficulty of seeing the game in-person has prompted fans to crowd bars, streets and watch parties all over the city. The watch party near the Garden has become a major event all through the playoffs, but with Trump attending, that event will be moved a few blocks away outside the security perimeter, at Bryant Park.

“We improvise,” said Knicks guard Jose Alvarado, who is a New York native. “We’re New Yorkers. We’re going to find a way to watch a game, and that’s what we’re doing.”

Whyno writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Brian Mahoney contributed to this report.

It was a strange year on Broadway, but then it’s been strange everywhere. Our world at times seems downright unrecognizable, with politicians acting like mob bosses, AI transforming not just the internet but potentially the entire economy, the cost of living leaving only the super rich able to keep up, and I won’t even mention the climate crisis, but the forecast calls for more doom and gloom.

Good work, however, won’t be denied, even if Broadway producers have perhaps overlearned the lesson of last year’s sleeper, Cole Escola’s “Oh, Mary!” Parody with a heavy dose of camp has become all the rage in a theatrical season in which the best musical winner, “Schmigadoon!,” is an affectionate sendup of golden age classics by Rodgers and Hammerstein, Lerner and Loewe and their inspired descendants.

If Broadway is changing faster than the old guard can keep pace, the same is true for the culture in general. The economics of producing have scrambled the old playbooks. Unusual risk has occasionally brought unexpected rewards. “Schmigadoon!” fended off the competition to take the night’s top prize along with awards for both its book and score by Cinco Paul.

Michael Arden’s spectacular production of “The Lost Boys” — the staging won awards for Dane Laffrey’s scenic design and Jen Schriever and Arden’s lighting — enriched the 1980s cult film on which the show is based with human substance and high-flying showmanship. Shoshana Bean’s win for her featured performance as a persevering single mom, is a testament to the musical’s capacious heart. Ali Louis Bourzgui’s somewhat unexpected yet eminently worthy triumph for his featured performance as the vampire with front-man magnetism, catalyzed the production’s thrilling virtuosity. But few would describe this year’s ragtag selection of new musicals as robust.

The only overriding lesson may be that there are no overriding lessons. Two-time Oscar winner Adrien Brody made his Broadway debut in “The Fear of 13,” reprising his acclaimed Olivier-nominated London performance. But he didn’t even receive a nomination for his work — a snub that I found unaccountable.

Spoofs like best musical nominee “Titanique,” a zany burlesque of James Cameron’s “Titanic” and all things Celine Dion, found new respectability on Broadway. And “Two Strangers (Carry a Cake Across New York”), the two-person British musical by Jim Barne and Kit Buchan, endeared itself to audiences (if not so much to Tony voters) with its rom-com appeal. But what does it say about a season in which musical revivals upstaged new work?

“Ragtime,” the Lincoln Center Theatre production directed by Lear deBessonet that originated at New York City Center, was not only the most operatic offering of the season but was all the most emotionally stirring and dramatically ambitious. The show, which justly received the Tony for best musical revival contained perhaps the season’s most seismic tour de force. Joshua Henry’s Tony-winning lead performance as Coalhouse Walker Jr., the path-breaking pianist tragically ahead of his time, was astonishing in both its theatrical might and its generosity, which allowed everyone around him to shine, especially Caissie Levy, who picked up a Tony for her lead performance as a white matriarch whose political consciousness courageously awakens.

“Cats: The Jellicle Ball” pulled off the seemingly impossible by making Andrew Lloyd Webber’s megamusical look cool on Broadway. The production’s radical concept brings the queer audacity of Harlem Ballroom culture to these feline proceedings. For their imaginative daring, co-directors Zhailon Levingston and Bill Rauch were justly honored as were costume designer Qween Jean and choreographers Omari Wiles and Arturo Lyons, among the production’s notable awards.

“Chess,” which was strangely overlooked in the best musical revival category (“The Rocky Horror Show” strutted in instead), may not have managed to overcome the challenge of this over-elaborate geopolitical tale, even with a puckish new book. But the production made Nicholas Christopher a likely future Tony winner star.

What was old was new again on Broadway, but let’s hope that producers can still believe that the best is ahead of us.

At the recent glitzy PEN America Literary Gala at the Natural History Museum in New York City the evening’s MC, B.J. Novak, declared that the crowd was there to celebrate more than just freedom of speech — they were there for “literary glamour.”

“Writing is glamorous,” he declared. “Reading is glamorous.”

For Novak, bestselling novelist Ann Patchett — who has also worked tirelessly on behalf of independent booksellers and in support of her fellow writers, and was one of the event’s honored guests — epitomizes that allure. “I think it’s great that Ann Patchett is a smoke show. She doesn’t have to be,” he quipped. “It’s just cool that she is.”

With “Whistler,” Patchett’s 10th novel, she definitively proves that the “smoke show” moniker, if at all relevant, is icing on the cake. This exquisite writer has once again delivered an incandescent work of fiction — sweet, but never sentimental, infinitely wise and suffused with love. It’s also an ode to New York City itself.

“Whistler” is narrated by protagonist Daphne Fuller, a 54-year-old English teacher married to Jonathan, a restlessly retired doctor and hospital administrator who dotes on his wife and whom he regards as “extraordinary.” When we first encounter the couple, they’re roaming the Metropolitan Museum of Art — which, one gets the sense, they know by heart. As Daphne ponders the sculpture “Two Horses,” by Charles Ray, Jonathan spots an elderly stranger eyeing his wife, casting glances in her direction. The stranger follows them from room to room fixated on Daphne. Jonathan’s curiosity is piqued, and he slips away from his wife’s side to get to the bottom of why they’re being followed — which is revealed to be the novel’s inciting incident.

Turns out that stranger is no stranger at all. He is Eddie Triplett, a long-lost stepfather whose divorce from Daphne’s mother, Abigail, remains an unhealed wound. Running into Eddie now for the first time in more than four decades, Daphne is startled by the rush of emotion she feels: “I hadn’t known there was something in me to break,” she reflects, “but there it was and break it did. I stepped into an open crack in time and fell backwards.”

Eddie, as it happens, is but one of Daphne and her sister, Leda’s, three dads. By the time Abigail marries her third husband, mild-mannered Lucas, and the couple go on to have three sons, Daphne has grown a protective shell. These facts are narrated with detachment by the protagonist herself. As she and Eddie gently unspool their memories and together fill in the blanks, their bond deepens. The “falling backwards” Daphne experiences in Eddie’s company — traversing time — soothes, softens and delights her.

As the novel unfolds, what becomes ever clearer is that Daphne and her author are undeniably similar, though Patchett has observed: “I am normally careful to make sure there is a big wall between my life and my fiction.” In “Whistler,” she throws that caution to the wind. Easter eggs are scattered throughout. Like Daphne, Patchett is married to an older man — also a doctor — whom she adores. She too had three dads, as she chronicled in a 2020 New Yorker piece aptly titled “My Three Fathers.” Patchett and her heroine also appear to share this enviable trait: They navigate life with grace, generosity and utter competence. IRL, Patchett returns emails on the day she receives them, is an outspoken advocate for free expression, is generally renowned for her good deeds. She’s also widely known for her many devoted friendships, though she doesn’t suffer fools. You’d want to be her ride or die. As you would … Daphne’s.

In an interview 10 years ago, Patchett observed that it wasn’t until she read a piece by Jonathan Franzen, “in which he insisted that the novelist had to do what scares him most, and for him, that had been writing about his family,” that she considered following that path in her fiction. “I thought ‘oh nothing would scare me more. I would happily ride down the Amazon in a canoe and deal with snakes’ ” (as she did for “State of Wonder”) “ ‘than face my family.’ ” In 2016 she wrote “Commonwealth,” which drew on her personal experience of divorce and dysfunction, themes she revisits in “Whistler.” But in “Whistler,” it’s as if Patchett herself is in the reader’s ear. (And, by the way, should you pick up the audio version of the book, she narrates and is literally in your ear.)

Patchett has said she had an ulterior motive for writing “Whistler.” She’d been in the midst of writing a different book, a novel about a Wyoming rancher and her horse, Whistler, but it wasn’t clicking. As she pressed on over the better part of a year, a second idea came to her “like a fever dream.” She immediately filed away the messy work-in-progress and began writing a fictional ode to a cherished friend, former publishing executive Jim Fox, to whom “Whistler” is dedicated. Fox had died two years before, on his 85th birthday, and Patchett was still grieving. Her aim, with “Whistler,” she has said, is to put down on paper how much they loved each other. Fox is reborn as Eddie Triplett in the book, a charming and erudite book editor who radiates joie de vivre and is among the loves of his stepdaughter Daphne’s life.

Patchett’s literary style isn’t of the show-offy variety packed with dazzling sentences and edge-of-your-seat cliffhangers. The drama is quiet. Her words accrue and gain power through their spareness and clarity, and a level of character development that forges an easy intimacy with the reader. There’s also a sly wit and sagacity that have become Patchett signatures, honed to perfection in “Whistler,” whether wrestling with the legacy of family trauma, or the human struggle to accept the transitory nature of it all. Or, as Patchett’s mother once admonished after the failure of her daughter’s first marriage: “Stop trying to make everything permanent. It doesn’t work.”

While Patchett has clearly drawn on actual events and individuals to produce this luminous work, she exhibits the expert novelist’s knack for following a plot where the imagination takes it. I don’t recommend consuming “Whistler” in one enormous gulp. I dipped in and out, savoring scenes, reflecting on them, occasionally shedding a tear. In other words, I didn’t want it to end.

Haber is a writer, editor and publishing strategist and co-founder of the Ink Book Club on Substack. She was director of Oprah’s Book Club and books editor for O, the Oprah Magazine.

NEW YORK — The World Cup, a 48-team, 104-match behemoth kicking off this week in Los Angeles and across 15 other cities in the United States, Mexico and Canada, presents an unprecedented security challenge, with more countries, games and a larger footprint than ever before.

It also comes against the backdrop of the U.S. and Israel’s war with Iran, mounting political violence in President Trump’s orbit and growing fears of artificial intelligence-fueled disruptions, creating a complex threat environment for authorities.

Overseeing the sprawling security apparatus is a legion of federal agencies, state and local police departments and private entities. Their responsibilities range from securing stadiums and fan zones to escorting teams and protecting dignitaries.

Their tools include hunter drones that can shoot nets over objects in restricted airspace, bag-inspecting robot dogs, giant X-ray trucks and thousands of AI-powered cameras trained on public spaces soon to be thronged by fans.

In the U.S., it’s “78 Super Bowls over 39 days,” said Andrew Giuliani, executive director of Trump’s World Cup task force, which is overseeing the multiagency effort.

“There’s never been a summer like this in American history from a security angle,” said Giuliani, son of former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. “We’re as prepared as we can be.”

Collaborative effort

The tournament has the same high-level federal security designation as the Super Bowl, just below a presidential inauguration or a national political convention, ensuring federal, state and local coordination. It coincides with other major events linked to the 250th anniversary of America’s founding.

So far, Giuliani said, there are no credible threats.

The Department of Homeland Security, focused on Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown and with a funding lapse only recently resolved, estimates that as many as 7 million people will visit the United States for the World Cup.

The U.S. Secret Service, under scrutiny after security breaches and attempts on Trump’s life, is in charge of protecting world leaders who show up to cheer on their countries. Trump has expressed interest in attending a match.

“I feel very comfortable where we’re at, and we feel like we have a zero-fail mission,” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told Congress last week, noting that the Secret Service was understaffed by about 860 agents. “But it’s going to be complicated.”

Officials have indicated they are confident they can keep Trump safe because they will be integrating his usual security into the robust World Cup plan on days he may watch a match.

The FBI has spent two years developing its security plan, incorporating lessons from other major events such as the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade and New Year’s Eve ball drop in New York and testing them at smaller ones, including last weekend’s Israel Day parade in the city.

“We prepare for the worst day,” FBI Special Agent in Charge Amit Kachhia-Patel in New York told the Associated Press. “And that’s how we go into any single event.”

To help cover security costs, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has distributed $625 million to the 11 U.S. host cities. An additional $250 million is being directed toward tracking and neutralizing suspect drones.

The disbursement of those funds was held up by the department’s funding delay in Congress, which the Trump administration has argued hindered security planning.

Others involved in the planning effort said the federal government could have played a more hands-on role even before the partial shutdown.

John Cohen, a former senior Homeland Security official who has been briefing state leaders before the matches, said the government was largely absent from planning meetings last year and did not begin sharing threat intelligence with host regions until recently.

“With an event of this magnitude, one would expect the federal government would’ve played a more active role,” Cohen said. “It felt like a missed opportunity to showcase that collaboration.”

Evolving threats from drones and AI

In January, thousands of officials involved in World Cup security gathered for exercises simulating crowd surges, vehicle attacks and mass shootings.

A month later, the U.S. and Israel launched a war with Iran.

“The security picture fundamentally changed,” said Stefano Ritondale, chief intelligence officer at Artorias, a defense intelligence company not involved in the security preparations. “There’s a major difference in preparing for a lone-wolf radical who rams his car into a public place and a terrorist who is bankrolled by a foreign country we’re at war with.”

Among the greatest concerns are drones.

Since the last World Cup in Qatar in 2022, drones have become a prominent weapon in conflicts including Russia’s war in Ukraine and Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

“If there is one threat that keeps me up at night, it is from drones,” said New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch, whose department is partnering with the FBI on drone mitigation.

Drones are prohibited over stadiums and fan zones, and Kachhia-Patel said the FBI has a “full suite of options” to thwart incursions. They include agents monitoring the sky and a “variety of means” to safely down the devices, he said without elaborating.

Before this year’s World Cup, the growing sophistication of AI videos was a particular concern, with officials warning that state actors can harness the technology to sow misinformation and panic.

On match days, the FBI will activate joint operations centers in each host city, bringing together local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to monitor and investigate threats.

“If there’s a video that shows an explosion going off at a site, and it’s AI-generated, we have people on the ground who can validate whether or not that’s true,” Kachhia-Patel said.

Opportunity for private tech

Some AI companies have pitched themselves to police departments in host cities, promising to comb through data and surveillance on game days to prevent threats, including unruly fan behavior.

“We know sports fanaticism around here in terms of the NFL and baseball to some extent, but nothing like international soccer,” said Jake Becchina, a police spokesperson in Kansas City, Mo., which is hosting six matches.

