succeed

Mayor-elect of New York says he will not mince words on Trump, but ‘door open’ to dialogue.

United States President Donald Trump has suggested that he is open to assisting New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, but warned that the trailblazing democratic socialist will need to be “respectful” of Washington to succeed.

Trump made the comments on Wednesday as Mamdani announced his transition team following his historic election as the first Muslim and first South Asian mayor of the US’s largest city.

Responding to Mamdani’s victory night remarks pledging to stand up to Trump, the US president described the mayor-elect’s comments as a “dangerous statement”.

“He has to be a little bit respectful of Washington, because if he’s not, he doesn’t have a chance of succeeding,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier.

“And I want to make him succeed. I want to make the city succeed,” Trump added, before quickly clarifying that he wanted New York City, not Mamdani, to succeed.

Earlier on Wednesday, Trump suggested that his administration would “help” the new mayor, even as he branded him a “communist”.

“The communists, Marxists, and globalists had their chance, and they delivered nothing but disaster, and now let’s see how a communist does in New York. We’re going to see how that works out,” Trump said in a speech to the American Business Forum in Miami, Florida.

“We’ll help him, we’ll help him. We want New York to be successful. We’ll help him a little bit, maybe.”

Trump railed against Mamdani in the run-up to Tuesday’s mayoral election in New York, describing him as a “communist lunatic” and threatening to cut off federal funding to the city if he won the race.

Mamdani, whose platform includes free universal childcare, free buses, and government-run grocery stores, has rejected the communist label, describing himself as a democratic socialist.

While Mamdani will be responsible for governing a city of about 8.5 million people, his election has been widely seen as having implications nationwide amid the Democratic Party’s struggles to reconcile its centrist and progressive factions and effectively counter Trump.

In his victory speech, Mamdani cast his election as a model for how to defeat Trump, addressing the TV-loving president directly by telling him to “turn the volume up”.

In a speech laying out his priorities on Wednesday, Mamdani, who is set to take office on January 1, reiterated his determination to oppose Trump, while also indicating his willingness to engage with the administration.

“I will not mince my words when it comes to President Trump,” the mayor-elect said.

“I will continue to describe his actions as they are, and I will also always do so while leaving a door open to have that conversation.”

During a 19-year playing career that yielded 123 bookings and 12 red cards, Muscat was once branded the “most hated man in football”.

Post-retirement, he revealed, external former Rangers manager Alex McLeish did not trust him to play in an Old Firm derby during his brief spell at Ibrox.

It is to the Australian’s credit that he has since gone on to somewhat shake off his hot-head image in an impressive 13 years in management.

His glowing CV attracted Rangers two years ago, but he reportedly missed out on the job when the club opted for Philippe Clement instead.

At that time, former Rangers team-mate Neil McCann told BBC Scotland that the Ibrox side would be getting someone with “presence” who “understands the league, the intensity, the rivalry and how to get the job done”.

Muscat was then first-team boss at Yokohama F Marinos, where he won 2022 J-League after taking over from Ange Postecoglou following his exit for Celtic.

He also succeeded Postecoglou at Melbourne Victory after a period working under the current Nottingham Forest head coach.

It was in Melbourne where Muscat’s managerial career began, winning the A-League Championship twice in five-and-a-half years before his move to Japan.

Runners-up spots in the J-League in 2021 and 2023 bookended his 2022 triumph in Yokohama.

Muscat became a title winner in a third different country last year in China, and he is on the verge of another with just four games remaining as his side sit top with a two-point lead.

Across his managerial tenures in Australia, Japan and China, his win rate stands at 54%, with his teams scoring an average of 1.9 goals per game while conceding 1.2.

His Shanghai Port side scored 96 times in a 30-game league-winning campaign last year.

Those numbers suggest this is a coach who can win while implementing a front-foot approach. How that translates to Scottish football is unclear, though.

More than three years after 11 U.S. cities were awarded the right to host games during next summer’s World Cup and just two months before the tournament draw, President Trump is threatening to move matches out of places he considers “a little bit dangerous.”

