We have a curated list of the most noteworthy news from all across the globe. With any subscription plan, you get access to exclusive articles that let you stay ahead of the curve.
We have a curated list of the most noteworthy news from all across the globe. With any subscription plan, you get access to exclusive articles that let you stay ahead of the curve.
We have a curated list of the most noteworthy news from all across the globe. With any subscription plan, you get access to exclusive articles that let you stay ahead of the curve.
We have a curated list of the most noteworthy news from all across the globe. With any subscription plan, you get access to exclusive articles that let you stay ahead of the curve.
Prince Harry once famously described his brother and father as being ensnared in the “toxic” lifestyle of the British royal family, while expressing relief that he himself had managed to break free.
However, in a change of heart, it’s been confirmed by Page Six that Harry will be returning to the UK with Meghan Markle, along with their children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet.
In the high-profile interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021, Harry reflected on how he initially felt there was no escape from royal duties, a sentiment that propelled his departure in 2020.
“I was trapped but I didn’t know I was trapped,” Harry revealed during the interview. In expressing empathy for his family, he added, “Trapped within the system like the rest of the family. My father [King Charles III] and my brother [Prince William] are trapped. They don’t get to leave and I have huge compassion for that.”
When Oprah asked directly if William also had desires to leave the royal fold, Harry was cautious. “I don’t know — I can’t speak for him,” he answered.
Winfrey later asked why his father put up with such a “toxic environment,” to which Harry responded, “He’s had to make peace with it.”
Harry shared that watching his wife struggle with royal life made him rethink the way his family deals with things.
Here’s the latest on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s shocking move back to the U.K. after 6 years in the U.S.
“I went to a very dark place as well,” he recalled. “I wanted to be there for her. That’s just not a conversation that would be had. I guess I was ashamed of admitting it to them.”
He continued, “I don’t know whether they’ve had the same feelings or thoughts. I had no idea. It’s a very trapping environment that a lot of them have been stuck in. I didn’t have anyone to turn to.”
“You know we’ve got some very close friends that have been with us through this process, but for the family, they all had this mentality of ‘this is just how it is. You can’t change it. We’ve all been through it.’”
Harry, 41, and William, 44, have been experiencing tension since 2018, and their feud intensified after Harry’s multiple tell-all interviews and his 2022 Netflix doc “Harry & Meghan,” as well as his 2023 memoir, “Spare.”
The brothers’ current relationship remains “so broken,” an insider told People last month.
A second source said “there has been no movement, especially on William’s side. There is no contact.”
The Duke of Sussex, meanwhile, once said raising his children in the United States was a dream his late mother, Princess Diana, had for him.
“I feel as though it’s the life that my mom wanted for me,” he said at the 2024 New York Times DealBook Summit, of his 2020 move to Montecito, California, where he’s been raising his son and daughter with Markle.
“To be able to do the things I’m able to do with my kids that I undoubtedly wouldn’t be able to do in the UK, it’s huge,” he continued. “I’m hugely grateful for that.”
He said at the time that he planned to stay in the US indefinitely, adding, “I very much enjoy living here and bringing up my kids here.”
He also revealed earlier that year that he’d considered obtaining his US citizenship.
“The American citizenship is a thought that has crossed my mind but is certainly not something that is a high priority for me right now,” he said during an appearance on “Good Morning America.”
The family visited Princess Diana’s childhood home, Althorp, during their recent European getaway with their children last month.
Markle shared family photos of their visit to Diana’s ancestral estate via Instagram at the time, including pics of Archie, 7, and Lilibet, 5, wandering the fields of the property.
Harry’s mother is buried at Althorp on Oval Lake, a secluded island on the 15,0000-acre estate now owned by her brother, Charles Spencer.
Diana died in a horrific car accident in Paris in 1997.
The visit to Althorp came after Charles and Queen Camilla welcomed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their two children at Highgrove House, with the monarch seeing his grandchildren for the first time in four years.
Texas and Minnesota clash over extradition of ICE agent Christian Castro
Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison are embroiled in a contentious standoff over the potential extradition of ICE agent Christian Castro. Their disagreement centers on Castro’s legal proceedings and has sparked broader discussions regarding the balance of power between state jurisdictions and federal immigration law enforcement, as well as the accountability mechanisms for officers within those systems.
Probation officers in a southwestern county in Idaho have been assisting federal immigration officials by identifying foreign-born individuals on probation. However, these officers have forwarded names without independently confirming the legal status of the individuals in the United States.
In Canyon County, Idaho, over 140 emails from May to July 2026 reveal a coordinated effort between county probation officers and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The communications detail how officers have systematically assessed their case files to generate a list of foreign-born probationers, subsequently providing this information to ICE’s Boise office, as unearthed by InvestigateWest’s inquiry.
One interaction in May highlights this collaboration: a probation officer reached out to ICE regarding an individual scheduled for a routine probationary check-in.
“He’s due to appear for his appointment tomorrow morning at 7:30 a.m.,” Canyon County misdemeanor probation senior officer Norma Naranjo informed six ICE agents via an email dated May 13.
A southwestern Idaho county’s probation officers have been compiling a list of foreign-born people on probation for ICE agents.(Getty Images)
The next day, the man arrived for his appointment a few minutes early, and Naranjo contacted the ICE agents again to ask if they would be coming soon.
“He is here are you guys on your way?” she wrote.
It was unclear from the heavily redacted emails if ICE agents took the man into custody at his probation appointment, according to InvestigateWest.
