sue

The biggest news to come out of two film festivals this week stemmed from documentaries about tech moguls gone bad.

When Alex Gibney’s film production “Musk” premiered at the Venice Film Festival on Tuesday, it received a five-minute standing ovation, shouts of “thank you” from the audience and endless play across social media. The nearly four-hour production chronicles the rise of the world’s first trillionaire out of the dot-com boom, and lays bare the dangers that the Tesla and SpaceX chief executive now presents as a plutocrat with questionable judgment and unchecked power.

Closer to home, at the Telluride Film Festival, it was comedian Nathan Fielder (“The Rehearsal”) and Lance Oppenheim’s “You Can See Everything” that made breaking news. Their film features unfettered access to former Theranos Chief Executive Elizabeth Holmes in the weeks before she reported to federal prison to serve a sentence of 10 years and three months. She rode the early 2000s wave of venture-capitalism consumer-tech hype, defrauding investors and the public with a bogus new way to test blood. By 2014, she was the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire.

A couple of decades ago, films about Musk and Holmes probably would have framed the pair as forward-thinking entrepreneurs and architects of a new era. Today, the pitchforks are out, and who else better represents the hubris and greed of late-stage capitalism?

There’s plenty of buzz around both films ahead of their October releases, yet the richest man in the world is helping promote the “Musk” doc by incessantly posting about Gibney and his “hit” piece.

Musk’s X posts have referred to the filmmaker as a “horrible human” and a “bitter old man” and declared, “Dogs— is worth more respect.” Always looking for a conspiracy to explain away the perfectly explainable, he wrote that the film was a “psy op.” He included in the post an image of Gibney as a puppet of the Democratic Party and George Soros. Musk also offered Trumpian prose: “Gutless Gibney’s fatal flaw of fabricating a false film.”

“Musk” is due for a theatrical release in the U.S. on Oct. 16 followed by a streaming launch on HBO Max.

Musk’s attorney Alex Spiro is threatening a lawsuit. He sent a letter to the Gibney-led Jigsaw Productions accusing the filmmaker of misrepresenting facts about the mogul. Spiro says the filmmaker suggested that Musk used his Starlink satellites to bend the 2024 election in favor of his friend and ally Donald Trump.

“You are … on notice, before release, that the insinuation is false, that the material refuting it is public, and that you chose not to be told the rest,” Spiro wrote. Spiro claimed he contacted the production “multiple times” and “requested an opportunity to present the facts in the normal fact-checking process that is the hallmark of ethical journalism. You have refused to engage.”

Gibney says Musk declined to be interviewed for the film. In his absence, the documentarian created a digital avatar of the Tesla CEO and used statements pulled from decades worth of the entrepreneur’s interviews and public appearances. The film chronicles his childhood in South Africa and his time in Silicon Valley, and suggests that Musk’s genius is not as an inventor but as an investor. His talent, the film contends, is stock-pumping.

“Musk” also reportedly explores how the trillionaire had access to sensitive techno-surveillance data when he ran the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under President Trump in 2025. Geoffrey Hinton , often referred to as the Godfather of AI, is interviewed in the film and explains why Musk’s potential access to the data is such a problem: “It’s fairly clear to me that Trump is hell-bent on corrupting the midterm elections,” Hinton says. “If you wanted to corrupt those midterm elections and you wanted to use AI, all you needed to do was get detailed information on U.S. citizens. And what DOGE did looked like just what you would do.”

Gibney in interviews about the film has warned that Musk’s widespread, unchecked power is “extremely dangerous to world democracy.”

“What I discovered was that the story of Musk was not [a] new tech story,” Gibney said in a news conference at the Venice Film Fest. “[It’s] really the story of an old wine in a new bottle. His story turns out to be the story of the confidence man, the stock pumper, his wealth and power comes from inflated stock, and so I had told that story before with Enron and with Elizabeth Holmes, and so it was a story that was oddly familiar to me.”

Gibney is renowned for taking on big money, corruption and anything else that reeks of injustice. He’s tackled Wall Street, big pharma, Scientology, Guantanamo, and even Theranos founder Holmes.

The new film about Holmes, “You Can See Everything,” offers a quirkier, up-close take on Holmes. Produced by A24 and set for an Oct. 16 theater release, it follows the disgraced CEO post-conviction, and she appears more than comfortable in front of the filmmakers and their cameras. Audiences at Telluride were surprised by the access she gave to the filmmakers, and that Holmes spoke openly about her plans to launch a biotech comeback and revive Theranos from her cell in a Texas prison camp.

Forget the celebrity glitz of high-profile film festivals. In these eat-the-rich times, it’s the dark side of wealth, fame and alleged genius that satiate audience appetites. Enter two new documentaries that feed the beast.

Israeli prime minister denies claim that UAE president warned him of Hamas plans before the 2023 attacks.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he will sue the Haaretz newspaper over a report that claimed he was warned of Hamas’s plans for an offensive days before the attacks of October 7, 2023.

In a statement on X on Wednesday, Netanyahu called the report “fabricated” and “false” and said he had instructed his lawyers to also sue Haaretz and the authors of the report, Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yaval.