Trump made the comments while speaking to reporters Thursday in the Oval Office and the cities that appear to be in his crosshairs are Democratic ones such as Seattle and San Francisco, which have not supported the president’s immigration policies.

“They’re run by radical left lunatics who don’t know what they’re doing,” Trump said.

Seattle is scheduled to host six games, including a group-stage match featuring the U.S. Six matches will also be played at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, about 40 miles south of San Francisco. The tournament will kick off June 11 and end July 19 with the final in East Rutherford, N.J.

The president did not mention Inglewood, which will stage eight matches — including at least two U.S. games — at SoFi Stadium. The eight other U.S. host cities are Atlanta; Boston; Arlington, Texas; Houston; Kansas City, Mo., Miami; East Rutherford, N.J.; and Philadelphia. The 2026 World Cup will be the first to be shared by three countries with matches also scheduled to be played in Mexico and Canada.

“If any city we think is going to be even a little bit dangerous for the World Cup, or for the [2028] Olympics … but for the World Cup in particular, because they’re playing in so many cities, we won’t allow it,” Trump said.

“We’ll move it around a little bit. But I hope that’s not going to happen.”

Trump does not have the authority to relocate World Cup matches, which are overseen by FIFA, soccer’s global governing body. But FIFA leader Gianni Infantino, who Trump calls his “great friend,” has given in to the president before. Just last month, FIFA agreed to Trump’s unusual request to move the World Cup draw, which will set the matchups for the group stage, to the Kennedy Center in Washington D.C.

A FIFA spokesman did not respond to requests for comment. But another person heavily involved in World Cup preparations in multiple cities said Trump’s threat to move games is all bluster.

“As a practical matter, it would be impossible,” said the person, who is not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), whose district abuts Inglewood, agreed.

“It’s so laughable, it’ll make you want to take a Tylenol,” she said.

“No one is taking this seriously,” she continued. “He has absolutely no power over that. The World Cup is not about Donald Trump. It’s also not about the United States. So another distraction and another example of ego and ignorance.

“My hope is that this president would be focusing on making sure that the U.S. host cities have the infrastructure that they need.”

According to the Athletic, FIFA’s contracts with host cities say the group “shall not have the right for ordinary termination” of the agreements. Most host cities have already spent millions of dollars to prepare for the World Cup and are anticipating a sizable economic boost from the tournament.

A study released last summer by Micronomics, a Long Beach-based economic research and consulting firm, found that the World Cup will have an economic impact of $594 million on Los Angeles County, including $343 million in direct spending from an estimated 180,000 out-of-town visitors.

Trump wouldn’t have to move games to make things difficult for cities he disfavors, however. In July, Congress allocated $625 million in federal funds for World Cup security. According to Andrew Giuliani, head of the White House World Cup task force chaired by Trump, cities will submit their expenditures with requests for reimbursement, but the task force will have wide latitude in deciding which bills to pay.

Trump has made crime and retribution a major theme of his administration, sending national guard troops — or threatening to send them — to Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Memphis and Chicago, all cities with Democratic mayors. Nine of the 11 World Cup host cities in the U.S. have Democratic mayors.

The metaphor feels almost too obvious, the iron-and-brick facade of a half-finished, $200-million football palace looming over Howard Jones Field. A chorus of construction equipment cuts through the chaos of a preseason football practice, the whole scene a reminder that USC, in Year 4 of the Lincoln Riley era, is building toward something.

Where USC’s football program stands in that building process is a bit more complicated to capture. After winning 11 games in Riley’s first season as USC’s coach, the Trojans’ win total has declined in each of the two seasons since. Riley, through 40 games at USC, now has one fewer win (26) than his predecessor, Clay Helton (27), did at the same point during their tenures.

But in recent months, a groundswell of momentum has been building at USC. During the offseason, the Trojans retained top-tier defensive coordinator D’Anton Lynn in spite of serious advances from his alma mater, Penn State. They added a rising star in general manager Chad Bowden, who has been an adrenaline shot to the entire program. They surged to the top of the recruiting rankings for the class of 2026 and finally began setting the pace in the NIL space, where they once lagged far behind other programs of their stature.