The department has contracted with Peregrine Technologies, which promises to sift through police data and publicly available information such as team practice locations and the country affiliation of popular bars, to get ahead of possible conflict.

In Dallas, a recent $120-million tech upgrade will give local police body cameras capable of real-time translations, helping law enforcement communicate with international visitors soon to descend on the region.

Several drone detection and mitigation companies are joining efforts to help federal agencies secure the skies.

One of those companies, Fortem, has claimed to have signed a multimillion-dollar contract with the Department of Homeland Security before the World Cup for an unusual drone mitigation strategy: quadcopters that can shoot nets at encroaching drones to trap them in midair. A Homeland Security spokesman declined to discuss the contract.

Just as the teams will aim to perform their best on the pitch, Giuliani said the security planning was a unique chance to “show off American exceptionalism.”

“If we do our job right,” Giuliani added, “nobody will be talking about security at the World Cup.”

Offenhartz, Sisak and Santana write for the Associated Press. Offenhartz and Sisak reported from New York, Santana from Washington. AP writer Alanna Durkin Richer in Washington contributed to this report.

In this week’s episode of The Envelope podcast, “Love Story” stars Paul Anthony Kelly and Sarah Pidgeon open up about inhabiting John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette — and creating a cultural moment of their own.

Kelvin Washington: Welcome to the next episode of The Envelope, Kelvin Washington alongside Yvonne Villarreal; we got Mark Olsen as usual. And so you, my friend, had a chance to speak with stars of “Love Story” — Ryan Murphy, of course, tackling love with this. So it got me thinking, give me some real-life love stories that you’d like to see portrayed, maybe next season. Some love stories you always found interesting.

Villarreal: This one doesn’t have a tragic ending, and that’s why I want it. And that is Ina and Jeffrey Garten. “Barefoot Contessa”!

Olsen: I didn’t know that there was a great romance in her life.

Villarreal: Mark. You’ve never heard of Jeffrey? You don’t know Ina and Jeffrey. OK, this is why we need it. That man adores Ina and anything that she makes. Chicken, anything. This is a love story I need to see get the full display. I’ve read it in her book, but I need —

Olsen: So like “Julie & Julia.” Julia Child and her husband.

Villarreal: But cuter, sweeter, more adoring.

Washington: Loving the food theme here.

Villarreal: She’ll make anything and he thinks it’s delicious, and she laughs at everything he says, and I just want more of it, and I’m very curious what a Ryan Murphy take on Ina and Jeffrey would be.

Olsen: But see, that’s the thing. A Ryan Murphy take on that would ruin it for you.

Washington: That would be dramatic and spicy. Salacious.

Villarreal: Nothing could ruin it for me.

Washington: You got one?

Villarreal: Yeah, what’s yours?

Olsen: Well, I have two. One is because the sort of the ’90s vibes of “Love Story.” So you would obviously do Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love. And that one would be very exciting and dramatic and very ’90s-ish. But I think for more of a torn-from-the-headlines [version], Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce.

Villarreal: It’s too current.

Olsen: That’s why though.

Villarreal: How about you?

Washington: So I’m gonna stay with your ’90s. Instead of the pop grunge. I’m going to go R&B pop. I’m going to go Bobby and Whitney.

Olsen: I mean, that’s gold right there.

Washington: I’m just saying. You got love, you got fame, you got tragedy. You’ve got stuff that we didn’t know about behind the scenes.

Villarreal: Maybe he could hire us as head writers for each of these seasons and we can all have our say.

Washington: We can all have our own season. So as I mentioned, Yvonne, you had a chance to sit down with Paul Anthony Kelly and Sarah Pidgeon of “Love Story.” How’d that chat go?

Villarreal: They play John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette, respectively, and it sort of looks at this seven-year tumultuous relationship and what they both endured navigating the spotlight and what that did to them, how they each felt about it. So it was interesting to get the take from Paul and Sarah about how they’re also navigating the spotlight, because I feel like social media fame is quite different than what John and Carolyn were navigating back then. And I was curious to see what it was like for them. So yeah, it was an interesting conversation.

Washington: All right, let’s get into that conversation now.

Sarah Pidgeon and Paul Anthony Kelly, the breakout stars of FX’s “Love Story.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Villarreal: I imagine doing this series has been a sort of singular experience. What do you want to remember about this moment that you’re in?

Kelly: All of it’s so fun, it’s exciting. It’s definitely, for me, a new muscle that I’m learning to use and explore and stretch and flex. And I get to hang out with her a little bit more. It was wonderful.

Pidgeon: I think it’s just really hard to contextualize what this [is] — [to Kelly] I don’t know if you feel this way too — because there hasn’t been a ton of space from even the show having all the episodes come out. I don’t think I totally understand how this fits into the story of my life. I recognize that we’re experiencing something very exciting. And I think I speak for both of us that we feel really grateful and so honored to have taken on these roles and that it’s resonated and has excited people. But being out and about in New York and someone stops you and says, like, “Are you that girl from that show?” … When you’re making something, it can feel so insular. I remember when I started, I had a freak out sort of midway through like, “Oh, this is actually going to come out. It’s not just about the making of it. People will see it.” I had a huge heat rash. [To Kelly] Remember when we were in Hyannis Port? I just haven’t totally had that perspective. It’s just been very full-on in the most exciting, lovely, happy way.

Kelly: It’s all unfolded in succession. There’s been no period of time to really process. I can’t believe I did it, still. It’s out and it’s exactly the same thing … people are like, “Hey, you’re the guy in that thing, right?” I’m like, “Yeah.”

Villarreal: Has it happened in an awkward way?

Kelly: No, no, it’s all been overwhelmingly positive. I guess that’s best-case scenario, but I still try to walk around with a mustache and glasses and a hat and they’re still like, “Hey …!”

Villarreal: You didn’t try to go to the [JFK Jr.] look-alike contest in New York?

Kelly: Oh, my gosh, no.

Pidgeon: He would have won. That wouldn’t have been fair.

Kelly: It’s too many people. I got the show, so I think I already won.

Villarreal: A big theme of the series is exploring the heavy ramifications of fame on privacy. And aside from the great opportunities that come with doing the press or other things that come along with this, what has it been like adjusting your life to this experience?

Pidgeon: That idea was on both of our minds when we were filming. And we were filming in New York, so apart from the scenes and subject material we were exploring, we actually experienced it in real life as well. You have even more characters in a scene when you’re shooting on the streets of Tribeca and people stop and watch. And there was a lot of interest from the public while we were filming. I’ve been marinating on that idea. Maybe not marinating, but meditating. [Or] a little bit of both. Through our characterization of Carolyn and John, I think we felt those extremes. I haven’t felt anywhere close to that. But I don’t know about you [Kelly], but I feel like I’ve been quite busy going different places, coming on podcasts and things like that where my downtime hasn’t really been spent walking the streets so much. It’s been kind of going home and taking a shower and going to sleep.

Kelly: Same. I haven’t really had much time to go out and just be in the public, which I think has been kind of a gift. I recently had a child, so I have no time between the show and being dad. It’s been really great to live within that little privacy bubble I have at the moment. I’m going to New York for the first time in a little while tomorrow.

Villarreal: Has living in their story made you more conscious of what types of boundaries you do want to set?

Kelly: Absolutely. That was a really great gift of the show. And exploring the exponential setting of what privacy means to people, certainly those two individuals. But now I’ve adopted that within my own life, and it’s like, “OK, yeah, I like to be a private person.”

Villarreal: What about you, Sarah?

Pidgeon: So much, at least for Carolyn, was she was constantly battling this sense of how she was being perceived. And I really admire her ability, whether or not she felt the pressure [to do so] — she never spoke on the record and never had to correct the record despite, in my mind, a lot of those allegations being false in the stories about her. That sense of sort of self-possession is quite admirable and, again, this is so new for the both of us. Being able to embody her, that approach and attitude towards it, is something that’s quite interesting to me. And I mean, it definitely has a lot of self-restraint attached to it, so who knows if I possess that as well.

Villarreal: The love story between John and Carolyn, as well as their fateful flight, generated a lot of media attention. And I know you, Sarah, were a toddler, at the time of their deaths; and you, Paul, were a young boy — and you’re a Canadian. What was your image of them in terms of the lore that surrounded them before making the series?

Kelly: Growing up in Canada, I was familiar with who he was. I became even more familiar with them after living in the States for a while. I was a model before, and I had been told I looked like him, so after being told that, you kind of do a little bit of research. Who is this guy? And I was like, “I don’t look anything like JFK.” But then I realized [they meant] JFK Jr. “OK, maybe; yeah, I do look like him a little bit.” So I became more aware of them after that. But growing up, it definitely wasn’t in my cultural zeitgeist, whatever you want to call it.

Pidgeon: I knew that Carolyn worked at Calvin Klein. I knew they were married. I knew their story. I was such a young child when they passed, but they remained so in the cultural conversation because, especially in 1999, they represented such hope in politics. And they’re such a modern couple, sort of breaking the rules of what those norms are, especially coming from such a storied family that has such legacy in the States.

Villarreal: There’s an overwhelming amount of source material from the Kennedy side, but less so on Carolyn. What proved to be most useful to you? What were the things that you turned to to study or figure out who she was?

Pidgeon: That was such a mystery. [I was] taking these still photographs, mainly paparazzi images — and now that I’ve had a few photos taken of myself, you hold yourself differently when you know someone’s taking a photo of you that you also don’t know. That plus videos of her, very few in which she was speaking. And some of the candid photos, mainly from when she was younger. I sort of laid those on top of each other and then used as many books that I could find and interviews that people would give who knew her. But there’s scarcity in terms of that information. That at times felt arresting, but at other times … there’s a lot of freedom in that. And I think that’s what was so interesting about playing this character that is so well known and yet very enigmatic. Finding her walk and thinking about how that changes over the course of nine episodes and six-and-a-half, seven years. How this woman with so much freedom and anonymity — 26 years old, living in New York City, barreling down these streets in the East Village — then changes when she’s the most photographed woman in America. How that perception changes you physically.

Villarreal: Her walk was very striking for me, because I’m like, I can’t move that way.

Pidgeon: Yes you can. You can get a pair of Manolos.

Villarreal: It won’t look as elegant as you, Sarah, but talk to me about finding that walk because, like you said, it shifts from when the onslaught happens. Did you work with a movement coach? Was that all you?

Pidgeon: Julia Crockett is so incredible. There’s not enough hours in the day to sing her praises. We started with a lot of what I just mentioned, the quotes that people said of how she moved. She spoke with her hands. She could be a fast walker — most people who live in New York are. If there was a video of what I was doing in these hotel rooms, they’d think I was absolutely crazy. Rolling around on the floor, isolating different parts of my body, making it as dramatic as possible, and working it into a circle of attention that felt real. And understanding we were both 5-10, which helps. I think tall women carry themselves in a certain way. But understanding that my body is still my body, and our production I don’t think was particularly interested in doing huge physical transformations in terms of prosthetics or things like that. But getting the shoes, walking around in my spare time in New York in heels, which Carolyn does in the show and Sarah Pidgeon does not. That really changes you and it changes how you feel. And just always having that through line of, “What were the touchstones of Carolyn as a young woman, and where did I want her to end up physically?” You can see it through so many different versions in these different photographs — her hair changes, how she dresses changes, the red lip. I [was] always remembering that there was a journey that I was going on: “How can the world close in on her? What does that feel like?” Also, not only putting it into my body first, but feeling it in my body, imagining that. And what are the images that come up? We thought about [her as a] mossy ball; very tactile, just rolling down these hallways in the Roosevelt Hotel in Hollywood.

Villarreal: Paul, you had about three weeks from when you got cast and when production started. And there’s ample stuff to sift through. How did you figure your way out through the noise? What was the thing that really helped you lock in to who he was?

Kelly: He narrates his father’s book, “Profiles in Courage,” and that for me was a great asset. I had to learn how to use my tongue in a different way than I’ve ever spoken before. His speech patterns are different. I worked with a dialect coach. I would listen to that all day, every day — amongst ’90s alt music, some Nine Inch Nails and stuff because that’s what John would do.

Villarreal: Was that what he was into?

Kelly: I think so. One of my favorite photos of him is a candid photo, and he’s wearing a Nine Inch Nails shirt. I’m like, “My guy! Here we go. I can relate.” I watched a lot of his interviews just to see how he kept his cool and composure. He was a very relaxed individual under extreme stress situations. The Larry King interview was a great one; I relied on [it] a lot. I also looked at a lot of images and saw how he moved through the world. I was a model before so I’m pretty good at understanding how my body moves and how to move it; I also worked with Julia pretty briefly, but she gave me some really great tips and I took those throughout the entire duration of filming and just ran with it.

Villarreal: Are you someone that takes bike as your transportation often?

Kelly: Oh yeah. Four wheels moves the body, two wheels moves the soul.

Villarreal: How is it doing it with the suit on?

Kelly: It’s hot.

Pidgeon: Yeah, you did a lot of that in July during a heat wave.

Kelly: Oh, my gosh, when we started filming, the first scene where John is introduced on the bicycle, we shot that on a Sunday and it was like 103 degrees outside and I’m in a ’90s wool suit. It was great … And a hat. And a backpack. There’s a photo where there’s several hands coming at me with fans and spritzer.

Villarreal: How about finding John and Carolyn together? What did that look like for the two of you, figuring out who they were as a couple?

Kelly: I feel like it happened organically. We had like this unspoken bond and trust with each other from the moment we met and it was just like, “OK, we both understand the assignment.” Then we get to step into these shoes and we understand what that was like, I guess, but just going through it together [helped]. It’s also so well written and it is easy to fall into that. It’s very easy to fall in love with this one every day and then fight.

Pidgeon: Oh, you flatter me.

Villarreal: Because you both were so young at the time that they were a couple, were there modern-day couples of your generation that you looked to in terms of how they dealt with the spotlight? Was there someone you were looking to, to help you understand it?

Pidgeon: I think they were pretty singular, especially considering so much of how we view them as a couple was the time in which they existed. I don’t think I can really point to a couple … obviously there’s a comparison with [Princess] Diana, but I can’t really I put my finger on a couple that had the same essence of John and Carolyn, or the same challenges and obstacles of being a couple in public life. [To Kelly] Can you think of anyone?

Kelly: Not really, no.

