tells

Sexual misconduct allegations against Arnold Schwarzenegger roiled California’s gubernatorial recall race Thursday as the Republican apologized for having “behaved badly” toward women while insisting he would champion their cause.

Responding to a Los Angeles Times story on accusations by six women that he touched them in a sexual manner without their consent, Schwarzenegger dismissed the report as “trash politics,” but went on to acknowledge unspecified wrongdoing.

“I always say that wherever there is smoke, there is fire,” he told several hundred cheering supporters at a San Diego rally.

“So I want to say to you, yes, I have behaved badly sometimes. Yes, it is true that I was on rowdy movie sets, and I have done things that were not right, which I thought then was playful. But I now recognize that I have offended people. And to those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, I am deeply sorry about that, and I apologize.”

Asked later about the specific incidents in an interview on CNN, Schwarzenegger said: “I don’t remember so many of the things that I was accused of having done.”

Pressed further, he said: “I would say most of it is not true.”

He also sought to shift blame to his opponents. “It’s very interesting that since I’m ahead in the campaign … all the things are coming out,” he said. “I’m very pro-women. I’m very much into equality. Those things are not coming out.”

Schwarzenegger’s strategists had designed the closing part of the campaign — a four-day bus tour of the state — as a “triumphal march.” Instead, the candidate began the day apologizing for sexual misconduct. By nightfall he was sitting with his wife, responding not only to that issue, but to allegations in the New York Times and on ABC’s “World News Tonight” that he had expressed admiration for Adolf Hitler during the 1970s.

The Austrian-born actor denied the accusation and called Hitler a “disgusting villain.”

“I always despised everything Hitler stood for,” said Schwarzenegger, whose father was a Nazi. “I hate the regime, the Third Reich and all of those whole Nazi philosophy, have always fought against that.”

Political strategists differed on whether the sexual misconduct allegations might affect Tuesday’s election.

The disclosures came a day after a confident Schwarzenegger had unveiled plans for his first 100 days in office. Recent polls have shown voters inclined to toss Gov. Gray Davis from office and replace him with Schwarzenegger.

Thursday’s events made the tumultuous eight-week campaign even more volatile.

One Schwarzenegger event Thursday in Costa Mesa was disrupted when a Los Angeles woman, Gail Escobar, told reporters about an alleged confrontation with the actor many years ago.

As she spoke, an angry confrontation erupted between Schwarzenegger’s supporters and roughly half a dozen female protesters carrying signs saying: “Hey, Arnold. Stop Harassing Women Now.”

A supporter ripped in half a sign reading “No Groper for Governor.” An elderly man shouted at the protesters: “You’re too stupid to get respect!”

On a nationally syndicated radio show, Joy Browne, a psychologist, detailed an incident in the late 1970s in which she alleged Schwarzenegger had harassed her.

In Santa Monica, the disclosures dominated a campaign event by the governor at the pier aquarium. After one reporter asked Davis to comment on The Times story, another suggested ushering out the 30 Santa Clarita first-graders on hand to witness the governor’s signing of four environmental bills. The children were led from the room before questioning resumed.

Davis was careful not to gloat over Schwarzenegger’s situation. He called the allegations of groping and lewd language directed at women “a matter between the voters and their conscience.”

“I would just rather leave this matter to the voters of this state,” Davis said at the bill-signing ceremony. “They will digest it. They will decide what importance to attach to it.”

But Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, the only Democratic officeholder running to replace Davis, seized on Schwarzenegger’s apology as a new weapon against his chief Republican rival.

“These charges of sexual battery and harassment are serious and recent,” Bustamante said at a Compton Community College campaign stop.

He read an excerpt from the California Penal Code, saying, “Any person who touches an intimate part of another person against the will of the person touched” is guilty of misdemeanor sexual battery.

Some Republicans, meanwhile, accused The Times of partisanship and excused Schwarzenegger’s behavior; others expressed outrage over his admission of misconduct.

“What we saw in the L.A. Times today was not an attack on Arnold Schwarzenegger,” said Rep. David Dreier (R-San Dimas). “It was an attack on every single one of us who want to take back California.”

The actor’s major Republican recall opponent, state Sen. Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks, said he viewed the accusations “with a high degree of skepticism,” because they emerged so close to the election.

But “if true, these acts are reprehensible and inexcusable,” he said. “And as the father of a 13-year-old daughter, I’d say to him, ‘Get out of the race.’ ”

The Times article on Thursday, which was based on a seven-week investigation, quoted women as saying Schwarzenegger had groped and humiliated them in incidents as early as 1975 and as recently as 2000. Three described their surprise and discomfort when Schwarzenegger grabbed their breasts. Another said he reached under her skirt and gripped her buttocks, while another said he tried to remove her swimsuit in a hotel elevator.

Four of the women spoke on condition of anonymity. Three said they feared Schwarzenegger’s power in the entertainment industry where they worked, and the fourth said she did not want to be exposed to public humiliation. None of the women had filed formal complaints against the actor, but their accounts were confirmed by friends or relatives in whom they had confided well before the recall.

The Times did not learn of any of the six women from Schwarzenegger’s opponents in the recall campaign, and none of them approached the newspaper on her own.

E. Laine Stockton, who said Schwarzenegger had reached under her T-shirt to touch her breast at a Venice Beach gym in 1975, said Thursday that Schwarzenegger should apologize personally to each of the women.

“He didn’t do it to us as a group,” she said. “He did it to us in public places. As far as I’m concerned, I want a face-to-face apology.”A woman who had told The Times that Schwarzenegger pulled her onto his lap and whispered a lewd comment said she was upset that Schwarzenegger had coupled his apology with an attack on “trash politics.”

“It kind of discounts the apology a little bit and puts the shame on the person it happened to,” she said. “The wording seemed to suggest that what happened to me is part of some larger political scheme that’s in the gutter, even though it’s not something I did. It’s the truth about something he did.”

Another woman quoted in the Times story, a former waitress, said Thursday that the actor’s apology was too narrow. She alleged that as she waited on his table, Schwarzenegger had asked her to go into a bathroom and stick her finger in her vagina and return to him. “Not everyone he offended was on a movie set. I was a waitress refilling his coffee cup,” she said.

Although earlier asking not to be named in The Times investigation, the woman, Nicole Alpert, decided Thursday to disclose her identity. She is a motivational speaker for women and a hairdresser.

“I have chosen to pour the proverbial hot pot of coffee on his head,” Alpert said. “As a woman who speaks out for herself and other women, if somebody offends you in any way, no matter who they are — Mr. Famous Actor or Mr. Governor of California — speak up for yourself. You may find out that two things happen: One, you protect your honor and, two, you get an apology. How great is that?”

The apology came Thursday morning at the San Diego Convention Center rally, an event that kicked off a four-day campaign bus tour.

“You know when you get into politics they try to tear down your character and tear down everything you stand for, and, as you know, this morning they have begun with the tearing down,” Schwarzenegger told the crowd. “Yes, absolutely. But I know — I know that the people of California can see through these trash politics. Yes. And let me tell you something — a lot of … what you see in the stories is not true.”

But he then apologized and added: “When I’m governor, I want to prove to the women that I will be a champion for the women. A champion for the women. And I hope that you will give me the chance to prove that. Now let’s go from the dirty politics back to the future of California.”

When he finished speaking, the blue curtains behind him parted to reveal the bus that will take him on a “California Comeback Express” tour. He climbed up the steps and as the bus drove around the Convention Center perimeter, he leaned out the door, beaming and giving a thumbs-up.

Later, at a boisterous Orange County Fairgrounds rally in Costa Mesa, Schwarzenegger vowed to “destroy the car tax,” which the Davis administration has tripled to help close a multibillion-dollar budget gap.

“In the movies, when I played a character and I didn’t like someone, you know what I did? I destroyed it,” he told the crowd. “I’ll show you exactly what we’re going to do to the car tax.”

A crane then dropped a giant weight onto an Oldsmobile Cutlass, crushing the vehicle.

“Hasta la vista, car tax,” Schwarzenegger said as the rock anthem “We’re Not Gonna Take It” blasted through loudspeakers.

