Fans believe 'Ted Lasso' star and Kansas City native Jason Sudeikis helped bring Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift together

USA Gymnastics and Nike have reached an agreement on a sponsorship deal that will carry through the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics

The two biggest economies and polluters need to work together to avert the crisis, experts say.

JAKARTA Indonesia's annual inflation inched up in August, but was below market expectations and still within the central

Tottenham have condemned the racist abuse received by defender Destiny Udogie following Saturday’s home Premier League win against Liverpool. Udogie, 20, was the target of several racist slurs on social media following Tottenham’s controversial 2-1 home victory after being involved in Liverpool forward Diogo Jota’s dismissal. Jota was shown two yellow cards for two separate second-half challenges on the Tottenham left-back within the space of a minute. Tottenham said on their official website: “We are disgusted at the racist messages directed towards Destiny Udogie on social media following Saturday’s game against Liverpool. “We will work with the Premier League and, where possible, take action against any individual we are able to identify. We stand with you, Destiny.” Liverpool also vowed to help identify the perpetrators, saying in a statement posted on X, formerly known as Twitter: “Liverpool FC condemns all forms of racism and discrimination and will work with the relevant authorities and social media platforms to help identify those responsible and apply the strongest possible consequences.” Tottenham won the game 2-1 thanks to Joel Matip’s stoppage-time own goal after Cody Gakpo had cancelled out Son Heung-min’s first-half opener. Liverpool defender Curtis Jones was shown a straight red in the first half after VAR intervention for a foul on Yves Bissouma and the visitors were incensed when Luis Diaz’s opening goal was incorrectly ruled out for offside. PGMOL later issued a statement admitting that a “significant human error” had taken place by VAR officials in their decision not to award the goal. Read More Liverpool to ‘explore options’ in response to ‘unacceptable’ VAR error

Ancient clay tablets unearthed from ancient ruins in Turkey by archaeologists have revealed a language lost to the passages of time. The new language was discovered in the ancient capital of the Hittite Empire at Hattusa (known as Boğazköy-Hattusha). The well-preserved tablets are among many incredible artworks found at the site - a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Over the past four decades, researchers have dusted off nearly 30,000 unique tablets - with most written in Hittite. New research, however, shows that some of the tablet haul shows that they are written in a language previously unknown to modern man. Of course, the meaning and words of this language have not been deciphered, but it appears from early inspection to branch off from languages used within the Hittite Empire - and is being referred to as Kalašma. archaeologist Interestingly though, researchers from the Istanbul Department of the German Archaeological Institute have noted that the new language is found within a recitation in a 'cultic ritual text'. While that's usually the basis of a middling horror movie, we're certain that there's nothing to worry about - it stems from an ancient Hittite practice. Professor Daniel Schwemer explains that the discovery wasn't unexpected. "The Hittites were uniquely interested in recording rituals in foreign languages," he said. These ritual texts provide insight into little-known languages, and thanks to this discovery, one more has been added to the list. Sign up for 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.