The report, published on Tuesday, claimed that the president of the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed bin Zayed had warned Netanyahu about a possible attack by Hamas 10 days before the events of October 7, 2023.

Palestinian fighters killed at least 1,195 people in southern Israel on that day, and took some 251 others captive. The attacks prompted Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, in which at least 73,669 Palestinians have been killed.

The Haaretz report claimed that the UAE president, who is also known as MBZ, spoke to Netanyahu by phone and warned him of a threat from then-Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.

According to Haaretz, Sinwar – who was angered by stalled prisoner exchange talks and Israel’s continued blockade of Gaza – had relayed the warnings to the UAE through an intermediary. He said he was preparing a “huge surprise” and told contacts to tell Israel “to expect an earthquake”, according to the report.

It said MBZ and his aides read this as a sign of an impending full-scale attack and passed the intelligence to Israel’s Shin Bet agency. But the internal security agency dismissed the threat.

MBZ then raised the warning directly with Netanyahu, who also brushed it aside, the report said.

The UAE has declined to comment on the allegations.

Its Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on Tuesday saying that “the UAE government does not comment on media stories or speculation regarding conversations between government leaders”.

The Haaretz report comes at a time when Netanyahu is trying to secure his position as prime minister in the upcoming Knesset elections in October. Netanyahu has been trailing in the polls, facing a fierce challenge from former military chief Gadi Eisenkot.

Netanyahu on Wednesday called the Haaretz report “politically motivated” and part of the “left’s election campaign”.

He also denied its claims of a phone call with MBZ.

“The National Security Council and the Military Secretary meticulously reviewed the Prime Minister’s call log for those days—and found no trace of it whatsoever,” he said.

In a separate statement, Netanyahu also claimed that the person responsible for Haaretz’s “false report” was the Palestinian political figure, Muhammad Dahlan.

Dahlan was expelled from the Fatah party in 2011 after a power struggle with the current president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and lives in the UAE.

Dahlan’s representatives have rejected the claim, according to Israeli media.

Celebrity MasterChef star Sue Cleaver has previously opened up about a terrifying health battle that left her ‘seriously ill’

Sue Cleaver previously suffered a “scary” health scare

The actress, best known for playing Eileen Grimshaw in Coronation Street, opened up about a terrifying health battle which left her seriously ill and needing treatment in intensive care. The star is currently appearing on Celebrity MasterChef as she takes on a new challenge away from the cobbles.

But while viewers watch Sue battle it out in the kitchen, the star has previously spoken candidly about a difficult period in her life after undergoing surgery and later becoming seriously unwell. In 2023, Sue revealed she had endured a particularly difficult year after undergoing a hysterectomy before later being rushed to A&E.

Speaking about her health at the time, Sue explained that she had been seriously ill and had required intensive care treatment. “I had a really bad year. I had a hysterectomy in March then a few weeks ago, I ended up in A&E,” Sue said during an appearance on ITV hit chat show Loose Women.

Sue chose not to go into detail about exactly what had happened but admitted it had been an extremely frightening experience.

She explained: “I don’t need to go into details, but I have not been on a diet this year. I have been seriously ill. It was a scary, scary time. I had surgery and ended up in intensive care.”

The star had been subjected to speculation about her changing appearance, with images of her being used in adverts promoting weight-loss products. But Sue made clear that her weight loss had not been the result of following a particular diet. Instead, she had been dealing with serious health problems behind the scenes.

Despite the difficult experience, Sue was able to joke about the attention she had received over her appearance. “I’ve been seriously, seriously ill, but I look amazing!” she quipped.

The health scare came several years after Sue experienced another frightening medical emergency. In 2019, the actress developed sepsis after suffering from a kidney infection.

Sue later recalled becoming extremely unwell while she was working, initially believing that her symptoms could have been caused by flu or another illness.

Her condition deteriorated rapidly and she was eventually taken to hospital, where doctors diagnosed her with sepsis. The actress has since spoken about how serious the situation became and how important it was that she received medical treatment.

Sue has continued working throughout her health battles and has remained a familiar face on British television.

Now, the actress is taking on another challenge as she joins the line-up for Celebrity MasterChef. The cooking competition sees famous faces put their culinary skills to the test as they compete to impress the judges.

For Sue, it marks another chapter in her television career and gives viewers the chance to see a different side of the much-loved soap star.

Celebrity MasterChef is available to stream on BBC One and BBC iPlayer

California and a coalition of other Democratic-led states sued again Wednesday to block the U.S. Postal Service from implementing new nationwide rules for mail ballots, arguing they usurp state authority over elections at President Trump’s behest, expose voter information unnecessarily and threaten chaos in the rapidly approaching November election.

The Postal Service formally issued a 95-page “final rule” on Friday asserting that it was amending its mailing standards for mail ballots in federal elections to comply with Trump’s March executive order.

Trump demanded the rule changes as part of a broader plan to combat what he alleges — without evidence — is widespread voter fraud in the U.S., including by noncitizens voting through the mail. Election experts say there is zero evidence of such problems existing at scale.