Pidgeon: It was also that we were coming in on this advent of paparazzi. Obviously coming from such an important family, there was — and I want to speak for you [Kelly] in terms of how you felt about your characterization of JFK Jr. — but there was so much investment in them as a couple because America, and really the world, had watched him grow up. So of course there is this heightened interest in who America’s son marries. And again, that hope that they were this modern couple, one that we’ve never seen before, and what will they become in this new millennium? In terms of finding them together, what was so wonderful about the writing of the show was they were — granted, it happened in about three or four episodes [for the show’s purposes] — but as we were getting to know each other, so were Carolyn and John. They were falling in love with each other and figuring out what that dynamic was and having those misfirings and miscommunications and moments of intensity and questioning. The amount of times I’ve used the word “meta” while talking about the experience of making this show, that sort of mirrored life in a way. I was able to just absolutely give over to Paul and trust him and be excited working with him every single day and be so curious about who John and Carolyn were that day on set. No one better than Paul Anthony Kelly.

Kelly: Oh, you flatter me.

Villarreal: There are a lot of scenes that are stuff that we’ll never know whether they actually happened. But then there are the moments that were played out in tabloids — one of them is the Bryant Park episode. What can you tell me about what that was like shooting on the streets of New York? What do you remember about that experience?

Kelly: What was it, the Nextdoor app called?

Pidgeon: Citizen.

Kelly: The Citizen app. They called it [a] “domestic dispute” … so we were obviously doing our job correctly. It was interesting. Shooting in New York is a very interesting experience because you have all these outliers just watching and gawking. Everyone’s got phones and cameras and what have you. And we’re so in it and doing it and then to have like this blowup argument over and over and again, take after take, angle after angle.

Pidgeon: I wonder if someone reported us just to be like, “Make it stop!”

Kelly: Yeah, exactly. Nobody tried to save you in the moment. Maybe that was them trying to save you [by posting it in the app].

Pidgeon: That was always something to contend with or accept, really, at a certain point. This is an expectation of working in the city. And what I really liked about that scene was that — considering there was such little videography of her, especially because that was a private moment that was unfortunately caught on tape — they both had less inhibitions. I found it [to be] a really amazing exercise as an actor to finally be able to really take something and mimic it exactly and find how the words that Connor [Hines] had written [aligned with it]; it felt like such a great sign when it felt the writing really matched what I physically knew to be true. Because our interest in the story is what happens behind closed doors, as you said. But in those few moments that we did re-create, the real-life [moments], it felt very reassuring as an actor to feel like the words that we were speaking matched the physical footage. I just found it such an exciting way to go about it, to have it really be this outside-in approach. You take this physicality and vocal pattern that I had developed as Carolyn, but then really have some proof for that to be the jumping-off point. I love that we had that scene; we had when they take their first photo after their wedding; we had, in Episode 9, the [Newman’s Own/George Awards] event. Remember that clip that we watched? We’re in the exact same outfits, and I think it’s the Newman’s Own event. I always appreciated those moments. It felt like a different way in to a character that I had really started to get to know at that point.

Villarreal: Whenever I watch something based on a true story or people that were like historical figures, I can’t help but Google to see if something really happened. Is there something you Googled in the process of making the show where you were like, “Did this really happen?”

Pidgeon: There’s a bit of speculation as to how they met. There’s a couple of different stories. Considering this couple was so well known, the fact that there’s still a mystery into how they even met for the first time I think is quite interesting.

Villarreal: I Googled — and I will say I clearly am not the only one that thought this because there was a whole story of it — “Did they really eat KFC chicken?”

Pidgeon: They did.

Kelly: Fine dining.

Pidgeon: You didn’t eat any chicken.

Kelly: Noooo. I got secondhand chicken. That chicken, oh my gosh.

Pidgeon: They did warm it up a bit, but it was pretty cold, you know.

Villarreal: We can’t talk about this show without talking about the wardrobe, the costumes. It’s such a key piece to the storytelling here. Tell me about that collaboration and what the clothes said to you about who Carolyn is and then who John is.

Pidgeon: Yes, clothes are incredibly important to the story and to how most of the public knows and remembers Carolyn. Working with Rudy Mance was so incredible. What he was able to source, while we’re not necessarily sure if they were pieces that Carolyn herself wore, they were the exact pieces of the exact same collection. The very few pieces we weren’t able to source, they were impeccably re-created. Just the attention to detail, I had never really experienced something like that. It was just really watching a master at work, and the rest of our crew as well; not a detail was ever overlooked. The mystery that we really tried to solve in the beginning was: Wow, there’s so many photos of her [from] ’95, ’96 and beyond; there are far fewer photos of what she looked like when she was working at Calvin Klein. And we’re in that space and that time for quite a while. From the photos that we do have of her living in this time in her life, and then how we know she will dress, what are the through lines? What are the pieces she repeats? I don’t think I wore much Prada in the first two, three episodes, which makes sense, because she was just starting out at Calvin Klein. We [had her wear] a lot of Calvin pieces. What was so insightful to playing her was her sartorial choices and her understanding of how, especially since she never spoke on the record, [and] what she can communicate through fashion and how in those initial fittings, even before I really spoke the words of those episodes, how it immediately changed how I held myself as Carolyn was growing and getting older. I keep referencing this quote about Yohji Yamamoto, a designer whom she wore frequently. He liked making the association with his clothing to armor. I just thought that was such a great way into her sort of mental state and how she approached clothing. It was very her, she wore the clothes. That was something that I had to remember, that if I was going to try and embody her, I had [to] feel like I was wearing the clothes because that’s what really stuck out. You always saw her first, despite her wearing some incredibly beautiful clothing. Carolyn was No. 1.

Kelly: John had such great style. Sometimes it was pretty kooky. I also loved that too because it just is such a sense of him. Working with Rudy was a dream. He and his team were incredible. They were able to source so many things. And if they couldn’t find it, it was a direct re-creation, like exact copy of what it was. I remember even just like those shorts with the Knicks logo that he wears playing football. I remember seeing a comment, “John would never wear those.” [Sighs.] “OK, sure.” There’s something about getting into those outfits that it just was this whole other transporting layer of becoming. You hold yourself differently in these things and it just made it feel more real and you’re like, “OK, cool,” and you just live in it and it feels good and you get slouchy and whatever. It was really nice.

Villarreal: How does your style compare? Did they influence your style now?

Kelly: Honestly, it’s a little different, but it’s not that far off. I feel pretty good in a suit. I like to wear suits a lot. I’m the suited heavy metal guy.

Pidgeon: You also have that cool factor about you too. I think there’s something in that with John. He looked great in a suit, he looked great in a tux, but then there was a bit of an edge to him. There was bit of a realness, I think, that you guys share.

Villarreal: Everyone’s trying to emulate it. So many TikToks of people trying to re-create it. Sarah, do you feel like you can never go back to brunette now? Like this is your thing now? You have to stick with it?

Pidgeon: The blond seems to be working. I like being a different hair color. I don’t think I’ll be blond forever. Simply too much time [involved]. It’s so much work. My colorist is amazing — Kari Hill. Cannot sing her praises enough. And Alex Pardoe, who does extensions. It’s been really interesting to find how I [am as a blond] — so much of my time being blond was embodying Carolyn. [Paul and I] would both sleep on the weekends. We wouldn’t do anything while we were shooting. So I didn’t really get a chance to take a walk in this new hair. And when I started dressing again, to go out, I would put on my favorite clothes from when I was brunette. It’s like, “Oh, it just doesn’t hit.” It’s been cool to see how I present and how color theory is crazy. But we’ll see, I guess it depends on how much time I have on my hands.

Villarreal: The series really grapples with the media invasion that swirled around them. What do you say to the critics that feel that a show like this either reignites that craze or contributes to it? What do you want the takeaway of a show like this to be?

Pidgeon: Thinking about one of the first questions you asked — how are we now dealing with with being potentially recognized — I think the intensity of interest in famous people, famous couples, celebrity, actors, musicians, you name it, artists, it’s changed shape, but it has never gone away. Our intention in making this show was, again, what we know about their lived reality, but what can we infer might have happened behind those closed doors. To the general public, [they were] sort of two-dimensional … I knew very little about Carolyn, but I ingested so many photos of her far before this project was ever on my radar. While I recognize this may have contributed to reigniting interest in them, I hope that that interest feels like there’s a more intimate understanding of these people; that they weren’t just figures, that they were people with very full lives, feelings, a profound sense of privacy, intense relation to each other, very, very human. I guess that would be my answer to that. I hope that this is also a bit of a lens or a mirror that, again, if that intensity hasn’t changed, how might we [change it] in the future?

SAN ANTONIO — Go crazy, New York. Or, perhaps more accurately, crazier.

The red-hot Knicks are going home, two wins away from an NBA championship that the capital of the world has been waiting to see for generations.

Jalen Brunson hit a go-ahead free throw with 9.5 seconds left after a turnover by Victor Wembanyama moments earlier, then Wembanyama missed a jumper at the end of New York’s 105-104 win over the San Antonio Spurs on Friday night for a 2-0 lead in the NBA Finals.

“What a ballgame,” Knicks coach Mike Brown marveled.

Karl-Anthony Towns had 21 points and 13 rebounds, while Brunson and Mikal Bridges each scored 20 for the Knicks. They have won 13 straight, the second-longest streak by any team in NBA playoff history.

“New York City showed up,” Towns said. “The fans showed up. The energy showed up. And we found a way to get it done.”

The Knicks are just the third team to win the first two games of a finals on the road, joining Michael Jordan and the 1993 Chicago Bulls, and Hakeem Olajuwon and the 1995 Houston Rockets.

Both of those teams won championships, the Bulls needing six games to oust the Phoenix Suns, the Rockets going home after winning those first two games in Orlando and sweeping the Magic. The Knicks, seeking their first championship since 1973, are in position to join them.

Wembanyama, after a very quiet first half, scored 29. De’Aaron Fox had 20 for San Antonio.

“We can’t change the past,” Wembanyama said, “We’re already thinking about Game 3.”

The series shifts to New York. Game 3 is at Madison Square Garden on Monday night.

New York Knicks guard Landry Shamet, left, celebrates with guard Mikal Bridges after making a three-pointer in the second half against the San Antonio Spurs in Game 2 of the NBA Finals on Friday.

(David J. Phillip / Associated Press)

President Donald Trump — a native New Yorker — plans on attending Monday. And ticket prices on the secondary market, for the worst seats at MSG, were approaching $9,000 apiece on Friday night, with Knicks fans evidently willing to pay tippy-top dollar just to be in the building as the team nears what would be its first championship in 53 years.

The Spurs were down 14 midway through the fourth and came all the way back — scoring the next 14 points to tie the game. Wembanyama’s three-point play with 57 seconds left gave the Spurs their first lead in nearly two full quarters, putting San Antonio up 104-102.

“We showed tremendous desperation, urgency and competitive response,” Spurs coach Mitch Johnson said. “Hopefully we can try to bottle that up … and try to play to that same level.”

But the Knicks got the last three, Brunson — the hero of Game 1 for the Knicks — getting them all.

Brunson scored on the next possession, just his seventh basket in 24 shots on the night, and the game was tied. Wembanyama missed a long jumper, OG Anunoby got the rebound for New York with 30 seconds left, the Knicks called time and the stage was set.

The Spurs got a stop, but Wembanyama threw the ball away. Brunson got fouled, the Knicks had the lead back and before long Spurs fans were filing out of the arena — possibly for the final time this season.

The Spurs called time with 7.5 seconds remaining. Fox took the inbound pass, then set up Wembanyama for a jumper that would have won it. The shot bounced off the rim, and it was over.

“We had to get a stop. We hadn’t gotten a stop all quarter,” Towns said.

They got their stop. Next stop: New York, where the hottest team in basketball knows an NBA title is just two wins away.

Reynolds writes for the Associated Press.

Comedian and “Saturday Night Live” standout Marcello Hernández will host this year’s ESPY Awards, ESPN announced Wednesday.

The event, honoring excellence in sports performance, will be broadcast live on ABC and the ESPN app from the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center on July 15, making it the first ESPYs in New York City since 1999. For the last 25 years, the awards ceremony was held in Los Angeles.

“I started doing comedy 10 years ago, in Cleveland, Ohio, and I would take the train 12 hours to New York to sell comedy tickets on the street in Greenwich Village in exchange for stage time,” Hernández said in a statement. “It is an honor, and frankly feels crazy to be hosting the ESPYs this year in New York. I’m sure the energy is going to be great.”

Hernández recently headlined the biggest Spanish-language comedy show ever at the Hollywood Bowl as part of the Netflix Is a Joke Festival in May, and wrapped up his fourth season of “SNL” soon after. His first stand-up special, “American Boy,” premiered on Netflix in January.

He’s also a sports enthusiast, having grown up playing soccer and competing at the collegiate level during his time at John Carroll University in Ohio.

“Marcello is one of the most electric, young comedians today. His genuine enthusiasm for sports and his ties to New York City make him a natural fit to host this year’s ESPYs,” Craig Lazarus, ESPN vice president and executive producer of the ESPYs, said in a statement.

Hernández succeeds last year’s emcee, comedian Shane Gillis, as well as past hosts that include Jimmy Kimmel, John Cena, LeBron James and Peyton Manning.

In January, Puck reported that the change in venue is an effort to capitalize on the popularity of Fanatics Fest, the massive sports festival taking place in New York’s Javits Center from July 16-19, which also coincides with the World Cup final on July 19 at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey.

“This return to the heart of Manhattan brings the celebration of sports back to its roots for an unforgettable night at an iconic cultural landmark,” an ESPN spokesperson said in a statement.

“Hell’s Kitchen,” the Alicia Keys musical that has landed at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre in a blaze of rousing sound, deploys the R&B star’s glorious treasure trove of work in the service of a semi-autobiographical version of her coming-of-age story in the Manhattan neighborhood that gives the show its title.

The Hell’s Kitchen of Alicia Keys’ story, set in the 1990s, isn’t the gang-ridden Hell’s Kitchen of West Side Story, set in the 1950s. Keys grew up in Manhattan Plaza, a federally subsidized residential complex that provides affordable housing for artists. But for a teenager in rebellion from her watchful mother, the vibrant, music-filled street life comes with its share of dangers.