The list compiled for ICE appeared to have been made without confirming that the people in question are in the country illegally. According to InvestigateWest, one probation officer said in an email that the names he submitted included everyone in his files who had reported being born outside the United States. Foreign birth alone does not indicate unlawful immigration status; foreign-born people can include naturalized U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, commonly known as green-card holders.
Idaho law enforcement agencies have long worked with federal immigration officials to detain illegal immigrants who are in jail or serving their sentence on probation, but immigration attorneys and advocates fear that Canyon County’s foreign-born list could lead to probationers in the country legally being detained, particularly as ICE agents during the Trump administration detained or caught up U.S. citizens and people with lawful or pending immigration status in immigration enforcement actions. Some lawfully present noncitizens, including green card holders, can also be subject to removal based on certain criminal convictions or other grounds under federal law.
Nikki Ramirez-Smith, an immigration attorney with Ramirez-Smith Law in Nampa, Idaho, said the county’s efforts to compile a list of foreign-born people on probation for ICE is “an invasion of privacy.”
“It’s one thing to know that someone is “undocumented”, it’s another thing to just start targeting every single person who was born in another country,” she told InvestigateWest.
Jeff Breach, the director of Canyon County’s misdemeanor probation department, said the list includes “individuals whose place of birth is a foreign country — and can also include individuals that have been previously flagged with an immigration hold.”
“Verifying and determining legal presence/status, along with any related enforcement, is within the purview of federal authorities,” Breach told the outlet.
Breach said ICE has requested a list of people that could be in the country illegally, typically on an annual basis and across administrations. He said the probation department coordinates with ICE the same way it would with any local or state law enforcement agency by providing them “information to carry out their lawful duties.”
Steve Cushman, director of constituent services for Canyon County, said he did not know exactly when the lists were first requested and provided, but added that it is his understanding that it goes back as far as the Obama administration.
On June 3, Naranjo told five ICE officers that she would talk to Breach about the “foreign-born list.”
The list compiled for ICE appeared to have been made without confirming that the people in question are in the country illegally.(Kevin Carter/Getty Images)
“We are working on a procedure to keep a list current for your agency,” Naranjo wrote. “I will get back to you on this as soon as we figure something out.”
Two days later, Breach sent an email to his staff directing them to compile a list of illegal immigrants.
“ICE has requested a list of offenders who are in the country illegally,” he wrote. “I need you to go through your caseload this month and send me a list of names of offenders who you believe are in the country illegally. I’ll review the names and put together a list that can be sent to ICE so that they can look into if the person is in the country illegally and if they want to take any action.”
The email shows ICE requested offenders believed to be in the country illegally, rather than all foreign-born probationers. Subsequent messages, however, show at least some probation officers used foreign birthplace as a way to identify people for review.
Most of the emails from May 1 to July 10 are heavily redacted, but they show how probation officers used information in their case files to compile the list.
“That’s everyone in my cabinet that filled out (an) intake form and stated not born in US,” Brandon Black, a Canyon County probation officer, said in an email back to Breach on June 8.
Another officer, Justin Donovan, told Breach that he only identified one person under his supervision who “may be here illegally,” adding that the man “only had an ID from Mexico during his last arrest.”
More than half of the people on the list were on probation for driving under the influence, five people were on probation for drug-related crimes and nine people for disturbing the peace, according to InvestigateWest. Only seven people were identified as having an ICE hold, meaning the federal government had already identified them for potential deportation.
Probation officers were regularly alerting ICE agents about the dates and times that certain probationers would be arriving at their office, according to the emails. In some cases, probation officers asked ICE if a person who had missed check-ins was in their custody. In two instances, officers emailed ICE just before and during the appointments to verify they were on their way to detain a probationer. One officer also gave ICE agents the home address and make, model and license plate of a probationer’s car.
Breach estimated that in the last three months, ICE agents have been at one or two probation appointments per month.
“All the law enforcement agencies we work with prefer to meet with offenders up in the office due to it being a controlled environment, which means it is safer for the offender, the officer, and the public,” he wrote. “There is an expectation from law enforcement agencies and the public that probation officers work cooperatively with law enforcement to ensure the safety of all parties involved.”
Pressed on whether the department is concerned that U.S. citizens or others with legal status could be included in the list, Breach referred to a previous statement that verifying a person’s status “is within the purview of federal authorities.”
“ICE may still target someone if they think the conviction is a deportable or removal offense even if they (have legal) status. Sometimes, ICE doesn’t get that right,” Alycia Moss, an immigration attorney with Fennemore Law in Coeur d’Alene, told InvestigateWest, noting that ICE agents should know if someone on the list is deportable or not but may still target people who are in the U.S. legally.
Immigration attorneys and advocates fear that Canyon County’s foreign-born list could lead to probationers in the country legally being detained.(Bloomberg)
Canyon County has faced criticism in the past for its attempts to help ICE.
In 2019, staff at the Canyon County Sheriff’s Office were told to notify immigration officials of “all foreign-born inmates” who were booked into the jail. Some of the people they alerted agents to were U.S. citizens who had posted bond, according to the Idaho Press. If inmates served jail time and posted bond, staff were directed to contact immigration officials.
That year, Canyon County faced three lawsuits from people who said they were illegally held in jail, despite posting bond, because the county refused to release them over their immigration status. The county settled with at least one man for $13,000.
The sheriff’s office is also facing a lawsuit from the ACLU of Idaho over allegations that the county and other law-enforcement agencies involved in an October 2025 ICE raid racially profiled Latino attendees and unlawfully detained people at a horse-racing venue. The allegations have not been adjudicated.