On Wednesday night, the Republican front-runner also was forced to respond to reports that quoted from an unpublished book proposal in which Schwarzenegger, then a bodybuilder, allegedly cited Hitler as one of his heroes.

“He came up from being a little man with almost no formal education …. I admire him for being such a good public speaker and for what he did with it,” Schwarzenegger was quoted as saying in a “verbatim transcript” of a 1975 interview he reportedly gave while making the documentary “Pumping Iron.”

At the news conference with his wife, Maria Shriver, Schwarzenegger said he could not remember making any such statements.

“I cannot imagine I’ve ever said anything favorable on those things,” he said.

The author of the book proposal, George Butler, who served as producer of the documentary, has given conflicting accounts of Schwarzenegger’s remarks on Hitler. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times two months ago, he denied Schwarzenegger had ever made such remarks. This week, however, he told ABC and the New York Times that Schwarzenegger had made the remarks.

Shriver said the sexual misconduct allegations “show why really good people don’t want to go into politics anymore.”

“I don’t get into specifics,” she said. “As I say to my children, it always takes great courage to do — stand before anybody and apologize,” she said. “I think that’s what Arnold did today. I think he handled it and his statement speaks for itself.”

Many political strategists in both parties largely dismissed the impact of The Times report, saying the late-campaign timing of the revelations, as well as Schwarzenegger’s swift apology, should mitigate the fallout. That is, they said, barring new developments that advance the story or keep it alive through the weekend.

For voters backing the recall at this point, “Heaven and Earth is not going to move them to ‘no,’ “said Gale Kaufman, a Democratic strategist who is not involved in the race.

Arnold Steinberg, a GOP strategist also watching from the sidelines, said much the same thing.

“There’s an increasing skepticism among voters toward last-minute charges in any campaign,” he said. At this late stage, “Voters look to reinforce their views and discard information that contradicts that view,” he added.

Others suggested that the revelations — if not the exact details — were hardly new or surprising. Allegations of Schwarzenegger’s untoward behavior toward women circulated widely more than two years ago in a Premiere magazine article published as the actor was weighing a run against Davis in the 2002 election.

Still, some conservative activists said the allegations could erode Schwarzenegger’s support among Republicans.

Steve Frank, a conservative leader who worked for former GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill Simon Jr., said Schwarzenegger “may have brought down the whole recall.”

“The conservatives didn’t like Bill Clinton for doing this, and we would be hypocrites to approve of Schwarzenegger doing this,” he said.

Meanwhile, a new accusation surfaced from Escobar, 41, a Los Angeles wife and mother and a waitress at a restaurant in the Fairmont Miramar hotel in Santa Monica. In an interview with The Times, she said Schwarzenegger had threatened to assault her when she was a teenager in the late 1970s.

Her account could not be independently confirmed. She was accompanied to the event by fellow members of the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, which opposes Schwarzenegger in the election.

When she was a 16-year-old student at Santa Monica High School — then named Gail Kay — she and a school friend were drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes at a coffee shop across from the school.

They were sitting at the counter when Escobar’s friend noticed that Schwarzenegger and another bodybuilder were there. After the two men finished eating, Schwarzenegger left the restaurant but the other bodybuilder came over to Escobar and said Schwarzenegger wanted to see her, Escobar said.

“I told him if Arnold wants to see me, he can come back inside and see me,” Escobar said. “He then proceeded to pick me up out of my seat and drag me out of the restaurant, through the lobby to the parking structure.”

Escobar said her friend was amused by this and followed voluntarily. The other man held Escobar there until a vehicle pulled up, she said. Schwarzenegger was in the passenger seat, she said. He “rolled down the window and said, ‘We are going to rape you girls tonight,’ ” according to Escobar. “Then the bodybuilder who was holding me let me go and I ran. At that age, I was scared. Looking back today, I’m infuriated.”

*

Times staff writers Mark Z. Barabak, Gary Cohn, Richard Fausset, Scott Glover, Matea Gold, Gregg Jones, Matt Lait, Joel Rubin, Robert Welkos and Nancy Vogel contributed to this report.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Text of Schwarzenegger’s Response to Allegations

“You know when you get into politics they try to tear down your character, and tear down everything you stand for. And as you know, this morning they have begun with the tearing down. Yes. Absolutely.

“But I know — I know that the people of California can see through these trash politics. Yes. And let me tell you something — a lot of those, what you see in the stories is not true. But at the same time, I have to tell you, I always say wherever there is smoke, there is fire. That is true.

“So I want to say to you, yes, I have behaved badly sometimes.

Yes, it is true that I was on rowdy movie sets, and I have done things that were not right, which I thought then was playful.

“But now I recognize that I have offended people. And to those people that I have offended, I want to say to them I am deeply sorry about that, and I apologize, because this is not what I tried to do.

“When I am governor, I want to prove to the women that I will be a champion for the women, a champion of the women. And I hope that you will give me the chance to prove that.

“Now let’s go from the dirty politics back — to the future of California.”

FORT COLLINS, Colo. — The Trump administration is telling Colorado to stop importing gray wolves from Canada as part of the state’s efforts to restore the predators, a shift that could hinder plans for more reintroductions this winter.

The state has been releasing wolves west of the Continental Divide since 2023 after Colorado voters narrowly approved wolf reintroduction in 2020. About 30 wolves now roam mountainous regions of the state, and its management plan envisions potentially 200 or more wolves in the long term.

The program has been unpopular in rural areas, where some wolves have attacked livestock. Now, after two winters of releases during the Biden administration, wolf opponents appear to have found support from federal officials under President Trump.

Colorado wolves must come from Northern Rockies states, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Nesvik told Colorado Parks and Wildlife Director Jeff Davis in a recent letter.

Colorado must “immediately cease and desist any and all efforts related to the capture, transport and/or release of gray wolves not obtained” from northern Rocky Mountain states, Nesvik wrote.

Most of those states — including the Yellowstone region states of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, where wolves from Canada were reintroduced in the 1990s — have said they don’t want to be part of Colorado’s reintroduction.

That could leave Colorado in a bind this winter. The state plans to relocate 10 to 15 wolves under an agreement with the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship in Canada, a statement by Colorado Parks and Wildlife spokesperson Luke Perkins said Friday.

The agreement was signed before the state got the Oct. 10 letter from Nesvik, according to Perkins. He said the state “continues to evaluate all options to support this year’s gray wolf releases” after getting “recent guidance” from the Fish and Wildlife Service.

Though some of Colorado’s reintroduced wolves have come from Oregon, wolves released most recently have come from British Columbia.

The issue now is whether the federal agency required that wolves must only come from northern U.S. Rocky Mountain states when it designated Colorado’s “experimental” population of reintroduced wolves.

A federal notice announcing the designation in 2023 referred to the northern Rockies region as merely the “preferred” source of wolves, not the required one.

Defenders of Wildlife attorney Lisa Saltzburg said in a statement that the Fish and Wildlife Service was “twisting language” by saying wolves can’t come from Canada or Alaska.

People in Colorado “should be proud of their state’s leadership in conservation and coexistence, and the wolf reintroduction program illustrates those values,” Saltzburg said.

The Colorado governor’s office and Colorado Parks and Wildlife are in touch with the U.S. Interior Department about the letter and evaluating “all options” to allow wolf releases this year, Gov. Jared Polis spokesperson Shelby Wieman said by email.

Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson Garrett Peterson, whose voicemail said he wouldn’t be available until after the government shutdown ends, didn’t immediately return a message seeking comment.

Gruver writes for the Associated Press.

James Martin was back on our screens today with a new episode of his ITV show

James Martin found himself in a bit of a pickle with a guest on his ITV programme, James Martin’s Saturday Morning today (October 18), following a change in the show’s time slot and his recent candid admission, reports the Express.

The incident occurred while James was assisting fellow chef and old friend Galton Blackinston in preparing a scallop dish.

As he chopped some tarragon for Galton, James asked: “Chief, do you want these sauced or not?”

“Yeah, yeah. Yes, I do,” Galton responded, opening one of the scallop shells while the other two remained closed.

James stirred the tarragon into the butter sauce as Galton spooned some onto one of the scallops.