The only pressing questions now for USC, it seems, are on the field. Even as enthusiasm builds for 2026 , when the football facility will open and the top recruiting class lands, the upcoming season is a critical one for Riley. A third consecutive disappointing campaign would force USC to face some uncomfortable truths, some of which the school can’t afford to confront.

“I just feel great about the progress that’s been made,” USC athletic director Jennifer Cohen told The Times. “And now we’re now in a position where our expectations are high. We all know what they are and that’s to win.”

The Times spoke to Cohen ahead of the Trojans’ season opener against Missouri State to discuss that progress and the expectations that come with it, for Riley and the program.

The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Where would you say the football program stands right now?

“We’ve seen a tremendous amount of momentum, in particular this offseason, with a combination of moves and investments on the retention side of the coaches that we already had that were doing a great job within our program and culture. Just the quality of coaches overall is at an all-time high in my opinion. So that’s one big piece that’s helped with the momentum.

“The second is the front office development and just the hiring of [general manager] Chad [Bowden]. Chad being able to restructure his team and also restructure how all of our coaches work, how he supports Lincoln, how he supports the assistant coaches — he’s more than just somebody that’s developing a roster. He’s really a culture guy, and he’s been a great partner for Lincoln and the staff in football, but he’s really been a great partner for all of us, and he’s done a lot of bridging of relationships, both internally and externally. And top of all that, obviously, we’ve seen the specific momentum of their skill set from a recruiting standpoint coming to fruition in this ‘26 class.

“So that’s huge progress and has really moved us in a direction that we really needed to go in. The facility investment has obviously been exciting. Watching Bloom grow that quickly and the fact these guys know now that it’s real and they’re gonna be in it this time next year, I think that’ll help us from a retention standpoint. We’ve made so much progress this past year in NIL and how we invest in our student athletes in football, and then obviously being in this new era now where we’re entered into NIL agreements directly with students, I just feel great about the progress that’s been made, and now we’re in a position where our expectations are high. We all know what they are, and that’s to win.”

USC football general manager Chad Bowden, left, speaks with coach Lincoln Riley during a team practice.

(USC Athletics)

We’re entering Year 4 with Lincoln Riley. In each of those seasons since he’s been here, his win-loss record has declined. What is your confidence level with him as coach as we start the season?

“We’re both aligned on the expectations that we have, and that’s to win. And Lincoln knows that. I know that. You know that. Our fans — everybody knows it. I would just say we’re really embracing those expectations together. I feel really good about the support and the infrastructure and the resources that he’s been provided. I know he’s energized by it. He’s motivated by it, and there’s nobody that wants to succeed more than Lincoln. I’m really excited for us to get behind him and the guys and the staff and see those results.”

What sort of tangible results do you need to see from Lincoln and the program to maintain that confidence?

“The whole idea here, right, is that we’re going to win. Our goal and our standard here is that we win championships. That’s what we’re working towards, and that’s what we’ve invested in, and that’s what my expectation is, his expectation is, our collective expectation is as a Trojan family. We haven’t even played a game yet. My focus right now is on supporting him, supporting our coaches, supporting our student athletes and really just moving this program forward — moving this whole athletic department forward. This is a completely different era that we’re in, and we’re laser focused. And I’m laser-focused on pulling every lever that I can and we can for this program to succeed and for all of our programs to succeed.”

For the first time in nearly three years, investors (finally!) have something to talk about that isn’t related to artificial intelligence (AI).

The latest buzz on Wall Street comes from a familiar but controversial corner of the stock market: special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). And perhaps unsurprisingly, the sponsor behind the deal is none other than Chamath Palihapitiya — often referred to as the “SPAC King.”

While his early launches drew enormous hype, Palihapitiya’s SPAC stocks have been anything but royal — often leaving retail investors holding the bag. This track record has led some to question whether SPACs are good investments at all.

Still, Palihapitiya is back in the arena — this time with American Exceptionalism Acquisition Corp., a name as ambitious as the investor behind it. The question now is whether this latest venture signals a genuine comeback or simply another high-profile gamble in a market rife with wary investors.