News Media has reached out to the county’s probation department and ICE for comment.
The Los Angeles Chargers faced a glaring issue this offseason: reinforcing their offensive line.
Throughout the 2025 season, the Chargers struggled with a lack of interior depth on the line. However, with about $99 million in cap space, there was hope that they’d secure better protection for their star quarterback, Justin Herbert.
As the start of the NFL regular season approaches, a major setback has hit the Chargers’ offensive line. Center Tyler Biadasz has been sidelined indefinitely due to a severe ACL injury, along with additional damages to his left knee.
Breiden Fehoko, a former defensive tackle who spent his entire three-year NFL career with the Chargers, didn’t hold back his criticism of the team’s management, expressing his frustration online.
In a bold statement on X following the Biadasz injury, Fehoko wrote, “100 million in cap space, yet they choose to skimp on the most crucial position group. Plenty of quality free agents were out there to bolster our depth. I have no sympathy for this team.”
“Funniest thing about Jake Slaughter starting now, is they drafted him to play guard and by fate he’s back to Center. Now it’s back to the main issue, no interior depth,” Fehoko added in a separate X post.
General manager Joe Hortiz’s front office philosophy is building an NFL team through the draft, rather than making big splashes in free agency. The Chargers’ biggest deal of the offseason was Biadasz’s three-year, $30 million contract.
Rather than adding more proven talent via free agency to prepare for the unknown of injuries, the Chargers are left relying on Slaughter, a rookie. While he was a stellar center at Florida, there’s no guarantee he will pick up right where he left off in the NFL.
The Chargers are also monitoring left tackle Rashawn Slater, who is dealing with a flare-up in his surgically repaired knee. Slater and Joe Alt missed significant time last season, resulting in Herbert facing the highest pressure rate in the league.
LA didn’t want that to happen again and had the cap space to do something about it.
But things already seem uncertain for the Chargers as Biadasz’s injury once again exposes the offensive line.
Harry and Meghan’s fairy tale pursuit in the US has abruptly ended—ushering in an unexpected scenario for the UK.
A moment for compassion.
Knowing the facts, one crucial inquiry arises: What are their true intentions?
In a surprising turn of events reported late Wednesday in the US, the Sussexes announced they are relocating to England, with Archie and Lilibet set to start school there this coming September—news that reportedly took King Charles by surprise.
Insiders revealed to the Daily Mail that Harry and Meghan hadn’t hinted at their return during a meeting with the King back in July.
And that trip was notable for several reasons:
Meghan never showed her face publicly.
She was reported to have enraged Prince William by posting a photo of Harry and the children on what looked like a procession to Diana’s grave.
Harry and Meghan’s American dream has died – and with it, a nightmare for the UK is born. Sympathies.
This attempted reconciliation came as so many of the Sussexes’ commercial projects seem to have failed, money is surely tighter, and all their old Hollywood friends — Oprah, Ted Sarandos, Kris Jenner — appear to have made themselves scarce.
Netflix, Spotify, Lemonada — all done. As Ever reportedly has $10 million in unsold jams and other sundries on the books. Harry is said to be increasingly isolated and at loose ends.
It’s an epic humiliation, to be sure.
But there’s reason to suspect Harry and Meghan see this as a win.
The stated reason for their ignominious return, sources tell Page Six, is to be closer to King Charles. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, these sources say, want their children to have a relationship with Harry’s family.
Code for: Returning to England, after Harry and Meghan have banged on about their lives being in mortal danger there, has absolutely nothing to do with needing the halo effect of proximity to the royals.
Truly, that explanation makes no sense to me.
The children could have had a relationship with their family had Harry and Meghan not, as they did to Oprah, made wild claims about race or accused the royals of not caring about her mental health.
They could have preserved their relationship had they not disrespected the late Queen Elizabeth II by announcing Megxit without her sign-off.
Had Meghan not compared the British Royal Family to the American theme park franchise Medieval Times in their Netflix documentary.
Had she not mocked meeting the Queen, in that same documentary, with an exaggerated curtsy and a smirk on her face, as her hapless husband looked on in disbelief.
Had Harry not sold out his father and brother’s private moments or printed private text messages sent by Kate in his memoir Spare.
I could go on and on, but we all get the gist.
It surprises no one that People magazine, the preferred outlet of the Sussexes and one that has historically been very friendly to them, broke the exclusive here in America.
And their version of this narrative is a very positive one.
The magazine reports that ‘those close to the Sussexes believe they have successfully executed the ‘half in, half out’ model Harry and Meghan proposed to the royal family in 2019.’
A model that was thoroughly rejected by Queen Elizabeth at the Sandringham Summit in January 2020.
Yet here Harry and Meghan are, with sources telling People that they’ve pulled off the very thing that has been forbidden.
These two, in my estimation, are dangerous. They didn’t just ‘flee’, in their version of events, to the US for a new life.
They attempted to destroy the British royal family, levelling sensational claims as Prince Philip lay on his deathbed.
It was convenient for them to leave then, just as it’s convenient for them to return now.
The best part, the most Markle-a-vellian, is what People reports as their primary reason for leaving America:
‘While the couple appeared to have an idyllic life in Montecito, they have made no secret of their disillusionment with the current White House. With the midterm elections fast approaching, concerns about the direction of the US loom large for many.’
In other words: Trump!
President Trump, who warmly greeted King Charles and Queen Camilla during their state visit to the US this summer. Trump, who invited King Charles to address a joint meeting of Congress during that visit!
Harry and Meghan make an absolute mess of everything.