Kennedy Caughell as Jersey and Maya Drake as Ali in the North American Tour of Alicia Keys’ “Hell’s Kitchen” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Marc J. Franklin)

Ali (Maya Drake, who’s making her professional debut in this North American tour production) is a 17-year-old ready to break out of the cage her mother, Jersey (Kennedy Caughell), has placed her in. Jersey, a single mom, isn’t a tyrant. She just doesn’t want to see her daughter make the same mistakes that she did, namely get pregnant at a young age before she’s had a chance to realize her own dreams.

The book by playwright Kristoffer Diaz (“The Elaborate Entrance of Chad Deity”) is structured around a loving but combustible mother-daughter relationship amid the creative ferment of New York. This artistic neverland is crystallized in the apartment building that has music pouring out of every floor when Ali rides the elevator.

Maya Drake as Ali and the company of the North American Tour of Alicia Keys’ “Hell’s Kitchen” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Marc J. Franklin)

The story isn’t the strong suit of “Hell’s Kitchen,” which is powered by Alicia Keys’ versatile catalog, which has been supplemented with original material. The hits — “You Don’t Know My Name,” “Girl on Fire,” “Fallin’,” “If I Ain’t Got You,” “Like You’ll Never See Me Again,” “No One” and “Empire State of Mind,” among them — reverberate inside the Pantages with a thrilling exuberance.

What’s most impressive, however, is the way these tracks have been arranged both musically and dramatically. Jukebox musicals are notorious for shoe-horning in beloved songs without regard for storytelling integrity. “Mamma Mia!,” which crammed in as many ABBA hits as possible, hardly even bothered to find pretext for their inclusion. The lucrative example paved the way for more than two decades of musical theater shamelessness.

The company of the North American Tour of Alicia Keys’ “Hell’s Kitchen” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Marc J. Franklin)

“Hell’s Kitchen,” directed by Michael Greif, takes a more dignified approach, raiding Keys’ greatest hits in a way that doesn’t cause dramatic offense and better yet, adds a layer of surprise to music that is so well known.

The songs are allocated in unexpected ways. Numbers that you might think belong to Ali are divided among the company. Jersey is first in line, and Caughell makes the most of her opportunities. But sharing in the bounty are Davis (Desmond Sean Ellington), Ali’s mostly absent and chronically unreliable father; Knuck (Jonavery Worrell), Ali’s forbidden love interest; or Miss Liza Jane (Roz White), a pianist who lives in the building and becomes Ali’s formidable mentor.

There are other characters who offer luminous assistance, but these are the principals in a musical tale built around Ali’s central relationships. Keys’ origin story is more dynamic on an atmospheric than dramatic level. A mother having difficulty with her boy-crazy teenage daughter isn’t exactly breaking any ground, and Diaz avoids venturing into more turbulent territory. Ali’s divided identity, stemming in part from an all-too-present white mother and all-too-missing Black father, sets up issues that are touched on but never deeply engaged.

Desmond Sean Ellington as Davis and Kennedy Caughell as Jersey and the company of the North American Tour of Alicia Keys’ “Hell’s Kitchen” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Marc J. Franklin)

Miss Liza Jane spots Ali’s musical gift right away and fills her with a sense of pride and responsibility in her Black heritage. But her character’s role is somewhat earnestly compartmentalized. Knuck recognizes that Ali’s fascination with him stems in part from the way she sees him, much as her mother does, as a “thug.” But their tentative affair is secondary to the complex bond between Ali and Jersey, whose troubled connection with Davis helps Ali understand why her mother is so paranoid about her romantic choices.

But these concerns fall away when the performers start singing. Drake has a beautiful voice, but her Ali is slighter than that of Maleah Joi Moon, who won a Tony for her Broadway debut performance. I didn’t mind that Davis sings “Fallin’,” as Ellington has a voice of luscious thunder. Worrell’s Knuck more than holds his own with his duets with Ali. (In fact, I was more taken by his velvety interpretation of “Like You’ll Never See Me Again” than Ali’s more straightforwardly pretty version.) White’s Miss Liza Jane takes the Pantages audience to church in her numbers. And when Caughell magnificently directs “No One” to Ali, I can’t imagine there’s a dry eye in the house.

Desmond Sean Ellington as Davis and Maya Drake as Ali in the North American Tour of Alicia Keys’ “Hell’s Kitchen” at the Hollywood Pantages Theatre.

(Marc J. Franklin)

This tour production isn’t crisp in all areas. The dancing isn’t always smooth, the costumes struck me as a road show idea of New York cool, and the acting didn’t do much to compensate for some of the book’s less subtle moments.

But the energy of the production is infectious. “Hell’s Kitchen,” a New York story of a wunderkind discovering her gift, helped me get over my allergy to the jukebox genre. The soaring quality of the orchestra and the delectable company of voices pay exhilarating homage to a singular artist, who seems right at home at the Pantages.

MIAMI — The Trump administration has quietly instructed federal prosecutors in Miami to avoid pursuing criminal investigations into Venezuela’s acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a longtime target of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, according to current and former U.S. law enforcement officials, in the latest sign of warming relations between the White House and the oil-rich nation.

It’s unclear whether prosecutors had implicated Rodríguez in any crimes or whether investigators were moving toward an indictment. A Justice Department spokesperson said in an email “there was never an investigation into her to shut down.”

But DEA records obtained by the Associated Press earlier this year show she consistently surfaced on the radar of federal law enforcement dating to at least 2018, though she has never been criminally charged in the U.S. like several other senior Venezuelan officials.

The directive to pause scrutiny into Rodríguez was meant to avoid upsetting the administration’s efforts to stabilize Venezuela after the capture of her predecessor, Nicolás Maduro, among other reasons, a current official said. It was not clear whether the White House, which deferred comment to the Justice Department, was involved in the decision.

“Everybody has been told to stand down,” one of the former officials said.

The former officials, who had been briefed on the development, as well as the current official all spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss internal deliberations.

Rodríguez, a U.S. attorney representing her and the Venezuelan Communications Ministry didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The move eases pressure on Rodriguez

Removing the threat of potential indictment, even temporarily, eases pressure on Rodríguez as the Trump administration seeks to work with the acting leader to stabilize Venezuela after Maduro’s ouster and open the country to U.S. investment.

President Trump praised Rodríguez as a “terrific person” shortly after the U.S. military took Maduro and his wife to New York to face federal narcotics charges. Both have pleaded not guilty.

In recent months, the U.S. has lifted sanctions against Rodríguez and recognized her as Venezuela’s sole head of state, allowing her to re-establish ties with western banks and more freely work with U.S. investors seeking to tap into the world’s largest petroleum reserves. As ties between the two governments have deepened, some have held out the Venezuelan playbook — characterized by oil blockades, indictments of top leaders and threats of military intervention — as a model to drive regime change from within as the U.S. pressures other longtime adversaries in Iran and Cuba.

Rodríguez and her brother, Jorge Rodríguez, the head of the National Assembly, were hit with U.S. sanctions during Trump’s first term for their role in undermining Venezuelan democracy and cementing Maduro’s authoritarian rule.

Rodríguez “is doing a great job,” Trump wrote on social media in early March. “The Oil is beginning to flow, and the professionalism and dedication between both Countries is a very nice thing to see!”

In recent months, Rodríguez has hosted ceremonies with a steady stream of American oilmen, some of them partaking in high-profile delegations led by U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum.

Election talk deferred amid Trump’s praise

Missing in all the mutual backslapping is any talk of elections, even as Rodríguez last month blew through a 90-day limit set by Venezuela’s high court to fill Maduro’s position on a temporary basis.

“I don’t know,” she responded in English when a visiting U.S. journalist earlier this month shouted out a question about her time frame for holding elections. “Some time.”

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has demanded the administration explain its favorable treatment of Rodríguez, calling her a “central figure in Nicolás Maduro’s repressive regime.”

“Sanctions have been lifted on Ms. Rodríguez without any indication that she has taken concrete and meaningful actions to restore democratic order,” Sheehan, joined by Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, wrote in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent last week.

Rick de la Torre, a former CIA chief of station in Caracas, said that the decision to shield Rodríguez fits well with the Trump administration’s foreign policy goals in Venezuela.

“She’s a lifelong Marxist and was a senior leader of one of the world’s most corrupt regimes but the U.S. is providing her with breathing space and carrots to lay the foundation for democracy and U.S. investment,” said de la Torre, the CEO of Tower Strategy, which advises companies on Venezuela.

“There’s a shelf life to her utility, however. At some point she will face justice,” he added.

Rodríguez has been on DEA’s radar since 2018

The DEA had amassed a detailed intelligence file on Rodríguez dating to at least 2018, and has received allegations about her ranging from drug trafficking to gold smuggling, the AP reported earlier this year. One confidential informant told the DEA in early 2021 that Rodríguez was using hotels in the Caribbean resort of Isla Margarita “as a front to launder money,” the records show.

Her name has surfaced in nearly a dozen DEA investigations — several of which remained ongoing as recently as this year — involving field offices from Paraguay and Ecuador to Phoenix and New York. She had even been linked to Maduro’s alleged bag man, Alex Saab, whom U.S. authorities first arrested in 2020 on money-laundering charges, the records show.

Rodríguez deported Saab this month as part of a purge of insider businessmen who are accused of having enriched themselves through corrupt dealings with Maduro.

It’s unclear in which Miami investigations Rodríguez’s name surfaced. Two of the former officials said Rodríguez has also come up in meetings with investigators in Tampa, Fla., tasked last year by former Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi with looking into financial crimes in Venezuela.

At the time, Rodríguez was serving as Maduro’s vice president. Justice Department policy requires the attorney general to personally approve the charging of any foreign head of state, who are normally immune from prosecution under international and U.S. law.

Halting high-profile criminal probes of foreign leaders

The pausing of the investigations into Rodríguez comes as the Trump administration has similarly tapped the brakes on ongoing federal investigations into another prominent Latin American leftist, Colombian President Gustavo Petro.

The DEA had also designated Petro a “priority target” over alleged ties to drug traffickers that had been probed for months by federal prosecutors. The New York Times reported in March that U.S. officials recently assured the Colombian government Petro does not face charges in those cases.

Duncan Levin, a former prosecutor who worked for the U.S. attorney’s office in Brooklyn, said it would be “deeply troubling” for law enforcement to be “told to stand down from a legitimate investigation for political or transactional reasons.”

“The White House cannot use criminal enforcement as a diplomatic light switch,” Levin told AP. “DOJ decisions are supposed to be based on law, evidence, policy and public safety — not on whether a foreign official is useful to the administration at a given moment.”

Goodman, Richer and Mustian write for the Associated Press. Richer reported from Washington and Mustian from New York. AP Writer Regina Garcia Cano in Mexico City contributed to this report.

Grizz Chapman, an actor best known for his role as Grizz on NBC’s Emmy-winning comedy “30 Rock,” has died. He was 52.

Chapman’s cousin, Donte Harrison, confirmed the actor’s death on social media.

“Life gave my cousin Grizz Chapman some heavy battles, but he fought them with strength and dignity until the very end,” Harrison wrote. “A lot of people knew him as the sitcom star from 30 Rock, but we knew the man behind the screen. A good heart, good energy, and somebody who made an impact in this life.

“After years of fighting illness and dialysis, he passed peacefully in his sleep on May 22nd, 2026. I’m thankful we got time to reconnect 2 months before his passing.”

Born Mack D. Chapman on April 16, 1974, in Brooklyn, N.Y., Chapman got the name Grizz while working as a security guard at nightclubs around New York. The claim to fame of the 7-foot-tall security guard turned actor would be portraying a character that resembled himself: a towering bodyguard named Grizz.

Chapman played the mild-mannered bodyguard across 80 episodes of the wildly popular sitcom “30 Rock,” which starred Tina Fey, Tracy Morgan and Alec Baldwin. Chapman’s character was part of the entourage of Tracy Jordan (played by Morgan).

Chapman told Cracked in 2024 that landing “30 Rock” was the “hardest/easiest audition I ever had in my life.”

But it wasn’t until the second season of the show that Chapman felt he really broke through as a performer. On Episode 210, he performs a rendition of “Midnight Train to Georgia” alongside the veteran ensemble. “That showed so many levels of our talents — we got a chance to dance, we got a chance to sing, we got a chance to take direction and to be funny.”

In addition to acting in various projects, including the 2014 film “The Cobbler,” which starred Adam Sandler, and the 2016 thriller “Money Monster,” starring George Clooney and Julia Roberts, Chapman was an advocate for the National Kidney Foundation.

The actor battled high blood pressure and kidney disease and struggled with his weight for years, and in 2009, he announced he was seeking a donor for a kidney transplant. During an appearance on “The Dr. Oz Show,” the actor said, “I don’t want to go through this forever.”

Chapman told Dr. Oz that he’d coped with the news by acknowledging it was “a scary situation” but deciding to “face it one way or another.”

When Dr. Oz asked him what he wished for, the actor said, “I want to stay alive.”

Chapman spent nearly two years undergoing dialysis treatments three days a week for 4½ hours a day while filming “30 Rock” and hoping for a donor. In the process, he lost more than 150 pounds, hoping to be fit enough for the procedure. After the episode of “Dr. Oz” aired, a fan of Chapman’s, Ryan Perkins, flew from Arizona to New York to meet the actor. Perkins, then in his early 20s, knew he wanted to do something that could change someone’s life.

“I was emotional. I was excited. I wanted to scream. It was exciting to meet someone with that kind of willingness to help,” Chapman told the East Valley Tribune.

“How do you ever repay someone for something like that? You can’t. It’s not like borrowing $20 from someone and telling them you’re going to give it back. It’s something that you can never repay someone for.”

As a radio professional who grew up aspiring to work at CBS News Radio, anchor Steve Kathan understood the weight of the words he wrote and recorded Friday on the final broadcast of “World News Roundup.”

“America’s longest running newscast signs off for the last time,” Kathan said in the small dimly lighted studio in the CBS Broadcast Center on Manhattan’s West Side. “It all began on March 13, 1938,” he said, referring to the iconic news program.

Kathan played a recording of Edward R. Morrow, the legendary CBS News journalist who delivered his first report on the debut of the program, saying “the best in radio reporting is yet to be — good night and good luck.”

“And goodbye,” Kathan added, ending the run of around 23,000 editions of the 10-minute signature broadcast, delivered from CBS’ radio network . A final news update was scheduled to run later Friday night.

CBS News Radio and its 26 employees became a victim of budget cuts across parent-company Paramount’s news division announced in March.

“A shift in radio station programming strategies, coupled with challenging economic realities, has made it impossible to continue the service,” the company said.

