Archive

2025

Browsing

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., is being sued by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for tens of billions of dollars in damages for a lawsuit he filed against the country during his time as Missouri’s attorney general.

Schmitt is being sued by the People’s Government of Wuhan Municipality, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences for roughly $50 billion, several years after the lawmaker sued the country during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The lawsuit, first obtained by Fox News Digital, accused Schmitt, FBI co-deputy director Andrew Bailey, and the state of Missouri of damaging the reputations of China, Wuhan and the associated research facilities through ‘malicious vexatious litigation, fabricating enormous disinformation, and spreading stigmatizing and discriminating slanders.’

Schmitt said in a statement to Fox News Digital that he’d been ‘banned from Communist China, and now I am being sued and targeted by Communist China in a $50 billion lawfare campaign, and I’ll wear it like a badge of honor.’ 

‘China’s sinister malfeasance during the COVID-19 pandemic led to over a million Americans losing their lives, economic turmoil that rocked our country for years, and an enormous amount of human suffering, and as Missouri Attorney General I filed suit to hold them accountable,’ Schmitt said. ‘Instead of trying to defend its indefensible behavior, Communist China responded with frivolous lawfare, attempting to absolve themselves of all wrongdoing in the early days of the pandemic.’ 

‘This novel lawsuit is factually baseless, legally meritless, and any fake judgment a Chinese court issues in this lawsuit we will easily beat back and keep from being enforced against the people of Missouri or me,’ he continued. ‘This is their way of distracting from what the world already knows, China has blood on its hands.’

Schmitt, who served as attorney general for the Show-Me state from 2019 to 2023, sued the PRC, several Chinese government ministries, the Communist Party of China, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in early 2020, shortly after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the time, Schmitt accused the Chinese government of withholding information on the COVID-19 virus, failing to contain the outbreak of the virus, and actively hoarding high-quality personal protective equipment (PPE) while producing and selling lower-quality PPE for the rest of the world.

That case resulted in an eventual $24 billion judgment earlier this year.

The lawsuit against Schmitt, Bailey, who resigned as Missouri’s attorney general after he was tapped by President Donald Trump to serve as co-deputy FBI director in September, and Missouri contended that the preceding lawsuit, and statements published across a variety of media outlets, led to severe reputational and economic harm.

They’re demanding that apologies be published in several outlets, including The New York Times, CNN, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Chinese media outlets. The apologies come with a price tag, too.

Wuhan and the Chinese government demanded compensation of over 356 billion Chinese Yuan, which converts to just over $50 billion dollars.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

There’s a year-end rush in all aspects of life.

Businesses try to run up profits in December. Supervisors want to finish employee reviews. Professors must grade exams.

Congress is no different.

There’s always a race to the finish line in December on Capitol Hill. 

This year’s adventure is health care. But it’s a practical impossibility that Congress can actually make law on health care before the calendar flips. Premium spikes for 24 million Americans loom on January 1st. Congress tried — kinda — to address this problem. But not really.

So, if you’re that professor handing out the grades at the end of the semester, prepare to flunk some pupils, if not the entire Congressional student body.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., hermetically sealed any possibility of addressing health care in 2025 on Tuesday afternoon.

‘We’re not going to pass anything by the end of this week. But I do think there is a potential pathway in January if Democrats are willing to come to the table,’ said Thune.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., rapidly assembled a bill to allow groups of people – like a bunch of small businesses or a coalition of carpenters – to purchase what they call ‘association’ health plans. In other words, this alliance of people would suddenly have ‘buying power’ if they operate as a team. So if they purchase a set of plans as an ‘association,’ that would defray the cost.

‘This is going to be a great piece of legislation that everybody will unite around,’ said Johnson.

But many Republicans groused privately that it’s one thing to do ‘a health care bill.’ It’s another thing to actually short-circuit the astronomical leap in premiums which hit on January 1.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., spoke frankly about simply re-upping the existing subsidies.

‘We need to do deeper fixes. This is throwing good money after bad. There is some truth to that. But we have constituents. They’re going to have their premiums go up. That doesn’t help them. That’s why I think we need a temporary extension,’ said Bacon.

Many conservatives adamantly oppose continuing the subsidies. Even if that would help their constituents.

But Bacon addresses the realpolitik of the moment. 

‘It’s not our fault that these things are skyrocketing. But we are in charge. When you’re in charge, you’ve got to deal with it,’ said Bacon. ‘They’re going to have to find some compromise.’