As former President Donald Trump prepares for a momentous court appearance Tuesday on charges related to the hoarding of top-secret documents, Republican allies are amplifying, without evidence, claims that he is the target of a political prosecution. To press their case, Trump's backers are citing the Justice Department's decision in 2016 not to bring charges against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent in that year's presidential race, over her handling of classified information. His supporters also are invoking a separate classified documents investigation concerning President Joe Biden to allege a two-tier system of justice that is punishing Trump, the undisputed early front-runner for the GOP's 2024 White House nomination, for conduct that Democrats have engaged in. "Is there a different standard for a Democratic secretary of state versus a former Republican president?” said Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Trump primary rival. “I think there needs to be one standard of justice in this country.” But those arguments overlook abundant factual and legal differences — chiefly relating to intent, state of mind and deliberate acts of obstruction — that limit the value of any such comparisons. A look at the Clinton, Biden and Trump investigations and what separates them: WHAT DID CLINTON DO? Clinton relied on a private email system for the sake of convenience during her time as the Obama administration's top diplomat. That decision came back to haunt her when, in 2015, the intelligence agencies' internal watchdog alerted the FBI to the presence of potentially hundreds of emails containing classified information. FBI investigators would ultimately conclude that Clinton sent and received emails containing classified information on that unclassified system, including information classified at the top-secret level. Of the roughly 30,000 emails turned over by Clinton's representatives, the FBI has said, 110 emails in 52 email chains were found to have classified information, including some at the top-secret level. After a roughly yearlong inquiry, the FBI closed out the investigation in July 2016, finding that Clinton did not intend to break the law. The bureau reopened the inquiry months later, 11 days before the presidential election, after discovering a new batch of emails. After reviewing those communications, the FBI again opted against recommending charges. WHAT IS TRUMP ACCUSED OF DOING? The indictment filed by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith alleges that when Trump left the White House after his term ended in January 2021, he took hundreds of classified documents with him to his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago — and then repeatedly impeded efforts by the government he once oversaw to get the records back. The material that Trump retained, prosecutors say, related to American nuclear programs, weapons and defense capabilities of the United States and foreign countries and potential vulnerabilities to an attack — information that, if exposed, could jeopardize the safety of the military and human sources. Beyond just the hoarding of documents — in locations including a bathroom, ballroom, shower and his bedroom — the Justice Department says Trump showed highly sensitive material to visitors who without security clearances and obstructed the FBI by, among other things, directing a personal aide who was charged alongside him to move boxes around Mar-a-Lago to conceal them from investigators. Though Trump and his allies have claimed he could do with the documents as he pleased under the Presidential Records Act, the indictment makes short shrift of that argument and does not once reference that statute. All told, the indictment includes 37 felony counts against Trump, most under an Espionage Act pertaining to the willful retention of national defense information. WHAT SEPARATES THE CLINTON AND TRUMP CASES? A lot, but two important differences are in willfulness and obstruction. In an otherwise harshly critical assessment in which he condemned Clinton's email practices as “extremely careless,” then-FBI Director James Comey announced that investigators had found no clear evidence that Clinton or her aides had intended to break laws governing classified information. As a result, he said, “no reasonable prosecutor" would move forward with a case. The relevant Espionage Act cases brought by the Justice Department over the past century, Comey said, all involved factors including efforts to obstruct justice, willful mishandling of classified documents and the exposure of vast quantities of records. None of those factors existed in the Clinton investigation, he said. That is in direct contrast to the allegations against Trump, who prosecutors say was involved in the packing of boxes to go to Mar-a-Lago and then actively took steps to conceal the classified documents from investigators. The indictment accuses him, for instance, of suggesting that a lawyer hide documents demanded by a Justice Department subpoena or falsely represent that all requested records had been turned over, even though more than 100 remained. The indictment repeatedly cites Trump's own words against him to make the case that he understood what he was doing and what the law did and did not permit him to do. It describes a July 2021 meeting at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, which he showed off a Pentagon “plan of attack” to people without the security clearances to view the material and proclaimed that “as president, I could have declassified it.” “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret,” the indictment quotes him as saying. That conversation, captured by an audio recording, is likely to be a powerful piece of evidence to the extent that it undercuts Trump's oft-repeated claims that he had declassified the documents he brought with him to Mar-a-Lago. WHERE DOES BIDEN FIT IN? The White House disclosed in January that, two months earlier, a lawyer for Biden had located what it said was a “small number” of classified documents from his time as vice president during a search of the Washington office space of Biden's former institute. The documents were turned over to the Justice Department. Lawyers for Biden subsequently located an additional batch of classified documents at Biden's home in Wilmington, Delaware, and the FBI found even more during a voluntary search of the property. The revelations were a humbling setback for Biden's efforts to draw a clear contrast between his handling of sensitive information and Trump's. Even so, as with Clinton, there are significant differences in the matters. Though Attorney General Merrick Garland in January named a second special counsel to investigate the Biden documents, no charges have been brought and, so far at least, no evidence has emerged to suggest that anyone intentionally moved classified documents or tried to impede the probe. While the FBI obtained a search warrant last August to recover additional classified documents, each of the Biden searches has been done voluntarily with his team's consent. The Justice Department, meanwhile, notified Trump's vice president, Mike Pence, earlier this month that it would not bring charges after the discovery of classified documents in his Indiana home. That case also involved no allegations of willful retention or obstruction. _____ Follow Eric Tucker on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP ___ More on Donald Trump-related investigations: https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement Jim Jordan rejects Trump statement suggesting Mar-a-Lago papers weren’t declassified Kimberly Guilfoyle posts chilling warning over Trump indictment Trump-appointed judge will stay on Mar-a-Lago documents case unless she recuses

NAIROBI (Reuters) -Iran's President Ebrahim Raisi received a red carpet welcome from Kenyan counterpart William Ruto on Wednesday as he