Privately, longtime insiders at CBS News say the division has struggled for years to find ways to financially turn around its radio business.

The unit was operating at a loss with monthly revenues recently falling as low as $67,000, according to a network executive not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The service held on because it still had value in promoting CBS News and its journalism, reaching 20 million listeners a week.

Leadership over the years have put off the messy task of winding the radio business down due to its iconic status at the company. CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss was reluctant to make the cuts as well, according to people inside the company familiar with her thinking. But with Paramount taking on substantial debt to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery, considerations of the division’s legacy are likely to matter less in ongoing efforts to reduce costs.

Kathan had heard rumblings about CBS getting out of radio going all the way back to its first ownership change in the 1980s when Larry Tisch acquired the company.

“Even though I’ve been here 39 years, the thought was someone’s going to decide to do it,” he said.

As television dominated the media landscape, CBS News Radio retained its role as what Kathan called “the background track of American history.”

As a child growing up in Connecticut, Kathan recalls watching Douglas Edwards, the “World News Roundup” evening anchor for two decades, doing TV news updates in between the soap operas his mother watched on CBS. After Kathan joined the network in 1987 as a writer and producer, he would see Edwards and other famous names from the division walking through the hallways of the broadcast center before doing his afternoon newscasts.

“Just the fact that you were working with them made you think and realize you had to up your game,” Kathan said. “You wanted the audience to trust you as much as it trusted them.”

“World News Roundup” rose to prominence during World War II, when Murrow and other CBS News correspondents delivered live reports from Europe.

Once TV supplanted radio as a source for scripted entertainment, news and information became the primary mission of CBS’ radio division that began in 1927. In 1967, the company converted its owned AM radio stations — including its Los Angeles outlet KNX — to an all-news format.

While the stations focused on local news, traffic, weather and sports, they also prominently featured CBS News Radio reports at the top of the hour and other features throughout the day.

Longtime listeners became familiar with Edwards, Dallas Townsend, Reid Collins, Richard C. Hottelet, Christopher Glenn and other CBS News veterans who brought national and world stories to listeners throughout the day, introduced by a five-note sounder that simulated a telegraph. Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite were heard daily with analysis.

The radio network developed a major star in Charles Osgood, who joined WCBS in New York as anchor. He went national in 1971 with a twice-daily segment called “The Osgood File.”

Osgood wrote two-minute reports in succinct prose delivered in his mellifluous tones. He occasionally offered commentary in verse, which earned him the title of poet-in-residence at CBS News.

Osgood’s popularity was rivaled only by ABC Radio personality Paul Harvey. CBS News even allowed him to read commercial copy to satisfy eager advertisers who wanted their product messages presented in his comforting voice. When Osgood became a host on the TV side in the 1990s on “CBS News Sunday Morning,” his sign-off remained “I’ll see you on the radio.” He filed his final “Osgood File” report in 2017.

Charles Osgood in the WCBS radio studio in New York on July 25, 1967.

(CBS Photo Archive/CBS)

CBS sold off its radio stations in 2017, but continued to produce and distribute its network programs as the business faced competition from digital media.

Dustin Gervais, technical operations manager for the network, said CBS News Radio struggled as more audio advertisers prefer digital content because of its effectiveness at targeting specific demographic groups. The shift is reflected in radio ad revenue, which dipped about 2% to $14.37 billion, according to media research firm Kagan. But the digital ad revenue portion of that pie continued to grow, topping $1.75 billion.

Charles Forelle, managing editor for CBS News, said the company plans to remain in the audio journalism business through podcasting and not straight newscasts.

“We have a whole bunch of different things in development that are less news reading and more other things,” he told The Times.

Not all of radio’s problems are related to digital.

Michael Socolow, a professor of communication and journalism at the University of Maine, notes that the industry troubles began in 1996 when deregulation loosened the limit on the number of stations a single entity can own. Buying sprees of outlets led to owners who became highly leveraged and less able to invest in programming, which put the squeeze on suppliers such as CBS News Radio.

“Radio was hollowed out by the corporations, before its utility to the American citizen ended,” Socolow said. “You can trace it to the Telecom Act of 1996.”

Some of the 26 employees at CBS News Radio who were severed from the company have found work at Worldwide News Network, a service launched by John Catsimatidis, the owner of New York’s top-rated talk station WABC. The company said the service, which begins Saturday, will deliver “hard news, breaking headlines, and fact-driven reporting to affiliates across the country.”

CBS News Radio’s biggest customer — the all-news stations owned by Audacy, including KNX — have already switched their network service to ABC News Audio.

SAN DIEGO — The good people of New York like to consider themselves tough. If you can make it there, as Frank Sinatra crooned, you’ll make it anywhere.

Do not confuse hot takes with sounding tough. Two New York sports talk hosts this week took daft shots at Joe Davis and came off — in the last adjective with which any true New Yorker would want to be described — as soft.

Let’s rewind: Davis is the lead voice of the Dodgers on SportsNet LA. He is also the lead voice of the national baseball broadcasts on Fox. In the latter role, he called last Saturday’s game between the New York Yankees and the New York Mets.

At one point, Mets outfielder Carson Benge dropped an easy fly ball. Without missing a beat, Davis said: “Oh, no! Oh, no, the Mets!”

It was the perfect call. The foibles of the Mets are so many and so weird that Mets fans themselves have embraced a term for them: LOLMets. You can learn all about it in a 23-minute YouTube video narrated by a former Mets pitcher.

Commentator Stephen Nelson, Dodger Shohei Ohtani, interpreter Will Ireton, Dodger Roki Sasaki and broadcaster Joe Davis address fans during Dodger Fest at Dodger Stadium on Jan. 31.

(Jae C. Hong / Associated Press)

Firing one manager (Willie Randolph) at midnight in Anaheim? Dumping another manager (Carlos Beltran) before he could manage a game because he was the only player cited in the commissioner’s report on the Houston Astros’ cheating scandal? Opening this season with baseball’s highest payroll and spending some time with baseball’s worst record?

“This year, and in recent years, there have been so many moments where it looks like the Mets are right there, ready to make a run or win the division or win a championship, and then something just tends to go wrong,” Davis said in San Diego Tuesday.

“They were in a stretch right there where every single day, they were getting a stud hurt. They put together a winning streak against the Tigers, then Clay Holmes has the comebacker break his ankle.”

The next day, Benge totally clanked it, and Davis totally nailed it — in the moment, not with some scripted phrase waiting in his pocket.

“You hope that your reactions in those moments — in any moment in this job — are authentic,” Davis said. “You don’t have much time for it to be anything else.”

On Monday, Evan Roberts — a host on WFAN, New York’s top-rated sports station — unloaded on Davis for “mocking” the Mets.

“Joe Davis has become a clown for the Los Angeles Dodgers and we all hear it,” Roberts said, in remarks posted by the Awful Announcing website.

Got anything else?

“I think he’s a Dodger fanboy,” Roberts said. “I think he wants to just make love to Shohei Ohtani every time he talks about him … He’s a great broadcaster, and I’ll admit it. But, for now, I think Joe Davis is a Dodgers shill and it’s obnoxious.

“And I’d give him this advice, not that he cares, he doesn’t care: Don’t go to the Dodger parade and be the emcee. It’s a bad look. It just is. You’re sitting there as the national voice and now you’re pom-pom waving at the Dodger parade. Come on, man.”

Davis works for the Dodgers. When the boss wants you to emcee the World Series championship rally, you do. Would the Mets’ broadcasters do the same? When the Mets win their first World Series championship since 1986, we’ll find out.

Let’s hear from Sal Licata, formerly at WFAN and now working independently: “What’s up with Joe Davis, by the way? You Dodger homer. ‘Oh no, the Mets,’ that’s a national unbiased broadcast? You biased Dodger blue fool.”

There always will be people who claim Davis is biased toward the Dodgers, just as people claimed his predecessor, Joe Buck, was biased toward the St. Louis Cardinals. Buck worked for Fox on weekends and called Cardinals games during the week.

And, for the people who see only what they want to see, Davis is the voice of baseball’s evil empire. Maybe that aggravates New Yorkers, but consider how aggravated we are that we have to fight through hellish traffic to get to Dodger Stadium or a television set by 5 p.m. so we can see our team play in the World Series because the East Coast needs to see the game in prime time.

Or how annoyed we are that we get televised Yankees-Red Sox games shoved down our throats when Red Sox management has opted for irrelevance and the best rivalry in baseball is here, between the Dodgers and Padres.

Better yet, how about we all chill? It’s just a game. We could break bread with New York’s famous bagels, except the New York Times told us we have the better bagels.

On the second weekend of May, Gustavo Dudamel gave the New York Philharmonic a salsa shock. He gleefully brought the startled players together with the Spanish Harlem Orchestra, an uptown salsa and jazz band, for concerts at Lincoln Center and Washington Heights. The city‘s classical music fans treated it as a cultural breakthrough; Dudamel is expected to transform the orchestra as a cultural institution when he returns in the fall as its music and artistic director.

A day later he was back in Los Angeles to begin rehearsals at a Walt Disney Concert Hall that had been fantastically transformed by Frank Gehry for the Los Angeles Philharmonic’s staging of “Die Walküre.” Transformation — be it cultural, orchestral, personal — has marked Dudamel’s 17 years as music (and more recently artistic) director of the L.A. Phil, which is now coming to an end with his three weeks of concerts in Disney to close the season June 7, followed by a celebratory weekend at the Hollywood Bowl in late August.

But meeting with Dudamel in his dressing room after a “Walküre” rehearsal (the opera begins Tuesday night at Disney and runs for six nights, an act a night, the full opera performed twice) , he says as he has said before, he does not think of this as a culmination, merely the beginning of a new adventure. He’s apartment shopping in New York. But he is keeping his house in Los Angeles.

He’s also departing with two very long new titles as “Die Walküre” premieres: the Diane and M. David Paul Artistic Cultural Laureate of the L.A. Phil and Jane and Michael Eisner Founding Director and Conductor Laureate of Youth Orchestra Los Angeles (YOLA).

Gustavo Dudamel conducts the Los Angeles Philharmonic in a performance of Beethoven’s Missa Solemnis at the Walt Disney Concert Hall on Feb. 22.

(David Butow / For The Times)

“We are talking about projects,” he says. “Look, I’m coming back for two weeks in December,” when he will lead Beethoven programs. He returns in the spring. The Bowl will always be a second home.

“I’m living here and I’m not living here,” he explains. “The connection will always be here.”

The energy in New York is, he continues, “super exciting.” And what excites him the most is how comfortable he feels with the very real differences between L.A. and New York.

“As a Latino from Venezuela,” he says, “I have an immediate connection with the New York that is home of salsa. When I was in the womb I was hearing salsa.” His father, Oscar Dudamel, is a trombonist and salsa musician.

But he adds that mariachi, ubiquitous in Mexico and L.A., is also an integral part of Venezuelan culture. “What I have to say is that I am blessed. I’m blessed that both cities are now part of my life.”

Bringing ‘crazy’ ideas to Los Angeles

L.A., of course, has been the major part of his adult life. At 24, an unknown, he made his dazzling U.S. debut in 2005 leading the L.A. Phil at the Hollywood Bowl. Four years later, he became the orchestra’s music director and caught the world’s attention.

There is no doubt that Dudamel’s extraordinary talents would have meant a major career wherever he landed. But, here, he inherited the world’s most culturally open major orchestra, where fresh thinking and new music thrive. Disney Hall allowed him the extraordinary freedom to dream. Being back at Disney, Dudamel admits, is very emotional, especially conducting “Walküre” with Gehry’s sets of billowy, sumptuous clouds and fanciful white papery horses.

“Frank is here with us,” Dudamel exclaims about the architect, who died in December and with whom he had become close. Conducting Wagner’s opera, in many ways, sums up Dudamel’s ambitions, the way he has connected with more sides of L.A.’s cultural landscape than possibly any other artist.

In L.A., Dudamel grew as an artist and a person, he says, through his relationship with an orchestra that is uniquely flexible and a welcoming community. This allowed Dudamel to be what he likes to call “crazy.”

“I remember the first time I came here. I didn’t have a chance to do or see anything,” he says of his Bowl debut. “So, I remember driving from the airport to Sunset Boulevard, where my hotel was, and I didn’t understand anything. But immediately it was the connection with the orchestra.”

Frank Gehry designed the sets for a Jan. 18, 2024, performance of Wagner’s opera, “Das Rheingold,” with Gustavo Dudamel leading the Los Angeles Philharmonic at Walt Disney Concert Hall.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Flash forward 20 years from 2005 to 2025. In what seemed like a truly crazy idea, he brought the L.A. Phil to the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival, where he led a varied set of classical favorites and appearances with pop stars, for 150,000 people shouting “L.A. Phil! L.A Phil.” Among the highlights was “Ride of the Valkyries,” the English title of “Walküre.”

The symbolism of doing “Walküre” is, for Dudamel, unmistakable. Wagner’s four-part “Ring” cycle, of which “Die Walküre” is the second opera, strongly influenced the “Star Wars” films Dudamel grew up with. The saga’s composer John Williams is another L.A. legend who became for Dudamel like family. Williams has, in fact, written a fanfare, “Bravo Gustavo!” that Dudamel will premiere on June 4 in a concert in which he celebrates the musicians of the L.A. Phil.

The “Walküre” production, moreover, further expresses his desire to remain connected with L.A. When asked whether he still plans to complete the “Ring” cycle with the L.A. Phil, which he began two seasons ago with “Das Rheingold,” he says, “completely.”

It’s a radical notion, to say nothing of an extraordinarily expensive and time-consuming challenge for any orchestra given to a former music director, but Dudamel has never been one to take no for an answer. “At my last conversation with Frank,” he recalls, “I said I was coming to talk about ‘Siegfried’ [the next opera in the cycle], and he said, ‘You are crazy.’”

“That was Frank. He freaked out about the operas every time I talked to him about them. And then he came up with fabulous ideas.

“You know I never dreamed about coming to the L.A. Phil. I was happy in Venezuela and guest conducting elsewhere. But when I met Frank and John [Williams], I knew I had come to the right place.”

One reason Dudamel was happy in Venezuela was his position as music director of the Simón Bolívar Youth Orchestra, part of El Sistema, the country’s famed music education program. He brought a version of that to Los Angeles with YOLA, which offers free musical education to students. Bringing young people together to learn — and not just to play music but to listen to each other — has grown increasingly essential to him.