Will Palihapitiya’s new SPAC succeed? Read on to explore what history shows and what it could mean for investors.

Who is Chamath Palihapitiya?

Chamath Palihapitiya began his career in management roles at AOL and Facebook (now Meta Platforms). Outside of those corporate posts, he proved fortunate — and shrewd — in backing early-stage start-ups that ultimately found lucrative exits through acquisitions by larger companies.

Eventually, Palihapitiya left Facebook to pursue investing full-time — launching his own venture capital firm, Social Capital.

Fast-forward to the SPAC boom between 2020 and 2021, and Palihapitiya instantly became one of the most vocal voices and recognizable personalities in the space.

Some of his high-profile deals included SoFi Technologies (NASDAQ: SOFI), Virgin Galactic, MP Materials, Clover Health, and Opendoor Technologies.

SOFI data by YCharts

While admirers paint Palihapitiya as a bold contrarian investor willing to challenge Wall Street’s status quo, the uneven performance of many of these SPACs has given critics plenty of ammunition.

What is a SPAC?

A SPAC, often referred to as a “blank check company,” is a shell entity that raises money from investors through a public offering with the sole purpose of merging with a private company. Once a target is identified, the SPAC combines with that company — instantly taking it public without the lengthy, complex process of a traditional initial public offering (IPO).

The main difference between a SPAC and an IPO comes down to structure and timing. In an IPO, a company works with an investment bank to underwrite the deal — a process that can take months as bankers conduct roadshows, pitch to accredited investors, and determine an appropriate valuation.

By contrast, a SPAC is already listed on an exchange, so merging with it allows a company to bypass much of the regulatory and logistical friction.

For companies, SPACs provide a quicker, simpler alternative to the traditional IPO process. For investors, they offer exposure to buzzy businesses — often unicorns — that might otherwise be off-limits before they go public.

Image source: Getty Images.

Are SPACs good investments?

Just like traditional IPO stocks, determining whether a SPAC is a good investment ultimately comes down to “it depends.” While Palihapitiya’s most recognizable SPACs are often cited, it’s important to remember that he also backed some companies that later delisted or even went bankrupt. Taken as a whole, Palihapitiya’s personal track record in the SPAC arena has been disappointing.

That said, not every SPAC has fared poorly. Some companies have managed to carve out a path to success.

HIMS data by YCharts

Hims & Hers Health has become something of a darling among retail investors thanks to its bold entrance into the red-hot weight loss market, going toe-to-toe with GLP-1 juggernauts Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk. Moreover, AST Spacemobile and Rocket Lab have attracted speculative enthusiasm from investors captivated by the space exploration economy. Meanwhile, Vertiv has enjoyed tailwinds from the AI boom as its liquid cooling systems prove critical to ongoing data center infrastructure investment.

These examples come with important caveats. Winners like these tend to be outliers, often driven by retail hype or unique secular catalysts. A detailed study from the University of Florida underscores this point: Between 2012 and 2022 SPAC stocks delivered returns of negative 58% one year following their merger. Moreover, the median SPAC performance across industries from 2009 through 2025 has drastically trailed the broader market.

In other words, while some SPACs have thrived, these seem to be exceptions rather than the norm. American Exceptionalism Acquisition Corp. may succeed in capturing headlines, but for smart investors, it should be viewed as a speculative bet rather than a proven opportunity.

Considering both Palihapitiya’s past ventures and the results of the broader SPAC landscape, history suggests caution is warranted.

Lebanon’s government has announced a timeline for Hezbollah’s disarmament, saying the military would set out a plan to bring all weapons under state authority before the end of 2025.

This comes after months of pressure from the United States after Israel’s war on Lebanon killed more than 4,000 people and culminated in a ceasefire in November. Israel has continuously violated the ceasefire and still occupies five points in Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s arms have long been a contentious issue in Lebanon, and attempts to interfere in Hezbollah’s infrastructure or military capabilities have led to internal conflict.

However, Hezbollah took heavy losses in Israeli attacks last year, which diminished its status as Lebanon’s political and military hegemon.