Many questions have yet to be answered: Where will the Sussexes be living? Who will be paying for this new residence and the accompanying expenses — including security?
How will these two also be maintaining their properties in Montecito and Portugal, which they say they intend to keep?
The British taxpayers will surely not abide that expense.
And what of Prince William?
It’s an epic humiliation, to be sure. But there’s reason to suspect Harry and Meghan see this as a win.
Are Harry and Meghan hoping that, as they mend their relationship with the cancer-stricken King, they can paint William as heartless for refusing to forgive?
If that’s a strategy they’re considering, they’d do well to abandon it. No sane person thinks William is overreacting to the traitorousness of his brother and his ghastly (my opinion) wife.
Certainly not the British people. William is regularly ranked as the most popular member of the royal family, with a 71 percent approval rating, according to a recent YouGov poll.
Kate follows closely.
The danger here is surely that Harry begins making quasi-royal appearances — perhaps not technically as a working royal, but with the optics and messaging of one.
And that would be an absolute insult to William and Kate.
If Charles wants to reconcile with Harry privately, almost everyone could understand that. But this is not just any family, and it should be made clear that there is no public, official role left for Harry and Meghan.
Long before audiences actually met Wayne Whittaker in the gripping series Lucky, his menacing reputation had already been established. Characters whispered about his formidable presence, setting the stage for a character shrouded in mystery and fear.
While some seasoned actors with extensive filmographies might easily overlook a character like Wayne due to his limited screen time, William Fichtner, a distinguished character actor, found the enigmatic mentions about Whittaker too intriguing to pass up. His reputation alone was compelling enough to keep Fichtner engrossed in the screenplay.
“As an actor, it’s a delight to portray a character who is talked about before he even appears on screen. Questions like ‘What does Wayne think? Did you consult Wayne on this?’ create an intriguing aura,” Fichtner shared in an interview with DECIDER, comfortably seated in his exquisite “man cave.” This phenomenon teased Wayne’s looming presence, making his eventual appearance even more theatrical.
In the Apple TV crime series, Wayne’s first appearance might be in the latter part of Episode 2, but it’s unforgettable. Clad in luxe sweats, sipping homemade green juice, and residing in an ostentatious mansion perched in the Hollywood Hills, Wayne’s introduction culminates in a shocking display of brutality against his ex, Priscilla, portrayed by Annette Bening. By the series’ fifth episode, Wayne exits with a climactic flourish, and Fichtner expresses his satisfaction with the dramatic conclusion.
“I’m immensely proud of our work on Lucky. You can never predict the outcome of a project,” Fichtner remarked. ”But I believe that those who watch all the way through to Episode 7 will find it well worth their time.” His enthusiasm underscores the series’ ability to engage and surprise viewers right up to the finale.
Despite Fichtner’s penchant for playing fractured, fear-instilling characters, the actor is as lovely in real life as his co-star Bening promised. So after watching Wayne unleash his wrath on Priscilla, show nearly non-existent levels of empathy over the death of his son Cary (Drew Starkey), and order the murders of Lucky (Anya Taylor-Joy) and her dad John (Timothy Olyphant), hearing the Lucky star thoughtfully break down his performance is quite the trip.
In honor of Lucky‘s finale, Fichtner spoke with DECIDER about bringing his complex character from page to screen, working with Bening, what music he had on his Wayne Whittaker playlist, that big finale twist, and more.
DECIDER: You’ve spoken about not choosing roles based on the salary or the size. When you were reading these scripts, what first piqued your interest about Whittaker, or was the deciding factor?
WILLIAM FICHTNER: Because it was a limited series, we had the opportunity to read all of it. So even though Wayne was scattered throughout, it felt like the whole thing — start to finish — I enjoyed the journey. Very much so. Good writing is good writing. And Wayne’s one of those characters that, for an actor, it’s lovely to have a character that, before he even shows up, people are talking about him. “What does Wayne think? Did you talk to Wayne about this?” That’s a cool place to be. So by the time he shows up, he’s already had such a great intro. But especially when you get to Episode 7, the finale, everything’s on the table. It’s literally soup to nuts. You find out everything. And it’s just really cool.
When we finally meet him at the end of Episode 2, he’s wearing this expensive-looking sweatsuit. He’s got some jewelry. He’s making a smoothie in this gorgeous mansion. What did those details tell you about him?
I have to give props to our costume designer, Christine Wada. I’ve not seen the finale, but when I watched the first six episodes of Lucky, her work is so amazing in defining even Annette’s character, Priscilla. Her look is just so spot-on, and Christine creates this earthy look for Wayne that gives you so much. It’s kind of not what you’re expecting, but what it told me is that he lives in this incredible place that I don’t think a lot of people get to go into. Priscilla does, because she is a unique person in Wayne’s life, even with the ups and downs and the intensity between them. But you take somebody who has a place like this, and he has this health [obsession]. “I’m gonna treat my body a certain way.” He’s not a drug crazy guy. He’s going to treat his life a certain way. He’s going to live protected. He’s got to live separately. He has all of these things, and they add up, and it’s like, “Wow. You’re just that alone.” Without me even looking, it’s giving me so much about how somebody exists, and how they live, and what’s important to them. And all of that pays off for me as an actor. You just keep putting these pieces together and peeling another layer off.
Photo: Apple TV
I read that you make soundtracks for your character. Did you do that to better connect with Wayne as well?