Gustavo Dudamel has fun with John Williams at the Hollywood Bowl as he conducts the L.A. Phil during “Maestro of the Movies: John Williams with the LA Phil” on July 9, 2023.

(Emil Ravelo / For The Times)

On Thursday evening, USC awarded Dudamel an honorary doctorate during its graduation ceremonies at the Coliseum, where Dudamel also gave the commencement speech.

“I will never tire of repeating this: music, art and beauty are universal rights,” he told the graduates, urging them to go out into the world listening to others, seeing others, paying attention to everything. These are the practices he has long championed as the essential need for youth orchestras.

This was, in fact, almost precisely what he said when he first arrived in L.A. “I was very young, but I grew up with these ideas,” he told me.

“You have to say to the students, ‘Stop! Let’s pause. Just listen.’”

“It’s a way to really connect with what surrounds you, but also connect with yourself. That’s the beauty of all the layers of listening we do as musicians. I now think that is our main tool. In the end it’s not listening only to sounds. It’s listening as connecting with others.”

Practicing what he preaches

As Dudamel plans for his next chapter, he indicates that the advice he gives students is what he is also saying to himself.

YOLA students perform on stage during a “Gracias Gustavo Community Block Party” at the Judith and Thomas L. Beckmen YOLA Center in Inglewood on Oct. 11, 2025.

(Etienne Laurent / For The Times)

What L.A. gave him, he concludes, is a greater depth of his own listening. There was the guidance of Deborah Borda, who, as the orchestra’s president and CEO, hired and mentored him. There were the opera productions with Peter Sellars, who made him look deeply inside himself. There were the communities to discover and with which to collaborate.

New York, he insists, will be a further continuation of this process. “There are a lot of things to do. As I did here, that will be not only conducting but spending a big amount of time doing other things. I will have to listen to the community. Every place is different.”

And every place needs to be, for Dudamel, connected. He began his last season in Disney in the fall with the world premiere of Ellen Reid’s “Earth Between Oceans,” a bicoastal co-commission between the L.A. Phil and the New York Philharmonic, sonically evoking the environmental difference between L.A. and New York. He recently repeated it with his new orchestra in David Geffen Hall in New York.

In L.A., Reid’s score felt like a vast, moving, spiritual soundscape of our fires’ fury as well as our coastal fancy. At Geffen, it became a gripping showpiece, like attempting to zoom in a Ferrari through Manhattan streets, were they ever empty — the thrill of taking it all in.

Dudamel says his favorite place in New York so far is the orchestra’s archives. Becoming absorbed in the history of America’s oldest orchestra gives him new ideas. He wants simultaneously the old, the new and the many.

He also insists on ever more connections. ”We are making, many, many projects together,” he says of the L.A. Phil and the New York Philharmonic. That includes bringing the two orchestras together in a further experiment in listening.

“That‘s very important to me, one of my dreams. And it’s not difficult,” he says. “We have plans and it’s beautiful. We have to do that.”

CANNES, France — Cannes is technically half over and the hunt for a masterpiece continues. Critics on the Croisette are starting to resemble that classic comic-strip panel in which an explorer crawls desperately across the sand toward an oasis that’s only a mirage.

This far into an underwhelming festival, good films have a way of looking like great ones, such as James Gray’s “Paper Tiger,” a grimy thriller with Adam Driver and Miles Teller playing brothers in 1980s New York who get mired in a scheme to sanitize the Gowanus Canal. Driver’s ex-cop knows the codes of cutting deals with the Russian mob; Teller’s engineer is the square who can’t grasp how doing things the right way just makes the situation worse. As the normies, Teller and his naive wife, portrayed by Scarlett Johansson, feel like kids playing dress-up. (Johansson’s perm is a bit much.) Still, the script is tense and tight — and at this point, I’m happy to see anything with a plot.

Rodrigo Sorogoyen’s “The Beloved” has two of them: It’s a film within a film about a famous director (Javier Bardem) who casts his estranged actor daughter (Victoria Luengo) in his latest project. The fictional movie he’s making looks stiff, a period epic about Spain’s colonialist withdrawal from the Sahara in the 1930s, which doubles as a metaphor for the father’s destructive absence from his now-adult child’s life. A boozer, she’s not stable enough to stand up to the scrutiny of his sudden attention. Luengo herself holds the camera splendidly even in her character’s weaker moments, turning her charisma off whenever her father needs her to turn it on.

Consider it a shot and chaser to “Garance,” which stars a vibrantly sloppy Adèle Exarchopoulos as another alcoholic actress. Sharp, smartly paced and entertaining, it’s fantastic until the last stretch, which peters out and then abruptly stops.

One of the festival’s big themes seems to be connection: that we’re all stuck on this rock together and, ultimately, the difference between human and android, man and woman, is moot. At least three movies have someone saying, “That’s life,” with a shrug. The films themselves, however, are lifeless. Worse, they’re long. I can roll with movies that are mostly vibes, but only to a limit — say, 85 minutes.

Sophie Thatcher in the movie “Her Private Hell.”

(Neon)

Nicolas Winding Refn’s “Her Private Hell” is longer than that and the inertia is excruciating. The Danish director of “Drive” hasn’t made a feature film since “Neon Demon” premiered at Cannes in 2016 and this grim fairy tale feels more like a feint than a comeback. A sulky daughter (Sophie Thatcher) skulks around a misty skyscraper with her hot young stepmother (Havana Rose Liu) idly fretting about a murderer named the Leather Man. Down below, an Army private (Charles Melton) hunts the killer. Little happens other than chain-smoking, costume changes and interminable shots of color-shifting strobe lighting splaying across the cast’s cheekbones. Thankfully, Kristine Froseth adds pep as a bimbo who hasn’t yet learned how to talk as leadenly as everyone else.

Too much of the program is made up of tedious movies by beloved Cannes veterans — essentially affirmative action for auteurs. Eight years ago, Hirokazu Kore-eda won the Palme d’Or for “Shoplifters,” a chaotically enchanting portrait of a family of fraudsters. Now, he’s returned with “Sheep in the Box,” a slick and dull story about two grieving parents who adopt a clone of their dead son. “Sheep” aspires for Spielbergian catharsis — one scene seems to consider itself an art-house take on “A.I. Artificial Intelligence” — but the human characters come off as mechanical as the little robot boy. Between the musty setup and saccharine score, it’s the film equivalent of a bowl of stale candies.

Arthur Harari, who co-wrote 2023’s Palme- and Oscar-winning “Anatomy of a Fall,” is here as the director of “The Unknown,” a stilted drama about a sulky male photographer who wakes up in the body of Léa Seydoux after a nameless, wordless one-night stand. You can imagine Brian De Palma running with the sex-contagion idea (or “It Follows” director David Robert Mitchell grumbling that he deserved an inspired-by writing credit). But “The Unknown’s” shape-shifting intrigue stalls out once you realize that none of the characters have a personality to begin with. Who cares what soul is inside each shell if they’re all monotonously slack-faced? “Face/Off” it isn’t.

Léa Seydoux in the movie “The Unknown.”

(Festival de Cannes)

On that note, one emotional highlight to date was the presentation of an unannounced honorary Palme to John Travolta. (Yes, his face-swapping 1997 thriller with Nicolas Cage was in the celebratory montage.) Already bursting with passion to be world-premiering his directorial debut, “Propeller One-Way Night Coach,” Travolta was moved to tears. “Surprise complète!” Travolta gasped, kissing his trophy and blurting, “I was just happy to be here.” Indeed he was, as evident by the jaunty white beret he’d worn for the occasion, which quickly went viral on social media.

Travolta’s infectious enthusiasm carried over into the movie itself, a semi-autobiographical trifle about his childhood love of air travel. Set in 1962, a boy roughly Travolta’s age voyages from New York to Los Angeles on a series of hopping flights with his mother, who is hoping to land a rich husband or a good Hollywood role in that order. The kid’s joy is as stratospheric as the plane; he adores everything but the airline’s chicken cordon bleu. As a nostalgia piece, it’s “A Christmas Story” with a third of the jokes, none of the cynicism and not quite the length to justify itself as a movie. At barely an hour, it skedaddles in time to leave you with a sheepish smile.

Given the choice, I’d prefer to see a truly terrible movie over one that’s merely bland and mediocre. With that context, I’ve been literally raving over “Butterfly Jam,” a film so fundamentally misguided it could almost be the cineaste version of “The Room.”

Set in New Jersey, “Butterfly Jam” is a tale of toxic masculinity among braggadocious Circassian immigrants played by Barry Keoghan, Harry Melling and Riley Keough — actors who, despite their talent and effort here, are too notoriously Irish, English and Graceland-ian to be convincingly a part of a subculture this specific. It’s filmmaker Kantemir Balagov’s fault more than theirs. Despite supposedly arriving to the States as teenagers, the cast don’t even have accents, just dyed jet-black hair. While adamantly miserabilist, it does have a plot or at least one shocking plot point that’s so ghastly it made me giddy. A few scenes later, a pelican switches on a cotton candy machine with its bill, sending hot sugar whirring through the air — seriously — and I nearly applauded in delight.

Woody Harrelson and Kristen Stewart in the movie “Full Phil.”

(Festival de Cannes)

Likewise, a friend warned me against staying up through 2 a.m. for the premiere of Quentin Dupieux’s “Full Phil,” cautioning that it was the worst film they’d ever seen at Cannes in over a decade. But there was no way I’d miss watching Woody Harrelson and Kristen Stewart play a miserable father and daughter on a Parisian vacation, directed by a French oddball who rarely fails to entertain — although this time, he comes close.

The story is simple: The dad flusters, fidgets and whines; the girl gobbles room service as though aspiring to become human foie gras. “Full Phil” took about an hour to reveal its point — that parenthood makes you a glutton for punishment — and the jokes are more gestures at where a joke should be. Still, I support Harrelson and Stewart signing on to a project this cuckoo. Better still, it boasted something in short supply: a satisfying ending. Here’s hoping the festival itself ends stronger too.

Vice President JD Vance said Wednesday that the Trump administration is deferring $1.3 billion in Medicaid reimbursements to California over concerns the state is allowing “fraudsters” to drive up costs to taxpayers, including by pushing unnecessary medications on unsuspecting patients.

“There are California taxpayers and American taxpayers who are being defrauded because California isn’t taking its program seriously. But also, you have people who’ve been prescribed medications that they don’t even need,” Vance said. “Sometimes they’ve had drugs put into their bodies that they don’t need because fraudsters have actually encouraged false prescriptions and false administration and medications.”

Vance, standing alongside Dr. Mehmet Oz, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said the administration is also sending letters to all 50 states informing them that if they do not “effectively and aggressively prosecute Medicaid fraud in their states,” they will see federal funding cut off as well.

“We want California to get serious about this fraud,” said Vance, who President Trump named his “fraud czar” last month.

Oz called out what he said was widespread fraud in hospice services and similar in-home care programs nationally — and particularly in the Los Angeles region — and announced a six-month moratorium on new Medicare enrollment for hospices and home health agencies.

“A third of all these programs in the entire country are in Los Angeles. Ask yourself, how is that possible? It’s not,” Oz said. “They’re not that many people dying in Los Angeles. We’re not talking about California, just Los Angeles.”

He said he and others in the administration determined that “at least half of the hospices, in the entire area around Los Angeles, are fraudulent,” and had shut down 800 of them that last year had “charged the federal taxpayer $1.4 billion,” which “will no longer be paid.” That is a major increase from the 450 providers the administration said it had suspended as of last month.

The announcement was the latest attempt by the Trump administration to highlight and rein in fraud in federal healthcare benefits programs, particularly in blue states. The actions were met with immediate push back from California officials.

“We hate fraud. But that’s NOT what this is,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office posted on the social media site X. “Vance and Oz are attacking programs that keep seniors and people with disabilities OUT of nursing homes. Pretty sick.”

Newsom’s office said that the growth of In-Home Supportive Services placements in California was “simple,” and due to California “keeping more people OUT of far more expensive nursing homes!”

Such services cover assistants who help people with daily tasks such as bathing, laundry or cooking; provide needed care such as injections under the direction of a medical professional; and accompany them to and from doctor’s appointments. A 2020 report by the California state auditor found that nearly three-quarters of IHSS caregivers assist a family member.

Newsom’s office wrote IHSS care costs $30,000 a year, while nursing home care costs $137,000 a year. “SAVING TAXPAYERS: $107K per person,” it wrote.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta also criticized the administration’s moves.

“Once again, California appears to be targeted solely for political reasons,” Bonta said. “The Trump administration is planning to defer over $1 billion in Medicaid funding for vital programs that helps seniors and people with disabilities remain safely in their homes.

“My team is carefully reviewing all available information. We have not hesitated to challenge unlawful actions by the Trump administration, and we will continue to act whenever Californians’ rights or access to critical services are threatened,” he said.

Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla also lashed out at the Trump administration.

“The Trump Administration is attacking California over claims that they can’t back up,” Padilla wrote on social media. “Let’s be real, this isn’t about fraud — it’s about punishing a state that didn’t vote for him. Political retribution plain and simple.”

Fraud in California’s hospice industry has been a problem for years.

Authorities in the state promised to crack down on the issue after a Times investigation in late 2020 revealed that unscrupulous providers were billing Medicare for hospice services and equipment for patients who were not actually dying — with the hospice industry in the state exploding in size.

California’s Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal, is expected to cost about $222 billion for the budget year starting July 1, including both state and federal funding. Roughly 15 million Californians, more than a third of the state, are on Medi-Cal.

Vance, a potential 2028 presidential hopeful, has taken up his work as “fraud czar” with vigor, traveling around the country to drive home the idea that the Trump administration is working diligently to bring down healthcare costs by addressing waste, fraud and abuse that is rampant across the system.

He has said that waste and abuse is particularly prevalent in Democratic-led states such as California, New York and Minnesota.

“We have red states and blue states that go after fraud aggressively, but we also, unfortunately, have some states, mostly blue states, unfortunately, that do not take Medicaid fraud very seriously,” he said Wednesday.

Vance specifically threatened to cut off what he said is billions in federal funding for state-run fraud control units that are meant to prosecute people who abuse the system, but which he said aren’t doing the work. “This is a tool that we want the states to use, but unfortunately, a lot of states aren’t using these tools at all,” he said.

