Kai Cenat called out Adin Ross for lying about the contract that never came his way

LAKEVILLE, Minn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 21, 2023--

She disclosed that Goldberg had managed to persuade a fan to gift her a pair of glasses

Sources close to Sam Asghari said that he was often attacked by Britney Spears who had a violent temper and a knife obsession

A prominent Somali journalists' union says it is "deeply shaken" by Abdifatah Moalim Nur's death.

Deontay Wilder’s manager, Shelly Finkel, has said he is ‘optimistic’ that a fight between the “Bronze Bomber” and Anthony Joshua will take place early next year. Joshua knocked out Robert Helenius in the seventh round on Saturday (12 August), 10 months after Wilder stopped the Finn in Round 1, and a clash between the former heavyweight champions has never seemed closer. Joshua’s promoter, Eddie Hearn, has spoken positively about negotiations for months, while Finkel has commented on the situation less frequently. However, Finkel told Sky Sports on Tuesday (15 August): “I am optimistic that a deal can be made for Deontay to fight Joshua in early 2024.” The fight has been one of the most-anticipated in boxing since 2018, though Briton Joshua and his American counterpart have experienced mixed fortunes since. Joshua suffered his first professional loss in 2019 when he was stopped by Andy Ruiz Jr, and he has lost twice to Oleksandr Usyk since then. “AJ”, 33, has also outpointed Ruiz and Jermaine Franklin and knocked out Kubrat Pulev and Helenius in that time, though. Meanwhile, Wilder fought Tyson Fury to a controversial draw in late 2018 before suffering two knockout losses to the Briton. The 37-year-old has, however, knocked out Dominic Breazeale, Luis Ortiz and Helenius in the last four years. Click here to subscribe to The Independent’s Sport YouTube channel for all the latest sports videos. Read More Anthony Joshua has the blueprint to beat Deontay Wilder – is he brave enough to use it? Deontay Wilder’s coach reveals American’s reaction to Anthony Joshua knockout Tyson Fury promoter Frank Warren hits out at ‘boring’ Anthony Joshua performance

Pep Guardiola has lamented "annoying" new refereeing directives designed to combat time wasting during games.