A Christmas Congressional crunch often compels lawmakers to solve big legislative headaches before the holidays.

‘What intensifies the pressure is January 1st is coming,’ said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash. ‘It’s having a huge impact on people. I think that is definitely a forcing mechanism.’

The push from Democrats — and some vulnerable Republicans — was to renew the subsidies.

‘I don’t understand why we can’t just do a clean extension of what we just had in place earlier this year,’ said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. ‘I think that is the easiest and most accessible, no nonsense thing for us to do. Especially as the year is coming to an end.’

But that wouldn’t fly with conservative Republicans.

‘I pity the Republican that has to explain why they would propagate or perpetuate a fraud-ridden subsidy from the COVID-era to prop up a failed health care program,’ said House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas. 

Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., also opposes extending Obamacare help. But he worries what voters will think of Republicans if the party doesn’t address health care costs. 

‘I think that we fail the American people. We fail our base. We fail the Republican Party. Before I got up here, I was frustrated the Republicans didn’t repeal Obamacare,’ said Burlison. 

‘Repealing Obamacare’ probably won’t happen. That’s because the GOP has tried to unwind the measure since Democrats passed the first versions of it in late 2009. That’s why even through everyone was talking about health care on Capitol Hill, most were skeptical that lawmakers could solve this in a matter of days.

Despite possible Christmas magic.

And even as Thune punted health care into 2026, the House still nibbled around the edges. Critics argued this was only so House Republicans could inoculate themselves from denunciations that they did nothing on health care.

On Tuesday morning, Johnson nixed an idea from GOP moderates for a temporary extension of expiring Obamacare subsidies because it didn’t comply with Congressional budgetary rules.

But by afternoon, Johnson reversed himself to entertain another plan backed by Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y. 

Rather than simply extending federal Obamacare subsidies on an interim basis — which means that insurance companies receive the money — LaLota’s idea provides a two-year tax deduction for those who previously received the Obamacare aid.

President Trump said he would not sign a bill which continued to send money to the insurance companies. So the revamped approach cuts out insurance companies from the equation and policyholders score the tax relief.

‘There’s a real possibility they’ll get a vote on it,’ said Johnson. ‘I’ve tried everything I can to get them that vote on the floor.’

But a roll call vote is a far cry from an actual fix. And it’s uncertain that the House would adopt any amendment and copy it onto the underlying GOP health care bill.

However, a vote on the amendment could give Republicans from swing districts a fig leaf to say they tried to defuse the health care premium crisis. And it’s still unclear if voters might blame Republicans for not addressing health care — now that Democrats copied that issue onto the fall government funding fight.

Health care will be a major issue in the 2026 midterms.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. appeared skeptical that Congress could address the skyrocketing premiums in the near year.

‘You can’t do it after January 1st,’ said Schumer. ‘It’s expired already. It’s not the same as it was before. Once it expires, the toothpaste is out of the tube. 

Schumer also refused to commit to deploying the same maneuver about health care as the next government funding deadline approaches on January 30.

In short, Congress isn’t going to solve health care by Christmas.

But perhaps by Groundhog Day?

If that’s the case, any discussion about health care tied to Groundhog Day, probably resembles, well, Groundhog Day.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The Aaron Rodgers era is officially history for the New York Jets.

On Dec. 16, the team officially released Allen Lazard – a mutual decision on a move that has been expected for some time. Rumors have been swirling since the offseason that New York was interested in trading the veteran receiver.

Those talks quieted down as the season began, but were renewed around the trade deadline. No deal ultimately came to fruition and Lazard has been a healthy scratch for the last four games. He arrived as a free agent signing before the Jets’ trade for Rodgers in 2023, inking a four-year, $44 million deal.

He figured to be a welcome addition for the four-time MVP quarterback, providing Rodgers a receiver he was familiar with. That connection couldn’t recapture the magic in New York and the Jets waived the white flag on the Rodgers experiment, releasing the quarterback after the 2024 season.

Lazard seemed likely to follow Rodgers out the door, relocating the duo to Pittsburgh. Instead, Lazard eventually agreed to a $8.5 million pay cut, per OverTheCap, ahead of the 2025 season, which would’ve made him a free agent after the season.

Now Lazard is free to sign with any team. Will it be the Pittsburgh Steelers?

Here’s what to know.

Will the Steelers sign Allen Lazard?

There is no indication that the Steelers are prepared to claim or sign Lazard.