Yeah, I actually did. Usually when I finish something, I don’t tend to go back and hit the playlist. I’m too stuck on 70s on 7, and my wife refuses to let me go with 60s on 6. That ship has sailed. She’s like, I’m sorry, honey. [Laughs] But there was some rock and roll in there. There was INXS; there were some very sexy, cool rhythms.
Emotionally and physically, you share intense scenes with the great Annette Bening. What was it like working so closely with her and developing that toxic, very lived-in dynamic?
An absolute joy from the very moment that I met her. I mean that. I’m such a huge fan of her. I remember seeing Annette in a play called Coastal Disturbances back in the late 80s in New York, and just thinking, “Oh my God, who is this actress?” And the entirety of her career. And then here we have this first scene in Episode 2 in this beautiful mansion, and Annette comes in, and just the way she is in that scene, there’s a quality about her that you can’t act and you can’t play. It’s you. And she has that. She’s very alive, and when she comes in, it just pours out of her like Priscilla does. That dynamic of who she is and what she has to say and what is written in the script, and what Wayne has to saybecause Priscilla’s like “BOOM!” And Wayne is like, “That’s your problem.” So when you have all of that, and you put it together, and you have an amazing set, great writing, and an actress like that, let’s just stay out of the way and see what happens.
What was your initial reaction when you found out how Wayne was going to die?
Well, I kind of knew — I think it was mentioned somewhere along the line what would happen to Wayne in the end. But I must say, as the season unfolded, and we shot everything, and you get to that final thing… If Wayne had a blind spot, it was Priscilla, because no way did he see that coming. No way. Which is really fascinating. So if Wayne trusted anything in his very twisted dynamic and relationship, it was the trust that he had with her.
Apple TV
Whitaker is isolated in his house for most of his scenes. What was it like to come together with Annette and Anya Taylor-Joy and Timothy Oliphant, who I know was in Go, to film those big dialog-heavy finale scenes?
The whole ending was four or five intense days up in the north of LA in these like high desert oil fields. I remember that, mark my words, it never dipped below 100 degrees for five days. And that’s intense, but it all goes back to, “If it ain’t on the page, it ain’t on the stage.”
That’s really a well-written sequence. I have not seen the final episode yet completed, but it’s funny. Yesterday I went back, and I looked over Episode 7 again and was re-reminded. I remember it, but then I remembered all the details, and I thought, “Wow, no wonder you read this episode and were like, ‘I’m in!’” It’s such a great sequence that happens from the car ride, which I have to tell you was probably my favorite scene to shoot in the whole thing, being with Annette in that car getting to that finale showdown. I love the dynamics in that scene between the two of us. It’s different colors for Wayne and Priscilla, but a really cool scene.
He opens up about his father’s abuse and finally expresses something resembling the bare minimum of empathy for Priscilla’s loss, only to conclude by saying he never had a kid. Do you think there’s any part of him that felt that loss of Cary?
Honestly? I don’t, and it’s not heartless; it’s more of the way that Wayne lives. That’s the way I always read it. It’s what he says to her in the car at the end. “I told you from the beginning, this is your journey. I’m not taking this journey.” He just says, to me, “This has always been on the table. And maybe I should have expressed that sooner, my remorse about what had happened to him. But you know, and I know, that I was never going to be anything but what I was.”
Photo: Apple TV
Looking back at the bittersweet limited series experience, what’s your takeaway?
I’m just really proud of what happened with Lucky. You never know how something’s gonna come out. I remember when I watched the first episode when it aired, I thought, “Okay, all right. All right, they put the script in a cannon and blew it out. Great.” And Anya was just riveting, and I just enjoyed it. I’m really proud to be a part of it. And I think if people tune in and get to Episode 7, the finale, then they’re not going to be disappointed.
Your first IMDb credit was in 1989. Nearly four decades later, is there any specific role, or genre, or collaborator you’re still very eager to pursue?
The people that are out there and directors who I haven’t worked with, who I would love to, the list is so long I couldn’t even get into it. And there are so many actors that I’ve never met who I would like to work with. But there are only so many hours in a day. And it happens all the time that you get a chance to work with someone, and you’re like, “Wow, that was really special.” A couple of years ago I worked on a little indie film [Cutman] in Upstate New York with a 10-year-old girl from Long Island named Caroline Concannon, and she plays this daughter of a heroin addict, and we have this friendship, and I am an angel for her. One of the best experiences I ever had was with this 10-year-old; it was just such a remarkable thing. A remarkable human being and actress, and that’s exciting stuff. So you never know what’s gonna come [into your life]; you can’t plan it.
For people who are becoming new fans of yours through streaming, be it through new shows like Lucky or older ones like Prison Break, is there a project you worked on that you don’t feel got the attention or love you thought it deserved that you recommend they go back and watch?
I love Talamasca, which is why I’m really glad it’s coming out on Netflix. I think there are several reasons why it isn’t going for a second season, but I do think that Netflix will certainly help the journey of that show. And it was one of the better times I ever had.
I’ll also add The Company You Keep, which I loved and was canceled far too soon. Love Milo Ventimiglia. Loved your Prison Break reunion with Sarah Wayne Callies.
Oh I love Milo. I love Sarah. Literally just a few days ago I sent both of them a message out of the blue. I haven’t seen Milo in a while, haven’t seen Sarah. I just woke up like three days ago, and I’m like, “I gotta check in with them.”
Currently, Australians are holding onto a massive $4.4 trillion nestled in superannuation savings, earmarked for their golden years. Yet, a heated discussion persists: should these funds be tapped into early to alleviate financial pressures?