Ohio concludes a hastily called and highly charged special election Tuesday, a contest that could determine the fate of abortion rights in the state and fuel political playbooks nationally heading into 2024. On the ballot is Issue 1, a proposal to raise the threshold for passing future changes to the state's constitution from a simple majority to 60%. But more passionately in the sights of the proposal's backers — including Republican officeholders — is a proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot that calls for enshrining access to reproductive care in the state's foundational document. The measure was clearly resonating with voters, who turned out in huge numbers during the early voting period, which ended Sunday. The number of advance ballots cast — a combination of mail and early in-person ballots — hit nearly 700,000, more than double the early vote during the state's two previous midterm primary elections in 2022 and 2018. Ohio's August elections have historically focused on local issues and been plagued with chronically low turnout. The Republican lawmakers who backed Issue 1 maintained that the measure was not about thwarting the fall abortion amendment, despite reinstating an August special election just like the ones they had only recently voted to eliminate. Raising the bar for passing citizen-led constitutional amendments could make it difficult, if not impossible, for the fall proposal to succeed, based on polling figures. Voters in several states, even deeply conservative ones, have affirmed abortion rights since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, though usually with less than 60% of the vote. AP VoteCast polling last year found that 59% of Ohio voters say abortion should generally be legal. Out-of-state money has poured into both sides of the contest over the 60% threshold, even as both supporters and opponents say one of their main goals is to keep special interests from having more influence over state policy than average Ohioans. The campaign in favor of Issue 1, Protect Our Constitution, has told voters that raising the threshold will keep deep-pocketed interest groups from pushing redistricting, gun control and minimum wage policies on Ohio. One Person One Vote, the opposition campaign, argues that raising the threshold for passing future amendments would prioritize the interests of Ohio's increasingly conservative GOP supermajority at the statehouse over those of everyday voters. But abortion rights are at the epicenter of the fight, as Ohio and other states have been given control of their own abortion policies following the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade last summer. Ohio's ban on most abortions had been placed on hold under Roe and then allowed to take effect briefly after the court overturned it. Since then, it has been frozen again while a challenge alleging it violates the state constitution plays out. The abortion amendment would give individuals the right to make their own reproductive health care decisions, including on contraception, fertility treatment, abortion and miscarriage care, until a fetus is viable outside the womb. At the same time, a broad bipartisan coalition opposes Issue 1 for other reasons. Former Ohio governors and attorneys general of both parties have come out against the constitutional change, calling it poor public policy. If passed it would reverse 111 years of direct democracy that has the potential to affect future citizen-led ballot efforts. Protect Women Ohio, the campaign against the fall abortion question, has spent millions on the August election — airing ads suggesting the measure not only codifies abortion, but could pressure children into receiving gender-affirming care and undercut parental rights. Several legal experts have said there is no language in the amendment supporting the ads' claims, but it follows a pattern through this election cycle of misinformation and fear-mongering being used to sway voters. Issue 1 opponents have aired ads and mobilized a large coalition, including voting rights, labor, faith and community groups, as well as the state Democratic Party. It was because of chronically low turnout that lawmakers voted just last year to scrap summer elections, prompting an unsuccessful lawsuit alleging this year's August special election violated the new law and calling further into question if it was brought back solely to thwart abortion rights for Ohioans. ___ The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content. ___ Samantha Hendrickson is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Read More Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Attacks at US medical centers show why health care is one of the nation's most violent fields Ohio election that revolves around abortion rights fueled by national groups, money Taylor Swift bracelet-trading trend makes way to Women’s World Cup in Australia

Private equity group Consortium Brand Partners announced Wednesday it has acquired actress Reese Witherspoon's fashion and lifestyle brand, Draper James, through a majority stake.

The White House and congressional Republicans have yet to reach a debt ceiling deal, and a US default looms. Business owners, and the rest of the country, are in wait-and-see mode, bracing for possible recession and job losses should a default happen.

Jordan Peterson has labelled a brown man a “Caucasian”, and has unsurprisingly been slammed for doing so. British-American broadcaster and author, Mehdi Hasan, responded to the outrageous statement made about him by Peterson yesterday. Peterson, the rightwing celebrity psychology professor, posted on X/ Twitter, on 27 August. He said that Hasan was “not really brown. More like a light tan. Just like ‘white’ people.” He added: “Plus you're a Caucasian. By definition. Buddy.” In response, Hasan posted: “Nothing to see here, just Jordan Peterson, a white man, telling me I’m not brown, I’m actually white. Also, how am I a Caucasian, ‘by definition’?” Hasan is a Brit who was born to Indian parents from Hyderabad in the south of the country. They emigrated to the UK before he was born. In 2021, he tweeted that he was "tired of people telling me that I shouldn't take any pride in my south Asian heritage today, or that it has any relevance to my political views". "There's a word for this and it starts with R," he added. Hasan moved to America in 2015 to work as a producer and presenter on news TV. Now, he hosts his own show on MSNBC. It is unclear what definition of the word "Caucasian" Peterson is referring to. The Cambridge Dictionary defines the word as “belonging to the races of people who have skin that is of a pale colour”. Peterson’s bizarre attack on Hasan’s heritage was a response to a monologue by the presenter on his TV show. Hasan criticised white American conservatives’ attitudes in the wake of a mass shooting in which a white person killed three black people with an assault rifle. “Tonight, this brown Muslim is asking the white conservative community to do the same: get your house in order, crack down on the hate preachers... condemn the right of white supremacist ideology,” he said. Peterson did not respond to Hasan’s most recent post. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

Icing has been a rule in the NHL for decades, but it still takes some explaining to new fans. What is icing, and why does it exist in the first place?