“Not too much,” Galton advised the viewers at home, while James quickly removed the shells from the other scallops.

READ MORE: Gordon Ramsay savages James Martin in expletive rant about Strictly Come DancingREAD MORE: I drove two hours to eat at James Martin’s restaurant and was gobsmacked when bill came

“I was just matching the tops. Do you know what I mean?” Galton attempted to clarify, to which James retorted: “Well, it’s going well so far.”

“Shut up. Let me concentrate,” Galton told him, continuing to spoon out the mixture.

Both James and Galton chuckled at their banter as they completed the dish, featuring golden pastry, succulent scallops, butter sauce and crispy lardons.

After finishing the dish, Galton confessed: “I’m delighted, that’s the best thing I’ve ever done.”

Their friendly ribbing continued throughout the programme, with Galton later quipping: “I was going to say you lost a bit of weight and then you turned to the side.”

James responded with a cheeky quip: “This is the last time we’re seeing Galton, but anyway.”

He proceeded to wrap up the programme, telling audiences: “That’s all we’ve got time for today before I go to the gym.” He added: “I can breathe out now.”

The programme welcomed guests including seasoned broadcaster Mariella Frostrup and culinary experts Jonathan Phang and Galton.

Mariella discussed her illustrious broadcasting journey, which included reporting on Live Aid, and reminisced about first hearing the iconic 1984 charity anthem Do They Know It’s Christmas?

Speaking about the tune, she revealed: “There was something about that record. Hearing Bono’s voice. It still gives me goosebumps. It just felt like an incredible song.”

Try ITVX Premium free for a week

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£59.99

£0

ITVX

Get ITVX Premium here

ITVX Premium offers exclusive ad-free content that can be streamed on-demand and on the go, with everything from Hollywood blockbusters to bingeable British box sets.

An annual plan costs £59.99 – equal to £4.99 per month – after a seven-day free trial.

Mariella elaborated on how the track represented “something much bigger than ourselves” and noted: “We were sure we were going to change everything.”

She acknowledged it stood in sharp contrast to today’s climate where people feel helpless to create meaningful change amid current political circumstances.

The broadcaster has expanded into the food industry alongside Mary Berry’s chef daughter Belles Berry, with the duo co-writing the cookbook Menolicious which explores nutrition during the menopause.

Meanwhile, Jonathan revealed details about his former role representing top models during the 1980s, including legendary figures like Naomi Campbell and Tyra Banks.

When questioned about whether he longed for the glamorous fashion industry, Jonathan candidly informed James: “No. I’m glad it’s over.”

He has since established himself as an accomplished food author and chef, demonstrating his comforting chicken broth recipe.

James Martin’s Saturday Morning is broadcast on ITV, every Saturday at 9.30am

For those who know of the spectacle that is Juan Gabriel there is no explanation necessary, for those who don’t, no explanation will suffice.

A new Netflix docuseries attempts to capture the magic of the frequently bedazzled genre- and gender-defying showmanship of “El Divo de Juárez,” who died at 66 of natural causes in 2016, while also investigating the internality of the man behind Gabriel — Alberto Aguilera Valadez.

Juan Gabriel was known for his epic stage performances, where he was often accompanied by an orchestra, dancers and dozens of mariachis dressed in tight jackets and sombreros, while belting out such hits as “Hasta Que Te Conocí,” “El Noa Noa” and “Amor Eterno.”

His colorful outfits and flamboyant dance moves drew speculation about his sexuality, but he famously preferred to remain coy on the issue and to this day remains a queer icon throughout the Latin American world.

“Juan Gabriel: I Must, I Can, I Will,” which premieres Oct. 30, utilizes a goldmine of hundreds of thousands of personal and never-before-seen voice recordings, photos and videos of one of Mexico’s most revered singer-songwriters, giving audiences a holistic look at the pain, joy, contradictions, artistry and genius that informed Gabriel’s worldview and perception of himself.

The project is director María José Cuevas’ second production with the streaming giant — her 2023 documentary feature “The Lady of Silence: The Mataviejitas Murders” recounted the story of famous Mexican serial killer Juana Barraza, who was sentenced to 759 years in prison for killing 16 elderly women and the suspected killing of dozens more.

Cuevas’ implementation of the juxtaposed duality of Juan Gabriel and Alberto Aguilera Valadez was inspired by his insistence that the two entities were distinct yet symbiotic, as was shown in a 2014 filmed self-interview the singer conducted.

“In order to understand the greatness of Juan Gabriel, I had to know Alberto. He always played with that duality,” she said. “From a very young age he would say in interviews that he invented Juan Gabriel to shield Alberto, he invented an idol in order to protect his private identity.”

In an interview with The Times, Cuevas spoke about her personal connection to the famed singer, the overwhelming archives she had access to and the ways in which Juan Gabriel united and continues to unite people to this day.

This interview was translated and edited for length.

What was your relationship to Juan Gabriel before taking on the task of directing this documentary?

I remember clearly turning on the TV [when I was young] and seeing video clips of Juan Gabriel with his red sweater and white jeans. I later had the opportunity to go to his first performance at the Palacios de Bellas Artes in 1990 with my parents. One is accustomed to going to Bellas Artes for opera, ballet, classical music and the concert began with that formal tone, but there reached a moment where audience members couldn’t keep up the facade of elegance and everyone let their hair down.

For me that moment was incredibly revelatory, I finally noticed that he was a whirlwind in every sense of the word. I didn’t realize at the time that I was present at a such an important cultural milestone. When I watched it in retrospect, from all the camera angles we were privy to for this documentary, I got goosebumps and I wish I could go back to being 18 years old and experience it with the intensity that I have for his music now.

I think that Juan Gabriel always transports us to something personal, but also to something collective. In Mexico, Juan Gabriel’s death was a very collective experience. You would go out into the street and you would hear his music in cars, the corner store, coming out of neighbors’ houses.

How did you gain access to the vast collection of archived materials that are present in the documentary?

That’s really the treasure of the project. Juan Gabriel’s story has already been told, but what makes this project unique is that it’s a story told by [the recordings and photos] he left behind. One of the first things he did after reaching success wasn’t just to buy his mom a house, but also to buy himself a Super 8 camera. From then on he picked up the habit of recording his everyday activities as Alberto Aguilera and later on he always had a camera following around as Juan Gabriel.

From our first meetings with Netflix, I figured we should ask Gabriel’s family if they had anything to share with us. I thought maybe it would be a photo album that was laying around, maybe a box of memorabilia or a few cassettes. So it was to our great surprises when they sent us over a photo of a warehouse with shelves full of every different kind of film. It was crazy. And that’s when I remembered that Juan Gabriel’s close friend and actor Isela Vega was helping him catalog all of his videography.

I never imagined that within those videos that we’d find the public persona of Juan Gabriel and the private persona of Alberto Aguilera. Another elucidating moment was that Juan Gabriel reached a moment where he became conscious of the level of his celebrity and that it wasn’t a coincidence that he recorded most of his life. And there reached a moment where I realized he saved all these recordings so that one day people could revisit all his saved materials and they could reconstruct his personal story through what he left behind.

There’s a moment in the documentary where we’re at one of his concerts and there are men of all orientations in the crowd that are asking JuanGa to marry them. That seemed particularly powerful to me because in that moment the veil of machismo seemed to fall.

Yeah, I think an important part of making this portrait of Juan Gabriel was understanding the context of Mexico in the ‘80s. It was very conservative, very machista and then all of a sudden this guy drops in with all this talent and charisma and he says, “Here I come, get out of the way because I’m gonna conquer everyone.” And that wasn’t so simple at that time. He showed his greatness at any and every stage he was put on. He was able to win over people in every social class in a very elitist Mexico. He won over everyone from the most macho man to women.

Even greater than the achievement that was his performance at Bellas Artes were his performances in palenques when he was young. Palenques being these circular stages where you can’t hide because you’re standing right in the middle of everything. And he would take the stage late at night when everyone was already drunk and they were audiences that were, in general, very machista.

Suddenly a very young Juan Gabriel would appear to perform rancheras. I always say he was a provocateur, but also a seducer because of his ability to win over a crowd. There were audiences that would yell derogatory things at him and that’s when he’d really play with the audience.