Championship clubs’ spending on wages exceeded revenue for a fifth successive season in 2021-22, according to a new report. Deloitte’s Annual Review of Football Finance found second-tier teams’ combined wages-to-revenue ratio was an astonishing 108 per cent, as clubs continued to chase the dream of reaching the Premier League. Nottingham Forest, who ultimately succeeded in reaching the top flight at the end of the 2021-22 season via the play-offs, spent almost 200 per cent more on wages than they earned in revenue – £58.6million compared to £29.3m – in their promotion year, according to figures in the Deloitte report. Championship clubs’ total revenue was up 13 per cent in 2021-22 compared to the season before, reaching £676million. However, while wage costs fell for a second consecutive year, they remained higher than revenue for the fifth season in a row. Tim Bridge, lead partner in Deloitte’s Sports Business Group, said: “The glamour of Premier League promotion is spearheading the continual drive for investment in Championship clubs, often in an unsustainable manner, driving some clubs to overstretch financially. “It is critical that long-term decisions are now made by clubs’ owners and, with the introduction of the independent regulator, focus will turn to improving the distribution mechanism of revenues between the leagues and clubs. “This must be accompanied by appropriate governance and financial controls to ensure that any proposed solution is suitable and sustainable.” EFL chairman Rick Parry believes the disparity in revenue between the Premier League and the Championship has created a “cliff edge” between the leagues, and argues parachute payments are also fuelling inequality within the Championship. Deloitte’s report underlines the value to clubs of reaching the Premier League. Relative to the 2022-23 season, it says revenue from broadcasters is expected to provide a minimum uplift of more than £90m for Luton, approximately £84m for Sheffield United and £54m for Burnley, with both of those two clubs in receipt of parachute payments whilst participating in the Championship. The report said that should a club suffer immediate relegation, assuming they are not in receipt of parachute payments at that point, under existing arrangements the parachute payments from the Premier League will continue to provide an uplift over the following two seasons of at least £80m. For a Championship club not otherwise in receipt of parachute payments, the value of promotion will be at least £170m across the next three seasons and, if a club survives their first season in the Premier League, they will be entitled to three seasons of parachute payments and the incremental revenue will be over £290m across five years. Discussions over a new financial settlement between the two leagues are ongoing. The Government said in its White Paper on football governance that a new regulator will be given backstop powers to impose a settlement if one cannot be agreed, but it is unlikely the regulator will be up and running until 2024-25 at the earliest. Parry accepts that reform of the distribution package has to go hand in hand with cost control measures, which are also part of the ongoing ‘New Deal For Football’ talks between the EFL, the Premier League and the Football Association. What we really want to see in the English game is a variety and diversity of clubs coming through the league at different points in time Tim Bridge, lead partner in Deloitte’s Sports Business Group Bridge believes it is vital for the leagues to see the common ground they share to resolve the dispute on distribution. “The point I would make is that the longevity of the Premier League and the ability for clubs to move up and down between the Premier League and the Championship and to achieve variety in those clubs is a good thing for the overall brand and the marketing position of English football,” he said. “Part of the beauty of the Premier League is always that any team can beat any other team. And so at any one point in time, what we really want to see in the English game is a variety and diversity of clubs coming through the league at different points in time, bringing new storylines, bringing new faces to the league because frankly that keeps it fresh.” Wage spending in the Premier League in 2021-22 grew by £192m compared to the previous season, but this was outpaced by a £586m increase in revenue, meaning the top flight’s wages-to-revenue ratio fell for the second consecutive season from 71 per cent to 67 per cent. That is still a significantly higher ratio than the average of the three seasons pre-pandemic up to 2018-19 – 58 per cent. Across Europe’s ‘Big Five’ leagues as a whole however, revenue growth was outpaced by wages, which stood at 12.3 billion euros (£10.5bn). This comes at a time when the continent’s football governing body UEFA has introduced new financial sustainability regulations, including a cost control rule which by 2025-26 will limit a club’s spending on wages, transfer fees and other player and coach costs at 70 per cent of turnover. UEFA could go even further in the future, with president Aleksander Ceferin raising the possibility of a Europe-wide salary cap in an interview in April.

The documentary focused on the prime minister's role in anti-Muslim violence in Gujarat in 2002.

From their boltholes in the trenches in the frontlines of Ukraine's battle to resist the Russian forces, Kyiv's troops expressed frustration that they...

Javier Báez had a two-run single in the first inning, All-Star Michael Lorenzen combined with three relievers on a four-hitter and the Detroit Tigers routed to the Oakland Athletics 9-0