Opting to dip into superannuation prematurely can significantly dent future retirement funds, a situation particularly consequential for those in their 20s and 30s.
So, what are the rules for early access, and who must you persuade when filing a claim?
Strict rules on early access
Superannuation is fundamentally designed to sustain individuals financially as they step away from their careers and settle into retirement.
Contributions to super are taxed at rates lower than standard income taxes, and withdrawals made post-retirement enjoy further tax advantages.
Those low tax rates come with strings attached: rules that prevent people from using their superannuation savings for other reasons than income in retirement.
For the most part, superannuation savings in Australia are not readily withdrawn until at least age 60. People can withdraw super from age 60 if they have stopped working, or from age 65 even if they have not stopped working.
The Australian Taxation Office is very clear that there are limited circumstances in which you can access your superannuation before retirement:
on a range of compassionate grounds (such as for medical treatments, funeral expenses and preventing a forced sale of your home)
a terminal medical condition
severe financial hardship
temporary or permanent incapacity to work.
But the rules are strict. And who you need to apply to will depend on your reasons for seeking to withdraw money.
For instance, if you apply on compassionate grounds, you need to apply via the tax office and meet all of its criteria.
But in other circumstances, such as severe financial hardship, you need to apply directly through your super fund. Even if you meet all the criteria — which includes having received government income support payments for at least half a year — it’s up to the fund trustees’ discretion whether to say yes. The most you can withdraw for severe financial hardship is $10,000 in one year.
People often wish they could access their super for help with house deposits or home loan repayments. First home buyers may be eligible for the First Home Super Saver scheme. But in general, just needing help for mortgage repayments is not going to be sufficient grounds to access your super savings.
Beware scams and misleading ads
The tax office has had to issue warnings about misleading ads and social media claims, encouraging people to try to withdraw super on compassionate grounds, such as medical or dental expenses that are not absolutely necessary on health grounds.
The tax office says to be particularly careful with anyone suggesting super can be accessed to pay for cosmetic or elective procedures, as these treatments usually aren’t eligible.
If someone offers to help you apply to your super fund to take money out, that’s a red flag. It could even be a scam.
You can report ads or social media accounts making misleading statements about early access to super, either online or by calling the tax office’s tip-off hotline: 1800 060 062.
Separately, unlicensed, real-time “cold calls” about superannuation will soon be banned, under consumer protection law changes announced by Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino on Wednesday.
These rules will aim to prevent scammers or salespeople encouraging people to move their super, as happened with the First Guardian and Shield funds which later collapsed, affecting almost 12,000 people and around $1 billion in retirement savings.
Consider the long-term savings hit
There are lessons from the COVID pandemic about why withdrawal rules are so strict.
In 2020, the Coalition government’s COVID-19 Early Release Scheme allowed participants in financial hardship easy access to up to $20,000 from their super because many Australians were doing it tough.
One of us (Susan) was involved in a 2023 study that combined data from one of Australia’s largest super funds, Cbus, with a survey of more than 3,000 of its members to examine why people withdrew some of their super savings.
A majority of people reported they did need the money immediately. But around one quarter (26.6 per cent) said they were anticipating future needs.
Almost half (48.5 per cent) said they thought about the decision for a week or less, while many also withdrew as much as they could. When asked about the impact on their long-term retirement savings, only 17% correctly estimated how large an impact it would have.
By the end of 2020, 3.5 million Australians had made at least one successful application to withdraw from their super accounts, totalling about $38 billion.
A 2024 Super Members Council analysis of the COVID Early Release Super scheme found that a person aged 30 who withdrew the full $20,000 could be expected to retire with about $93,600 less in superannuation.
Protecting retirement funds
There will always be arguments for freeing up access to super a little.
But it’s important to keep the primary objective of the superannuation system firmly in sight.
The system exists to help finance the dignified retirement of working Australians, together with other sources of support such as the Age Pension, in an equitable and sustainable way.
Susan Thorp is a professor and head of Monash University’s Department of Banking and Finance.
She has received research funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the TIAA Institute (USA), IFM, and UniSuper and Cbus superannuation funds via ARC Linkage Grants. She is a member of the Steering Committee of the Mercer CFA Global Pensions Index, the ASIC Consultative Committee, the Board of New College (UNSW), and the Academic Council of the International Centre for Pension Management.
Scott Donald is a professor at the University of New South Wales’ School of Private and Commercial Law.
He does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
In an unusual twist to a surrogacy arrangement, the biological parents of a child born in Texas are accusing their surrogate of breaching their contract after she declined to proceed with an abortion. They are seeking damages that surpass $100,000.
According to a report by TMZ released Wednesday, Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed filed a countersuit against McKenna West shortly before her delivery on August 12. The lawsuit, submitted within Texas’s jurisdiction, argues that West’s decision contravenes their prior agreement.
Gilkar and Ahmed claim West’s actions breached the terms of their surrogacy contract and inflicted emotional distress. They demand a payout exceeding $100,000, alongside undisclosed reparations for what they describe as her “inhuman and outrageous behavior.”
The legal documents further reveal that the couple disbursed $60,000 to West throughout the pregnancy. This payment fell within the parameters outlined in their agreement, which purportedly covered provisions for pregnancy termination. They assert that West contravened these terms, leading to significant emotional turmoil.
McKenna West, the surrogate embroiled in this legal saga, relocated to Texas following the alleged insistence by the child’s biological parents to terminate the pregnancy.(Live Action)
The filing comes after the pregnancy became the subject of a multistate legal fight. The baby was diagnosed around 20 weeks with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), a severe congenital heart defect. Gilkar and Ahmed allegedly asked West to terminate the pregnancy after the diagnosis, according to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office. West refused and later traveled to Texas to give birth.