It feels almost impossible not to be moved by the music as you watch your documentary.

He’s really magnificent. I remember throughout the whole process of making the doc and I was watching the intimate home videos of Alberto Aguilera and it really reminded me that Juan Gabriel was a human like everyone else [not just this grand entertainer]. I’d put any concert of his and I was bowing at the altar of a star. It’s amazing what a powerful character he was up on that stage.

And how have you seen JuanGa’s legacy represent something very specific in the U.S.?

For Latinos in the U.S. he’s such an important figure because his work pulls people back to their roots. One of his greatest accomplishments as a performer was when he filled the Rose Bowl in 1993. In that moment he showed his influence and strength within the Latino world. He’s absolutely one of the key figures in Latin music.

US leader tells Israel it ‘must immediately stop’ bombing Gaza, says he believes Hamas is ‘ready for a lasting peace’.

A 20-YEAR-OLD mother has revealed how she really spends her Universal Credit payments. 

Skye Byrne, a young mum from the UK, claimed that not only has she treated herself to a holiday, but she even splashed the cash in Sainsbury’s on a huge homeware haul.

2

2

And as well as stocking up her daughter’s wardrobe, she also indulged with a McDonald’s takeaway.

Posting on social media, the content creator who lives in a council house, revealed a typical day in her life. 

She said: “What I spend in a day, UC Benefit Britain Edition.”

Skye kicked off her morning with a Universal Credit appointment and was quick to clap at trolls who have criticised her for booking a trip abroad.

She said: “For everyone that said, ‘you shouldn’t be going on holiday when you’re on UC,’ well, I told my work coach and she cried, she actually cried because she knows how much I’ve been wanting so badly to take my daughter on a holiday and she was so happy and thrilled for us, so, yeah, suck on that, everyone.”

Following this, Skye then headed to her local supermarket and stocked up on homeware buys and clothes for her daughter.

She added: “I went into Sainsbury’s and picked up these little bits and bobs for the house – I got three pillows and a blanket.”

As well as this, Skye also nabbed some tea towels and place mats, bringing her interior purchases to a total cost of £48.

However, Skye then picked up two pairs of £3.50 leggings and a pair of £7 jeggings for her child.

Following this, she also nabbed a pair of beige trousers and a PAW Patrol bottle, but was lost for words when she went to the till and saw the total cost of her haul.

The benefits recipient shared: “Honestly, I almost had a heart attack when I saw the price – this all came to £88, I was stunned.”

But the money spending clearly didn’t stop there, as Skye ended her day with a takeaway.

So glad my taxes are being spent wisely

TikTok user

Although Skye didn’t splurge masses on her fast food as it cost her just £2.99. 

“Then went into Maccas cause I was quite hungry, so I picked up a triple cheeseburger,” she concluded.

Social media users react

Skye’s TikTok clip, which was posted under the username @skyebyrnex, has clearly left many open-mouthed, as it has quickly racked up 32,100 views. 

But social media users were fuming by how Skye spent her money and many raced to the comments to express this. 

One person said: “So glad my taxes are being spent wisely.” 

I am allowed a nice home for my daughter to live in. I’m also allowed to take my daughter on holidays and enjoy her childhood

Skye Byrne

Another added: “How can you afford to shop in Sainsbury’s on UC? I’m lucky if I can afford Primark nowadays.” 

A third commented: “Workshy and diet shy.”

To this, Skye responded and alongside a kiss emoji, cheekily wrote: “Don’t be jelly.” 

At the same time, one user questioned: “Isn’t UC designed to help you survive when you aren’t working? Not for pillows? And apparently a holiday.” 

In response, Skye shared: “1. I am allowed a nice home for my daughter to live in. 2. I’m also allowed to take my daughter on holidays and enjoy her childhood.” 

Meanwhile, someone else asked: “How on earth do you afford to go on holiday?”

Setting the record straight, Skye wrote back and confirmed: “I save. I make sure I can do these things for my daughter.” 

Unlock even more award-winning articles as The Sun launches brand new membership programme – Sun Club

MYLEENE Klass today told a court she felt “sheer terror” after allegedly being targeted by a stalker who sent her gifts.

Peter Windsor is accused of hounding the former popstar and her Classic FM colleague Katie Breathwick over a four-year period.

2

2

The 61-year-old allegedly sent Myleene items with “sexual overtones” – including a Catwoman outfit and set of handcuffs.

He also called her a “naughty vixen” and sent a police uniform to the Classic FM studio, Birmingham Crown Court heard.

Giving evidence today, Myleene said she was informed in an email in August last year that an “accumulation” of items had been sent to her.

The 47-year-old became upset when she was asked about being told how Royal Mail had “intercepted” an air pistol addressed to her.

She said “it just felt extreme on every front” after she was shown a list of items and photographs of letters Windsor allegedly sent.

Myleene added: “It was very clear very quickly that it was a highly volatile selection of items.

“It was a huge shock, especially the extent to which it had escalated.

“It was pretty overwhelming when you have the accumulation of a bundle of this information. It’s pretty terrifying.”

The ex-Hear’Say star described the overall context of all the items as “pretty bleak”.

She added: “It’s a huge violation. It’s sheer terror really.”

Myleene told the court how she was informed by police in September last year that an air gun had been intercepted by the Royal Mail.

She continued: “He said to me that whilst the gun wasn’t necessary for a licence in this country, at such close proximity right up to 6ft it could prove fatal and police took it very seriously.

“I was extremely shocked because suddenly it felt extremely real.

“This was very clear what the intention was. There was no grey area here.

“It’s a gun in a box with my name on it.”

The court was told Windsor also stalked Myleene’s Classic FM co-presenter Katie Breathwick.

She is said to have received a stamp collection, bottle of champagne, a will-writing kit and running shoes with spikes on among other bizarre letters and parcels.

Police later arrested Windsor at his home in Birmingham and found a number of items that caused them concern.

They included a map of London where the women worked, a pair of black leather gloves, ladies stockings and a pair of binoculars.

Windsor later told police he sent Klass items as a joke after seeing her in “provocative underwear” in a newspaper.

He denies two counts of stalking and the trial continues.

Israeli tanks are advancing in Tal al-Hawa, Sabra and other neighbourhoods of Gaza City in their ground invasion.

Hamas has issued what it calls a “warning” that the lives of two captives held in Gaza City are in danger as Israeli tanks push deeper inside several neighbourhoods of the besieged urban centre, where tens of thousands of Palestinians are trapped by Israel’s ground invasion and bombardment.

The Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of the Palestinian group, said on Sunday that contact has been lost with fighters holding Omri Miran and Matan Angrest after “brutal military operations and violent targeting in the Sabra and Tal al-Hawa neighbourhoods during the last 48 hours”.

“The lives of the two captives are in real danger, and the occupation forces must immediately withdraw to the south of Road 8 and halt aerial sorties for 24 hours starting from 18:00 this evening (15:00 GMT), until an attempt is made to extract the two prisoners,” it said.

Hamas released a “farewell picture” of captives in Gaza this month in another attempt to stop the Israeli army as it systematically destroys Gaza City and displaces hundreds of thousands of starving Palestinians once again.

Israel said 48 captives remain in Gaza, 20 of whom are alive. But the country has refused to stop the war despite being increasingly accused of committing genocide and as Israeli families call and protest for a comprehensive deal to end the war and bring back all captives.

Their pleas have not been heeded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government, and relatives and supporters are blaming the government for their prolonged captivity.

The political wing of Hamas said in a statement earlier on Sunday that the group has not received any new ceasefire or peace proposals from mediators Qatar and Egypt, even as United States President Donald Trump continues to predict an imminent ceasefire, which he has done several times in recent weeks.

The group confirmed that negotiations remain halted after Israel tried to assassinate top Hamas leaders in Doha on September 9 as they gathered to review a new ceasefire proposal presented by Trump.

But Hamas said it is “ready to study any proposal from the brother mediators with positivity and responsibility, in a manner that preserves the national rights of our people”.

Far-right Israeli ministers said on Sunday that they oppose a 21-point plan presented by Trump and any other deal that would put an end to the war before eliminating Hamas.