As the issue of disarming Hezbollah heats up, here’s what you need to know about the government’s announcement on Tuesday and the situation in Lebanon:

What did Hezbollah say?

It doesn’t like the disarmament plan.

In fact, Hezbollah said it would treat the decision as though it didn’t exist.

“The government of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam committed a grave sin by taking a decision to strip Lebanon of its weapons to resist the Israeli enemy. … This decision fully serves Israel’s interest,” the group said in a statement.

Despite its flat-out rejection of the government’s decision, Hezbollah has yet to respond with force.

Under its late leader Hassan Nasrallah, the group threatened that any act taken against its arms could lead to civil war.

This time, Hezbollah has not taken military action, possibly a result of a change in its strategy or because of its weakened capacity after the war.

Rumours circulated during a cabinet session on Tuesday that Hezbollah supporters in black shirts were gathering along the highway in Khaldeh, just south of Beirut, but that turned out to be a restaurant celebrating reaching one million followers on Instagram.

Pro-Hezbollah protesters did briefly block the airport road in Beirut after the government’s decision, but little else has manifested despite heightened domestic concerns.

What about Iran, Hezbollah’s backer?

Iran voiced support for Hezbollah but said it has no role in shaping the group’s decisions or policy.

The comments came from Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said the efforts to disarm Hezbollah wouldn’t work.

‏“This is not the first time they’ve tried to strip Hezbollah of its weapons,” Araghchi said. “The reason is clear: The power of resistance has proven itself in the field.”

Iran played a formative role in founding Hezbollah in 1982 during the heat of the Lebanese Civil War and has been the group’s main benefactor ever since.

But since Israel’s war on Lebanon, Iran’s ability to support Hezbollah has taken a major hit. The Lebanese government has blocked flights from Tehran, and the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in neighbouring Syria has blocked the land route used to transport funding and weapons.

How did Lebanon respond?

Iran’s comments angered some Lebanese officials.

Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi said Araghchi’s statement is “firmly rejected and condemned”.

“Such statements undermine Lebanon’s sovereignty, unity and stability and constitute an unacceptable interference in its internal matters and sovereign decisions,” Raggi said.

Is disarmament going to happen?

This remains to be seen.

Salam said after a follow-up cabinet meeting on Thursday that his ministers approved the “objectives” of a US proposal for “ensuring that the possession of weapons is restricted solely to the state”.

“The government is now expected to formally commit to disarming Hezbollah, a decision that could … ignite a political crisis,” Al Jazeera’s Beirut correspondent Zeina Khodr said.

Hezbollah has yet to respond forcefully, and anti-Hezbollah politicians have used increasingly bold rhetoric.

“If there is a cost to be able to centralise the weapons with the … Lebanese armed forces, [it may be] better like that,” Elias Hankash, a Lebanese MP with the anti-Hezbollah Kataeb party, said.

President Joseph Aoun and Salam will have to navigate US pressure and domestic support for disarming Hezbollah with opposition from the group and its supporters, who are reeling from Israel’s war.

The World Bank has said Lebanon needs $11bn for reconstruction and recovery, the vast majority of which is needed in southern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley and Beirut’s suburbs, where most of Hezbollah’s support is based.

Have any Hezbollah members expressed discontent with disarmament?

Plenty of discontent has been expressed.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected the idea, saying the group’s disarmament would make Lebanon vulnerable to attack and would serve only Israel.

Ali Mokdad, a Hezbollah MP, also dismissed the decision, calling it “ink on paper”. Another Hezbollah MP, Mohammad Raad, said the decision could never be implemented and compared Hezbollah giving up its weapons to “suicide”.

What are things like right now?

Tensions were heightened on Saturday when six Lebanese soldiers were killed while inspecting an alleged Hezbollah weapons site.

Hezbollah reportedly booby-trapped sites in southern Lebanon during the war in case invading Israeli soldiers came upon them.

Many from Lebanon’s south are antagonistic towards Beirut, feeling the government has not been able to defend the south, which continues to suffer from daily Israeli attacks. Residents also lament the lack of public statements about the deaths from those attacks.