It’s easy to connect the dots given Rodgers’ preference to work with familiar receivers. However, any decision to sign Lazard would likely require another move to the existing roster.

Pittsburgh already claimed Adam Thielen off waivers and also signed Marquez Valdes-Scantling, who caught a touchdown on ‘Monday Night Football’ in Week 15.

The receiver room is still headlined by DK Metcalf, but no one else has truly staked their claim to having a big role in the offense.

That could open the door for Lazard to land there in the midst of a playoff push with three weeks to go.

Steelers WR depth chart

DK Metcalf
Calvin Austin III
Adam Thielen
Marquez Valdes-Scantling
Ben Skowronek
Scotty Miller
Roman Wilson

The Steelers’ receiver room is essentially Metcalf and a bunch of guys.

Metcalf leads the team with 808 receiving yards, while tight end Pat Freiermuth checks in at second with 352 yards. Pittsburgh has relied on tight end and running backs in the passing game all season. While Lazard doesn’t profile as a savior, it’s hard to deny that he could be helpful if reunited with Rodgers.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The UConn women’s basketball team continues to hold down the top spot in the USA TODAY Sports women’s college basketball poll after a pair of victories last week.

The Huskies blew out DePaul by 67 points before defeating now No. 19-ranked USC, which fell two spots after the 79-51 loss.

The only change in the top 10 came as Oklahoma and Michigan flip-flopped positions. The Sooners (11-1) rose to No. 8 after a 22-point victory over Oklahoma State, which subsequently fell out of the rankings. Michigan (9-1) is now ranked No. 9 after wins over Purdue and Akron last week.

Louisville is the biggest riser in the poll this week, moving up three spots to No. 17 after defeating North Carolina. The Tar Heels fell five spots to No. 16 with the loss.

Nebraska (11-0) makes its season debut in the poll at No. 25.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Former Michigan football coach Sherrone Moore faces a felony home invasion charge, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison.
Legal experts suggest that Moore is unlikely to serve prison time, even if convicted, and could have faced more severe charges.
Moore is accused of forcibly entering a woman’s apartment, grabbing butter knives and scissors, and threatening to kill himself.

Every felony is serious: The one ex-Michigan football coach Sherrone Moore faces comes with a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

A final outcome in the case is far from certain. But legal experts who analyzed the charges against Moore said even if he takes a plea or is found guilty of the most serious charges he’s unlikely to go to prison.

In fact, one lawyer said Moore should breathe a sigh of relief prosecutors did not levy more serious charges, given a court record indicates a woman told police he pointed butter knives at her and backed her toward a separate room.

‘I think he’s fortunate they didn’t charge this with a Home Invasion 1 and Felonious Assault,’ said Scott Grabel, a veteran criminal defense lawyer based in Ann Arbor.

Moore is accused of forcibly entering the Ann Arbor-area apartment of a woman with whom he had a two-year affair on Dec. 10, shortly after the University of Michigan fired him. Once inside, law enforcement and prosecutors say he picked up butter knives and kitchen scissors, at some point threatening to kill himself. He then left, was arrested Dec. 10 and formally charged Dec. 12.

Prosecutors have wide discretion as to how they charge people: That means the exact same set of circumstances could yield very different charges filed by prosecutors in two different counties.

If the exact same thing Moore is accused of doing happened in a different county, Grabel said it’s highly likely Moore could be charged with first-degree home invasion, a felony that carries a maximum of 20 years in prison.

Instead, Moore faces third-degree felony home invasion, misdemeanor stalking and misdemeanor breaking and entering. Given the nature of these charges, Grabel and other lawyers told the Detroit Free Press the two nights Moore spent in a Washtenaw County jail could be his last behind bars on this case — even if he’s found guilty or takes a plea.

Grabel stressed he is not criticizing Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. In fact, he praised Savit for, in his view, showing prosecutorial discretion and not overcharging.

‘(Savit’s) job is not to get the highest conviction. It’s to look at the circumstances, and make a determination: What do I believe, with the law and the circumstances, do I think are appropriate charges that protect the community (and) are appropriate under the totality of the circumstances?’ Grabel said.

‘That’s where one county could charge A, one county could charge B. Just like with plea bargaining, one could give you an offer, one would say I would never give you an offer that good. Nobody did anything wrong here.’

In a statement Dec. 13, Savit said as of late last week there was not enough evidence to prove Moore intended to assault the woman. However, he noted the prosecutor has the power to change or increase charges ‘as new evidence comes in.’