In a post on X, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said: “Mr. Prime Minister, you have no mandate to end the war without a decisive defeat of Hamas.”

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said he would “never agree to a Palestinian state – even if it is difficult, even if it has a price, and even if it takes time”.

More than 66,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip since the start of the war in October 2023, according to the enclave’s Ministry of Health.

Dozens more Palestinians were killed in air strikes and shelling or while seeking aid on Sunday, including a child in a bombardment of the Sabra neighbourhood. Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis city reported an infant died due to malnutrition and inadequate medical treatment.

Israeli tanks are also inching closer towards the al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, which used to be the largest medical complex in Gaza but now lies mostly in ruins after several previous Israeli sieges.

Muhammad Abu Salmiya, director of the hospital, said on Sunday that his team is committed to keeping the facility running as long as possible as patients and displaced people are sheltering there.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has delivered a defiant speech at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), attempting to justify his country’s genocide in Gaza and denouncing Western allies for failing to stand by it in the wake of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack.

Speaking at UNGA in New York on Friday, the increasingly isolated Israeli leader railed against the “disgraceful decision” by some Western countries in recent days to recognise a Palestinian state.

“It will be a mark of shame on all of you,” he said.

“Your disgraceful decision will encourage terrorism against Jews, and against innocent people everywhere.”

Netanyahu delivered his speech to a sparse audience because many delegates left the General Assembly hall in protest as he made his way towards the stage.

The Israeli leader insisted that, despite the growing international pressure and condemnation of genocide, ​​Israel “must finish the job” against Hamas in Gaza.

“Western leaders may have buckled under the pressure,” he said. “And I guarantee you one thing: Israel won’t.”

Message to Hamas: Surrender or die

Netanyahu’s speech was also broadcast into Gaza via loudspeakers mounted on Israel’s border with the territory, a fact he acknowledged in his speech, issuing a message directly to the Israeli captives held by Hamas in the territory.

“We have not forgotten you, not even for a second,” he said. “The people of Israel are with you. We will not falter, and we will not rest until we bring all of you home.”

He said that, thanks to an “unprecedented operation” by the Israeli military, his speech was also being transmitted to the cellphones of people in Gaza, including Hamas leadership.

He issued an ultimatum that they should lay down their weapons and release the captives, or they would die.

‘You have to stand with Israel’

In his speech, Netanyahu — who faces an International Criminal Court warrant over alleged war crimes and growing global criticism to halt his nearly two-year war on Gaza — laid out a familiar narrative.

He detailed the horrors of the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, detailed the “seven-front war” that Israel had since waged, largely alone, against its enemies in the region, and criticised Western allies for failing to back it in what he painted as a shared battle against Islamist radicals who he described as “barbarians at the gate”.

“You can’t appease your way out of jihad,” he said. “You have to stand with Israel.”

Netanyahu wore a badge with a QR code on his lapel and encouraged his audience to scan it to receive Israel’s account of the October 7 attack, which killed at least 1,139 people.

“You too will see why we fight and why we must win. It’s all in here,” he said.

He said that had the United States suffered losses proportionate to those Israel had sustained in an attack, there was no way it would allow the attacker to continue to pose a threat.

Members of the US delegation in attendance, which has been Israel’s staunchest defender at the international organisation and main military backer, could be seen applauding throughout the speech.

Netanyahu has repeatedly used the 2023 attack, which killed at least 1,139 people, to justify continuing the war in Gaza, which has to date killed more than 65,000 people, according to local health authorities.

Denial of genocide

Holding a map titled “The Curse” as a visual aide, he listed off the enemies Israel had dealt with around the region, including Gaza, Yemen, Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Iraqi militia.

He denied Israel was committing genocide in Gaza, as a UN inquiry and a growing number of experts have found, saying Israel’s military would not tell them to evacuate if they were trying to commit genocide.

“Would a country committing genocide plead with the civilian population it is supposedly targeting to get out of harm’s way?” he said.

He also denied Israel was deliberately starving the population of Gaza, where famine has been recorded, blaming Hamas for stealing aid into the territory and selling it to finance the war.

Western allies ‘caved’

Netanyahu was particularly scathing of Israel’s Western allies, who have increasingly condemned its actions in Gaza and recognised a Palestinian state in a bid to bring about pressure to end the war.

“Giving the Palestinians a state one mile from Jerusalem after October 7 is like giving al-Qaeda a state one mile from New York City after September 11,” Netanyahu said.

He said that “when the going got tough,” many Western countries had “caved”, condemning rather than supporting Israel in response to what he said was pressure from a hostile media, “anti-Semitic mobs” and radical Islamist constituents.

Addressing Western leaders, he said, “You know deep down that Israel is fighting your fight,” and claimed, without evidence, that behind closed doors, leaders had thanked him for his country’s efforts in securing the world from terror.

WASHINGTON — The White House is telling agencies to prepare large-scale firings of federal workers if the government shuts down next week.

In a memo released Wednesday night, the Office of Management and Budget said agencies should consider a reduction in force for federal programs whose funding would lapse next week, are not otherwise funded and are “not consistent with the President’s priorities.” That would be a much more aggressive step than in previous shutdowns, when federal workers not deemed essential were furloughed but returned to their jobs once Congress approved government spending.

A reduction in force would not only lay off employees but eliminate their positions, which would trigger yet another massive upheaval in a federal workforce that has already faced major rounds of cuts this year due to efforts from the White House’s cost-cutting team the Department of Government Efficiency, and elsewhere in the Trump administration.

Once any potential government shutdown ends, agencies are asked to revise their reduction in force plans “as needed to retain the minimal number of employees necessary to carry out statutory functions,” according to the memo, which was first reported by Politico.

This move from OMB significantly increases the consequences of a potential government shutdown next week and escalates pressure on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. The two leaders have kept nearly all of their Democratic lawmakers united against a clean funding bill pushed by President Trump and congressional Republicans that would keep the federal government operating for seven more weeks, demanding immediate improvements to healthcare in exchange for their votes.

In statements issued shortly after the memo was released, the two Democrats showed no signs of budging.

“We will not be intimidated by your threat to engage in mass firings,” Jeffries wrote in a post on X. “Get lost.”

Jeffries called Russ Vought, the head of OMB, a “malignant political hack.”

Schumer said in a statement that the OMB memo is an “attempt at intimidation” and predicted the “unnecessary firings will either be overturned in court or the administration will end up hiring the workers back.”

OMB noted that it held its first planning call with other federal agencies earlier this week to plan for a shutdown. The budget office plays point in managing federal government shutdowns, particularly planning for them ahead of time. Past budget offices have also posted shutdown contingency plans — which would outline which agency workers would stay on the job during a government shutdown and which would be furloughed — on its website, but this one has not.

The memo noted that congressional Democrats are refusing to support a clean government funding bill “due to their partisan demands,” which include an extension of enhanced health insurance subsidies set to expire at the end of the year, plus a reversal of Medicaid cuts that were included in Republicans’ big tax and spending cuts law.

“As such, it has never been more important for the Administration to be prepared for a shutdown if the Democrats choose to pursue one,” the memo reads, which also notes that the GOP’s signature law, a major tax and border spending package, gives “ample resources to ensure that many core Trump administration priorities will continue uninterrupted.”

OMB noted that it had asked all agencies to submit their plans in case of a government shutdown by Aug. 1.

“OMB has received many, but not all, of your submissions,” it added. “Please send us your updated lapse plans ASAP.”

Kim writes for the Associated Press.

“The dawn of freedom will emerge, and the flag of Palestine will fly high in our skies.”
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was applauded by the UN General Assembly after he vowed Palestinians will not leave their homeland.

A travel expert has provided a list of several important travel tips to make your trip to Paris run more smoothly, claiming ‘no-one tells you’ about them elsewhere

If your debating whether to take a trip to Paris , an expert claims there are a number of things “no-one tells you” about the City of Love that may help sway your decision. Tonya Bullock of Crossroads Travel Agency, who has visited the French capital on eight occasions, took to TikTok to share her advice.