The focus on fraud comes against a backdrop of criticisms that other policy measures pushed by the administration have driven healthcare costs up or made it harder for people to access healthcare — including cuts to Obamacare subsidies and new work requirements in Medicaid, which are expected to strain hospitals around the country and led to millions of people losing healthcare coverage.

Democrats and Republicans have argued over who is to blame for rising healthcare costs, and Vance and Oz have clashed with California leaders before.

In January, Newsom filed a civil rights complaint against Oz after he posted a video accusing Armenian crime groups of carrying out widespread healthcare fraud in Los Angeles. In the video, Oz was shown driving around Van Nuys, saying about $3.5 billion worth of Medicare fraud had been perpetrated by hospice and home care businesses — and “run, quite a bit of it, by the Russian Armenian mafia.”

Newsom called Oz’s claims “baseless and racist.”

The administration previously launched investigations into potential healthcare fraud in at least five states — California, Florida, Maine, Minnesota and New York — and halted some $243 million in Medicaid payments to Minnesota over fraud concerns.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has also acknowledged using errant figures to justify a fraud probe in New York, deepening concerns in the administration’s methods for identifying problematic activity.

Vance said the deferral of funds to California and the letters warning other states to get serious is not about political retribution, but a wake up call. He said the Trump administration wants to help states root out fraud and abuse, including with new technologies — but can’t do so if they are not “willing to help themselves” first.

“We don’t want to turn off any money. What we want to do is ensure that people are taking fraud seriously. We want to protect Medicaid, we want to protect Medicare,” Vance said. “But we can’t do that if the states that are administering those programs are allowing those programs to be fleeced by fraudsters.”

The Associated Press contributed to this article.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in New York unsealed a suicide note Wednesday purportedly written by Jeffrey Epstein in July, 2019, before a failed suicide attempt soon after he had been taken into federal custody on sex trafficking charges.

The disgraced financier would ultimately die weeks later in the same New York facility in what was ruled a suicide.

While the note’s authenticity has not been established, it contains an apparent reference to a line from a 1931 Little Rascals film that Epstein had used in at least two email messages, according to the trove of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice this year in response to the bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act.

In the short handwritten note released Wednesday, Epstein allegedly wrote, “They investigated me for month — Found nuthing!!!”

The note concludes, “Whatcha want me to do — Burst out cryin!! No Fun – Not Worth It!!”

It was a phrase Epstein had used before.

In a September, 2016, email to his brother, Mark, he wrote, “whtchoo want me toodo — bust out crying” in response to news that their cousin had become a grandfather.

And in another message the following year to his childhood friend Terry Kafka, Epstein wrote, “Whatcha want me todo/bust out cryin,” in response to a message from Kafka about being nostalgic

Epstein’s brother and Kafka did not immediately responded to requests for comment.

The line is an apparent reference to a 1931 Little Rascals short film “Little Daddy,” in which the character Stymie says, “Well, what do you want me to do, bust out crying?” when another character says that it will be their last breakfast together.

The note emerged from the court records of Epstein’s onetime cellmate Nicholas Tartaglione, a former police officer who is serving four consecutive life sentences for a 2016 quadruple murder.

It was released in response to a request by the New York Times.

The note itself was not included in the millions of pages released by the Justice Department.

In 2020, “60 Minutes” disclosed a note Epstein reportedly wrote days before his August, 2019, death that included complaints about his conditions and similarly concluded with the phrase “No fun!!!”

Journalist Katie Phang sued acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche for allegedly failing to comply with the requirements of the Epstein files law passed last year, which required that the documents be released in their entirety within 30 days, with reasoning provided for any documents not released.

The department released the files after the deadline passed and has faced criticism for removing or not releasing some documents and simultaneously failing to redact the names of numerous Epstein victims while redacting the names of some of Epstein’s friends and associates.

This story includes spoilers for Episode 8 of “Daredevil: Born Again” Season 2.

By the end of “Daredevil: Born Again’s” first season, showrunner Dario Scardapane knew they were heading toward Matt Murdock’s big reveal in Season 2.

The second season finale of the Marvel series, out now on Disney+, sees Murdock (played by Charlie Cox) declare to the world that he’s the vigilante Daredevil.

“Coming in with Season 1, I wish I could say I knew exactly where we were going,” says Scardapane during a recent video call. “But I knew that moment in the courtroom where Daredevil outs himself, we were definitely heading towards that.”

Iain B. MacDonald, who directed Episodes 7 and 8, said that everybody involved understood that it “was going to be a super significant moment” while they were filming the scene.

“When that’s out, that’s out,” MacDonald says. “That moment clearly has a domino effect for the rest of the episode. … I’m super excited to just to see how that’s received by the fans … because as a director, you want to deal with big moments in what you direct, and that is, for me, one of them.”

A continuation of Netflix’s “Daredevil,” which initially concluded in 2018, “Born Again” has followed Wilson Fisk’s (Vincent D’Onofrio) rise from criminal kingpin to the supposedly reformed mayor of New York. Fisk’s authoritarian tactics and campaign targeting vigilantes pushes Daredevil underground to try to assemble allies in order to bring the Kingpin down.

Matt Murdock (Charlie Cox) returned to the courtroom to make his case.

(JoJo Whilden / Marvel)

Their much anticipated showdown occurs in a courtroom in the season finale during the trial of Karen Page (Deborah Ann Woll).

“Myself and my DP [director of photography], Jeffrey Waldron, looked at a lot of courtroom dramas, just to really think about how we can tell those courtroom stories really well, and do it creatively and imaginatively … and in the language of ‘Daredevil,’ ” said MacDonald. “It was a challenge, for sure, [but] I really, really enjoyed shooting them.”

While Murdock may have triumphed in the courtroom, his revelation has consequences as teased in the episode. Scardapane says those consequences will be explored in Season 3.

“That last scene in Season 2 tells you where we’re going,” says Scardapane. “If the question is, are we doing a specific comic book run that is beloved by all, including me, I think that it’s pretty obvious what we’re doing in that last scene.”

The fallout for Murdock, as seen in the episode, is his arrest and imprisonment. In the final moments of the finale, the Man Without Fear is shown getting locked up at Rikers Island. Murdock appears to have accepted his fate, but a glimmer of smile hints that this is not the end of his story.

“Charlie and I talked about [the scene], and we knew that we wanted to end on that close-up of his face,” MacDonald says. “He said we can do two things here, one which is like acceptance of circumstances, like he’s resigned. He has made the sacrifice of outing himself to the world about who he really is [and] he has put himself away in service of the greater good … as well as have that little moment of a hint of a smile to say, this is a beginning. This is a new adventure. This is a new challenge.”

In a conversation edited for clarity and length, Scardapane discussed Murdock and Fisk’s arcs in Season 2, “Daredevil: Born Again’s” timely political themes and what to expect in Season 3.

Karen Page (Deborah Ann Woll) and Matt Murdock (Charlie Cox) get a chance to celebrate in the “Daredevil: Born Again” Season 2 finale.

(JoJo Whilden / Marvel)

At what point did you know that what you were building toward in Season 2 would end with Matt Murdock in jail?

It’s kind of a process that snowballs. They had started before me. They were doing the Mayor Fisk run. It was much more procedural, much different tone. They did six episodes, and I came in, and we moved it more in line as a continuation of the Netflix series. When Fisk becomes the mayor of New York, you put the villain at a really, really elevated place. So, Season 1 was the rise of Fisk. Season 2 has got to be the rise of that which takes him down — the resistance.

That moment that Matt stands up in court and says, “I am Daredevil,” that’s like the record scratch. Everything has changed from this moment on. At the end of Season 1, beginning of Season 2, we knew we were heading toward that moment. That moment’s consequences, for Matt and for Fisk, are kind of the fodder for Season 3.

There are comic book runs that I shall not name — although they’ve been named — that take that dilemma that Matt put himself in and go to really great places with it. Coming in with Season 1, I wish I could say I knew exactly where we were going. But I knew at the very beginning, that moment in the courtroom where Daredevil outs himself, we were definitely heading toward that.

It felt significant that Matt and Fisk’s big showdown this season happened in a courtroom.

The fun of Daredevil since the comics started is here you have a lawyer who really believes in the justice system who goes out and breaks bones at night. He’s a vigilante lawyer. That’s such a dichotomy. When the villain takes power, when the villain is the police — this situation, the villain is the Anti-Vigilante Task Force — the villain has now become the power structure of New York and has become the justice system. How does Matt fight back? He fights back as a vigilante until it gets to a crucial moment where Karen is pulled into this flawed justice system. Now there’s nowhere he could go. He’s put in this place where both his personas have to integrate, have to kind of collide, for him to beat Fisk. I think that Charlie’s performance in that courtroom scene is his best courtroom performance in any episode of “Daredevil” ever. Building to that moment of Fisk and Matt facing off in court, it was pretty important because all four of them are in court there: Wilson Fisk, Kingpin, Matt Murdock and Daredevil are all there in that scene.

Wilson Fisk’s (Vincent D’Onofrio) ambitions are thwarted in “Daredevil: Born Again” Season 2.

(JoJo Whilden / Marvel)

Fisk, the villain, ultimately loses this battle. Can you speak a bit about his arc this season?

One of the joys of this job is working with Vincent D’Onofrio, full stop. He’s done such a good job of humanizing a monster. I don’t write Fisk as a villain. I don’t think Vincent plays him as a villain. And that’s where the fun comes in.

Building up a man whose appetite, whose isolation, whose just general hunger to dominate, making that character and then giving him this one lifeline to humanity in Vanessa — that’s all calculated. We knew in Season 1 when Foggy was killed that Vanessa was going to be the cost for Fisk. The idea that Vanessa set up Foggy to die using Bullseye, and Bullseye ended up inadvertently killing Vanessa, that was 100% in the DNA from jump. Vanessa passed away in the comic books in two different ways, but that takes Fisk now into a place where, for me, all bets are off. I think that the Fisk that Vincent is playing in Episode 6, 7 and 8 and beyond are a different animal entirely. We just finished a very special episode that is pretty much all Fisk in this new incarnation and it was pretty exciting. Vincent’s in rare form in Season 3.

I understand that the Anti-Vigilante Task Force stuff was shot before the the story and imagery became extremely timely.

It’s really strange because there’s footage in the finale that’s intentionally supposed to reflect certain events. One of the things that I really wanted to do with this story, when you’re dealing with politics and everything, is we’re living in a time where these values of mutual respect, mutual listening, mutual live and let live … what I would say, democratic values are being thrown out the window when you’re dealing with the other side. If somebody doesn’t share your beliefs, it’s free game. And I’ve never really seen a time like that. So we took that story, where the mayor’s side has no quarter for the vigilante side and the vigilante side has no quarter for the mayor’s side. When they storm the rotunda, it looks very familiar. That is intentional. I’m not going to dodge that. Because it’s the idea that everybody sees themselves as a hero of this story, where they’re treating the people on the other side horribly. There’s no lesson there. It’s just the idea that when mobs get involved, when large groups of people get involved, the higher morals and higher sense of humanity falls apart.

You’ve mentioned that in writing and filming this show, you were looking at history. But what was it like when the present started mirroring what you already made based on the past?

The sequence in Episode 2, when the bodega is raided and people are dragged away by the Anti-Vigilante Task Force, that was filmed before Los Angeles, before Minnesota — before all of it. The whole thing got really strange in that the real world started to feel cartoony, and I don’t mean that in a positive way.

I think we were, as writers and directors, tapping into an unease and a malaise that’s just out there. Having it look exactly like things that then happened on the news, that was chilling. It was really hard to get my head around it. It was hard for the people involved, the directors, the fact that some of those sequences in our show, of people being dragged away and thrown into vans, looked exactly like what we were seeing on the news.

There have been other touch points, like the affinity some Task Force officers have for the Punisher logo, that crosses from the fictional into reality.

I’ve been wrestling with this since working on “The Punisher.” The map of what you do when you want to be an autocrat: You form a militia, you empower them beyond, you target a group that you want to make scapegoats, you round them up. When Charles Soule was doing the Mayor Fisk run in the comic books, that’s what he was thinking about. S—, Tony Gilroy did it in “Andor.” When you build any kind of story about an autocrat, it follows the same script. Weirdly, the script’s now playing out outside our door, and that’s become really hard to deal with. The funny thing about this show in these times is, no matter what I say, somebody’s gonna get all like, “Oh, they put politics in our comics” and “they’re trying to teach us a lesson.” Nobody’s trying to teach you a lesson. We’re just laying out a story about a guy who’s a criminal who becomes a mayor and a guy who’s a lawyer who tries to take him down. But does that have echoes in what’s going on outside our window? Yes, it does.

There is a sect of the audience that gets very vocal about the MCU getting ”too woke” or comic books and superheroes ”becoming political.”

One thing that just broke me when we started Season 3, I posted a picture of our writers room, and it’s just some of the best genre writers in the television business. I posted it [on Instagram] and I said “so stoked to get into it with these guys.” The first comment was, “Looks like a pretty woke room. Don’t ruin the show.” How does a room look woke? Oh, so you’re looking at the makeup of the people in that room, and you’re saying that that is something you don’t like? I can’t help you [with that]. I’ve just got to go into that room and write stories.

It’s also not like superhero comic books haven’t had storylines about marginalized communities or interrogating people in power.

Guys, comic books are political. They’ve always been political. The first graphic novel that ever won a Pulitzer Prize was “Maus.”

Jessica Jones (Krysten Ritter) gets in on the action.

(JoJo Whilden / Marvel)

I think I’ve waited long enough to ask about Luke Cage, played by Mike Colter, showing up in the finale. How did all of that come together?

One of the things that I’ve said a bunch about this show is we lean into the idea that these characters have grown up. The time that has passed between the end of the Netflix shows and the beginning of this show, we acknowledge and we lean into. Their lives have matured. As anybody knows, in the comics, Luke and Jessica had a child, Danielle. Now for me, as a writer, that’s just great story. We have a family of two very interesting people who were made iconic by the performances of Krysten Ritter and Mike Colter. What does that little family look like moving forward? So that tease at the end has seeds for acres and acres of stories. There’s a world that I’m super interested in, that a lot of the characters from the Netflix shows live in, that I’d love to see go forward. A lot of that’s out of my hands. But Mike and Jessica and that family are important to these stories.

Can you say anything more about what Luke has been up to since audiences last saw him?