After Moore’s initial court hearing, his lawyer Joseph Simon said he needed to review additional evidence before commenting on the charges and the case.

On Saturday, though, Simon answered a Free Press question as to why he thinks his client was not charged with assault.

‘Your question highlights the need to first obtain and review all evidence against every element of the charged offenses before making speculative comments or conclusions and that is what we intended to do,’ Simon wrote in a text message.

Grabel and Arther Weiss, a defense lawyer in metro Detroit, reviewed the complaint against Moore and information shared publicly by prosecutors and police. Both noted every case is unique, with nuances and details that will affect what ultimately happens to Moore.

They also cautioned it’s always difficult to predict what exactly will happen in a case; prosecutors and law enforcement may have more details they have not released and new information could come out at any moment that may help or hurt prosecutors or Moore.

If this were any other defendant and everything else was the same, though, Grabel and several other lawyers with whom the Free Press spoke agreed probation would be the ultimate outcome in the case.

“He’s not going to go to prison, his guidelines are probationable,” said Todd Flood, managing partner at Flood Law PLLC and a former Wayne County assistant prosecutor.

‘The guy has spiraled out of control, he had a lot of issues that led up to this and he needs counseling more than anything. The other thing is you’ve got Eli Savit, he’s a prosecutor who looks at resolution from a global standpoint, and an equitable resolution in most cases in this jurisdiction is going to be how does he rehabilitate Mr. Moore and send a message at the same time that there’s consequences for his actions.’

Moore is perhaps the most well-known man in Ann Arbor and certainly one of the more famous people in the state. Until very recently, he had power, influence and attention. In theory, that shouldn’t matter. In practice, it might, said John Freeman, a Bloomfield Hills defense lawyer and former prosecutor.

‘You can try to look at the case in a vacuum, but there’s just no way of doing that. He is who he is, he’s got the notoriety and public profile that he has,’ Freeman said.  

‘That undoubtedly will be something that’ll be taken into consideration.’

Right now, the public — and to some degree, Moore’s lawyer, Simon — largely only know information provided in court or to the media by police and prosecutors. Grabel noted prosecutors are required to provide Moore’s team with the evidence they have in the case. As of late last week, Simon said he had yet to receive body camera footage cited by prosecutors.

That evidence should show not only what happened in that apartment, but offer a glimpse into why prosecutors did not push for a more severe charge.

‘Assuming that the complaining witness is OK with it, then I think probation is highly likely as an outcome,’ Freeman said.

‘Especially if there was no threat of serious physical injury or death. But it is concerning that he is alleged to have forcibly entered into the location. That definitely changes the dynamic, and makes it far more serious, especially because she was at home.’

Degrees of home invasion

Kati Rezmierski, first assistant prosecutor for Washtenaw County, told a magistrate on Friday, Dec. 12: ‘I understand that there isn’t evidence to suggest that (Moore) directly threatened the victim’ with butter knives or kitchen scissors.

However, a detective with the Pittsfield Township Police Department told the same magistrate during an earlier hearing the woman said Moore did point the knives at her.

‘She advised that she began backing up and as he was approaching her (the woman) advised that Moore grabbed two knives out of her drawer and pointed them at her, saying, ‘You ruined my life. You ruined my life,” the detective told the magistrate, according to a transcript of the hearing.

‘(The woman) advised that she continued to back up, telling him to leave, and he continued towards her with the knives, backing her towards the living room.’

Moore denied assaulting the woman or threatening her with any weapon when asked by police, a court record shows.

Both lawyers said it’s important to note prosecutors charged Moore with third-degree home invasion, not first-degree. First-degree home invasion comes with a maximum 20-year prison sentence, but also requires proving the person committed assault or some other very serious crime in addition to breaking into a home.

Originally, when asked about Moore, Pittsfield police told media they responded to an apartment, ‘for the purposes of investigating a reported assault.’ But Moore was not charged with assault.

‘In my experience, I’ve seen them charge much more serious charges on less egregious facts,’ Grabel said.

Weiss said while prosecutors could have charged Moore with first-degree home invasion, it may have been too difficult for them to prove he had a specific intent to assault her when he entered the apartment.

‘They’re butter knives,’ he said. ‘Are you going to be able to get a jury to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that when he took out the butter knives he intended to scare her into reasonably believing she would be assaulted?