She began by pointing out that whilst Parisian shops and restaurants take card payments, you should still take Euros in cash “just in case”. Tonya added that unlike some countries, tipping is optional as a service charge is usually included in the cost within a bill.

No doubt if you are heading to Paris, you will be keen to snap up some authentic French breads and pastries – and if that’s the case, Tonya suggests avoiding any “Instagram hype” and instead look for local, independent boulangeries.

When it comes to the city’s many museums, meanwhile, Tonya advised that entry to these is free of charge on the first Sunday of every month, whilst EU residents under the age of 26 can take advantage of not having to pay whatsoever. “Many museums offer evening hours – smaller crowds and magical light,” she added.

Of course Paris’ most famous sight and attraction is the Eifel Tower – another “magical” experience Tonya suggests, advising that it “sparkles every hour after sunset – but only for five minutes”.

As an alternative, however, Tonya recommends visiting the “less crowded” Notre Dame Cathedral towers or those of Basilique du Sacré-Cœur de Montmartre to get that perfect city view.

In addition, you take in the cityscape free of charge from the rooftop at Galeries Lafayette – an upmarket department store found on Boulevard Haussmann in the 9th arrondissement of Paris.

As for the Arc de Triomphe monument, meanwhile, the expert urges visitors to “use the walkway tunnel” and avoid trying to cross the Champs-Élysées avenue street.

More tourism tips followed in the form of Louvre Museum – where queues can be “skipped” should you use the “lesser-known” Carrousel entrance underground, according to Tonya.

When dining out, meanwhile, she has a simple suggestion to save you more money. “Water is free in most restaurants and cafes,” she said. “As for ‘une carafe d’eau’ [a carafe of water]’.”

However, she continued: “Coffee culture is different – espresso is standard, whereas cappuccinos are “mostly for tourists”. And when it comes to your meal, you are better off dining inside any restaurant as outside seats tend to be “pricier”.

Writing in response, one TikTok user sought further advice from Tonya, asking: “What is the best thing to carry your money/ID/ cards to prevent pickpocketing?”

To which she revealed: “The biggest thing is try to keep items on your front! NEVER wear your backpack on back or have a basic purse on shoulder. Keep things out of your back pockets too.”

Whilst a second person asked: “How do I tell who are locals? I’m totally clueless. I’ve seen multiple posts saying they dress to blend in and not stand out.”

Tonya explained: “I’d say fashion is a big one. We always like to play a game while sitting outside at a brasserie to identify if the person walking in front of us was Parisian or an American tourist. Not hard and fast rules but: no shorts/capris no athleisure layers – scarves, blazers, heavy jackets, etc.

“Especially when temperatures start to get a little cooler it’s crazy how they bundle up. For where to eat, I’d avoid anything near a major tourist attraction – all the restaurants will mark up and not good. Find a boulangerie off the beaten path that is literally just a counter – the best ones will typically be busy in the morning and mostly speaking in French.”

Brazil’s president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has dismissed criticism from the United States over the conviction of the country’s former leader, Jair Bolsonaro, on coup charges, and slammed Washington’s sweeping tariffs as “misguided” and “illogical”.

The comments, published in an op-ed in The New York Times on Sunday, came as Bolsonaro made his first public appearance since last week’s conviction for a hospital visit.

In his essay, Lula said he wanted to establish “an open and frank dialogue” with US President Donald Trump over his administration’s decision to impose a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian products in the wake of Bolsonaro’s trial.

He noted that the US has a trade surplus with Brazil, accumulating a surplus of $410bn in trade over the past 15 years, making it “clear that the motivation of the White House is political”.

The tariffs, Lula wrote, are aimed at seeking “impunity” for Bolsanaro, whom he accused of orchestrating the riots in Brasilia on January 8, 2023, when the former leader’s supporters stormed the presidential palace, the Supreme Court and the Congress in protest over his election defeat the previous year.

The events in the Brazilian capital echoed the storming of the US Capitol by Trump’s supporters on January 6, 2021, after he insisted for months, without evidence, that there had been widespread fraud during the election he lost to his Democratic rival, Joe Biden.

Lula described Bolsonaro’s actions as “an effort to subvert the popular will at the ballot box” and said he was proud of the Brazilian Supreme Court’s “historic decision” on Thursday to sentence the former president to 27 years and three months in prison.

“This was not a ‘witch hunt’,” he wrote.

Instead, it “safeguards” Brazil’s institutions and the democratic rule of law, he added.

Brazil’s democracy ‘not on table’

Lula’s op-ed comes after Trump’s secretary of state, Marco Rubio, threatened more action against Brazil over Bolsonaro’s conviction. In addition to the tariffs, the US has so far sanctioned Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has overseen Bolsonaro’s trial, and revoked visas for most of the high court’s justices.

For his part, Trump, who has repeatedly labelled the judicial proceedings a “witch-hunt”, has said he was “surprised” by the ruling. The US president, who also had faced criminal charges over the Capitol attack before they were withdrawn following his re-election, likened the trial against Bolsonaro to the legal actions against him.

“It’s very much like they tried to do with me, but they didn’t get away with it,” Trump told reporters on Thursday, describing the former leader as a “good president” and a “good man”.

In his op-ed, Lula said the US’s decision to turn its back on a relationship of more than 200 years means that “everyone loses” and said the two countries should continue to work together in areas where they have common goals.

But he said Brazil’s democracy was non-negotiable.

“President Trump, we remain open to negotiating anything that can bring mutual benefits. But Brazil’s democracy and sovereignty are not on the table,” he wrote.

Economists in Brazil estimate that Trump’s tariffs would hurt the country’s economy, including through the loss of tens of thousands of jobs, but not derail it, given its strong trade ties with other countries such as China. The blow has further been softened when the US granted hundreds of exceptions, including on aircraft parts and orange juice.

US consumers, too, are paying more for products imported from Brazil, including coffee, which has already seen recent price rises due to droughts.

In Brasilia, meanwhile, Bolsonaro, who is under house arrest, left his home to undergo a medical procedure to remove several skin lesions.

His doctor, Claudio Birolini, told reporters that the former president had eight skin lesions removed and sent for biopsies.

He added that Bolsonaro, who has had multiple operations in recent years due to complications from a 2018 stabbing in his stomach, was “quite weak” and had developed slight anaemia, “probably due to poor nutrition over the last month”.

Dozens of supporters gathered outside the hospital to cheer on the former leader, waving Brazilian flags and shouting, “Amnesty now!”.

The chant is in reference to the push of Bolsonaro’s allies in Congress to grant the former president some kind of amnesty.

“We’re here to provide spiritual and psychological support,” Deuselis Filho, 46, told the Associated Press news agency.

Thursday’s sentence does not mean that Bolsonaro will immediately go to prison.

The court panel now has up to 60 days to publish the ruling. Once it does, Bolsonaro’s lawyers have five days to file motions for clarification.

His lawyers have said that they will try to appeal both the conviction and sentence before the full Supreme Court of 11 justices, although some experts think it is unlikely to be accepted.

Move over, Superman! The only thing more powerful than a locomotive at the moment is the U.S. stock market, which, seemingly faster than a speeding bullet, has rallied to new heights.

When the closing bell tolled on Sept. 11, the benchmark S&P 500 (^GSPC -0.05%), iconic Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI -0.59%), and growth stock-dependent Nasdaq Composite (^IXIC 0.44%) all catapulted to record closing highs. Everything from the evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) — a potentially $15.7 trillion global addressable opportunity by 2030, according to PwC — to the growing prospect of a Federal Reserve rate cut in September has fueled optimism and risk-taking.

But the tricky thing about Wall Street is that when things seem too good to be true, they usually are.

President Trump delivering remarks. Image source: Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead, courtesy of the National Archives.

While a lot of attention is currently being paid to President Donald Trump’s tariff and trade policy and how it might adversely impact the U.S. economy by influencing the prevailing rate of inflation, there’s a far more sinister concern waiting in the wings, based on what history tells us.