West denies wrongdoing and is asking the court to dismiss the counterclaims, TMZ reported Wednesday.
Live Action founder and president Lila Rose, whose pro-life organization has been working with West, sharply condemned the lawsuit in a statement to News Media.
“The people who ordered McKenna to abort this little boy because of his heart condition are now dragging her into court, trying to punish and financially ruin her for refusing to kill him, while demanding custody of the same child they ordered to be killed,” Rose told News Media. “This lawsuit is retaliation against a courageous woman who is barely a week postpartum after carrying this baby and fighting to save his life.”
The biological parents have disputed allegations that they threatened or tried to force West to terminate the pregnancy. The Texas Tribune previously reported that, in a court filing, their attorneys claimed West initially agreed to terminate and made the appointment before later changing her mind.
The dispute has since played out in Alaska, California and Texas, with West asserting parental rights and the biological parents prevailing in key parentage proceedings. West calls the baby “Gabriel,” while Gilkar and Ahmed call their son “Rumi.”
The child was born Aug. 12. LifeNews reported Tuesday that he underwent a Norwood procedure Monday, the first of three surgeries typically required for children with HLHS.
Rose said the baby’s survival underscores why West was right to refuse the abortion.
“This child is alive today and recovering from his first life-saving surgery because McKenna had the courage to say no,” Rose said. “No contract can give one person the right to order the killing of another. Women are not incubators for hire, and children are not products to be discarded when they are sick.”
“McKenna acted heroically to save the baby boy she carried, and Live Action will continue to stand with her and defend the dignity and right to life of every child,” she added.
Attorney Lee Budner, who represents Gilkar and Ahmed, confirmed the procedure in a statement reported by LifeNews and said the child’s condition “remains critical and complex.” Budner has also called West’s continuing claims of custody “baseless” and said they violate court orders in Alaska and California.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton secured an emergency court order requiring medically necessary care for the baby.(Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
The fight over the baby’s medical care also drew intervention from state and federal officials. Paxton secured an emergency court order before the birth requiring that medically necessary care not be delayed or obstructed. His office also notified UT Southwestern Medical Center and Children’s Medical Center of Dallas of their obligations to provide life-saving treatment.
“The court has made the right decision in immediately acting to protect baby Gabriel’s life and ensure he receives the care he deserves,” Paxton said at the time. “My office utilized every tool at our disposal to protect life, and we will not back down in continuing to support baby Gabriel’s well-being. Every child in our state deserves to be cared for and protected, and that’s exactly what I’ll fight for.”
The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights later notified the two Dallas hospitals of their obligations under federal disability law, including requirements barring discrimination in medical treatment based on a patient’s disability.
The parents ultimately authorized the heart surgery, and their attorney has said they are focused on their son’s recovery.
West continues to seek parental rights in Texas. A hearing in the Dallas County case is scheduled for Aug. 25.
News Media reached out to Budner and Paxton’s office for comment on the biological parents’ counterclaims.
In a dramatic scene captured on video, a dirt bike rider being chased by police through Los Angeles streets caused a stir when he stopped mid-pursuit to refuel his bike.
The individual, suspected to be armed, was initially seen careening through the avenues of South Los Angeles before making an unexpected stop at a gas station to top off his tank.
In a rush, the rider hastily remounted and sped away, inadvertently yanking off part of the gas pump as he bolted.
Throughout the chaotic chase, the suspect, donning a head covering, was also observed using his cellphone—both holding it to his ear and scrolling through it.
A dirt bike rider leading police on a chase through the streets of Los Angeles pulled over to get gas during the pursuit in a wild moment caught on camera.
The suspect, who police believe is armed, was seen racing around South Los Angeles before stopping at a gas station to fuel up.
Iran’s government is seeking reparations from Ukraine after a July incident in the Caspian Sea involving an Iranian ship.
Ukraine has stated the event was unintentional, yet President Volodymyr Zelensky hinted that the vessel was allegedly transporting Iranian drone weapons intended for Russia’s military operations against Ukraine.
Occurring on July 25, the incident involved a drone attack by Ukraine in the Caspian Sea. It was initially reported by Ukraine as targeting two Russian ships believed to be carrying “military cargo from Iran.”
WATCH — President Trump: I’m the Last Person to Trust Iran:
Iran countered, claiming one of the targeted vessels was a civilian ship carrying iron from Russia to Iran. The strike reportedly resulted in the death of one sailor and injuries to two others on board.
Iran was infuriated by what it called a “hostile and criminal” act of “terrorism,” summoning the Ukrainian charge d’affaires in Tehran to lodge a formal protest. The Iranians accused Ukraine of attempting to connect the Russia-Ukraine war to the U.S.-Iran conflict and drag European powers into the latter.
Zelensky stood by the attack at first, adding that not only was Iran supplying Russia with drone weapons, but Russia was reciprocating by providing Iran with “active Russian satellite surveillance of the Gulf states and U.S. military facilities located there.”
“There is a clear correlation between Russia’s satellite imagery of these sites and Iranian strikes — both before the attacks, in preparation for them, and afterward, to assess the damage inflicted,” he said.
WATCH — Trump: I Thought Russia/Ukraine Would be Easy to Settle But Zelensky & Putin Hate Each Other:
Ukraine’s ambassador to Israel, Yevgen Korniychuk, claimed the Iranian ship was ferrying drone and missile components from Iran to Russia, not civilian cargo.