‘He’s got to have the intent to … at least threaten her with harm, so her being afraid with the butter knife is not enough — he’s got to have that intent.’

Ultimately, the testimony of the woman Moore is accused of attacking is crucial for any of these charges. Absent in-home cameras or a confession from the person accused, Grabel noted prosecutors frequently pursue first-degree home invasion based largely on statements from the person allegedly attacked.

Under third-degree home invasion, prosecutors only need to prove Moore committed a misdemeanor after breaking into a home. In this case, the listed misdemeanor is stalking.

Messages and consent key, lawyers say

Grabel said it’s crucial to understand how prosecutors plan to prove the stalking. Police told the court the woman reported receiving roughly a dozen calls and an unknown number of text messages after she ended the relationship with Moore earlier in the week, according to records.

On the third-degree felony home invasion, prosecutors must prove Moore intended to or did commit a misdemeanor — in this case, stalking — while at the apartment without permission.

‘Usually stalking is not a single episode. There’s got to be a course of conduct under the statute: more than one thing. If you don’t have the stalking, you don’t have the felony home invasion,’ Grabel said.

In order to show the course of conduct, he explained prosecutors would need more than one email, text message or other communication from the woman telling Moore to leave her alone.

‘If you fight the stalking, and there’s a weakness in the stalking, there goes the felony,’ Grabel said.

Weiss said how prosecutors prove Moore did not have consent to enter the apartment of the woman with whom he had an affair is also important.

Prosecutors do not need to prove Moore physically broke down the door, only that he used force to enter the residence and did not have permission to come inside. Under the law, the act of opening the door counts as force.

But Weiss noted, if Moore’s habit was to enter without knocking because he’d previously been given permission, that could factor into the home invasion charge.

‘For the purposes of a case, if the jury wants to believe it — simply her telling him you can’t come in or not answering the door is probably enough,’ he said.

‘But on the other hand, if … they had an intimate relationship for any period of time and he would come over all the time (because) their course of conduct is, ‘I can enter, I don’t have to wait for someone to open the door for me because if I’m coming over there’s permission,’ it can be a jury’s determination that they’re going to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that because of their relationship and course of conduct or habit that the non-live-in person had permission to come in.’

However, there is still a chance prosecutor bring more serious charges. Frequently, Grabel said prosecutors try to work out a deal with defense lawyers. If the defense lawyers agree to voluntarily forgo a critical early hearing that’s used to establish where there is enough evidence for the case to go to a hypothetical trial, then the prosecutors agree not to up the charges.

But, if the defense disagrees and says they want to hold that early hearing, prosecutors can say they will push for harsher charges at that time.

This is not a situation unique to Moore, and it isn’t necessarily happening in his case. But Grabel explained it’s a possibility that isn’t uncommon, one that presents a calculated risk to both prosecutors and the defense.

Prosecutors offer timeline of events

During the Friday hearing, Rezmierski walked through a brief timeline of events, providing additional details about the actions that prompted the charges against Moore.

Rezmierski said on Dec. 8, the woman with whom Moore had a roughly two-year affair ended their relationship. Moore, a 39-year-old married father of three, tried repeatedly to contact her, Rezmierski said. The woman did not respond, she said.

The Free Press generally does not identify people described as domestic crime victims without their consent.

At some point after this, Rezmierski said the woman provided evidence of their relationship to Michigan athletic officials. Athletic department leadership fired Moore for cause on Dec. 10.

After his firing, Moore allegedly drove to the woman’s apartment and ‘barged his way into that apartment,’ Rezmierski said. Court records show the woman’s lawyer, Heidi Sharp, called police. A detective quotes emergency dispatch, indicating Sharp said Moore was at the apartment attacking her client and he has ‘a long history of domestic violence’ against the woman.

This alleged history was not mentioned in court Friday.

A Pittsfield Township police news release states he entered through an unlocked door without permission. Police and prosecutors say an argument ensued; Moore allegedly grabbed butter knives and pair of kitchen scissors and threatened to hurt himself.

‘I’m going to kill myself. I’m going to make you watch. My blood is on your hands. You ruined my life,’ Rezmierski said in court Friday, quoting what Moore is accused of saying at the woman’s apartment.

‘A series of very, very threatening, intimidating, terrifying quite frankly, statements and behaviors there in that apartment.’

Ultimately Moore did not hurt the woman or himself before leaving the apartment, prosecutors and police say. But she told police after Moore left that she ‘has never been more terrified in her life,’ a court record states.