Donald Trump’s tariff and trade policy is in the spotlight

Although the S&P 500, Dow Jones, and Nasdaq Composite have soared year to date, things looked a lot different in early April. Following the close of trading on April 2, President Trump unveiled his widely touted trade policy, which included a 10% global base tariff, as well as the implementation of higher “reciprocal tariffs” on dozens of countries deemed to have adverse trade imbalances with America. The stock market plunged in the subsequent days, with the S&P 500 tallying its fifth-steepest two-day decline since 1950.

To be fair, what Trump unveiled on April 2 and the current tariff policies in place today look markedly different. A number of countries/regions have hashed out trade deals with America, and the president has delayed the implementation date of reciprocal tariffs for select countries.

Additionally, there’s no guarantee Trump’s tariffs will legally remain in place. In November, the Supreme Court will consider the validity of the president’s tariffs following an appeal from the Trump administration after lower courts ruled most of his tariffs were illegal.

Despite these uncertainties, worry about Donald Trump’s tariff and trade policy, specifically pertaining to its effect on inflation, is heightened.

The domestic rate of inflation has moved decisively higher as the president’s tariffs take effect. US Inflation Rate data by YCharts.

In the three months since Trump’s tariffs began having a discernable impact on the U.S. economy, the inflation rate, as measured by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), jumped from 2.35% to 2.92%. It’s quite the jump, and it’s certainly raising eyebrows amid a weakening job market.

The biggest issue with Trump’s tariff policy, as told by four New York Federal Reserve economists who published a study in December 2024 for Liberty Street Economics, is that it does a poor job of separating output and input tariffs.

In their study, Do Import Tariffs Protect U.S. Firms?, the four New York Fed economists examined the impact of Trump’s China tariffs in 2018-2019 on the U.S. economy and businesses. What they found was added pricing pressure on domestic manufacturers caused by the China trade war. Whereas output tariffs are placed on finished products, an input tariff is a duty for a good used to complete the manufacture of a product in the U.S. This type of tariff runs the risk of increasing production costs and reigniting the prevailing rate of inflation.

While some degree of pricing power is a good thing for businesses, the inflationary ramp-up we’ve witnessed over the previous three months is a bit concerning.

Image source: Getty Images.

Wall Street’s ticking time bomb is nearing historic levels

But even though Donald Trump’s tariffs are pretty consistently in the headlines, they’re not Wall Street’s biggest concern. Based on historical precedent, valuation is the ticking time bomb ready to pull the rug out from beneath the S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and Nasdaq Composite at any moment.

Truth be told, there isn’t a one-size-fits-all blueprint when it comes to valuing stocks. That you might find a stock to be expensive while another investor believes it to be a bargain is precisely what makes the stock market a market in the first place.

However, there’s one valuation tool that leaves little interpretative wiggle room: the S&P 500’s Shiller price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio, also referred to as the cyclically adjusted P/E (CAPE) ratio.

The most familiar of all valuation tools is the P/E ratio, which divides a company’s share price by its trailing-12-month earnings per share (EPS). While this is a handy valuation measure for mature businesses, it often fails to pass muster during recessions and for high-growth companies. This isn’t a problem for the S&P 500’s Shiller P/E since it’s based on average inflation-adjusted EPS over the prior 10 years. It means shock events have minimal impact on the Shiller P/E ratio.

When back-tested 154 years to January 1871, the Shiller P/E has averaged a multiple of 17.28. As of the closing bell on Sept. 11, it clocked in at 39.58, which is the highest reading during the current bull market and the third-priciest multiple during a continuous bull market in over 150 years. The only two times the CAPE ratio has been higher are when it fractionally topped 40 during the first week of January 2022 and when it peaked at its all-time high of 44.19 in December 1999.

S&P 500 Shiller CAPE Ratio data by YCharts. CAPE Ratio = cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio.

Admittedly, the S&P 500’s Shiller P/E isn’t a timing tool. Just because stocks are historically pricey, it doesn’t mean a game-changing innovation like artificial intelligence can’t keep valuations at nosebleed levels for months, perhaps even a few years. However, history is unmistakably clear in showing that premium valuations eventually end in short-term disaster.

Including the present, there have been six instances since 1871 where the Shiller P/E ratio has topped 30 for at least a two-month period. Following each of the previous five instances, the S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and/or Nasdaq Composite tumbled between 20% and 89%. While the 89% is an outlier for the Dow during the Great Depression, plunges of 50% or more are not out of the question, as was witnessed during the bursting of the dot-com bubble in the early 2000s.

If there’s a silver lining for this ticking time bomb, it’s that bear markets are historically short-lived.

In June 2023, Bespoke Investment Group calculated the calendar-day length of every S&P 500 bull and bear market dating back to the start of the Great Depression in September 1929. Bespoke found that the average length of 27 documented S&P 500 bear markets was just 286 calendar days, or less than 10 months. In comparison, the average bull market stuck around for 3.5 times as long, or 1,011 calendar days.

Even though history is quite clear that trouble is brewing on Wall Street, long-term investors remain in the driver’s seat.

For most people, birthdays are spent as a celebration with those who are closest to you and it was always that way for me – but this year, I wanted a change and it served me in more ways I could’ve imagined

I’ve always admired people who travel solo. For me, it’s nerve-wracking enough to go out to eat alone – I never thought I’d be brave enough to do it, not at this point in my life. But for my 26th birthday, I booked a ticket, and I don’t regret it.

Birthdays are odd days. You look forward to them, make plans with those closest to you, and yet, without fail, someone lets you down. Last year, I decided enough was enough and decided to give myself the gift I’d been waiting for.

I didn’t let the fear from my family members hold me back either. I booked a trip to Turkey, leaving no time for anyone to talk me out of it.

READ MORE: Eggs keep fresh ‘for weeks longer’ when stored in 1 common kitchen placeREAD MORE: ‘I made more than £70,000 in under 12 hours – and it’s all thanks to TikTok’

And I know I’m not alone in this. Solo holidays are trending right now, and for good reason. In a report by American Express, solo travel is shown to be a major trend among young travellers, with 76% of Millennials and Gen-Z planning solo trips in 2025.

Now, social media is full of people documenting their solo trips, and it’s giving others the push to try it for themselves. In my experience, as soon as I reached my hotel, I knew I’d made the right decision.

Paloma Orenda in Antalya was beautiful, and the staff went out of their way to make me feel seen. They gave me my own itinerary, booked me into restaurants, surprised me with a birthday massage, and reserved two days in a private cabana.

It wasn’t just the thoughtful gestures that I appreciated – every staff member was friendly, the food was great and the hotel was beautiful.

Going away alone brought its own challenges. I started strong with a whole row of seats to myself on the flight, but once there, eating alone or finding a sun lounger solo felt daunting.

The first few days were tricky. But once I got out of my head, I realised no one cared. People had spent good money on their holidays – they weren’t watching me. In fact, I might have been the person they admired, the one brave enough to go it alone.

For more stories like this subscribe to our weekly newsletter, The Weekly Gulp, for a curated roundup of trending stories, poignant interviews, and viral lifestyle picks from The Mirror’s Audience U35 team delivered straight to your inbox.

On my actual birthday, I had a massage and spent time at my cabana. It was set apart from the noise, shaded by trees, the sun warming the cushions. For the first time, the day truly felt mine.

I stayed in my own space and it was freeing. I enjoyed it far more than I ever expected. I remember sitting in a restaurant, glancing around nervously as I took the first bite. I braced for stares that never came – everyone was wrapped up in their own moments. That’s when I realised how much of my fear was in my head.

Now I understand why solo trips are essential. Yes, as a woman, and a Black woman at that, there’s always a fear about safety. But if I’d let those thoughts stop me, I’d never have stepped out of my comfort zone.

I admire people who go on solo holidays – and now I know anyone can do it. Looking back, I realise the best gift I gave myself at 26 was learning that my own company is enough. Gratitude has a funny way of softening loneliness.

Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We’d love to hear from you!

Israeli forces bomb more high-rise buildings in Gaza City as Netanyahu warns that this is the opening of the main operation to seize it.

Beat the Chasers is back and in an exclusive first look clip host Bradley Walsh has a question for the Chasers

Beat the Chasers is back for a brand new episode on Sunday night where Bradley Walsh has a question for the Chasers.

The hit ITV gameshow series sees contestants take on the Chasers in a bid to win big money and it’s currently airing its seventh season.