“This mail-in voting rule is an unlawful overreach that shows just how far President Trump will go to control elections, but as I’ve said before, this fight is far from over and we are confident that the facts and the law are on our side,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in a statement.

“Donald Trump does not run elections. States do. And his latest attack on democracy is proof of how weak he has become,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom. “California will continue to lead the way in defending democracy — using every tool at our disposal and every minute in our day. This perilous moment in history demands no less from us.”

The new postal rules require states to submit lists of eligible voters — including their names and addresses — to the Postal Service, and to use new ballot envelopes with digital barcodes that would allow the Postal Service to identify and reject ballots that don’t match those lists.

The rules do not give the Postal Service authority to dictate which voters may appear on state lists. However, the rules do acknowledge that the lists would provide state voter data to federal law enforcement for the first time, and would put those authorities in “a better position to identify any potential issues regarding compliance with federal law that may merit further investigation.”

Trump’s March executive order also required the Department of Homeland Security to use available federal data to compile its own state lists of eligible citizen voters, ostensibly to compare them with the mail voter lists provided by the states to the Postal Service, and identify and pursue any ineligible voters.

Wednesday’s lawsuit follows a Monday decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that found an earlier challenge from the states was premature, in part because it sought court relief to a rule-making process that required nothing of the states and before the Postal Service had moved to implement any changes.

“On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to fully close the door on the President’s attempt to interfere in our election administration. Today, we’re taking legal action to stop this unlawful rule in its tracks and ensure that voters can exercise their constitutional right to vote,” Bonta said.

The White House did not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment on the latest lawsuit.

However, it has defended Trump’s executive order as overdue and badly needed to secure U.S. elections, and hailed the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing the rule-making to proceed as “a major win for the security of American elections.”

“These are commonsense measures that protect the security of mail-in ballots and ensure only Americans are electing American leaders,” White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis said.

The high court allowed the Postal Service to move forward with its work to comply with Trump’s order, but explicitly noted that it had reached no conclusions as to the legality of the pending rules.

Trump administration officials have said they are pursuing fraudulent voters, and have warned state election officials that they could face legal consequences personally if they don’t do everything in their power to prevent voter fraud, including by noncitizens.

Critics contend Trump’s executive order was devised as an end run around laws and a slew of recent court rulings blocking the Trump administration’s demands for state voter rolls — which states, including California, have refused to provide.

States have argued the administration’s demands are in bad faith, intended to bolster Trump’s baseless claims that U.S. elections are compromised rather than enhance election security.

In issuing its new rules, the Postal Service rejected a slate of concerns from critics who submitted comments on the proposed rules, including that the changes are being proposed far too close to the November election and will cost states and localities a huge amount of money to comply with.

It also rejected concerns that creating a single nationwide voter database — which has never existed before — will provide a massive new target for foreign adversaries and other bad actors interested in disrupting U.S. elections.

The Postal Service concluded that the cost to the states is outweighed by the benefits of the changes. It said it has sufficient staffing to implement the changes, and is ready to safeguard the database it builds using “multi-layered security controls.”

The lawsuit, brought by 24 state attorneys general and the governor of Pennsylvania, asks for immediate court intervention to halt the Postal Service changes from being implemented while the litigation continues.

“Let’s be clear: the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to regulate elections — not the President and not USPS,” Bonta said. “Ballots are an extension of our voices and we’re asking the court to ensure that every person has the right to make theirs heard.”

Independent voting rights groups have also sued to block the Postal Service rules from being implemented.

Aug. 24 (UPI) — A group of grocers filed two lawsuits Monday over New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s plan to open five city-run grocery stores, saying it would harm neighborhood supermarkets.

The Multicultural Business Coalition, an organization that says it represents owners of smaller stores, said in the filings that the city would violate business owners’ civil rights if the new stores open and that officials did not study how the planned stores would affect existing businesses.

Kenneth Roldan, the president of the coalition, said the plan would have a “devastating” effect on small grocery stores. He called it “a direct assault on minority business,” The New York Times reported.

The plan for city-owned grocery stores, which would sell some items at a 30% discount, was part of Mamdani’s platform as he ran for mayor. It calls for five stores, one in each borough of New York City, to open by 2029.

Mamdani said at a news conference Monday that the new stores are needed to address the high cost of groceries and that they would not offer significant competition in the city.

“I’m confident both in the legality of this, that it will stand up in court, and the importance of delivering it,” Mamdani said.

The new stores would reevaluate prices once a month and set the cost for food items at 30% below retailers, The Hill reported. The city would own the land and cover the rent and construction costs. A private operator, selected through a request for proposals, would manage daily operations.

“We are talking about a reflection of a cost-of-living crisis that has seen grocery prices increase by about 30 percent over the last few years, and we’re also talking about delivering five city-run grocery stores in a city of 8.5 million people that has more than 1,000 grocery stores,” Mamdani said.

The first store is expected to open in 2027 in the Hunts Point neighborhood in the Bronx. An East Harlem store is expected to open by 2029. The city has not yet selected sites in Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island.