Luke went to do some work for Mr. Charles. That’s a little bit of an Easter egg, a storyline that will play out in the future. Mr. Charles’s interest in alternatively abled people, or people who can do special things, that interest has long tentacles. It touched Luke and Jessica. It touches Bullseye at the end of the season, and that moves forward.

I think everybody’s been curious since Charlie Cox’s return. Matt’s back. Now Jessica and Luke are back. Are we going to see all of the Netflix era heroes assembled?

The best way I can answer that question is that we take comic book runs, fan desires and unfinished business. On “Punisher,” we were planning for a Season 3. I know [“Daredevil” showrunner] Erik Oleson was getting ready to work on a Season 4. That all ended very abruptly. None of the shows really got an ending that brought it all together. I wouldn’t say that “Defenders” was an ending that brought it all together. There’s so much unfinished business in those Netflix shows. We definitely, definitely knew from way back, how the ending of the Mayor Fisk rise and fall, where that was going to go next. And it’s funny because I’m talking to you as we’re trying to end where it goes next, and we’re thinking about, “OK, now what happens after that?”

I’m just going to throw it out there that I’d like to see Misty Knight and Colleen Wing back also.

[Jessica Henwick, who plays] Colleen has already said that she is not in Season 3, and that’s a real sad thing for us. It was not for lack of trying. I want to do Daughters of the Dragon, come on! That was teed up in “The Defenders.”

I wish I could be more forthright, but I have to save some some secrets for Season 3. But I do believe that we set a launching pad at the end of Season 2 that takes us into some pretty fun places that we’re in right now, and I gotta go finish that.

Beanie Feldstein and Bonnie-Chance Roberts are expecting a baby, the “Booksmart” actor and her wife announced Monday on social media.

“Limited Edition Scouse Beanie Baby coming soon!!” the couple said in a joint Instagram post, captioning a carousel of pictures showing Feldstein with and without her wife, both dressed in shades of pink and white, plus a white-frosted cake ringed with the pink inscription “B+B are having a baby.”

Anyone want to place a bet on whether it’s a girl?

The “Beanie” in the baby caption is self-explanatory, while “Scouse” is a reference to the accent in Roberts’ Liverpool home town.

Feldstein and film producer Roberts, who met in 2018 during preproduction on the 2019 movie “How to Build a Girl,” made their red-carpet debut at the movie’s premiere and then got married in June 2023. The wedding festivities spanned two days in New York’s Hudson Valley and incorporated a summer camp theme.

Feldstein told Vogue at the time that the ceremony’s outdoor and rustic nature was inspired by “our happy place together.” The “Lady Bird” actor grew up going to summer camp and said her family has a history of finding love in those childhood spaces.

“To get married at a camp was a truly beautiful emotional homecoming,” she said.

Friends including Whitney Cummings, Kaitlyn Dever, Ben Platt, Olivia Wilde, Uzo Aduba, Joey King and Monica Lewinsky chimed in with glee in comments on the joint post.

“Luckiest baby,” wrote Wilde, who directed “Booksmart.” “And I’m finally a grandma!!!!”

Times staff writer Alexandra Del Rosario contributed to this report.

A child sexual assault case filed against Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler will proceed to trial in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The singer is accused of grooming, sexually assaulting and impregnating 16-year-old Julia Misley in the 1970s. The suit, first filed in 2022 in Torrance, claims he “used his role, status, and power as a well-known musician and rock star” to exploit Misley. The complaint also argues Tyler admitted to the alleged crimes in his own memoir, “Does the Noise in My Head Bother You?,” where he refers to her as his “teen bride.”

Earlier this week, a judge dismissed most of the case, citing the statute of limitations in Massachusetts, where the pair lived during their three-year relationship. But they allegedly crossed state lines while Tyler toured the country with his band, including to California, according to the complaint. Because of California’s Child Victims Act — a 2020 statute that allowed a “lookback window” where alleged victims can file lawsuits regardless of a statute of limitations — a portion of the case will still be tried.

“This is a massive win for Steven Tyler. Today, the Court has dismissed with prejudice 99.9% of the claims against Mr. Tyler in this case,” Tyler’s lawyer, David Long-Daniels, said in a statement to The Times. “The court has decided that only one night, 50-plus years ago, out of a three-year relationship is allowed to remain.”

New York has a similar statute that was recently employed by singer Casandra “Cassie” Ventura in her case against Sean Combs. She filed a sex-trafficking and sexual assault lawsuit against the music mogul in 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, just days before the expiration of a lookback window.

The lawsuit against Tyler, who previously appeared as a judge on “American Idol,” claims he and Misley first met at an Aerosmith concert in 1973. According to the document, he “performed various acts of criminal sexual conduct upon Plaintiff that night.” At the time, Tyler was in his mid-20s and Julia was 16.

The alleged encounter was the first of many, the lawsuit claims. In 1974, Tyler was named Misley’s legal guardian and took her on tour with the band.

According to the complaint, he described the nature of the relationship in his 2011 memoir, writing, “She was 16, she knew how to nasty … with my bad self being twenty-six and she barely old enough to drive and sexy as hell, I just fell madly in love with her. … She was my heart’s desire, my partner in crimes of passion. … I was so in love I almost took a teen bride. I went and slept at her parent’s house for a couple of nights and her parent’s fell in love with me, signed paper over for me to have custody, so I wouldn’t get arrested if I took her out of state. I took her on tour with me.”

The lawsuit also describes Misley’s alleged pregnancy with Tyler’s child, which ended in a “pressured” abortion.

In previous court documents, Tyler has denied the allegations and attempted to get the case dismissed.

“This reflects years of resilience and courage by Ms. Misley, driven by an unwavering pursuit of truth and justice. It is time for justice and for Tyler to be held accountable by a jury,” Misley’s attorney, Jeff Anderson, said in a statement.

The trial is scheduled for August.

Michael Tilson Thomas came onto the scene as a great hope for classical music, American music, Los Angeles music, modern music, multifaceted pop music, maverick music, Russian music, Broadway music and just plain music, whatever it might be and from wherever it might be found. He lived his 81 years as conductor, pianist, composer, educator and media personality promoting that hope, and died Wednesday having shown how hope is done. He looked ahead. He looked back. Yet he lived for the now.

It wasn’t always easy. He wasn’t, to say the least, always easy. But MTT made music matter by making hope matter. He was, moreover, one of us. He achieved greatness though an epic amplification of a uniquely L.A. positivity in which grumpy became wistful.

I first encountered MTT as a kid clarinetist and he, Michael Thomas back then, a student conductor at USC and already, at 19, music director of the Young Musicians Foundation Debut Orchestra. He was soon everywhere. A piano prodigy, he regularly performed (and hobnobbed) with the likes of Stravinsky, Copland, Boulez and Cage at Monday Evening Concerts programs when the Los Angeles County Museum of Art opened in 1965. That summer, he appeared at the Ojai Music Festival, which he would go on to lead as music director seven times.

MTT liked to describe his L.A. youth as driving from Jascha Heifetz’s house in the Hollywood Hills (where he accompanied the famed Russian violinist in classes) to LACMA to rehearse Ives and Renaissance music, to composition and conducting classes at USC. Then it was home to the San Fernando Valley to practice Beethoven.

All the while, he listened to the hip L.A. 1960s pop music stations on his car radio. He was particularly keen on, and became friends with, Chuck Berry. Home was where he would also encounter screen legends. Tilson Thomas’ father worked in films and television as a screenwriter, producer and dialogue coach. Theodor Thomas was, as well, a painter with a visionary sensibility and a pianist, self-taught other than a handful of lessons from Gershwin.

But it was Tilson Thomas’ mother and grandmother who may have had the biggest influence. His mother was a public school teacher. She instilled what became a key trait in her only child, who treated conducting as an exercise in learning both for the musicians and the audience (if not for him, because he basically knew it all). His grandmother, Bessie Thomashefsky and her husband, Boris, were stars of Yiddish theater on New York’s Lower East Side.

Boris died in 1939, five years before MTT was born. But Bessie and young Michael were close. She recognized that, like her, he was born for the stage, and regaled him with stage lore that put the stardust in his eyes. As a young kid, MTT played Beethoven piano sonatas so impressively that he wowed his babysitter, an architecture student at USC named Frank Owen Goldberg, who needed extra cash.

Frank Gehry, as he became, told me that MTT was already an entrancing showman. The two remained lifelong friends.

While MTT did not actually reside in L.A. for most of his life, he never really left it. It prepared him for all that was to follow. In high school, he met Joshua Robison, who became his lifelong partner and ultimately husband. Whether in New York, Miami, London or San Francisco, wherever they lived, they always talked about L.A. His father’s paintings were on the walls, as were Boris’ Yiddish theater posters, one proclaiming “King Lear,” translated and improved.

The Tilson Thomas package that emerged from L.A. was unlike any conductor the world had seen. He doted on the music of Rachmaninoff when Rachmaninoff was unfashionable and on Steve Reich when Reich was found unfathomable. He adopted classical music’s neglected outsiders and especially such key West Coast “mavericks” as Lou Harrison and Henry Cowell. He convinced Meredith Monk to write for orchestra and enticed everyone from Sarah Vaughan to the Mahavishnu Orchestra onto the symphony stage.

Studying at Tanglewood, the Boston Symphony’s summer home, MTT won the Koussevitzky Prize in 1969 and, with the encouragement of Leonard Bernstein, was appointed assistant conductor to music director William Steinberg. Before long, MTT became principal guest conductor, filling in frequently for Steinberg, who was in poor health.

MTT in his early 20s was vibrant, arrogant, fearless, full of ideas, a chance taker. Ever the Angeleno, he tooled around town in a Porsche. He talked to staid symphony musicians and audiences who didn’t want to be talked to and often played music they didn’t want to play or hear. And he dazzled them. He got a contract with the distinguished German record label Deutsche Grammophon and made exciting records with the orchestra of Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky, Ives and modern Americans. They remain a thrill to hear.

By 1974, it was Tchaikovsky one moment and a wonderfully crazy avant-garde opera the next. Stanley Silverman’s “Elephant Steps,” which MTT recorded in 1974, was for pop singers, opera singers, orchestra, rock band, electronic tape, raga group, gypsy ensemble and, of course, elephants. Richard Foreman wrote the libretto. There had been nothing like it then or since. A revival could prove a sensation. The Olympic arts festival, anyone?

At the same time, Tilson Thomas, who proved a born educator, succeeded Bernstein in delivering the New York Philharmonic’s Young People’s Concerts. When Steinberg left, the Boston Symphony Orchestra passed over MTT as too young (24) and not ready (he wasn’t, nor was Boston). He was just right, though, for the Buffalo Philharmonic, which he led from 1971 to 1979. It was a wild ride, with lots of exciting new music and no small amount of controversy — arresting performances of arresting new works (Morton Feldman in particular) and an actual arrest at Kennedy International Airport when small quantities of cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines were found in his luggage.

He may have seemed ready for a homecoming in 1981, but MTT’s appointment as principal guest conductor of the Los Angeles Philharmonic did not prove to be the return of the prodigal son. These were the years of Carlo Maria Giulini’s music directorship, and MTT brought currency — new music, Gershwin, flashy showstoppers. Much of it was a breath of freshest air, but he was also remembered for his brash youth, which was now a brash 30s. He ran afoul of some in the orchestra and of its imperious head, Ernest Fleischmann.

Having been branded the next Bernstein, MTT floundered. What he needed was not L.A., but a far distant remove to find himself. That happened in two parts.

In 1987, the educator in him led to his greatest project, the creation of the New World Symphony in Miami Beach, Florida. The training orchestra guides young musicians with conservatory backgrounds into the world of professional orchestras.

Around the same time, Bernstein talked the London Symphony Orchestra into hiring Tilson Thomas as music director. Far from L.A., Boston and New York, a newly mature MTT found his bearings, no longer the next Leonard Bernstein but the first and only Michael Tilson Thomas.

Miami gave MTT meaning, and he commissioned Frank Gehry to design a revolutionary concert hall and teaching facility. In London, his conducting took on depth without losing its surface glamour. What MTT still lacked, however, was a creative outlook. He had always thought himself a composer and could, at a party, make up a clever song at the piano on the spot. He had drawers full of sketches but little finished work.

It took a return to the West Coast for MTT, having turned 50, to put all of his musical, emotional, personal and spiritual parts together and achieve greatness. For 25 years as music director of the San Francisco Symphony, MTT conducted Mahler and Tchaikovsky with a depth of soul that integrated his Russian roots and Bernsteinian character. He advocated for mavericks in summer festivals. He found his voice as a composer. He and Robison were embraced as a beloved San Francisco couple. He alchemized the San Francisco Symphony into a Bay Area beacon.

In the challenging last chapter of his life, MTT turned tragedy into triumph to became a universal inspiration. The lockdown in June 2020 meant cancellation of his farewell concerts as music director, including a production of Wagner’s “The Flying Dutchman” with a set by Gehry. The following summer, MTT fell on stage while conducting the London Symphony in Santa Barbara. He was diagnosed with late-stage glioblastoma. He likely had less than a year to live.

Remarkably, MTT continued to conduct until last April. His appearances with the L.A. Phil and the San Francisco Symphony were transformative. He guest conducted in New York, London, Prague and elsewhere. In L.A., a dying MTT led a profound performance of Mahler’s death-obsessed Ninth Symphony, not as a farewell but as a shamanistic savoring of every moment of life. He asked not for sympathy but for joy.

For MTT, the music never stopped. In his later years, he advanced the theory that what you took away from hearing a performance mattered as much, if not more, than what you experienced. That may explain why this creature of the theater who was so graceful leading an orchestra and so enjoyed talking to the audience turned stiff and awkward when bowing to acknowledged applause. Was it his reluctance to leave? Insecurity? Attempt to remove his ego from the experience, as if he was now handing the music over to you?

It was probably all of those things. During his illness, when his movement became more difficult, he let go. He was simply happy to be there, happy to share music, happy to be alive, very happy to be loved. His final bows were a celebration of life.

Sadly, Robison died Feb. 22, exactly two months before MTT, who died four days short of a year since his final concert with the San Francisco Symphony. But he lives on through about 150 recordings and his website.

He and Robison worked as tirelessly throughout his illness to archive his life. His website provides a treasure trove of compelling radio and television programs, his copious Thomashefsky Yiddish theater archive, a vast legacy of searching and believing. And hope.