In an exclusive clip of this Sunday’s show (Sunday 7 September) it sees host Bradley Walsh ask The Chasers — Mark Labbett, Shaun Wallace, Anne Hegerty, Paul Sinha, Jenny Ryan, Darragh Ennis — a very “important” question…

Bradley, 65, says: “Let me ask you this, when they make Beat the Chasers the movie, who will play you, Governess [Anne’s Chaser name]…”

To which Anne, 67, responds: “I’m holding out for Margot Robbie” with Bradley quipping: “Aren’t we all!” as the audience bursts out laughing.

Anne continues: “She’s going to have to scrub up a bit but I think she’s got the basics!”

Bradley then says: “Yes, thank you, Vixen?” as he moves onto fellow Chaser Jenny Ryan who replies: “I think the key thing for a Beat the Chasers movie would be [who would play you]?” Viewers will have to tune in on Sunday night to see the rest of the stars’ answers.

It comes as Beat the Chasers star Mark quipped “I’ll get my coat” and made his exit after a contestant snatched a staggering £100,000 from under his nose in an episode on Sunday August 31.

Meanwhile host Bradley recently cautioned that he would be “fired” from The Chase if he implemented any major alterations on the hit ITV series.

The cherished host has fronted the ITV quiz show since it launched in 2009, and has graced our screens again with a fresh new series. Ahead of the new series’ release last month, Bradley assured viewers it won’t differ from the usual format.

Whilst appearing on The One Show back on Friday 15 August, Bradley faced questions about his hectic timetable.

“You’ve got The Chase coming up, you’ve got Beat The Chasers as well, anything different we can expect from these series?” presenter Clara Amfo enquired.

To which Bradley promptly responded: “No they’re the same, they’re what you see on the tin. I’m not allowed to do anything different, I think I’d get fired if I did anything different. You’ve got to stick to the rules, and stick to the format.”

He continued: “You can have a laugh in between.”

Beat the Chasers airs Sundays at 8pm on ITV1 and ITV X.

In one of his first company-wide directives, Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison announced that employees must work in the office five days a week, beginning in January.

In a Thursday email, Ellison outlined the company’s phased-in approach for office attendance — including offering a severance package to Los Angeles- and New York-based vice presidents and lower-ranking employees if they wish to leave the company rather than return to the office.

The move sets the stage for what’s expected to be deep staff cuts later this year. Ellison and his RedBird Capital Partners investors have promised Wall Street more than $2 billion in cost savings as they take over the storied media company, install their own teams and integrate Skydance Media businesses, including video games and animation, into Paramount’s operations. Paramount previously cut several hundred jobs this summer.

Paramount representatives have declined to comment on the pending layoffs beyond saying they hope to achieve the cuts with one large round.

The Ellison family and RedBird finalized their $8-billion takeover of Paramount last month after months of turmoil as federal regulators chewed over the deal until Paramount agreed to pay President Trump $16 million to settle his lawsuit over “60 Minutes” interview edits.

Since then, Ellison and his lieutenants have moved quickly to remake Paramount with big bets, including agreeing to pay $7.7 billion for media rights to UFC’s mixed martial arts events in the U.S. in a seven-year deal with TKO Group Holdings. The company also invested in the construction of a Texas-based production hub for prolific “Yellowstone” creator Taylor Sheridan. It agreed to pay $1.5 billion over five years for streaming rights for “South Park,” the Comedy Central cartoon.

On Thursday, Paramount said it had reached a three-year global film distribution deal with “Dune” studio Legendary, beginning with next year’s “Street Fighter.” Paramount will market and distribute Legendary films throughout the world, except in China, where Legendary East oversees releases.

Financial terms were not disclosed. The deal allows Warner Bros. to continue to distribute some films, including co-productions “Dune: Part Three” in 2026 and “Godzilla x Kong: Supernova” in 2027.

CBS News also is bracing for change. Paramount’s new chief is reportedly in negotiations with journalist Bari Weiss to buy her center-right news site, the Free Press, and join CBS News in an undisclosed role. A Paramount spokesperson on Thursday declined to comment on the talks.

Until now, Paramount staffers were expected to be in the office a couple days a week, but it was not consistently applied, according to people with knowledge of the matter but not authorized to comment.

Ellison is attempting to reset Paramount’s culture after years of under-investment, layoffs and management turmoil. In the email, he wrote the return-to-office directive was aimed at “building a stronger, more connected, and agile organization that can deliver on our goals and compete at the highest level.”

“We have a lot to accomplish and we’re moving fast,” Ellison said. “We need to all be rowing in the same direction. And especially when you’re dealing with a creative business like ours, that begins with being together in person.”

Media companies have had varying policies after the initial “work-from-home” policies imposed at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic nearly five and a half years ago. Sony Pictures Entertainment brought its employees back to the Culver City lot relatively quickly. Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger ordered a return to the office in January 2023, less than two months after he returned to lead the company.

“As I said during our town hall, some of the most formative moments of my life happened in rooms where I was a fly on the wall, listening and learning,” Ellison wrote in his email. “I’ve never seen that happen on Zoom. Being together in-person isn’t just about showing up — it’s about actively engaging with the business, supporting one another and the team’s efforts, and contributing to our shared momentum.”

Times Staff Writer Sam Masunaga contributed to this report.

On his Money Saving Expert (MSE) website, finance guru Martin Lewis outlined how passengers could be owed hundreds of pounds

Holidaymakers who jetted off this summer could potentially claim up to £520 in compensation. A financial expert has revealed that travellers whose flights were disrupted might be entitled to substantial pay-outs.

On his Money Saving Expert (MSE) website, finance guru Martin Lewis outlined how passengers could be owed hundreds of pounds. Compensation is available if your flight to or from a UK or EU airport was delayed by a specific amount of time. If your flight was scrapped, you might also qualify for monetary compensation alongside a replacement flight.

Writing for MSE, Martin posed the question: “Did you have a flight delayed or cancelled this summer? You may be due fixed compensation of up to £520 per person.”

READ MORE: Martin Lewis’ MSE issues new warning to anyone who had a summer jobREAD MORE: Santander, Lloyds and Nationwide customers can claim £190 before deadline in September

The flight doesn’t necessarily need to be recent – if it occurred within the past six years (or five years for Scottish departures) you could still secure a payout, reports the Liverpool Echo.

Martin explained that to be eligible, your flight must have:

• Been any flight from a UK/EU airport, or a flight to a UK/EU airport, but in the latter case, it must also have been on a UK/EU airline
• Landed three or more hours late to be considered delayed
• Been cancelled less than 14 days before it was due to fly
• Been the airline’s fault, so not bad weather, or issues with air traffic control – though airline staffing or servicing issues or knock-on delays due to previous flights usually do count

Martin noted: “The amount you are due is fixed depending on the length of the flight and delay. For some family long-haul flights, it can be £1,000s.”

MSE provided additional details, explaining: “Compensation under EU and UK rules is designed to makeup for the inconvenience of a delay – it’s not a refund of the flight ticket cost. So the amount you’ll get is fixed depending on the amount of time you were delayed and how far you were travelling.

“Crucially, it’s about when you arrive, not when you leave. You’ll start being eligible for compensation if your flight arrives three hours (or more) later than scheduled. So if you’re on a flight that takes off four hours late but lands two hours 55 minutes late, you won’t be eligible.” The arrival time is deemed to be when at least one of the aircraft doors opens.

What amount of compensation might you be able to claim?

Should your flight be cancelled, you ought to be offered either a replacement flight to your destination or a full refund. You may also be entitled to as much as £520 in compensation, according to MSE.

One MSE reader called Linda was motivated last year to attempt claiming money back for a delayed flight, and secured a total of £1,040. In an email she revealed: “I just wanted to thank you for your article on flight delay compensation.

“It triggered my memory of a delayed flight last November and I went straight on to the British Airways website and filled in the short form. It was so easy and a couple of weeks later I received an email advising that an amount of £520 per person would be paid into my account.

“We received £1,040 in total. What a result. Thanks to all the information on Martin Lewis’s site.” For further details, visit the MSE website.