“While I understand that there isn’t evidence to suggest that he directly threatened the victim with any of those implements that I’ve indicated, the totality of the behavior is highly threatening and highly intimidating. She was terrorized, your honor,’ Rezmierski said in court.

Officers with the Saline Police Department arrested Moore shortly after he left the apartment. Simon said during court after Moore’s arrest, he was taken to a local hospital for a mental health evaluation, then taken to the Washtenaw County Jail, where he remained Wednesday and Thursday before being formally charged and posting a $25,000 bond on Friday.

After the hearing, Rezmierski declined to comment.

Reach Dave Boucher at dboucher@freepress.com and on X @Dave_Boucher1.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

In a text message to an ESPN reporter Monday night, Manning’s father Cooper confirmed, ‘Arch is playing football at Texas next year.’

The decision should not have come as a surprise after Texas coach Steve Sarkisian recently told reporters that Manning would benefit from another year in college.

‘He’s a young man who’s gotten better as the season’s gone on, and not only physically, but mentally, maturity-wise. I would think he’s going to want another year of that growth to put himself in position for hopefully a long career in the NFL,’ Sarkisian said. ‘And he’s got some unfinished business of what he came here to do and what he came here to accomplish.’

Sarkisian made his comments at a press event in Orlando, Florida, where the No. 14 Longhorns (9-3) will take on No. 17 Michigan in the Citrus Bowl on New Year’s Eve.

‘We had a really good football season,’ Sarkisian said. ‘We left some meat on the bone with an opportunity to be SEC champs, national champs, and so ultimately for him, I think the competitor in him is going to say, ‘Man, I sure would like another crack at trying to do those things.”

In his first season as a starter, Manning has completed 227 of 370 passes (61.4%) for 2,942 yards, with 24 touchdowns and seven interceptions. He’s also run for 244 yards and eight touchdowns.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

And then there were two.

Although many NBA fans expected the Oklahoma City Thunder to coast to the third-ever NBA Cup title, the San Antonio Spurs, led by third-year center Victor Wembanyama, played spoiler with their 111-109 victory over the Thunder in the semfinals. Now, all that stands between this young group and an NBA Cup championship is the New York Knicks.

The Knicks have had an equally difficult path to the title game, having to take care of both the Toronto Raptors and Orlando Magic in order to get to this point. While both of those teams are tremendously talented, the Knicks haven’t faced much trouble, winning each game by at least 12 points.

Such dominance would make you think the Knicks are the favorites heading into tonight’s contest. However, the Spurs have proven themselves capable of taking on the best teams in the league, and they will be very tough to beat.

USA TODAY Sports will have live coverage of the NBA Cup final. Here’s everything to know for fans looking to watch tonight’s game between the Spurs and the Knicks:

What time is Spurs vs. Knicks NBA Cup final today?

The San Antonio Spurs and New York Knicks will compete for the third annual NBA Cup title on Tuesday, Dec. 10 at 8:30 p.m. ET (5:30 p.m. local) at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas.

Watch NBA Cup games with Amazon Prime Video

How to watch Spurs vs. Knicks NBA Cup final: TV, live streaming

The 2025 NBA Cup Final between the San Antonio Spurs and New York Knicks will stream exclusively on Amazon Prime Video.

Date: Tuesday, Dec. 16
Time: 8:30 p.m. ET (5:30 p.m. PT)
Location: T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas
TV: N/A
Streaming: Amazon Prime Video

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The next episode of the NFL’s Netflix Christmas doubleheader is set to feature one of music’s biggest legends.

Plenty of people hope for a dog under the Christmas tree each year. In 2025, Netflix and NFL delivered with Snoop Dogg, who is set to perform at halftime in Minnesota as J.J. McCarthy, Justin Jefferson and the Vikings take on Jared Goff, Jahmyr Gibbs and the Detroit Lions.

Netflix made the announcement on Dec. 16, releasing a promo video on X.

“NFL, Netflix, and your Uncle Snoop on Christmas Day?” Snoop Dogg said in the Netflix release. “We’re servin’ up music, love and good vibes for the whole world to enjoy. That’s the kind of holiday magic Santa can’t fit in a bag.”

“Christmas Gameday just got a whole lot cooler,” Netflix’s Chief Content Officer Bela Bajaria added. “We’re uniting two global cultural juggernauts, the NFL and the one and only Snoop Dogg, who will drop the hottest halftime show. As a West Coast girl and huge fan myself, I can confidently say this is the ultimate gift we could give our members. We’re ready to drop it like it’s hot with this holiday celebration!”