On July 28, the leftist newspaper New York Times (NYT) reported that Iran contemplated launching a ballistic missile at a Ukrainian seaport in retaliation, intended to “make a symbolic point but cause relatively little damage.”
The Iranians were reportedly talked down from this retaliatory action by diplomats, who warned that Ukraine’s response to a missile attack might be more than Tehran bargained for. Some Ukrainian analysts also felt it would be a mistake for Kyiv to get embroiled in another conflict while it was still fending off the Russian invasion.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had a phone conversation with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, who told him the strike on the cargo ship was “unintentional.” Sybiha had previously dismissed Araghchi’s accusations against Ukraine as “Iranian lies” in a social media post.
WATCH — Iran Gets First Taste of U.S. Sea Drones:
On August 10, Iran jolted the uneasily resolved dispute back to life by dismissing Ukraine’s claim of accidental targeting, and demanding reparations for the cargo ship bombing.
“We still believe that we have not been convinced by the Ukrainian side’s claim that this action was unintentional,” said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei.
“They must certainly compensate us. Naturally, if they do not compensate us, we will seek compensation ourselves,” he said.
Iran’s ambassador to Russia, Kazem Jalali, said on Wednesday that Ukraine has not paid reparations for its “act of terrorism” yet, but “negotiations” are still in progress.
“Ukraine’s European and American supporters must also accept their responsibility for Kyiv’s actions and hold them accountable,” he added.
Sugary sodas and fruit juices have never been the poster children for healthy eating.
These beverages have long been criticized as culprits of empty calorie consumption, often containing more sugar than four Krispy Kreme donuts. This excess can lead to increased risks of chronic health issues such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular diseases, and dental decay.
Now, emerging research suggests a new danger: consuming just one sugary drink per day might significantly heighten your chances of developing fatal stomach cancer.
In this latest study, researchers associated with Harvard delved into the health records of over 100,000 adults. Participants completed biennial surveys detailing their dietary patterns and beverage intake.
From the analysis, a startling pattern emerged. Individuals consuming at least one sugar-laden drink daily had more than double the risk of stomach cancer compared to those who avoided these beverages entirely.
And women were the most vulnerable, with a three-fold increased likelihood of being diagnosed with the condition compared to two-fold for men.
The researchers noted that while more research is needed to find a firm association between sugary drinks and gastric cancer, the new study is the first of its kind to investigate the potential relationship.
The findings also come as scientists race to find causes behind a nationwide surge in stomach cancer cases, particularly among adults under 50.
People who drank just one sugar-sweetened beverage like soda a day were twice as likely to develop stomach cancer in a new study (stock image)
Artificially sweetened beverages, however, were not associated with an increased risk of stomach cancer.
‘This is the first study to demonstrate an association between sugar-sweetened beverage intake and gastric cancer in a US population,’ Andrew T Chan, senior study author and gastroenterologist at Massachusetts General Hospital, said.
‘Gastric cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer death worldwide, but we’ve known very little about how diet might contribute to this cancer.’
According to the American Cancer Society, about 31,500 Americans are diagnosed with stomach cancer every year and just under 11,000 die.
Patients on average are 68 years old, and the majority are diagnosed after age 65.
While cases were on a steady decline for nearly a century, starting in the 2010s, there has been an uptick in younger groups.
Among people under 50, diagnoses have risen by roughly one percent a year, which experts say may be due to ultra-processed foods, antibiotic use and the stomach bacteria H pylori.
Early warning signs can be vague and easy to dismiss, including persistent abdominal pain, bloating and frequent burping. Rather than triggering alarm, these symptoms are often brushed off as stress, diet or minor digestive issues.
Instead of anything sudden or dramatic, many patients simply report a lingering sense that something is ‘off’ – a low‑level discomfort that gradually worsens over time.
By the time they seek help, they are often already at later, harder-to-treat stages.
Alt-rock band drummer Steven Kopacz is pictured at left with his family. He is battling stomach cancer for the second time. At right is Carly Douglas with her youngest child in April. She died at 34 after being diagnosed with stage 4 stomach cancer
In the new study, published in Gastro Hep Advances, researchers looked at health data from 112,284 adults enrolled in the Nurses’ Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study.
Participants filled out questionnaires every two years on dietary habits, including information on sugar-sweetened beverages such as soda, punch, lemonade and sports drinks. These generally include high-fructose corn syrup, though the researchers did not specify what sugars the beverages were sweetened with.
The team did, however, differentiate between sugar-sweetened beverages and those sweetened using artificial sweeteners, such as diet sodas.
Between 1986 and 2022, there were 278 documented cases of gastric cancer.
People who consumed at least one sugar-sweetened beverage a day – defined as 8oz or 237ml – were 2.4 times more likely to develop gastric cancer compared to those who never drank the beverages after adjusting for other risk factors.
While the risk was elevated for both men and women, women were at a three-fold greater risk while men were twice as likely to develop the disease. Men are typically more prone to stomach cancer, so the cause of the discrepancy is unclear.
Researchers are still identifying exactly why sugar-sweetened beverages may raise this risk, and are exploring multiple areas.
‘Several underlying mechanisms have been proposed, including weight gain, insulin resistance, steroid hormone imbalance, inflammation, DNA damage and dysbiosis [a gut microbiome imbalance],’ they wrote.
‘However, the precise mechanism of carcinogenic effects of sugar-sweetened beverages has yet to be investigated. Future studies are warranted to confirm these findings as well as to investigate the potential biological mechanisms involved.’