Netflix teased that there will be some additional special guests set to join the artist at halftime.

Snoop Dogg is no stranger to the big stage, especially when it comes to NFL halftime. He famously performed at the Super Bowl 56 halftime show alongside some of hip hop and R&B legends, Dr. Dre, Eminem, Mary J. Blige, Kendrick Lamar and more.

On Christmas, the 54-year-old artist will bring a little West Coast flavor to the Midwest’s U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis.

The rapper, singer, producer and actor is famously a fan of the Pittsburgh Steelers, who will not be in action on Christmas in 2025.

Instead, Snoop Dogg will get to take in an NFC North matchup between the Lions and Vikings.

Maybe that ‘G’ in ‘Nuthin’ But a ‘G’ Thang’ stands for Goff.

How to watch Snoop Dogg NFL Christmas halftime show

Time: 4:30 p.m. ET
Streaming: Netflix (national)
Channel (local markets only)

Minnesota: WCCO-CBS
Detroit: WWJ-CBS

Kickoff of the Vikings vs. Lions game is at 4:30 p.m. ET, meaning halftime should be around 5:30-6 p.m., depending on how quickly the first half is played.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

President Donald Trump isn’t offended by White House chief of staff Susie Wiles’ comments in Vanity Fair describing him as someone with ‘an alcoholic’s personality.’

On Tuesday, Vanity Fair published the first part of a two-part story about Wiles and the second Trump administration — which White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed featured comments that were ‘wildly’ taken out of context. 

In response, Trump and his allies have come to dish out praise for Wiles, following the publication of a story where Wiles issued some unsavory remarks about Trump and others in his orbit. Hours after the Vanity Fair story was published, Trump told the New York Post that he wasn’t insulted by Wiles’ description of his personality. 

‘No, she meant that I’m — you see, I don’t drink alcohol. So everybody knows that — but I’ve often said that if I did, I’d have a very good chance of being an alcoholic. I have said that many times about myself, I do. It’s a very possessive personality,’ Trump told the Post. 

‘I’ve said that many times about myself. I’m fortunate I’m not a drinker. If I did, I could very well, because I’ve said that — what’s the word? Not possessive — possessive and addictive type personality,’ Trump said. ‘Oh, I’ve said it many times, many times before.’

The White House referred Fox News Digital to the Post’s reporting when asked for comment. 

Included in the Vanity Fair story were several quotes from Wiles describing others within Trump’s orbit in an unflattering manner. In addition to the remarks about Trump, Wiles was quoted claiming that Vice President JD Vance has been a ‘conspiracy theorist for a decade,’ and that Attorney General Pam Bondi ‘completely whiffed’ how she handled the release of documents pertaining to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 

Likewise, she described the Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought as ‘a right-wing absolute zealot,’ and claimed that SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who headed up the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was an ‘odd duck’ and an ‘avowed ketamine (user).’ 

Even so, Wiles was also quoted praising Trump’s Cabinet, claiming that they are ‘a world-class Cabinet, better than anything I could have conceived of.’

In response to the story, Wiles claimed that the story was a ‘disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history.’

‘Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story,’ Wiles said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team.’ 

Meanwhile, other members of the Trump administration also swiftly came to Wiles’ defense — including some of those who were mentioned in an unfavorable way. 

Vance dismissed Wiles’ comments during an event in Allentown, Pennsylvania, where he claimed that he and Wiles have privately joked that the vice president is a conspiracy theorist. 

‘Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist, but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true,’ Vance said. 

Bondi also issued some praise for Wiles, and asserted that ‘any attempt to divide this administration will fail.’

‘Any attempt to undermine and downplay President Trump’s monumental achievements will fail,’ Bondi said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘We are family. We are united.’ 

Vought, who also served as director of the Office of Management and Budget during Trump’s first term, said that Wiles is an ‘exceptional’ chief of staff and that this is the most seamless era he’s experienced in his two terms working for Trump. 

‘In my portfolio, she is always an ally in helping me deliver for the president,’ Vought said about Wiles. ‘And this hit piece will not slow us down.’

Meanwhile, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed the piece was a playbook from the left to ‘trash & smear our best & most effective people.’ 

‘They do it to President Trump daily — and now to Chief Susie Wiles. Susie is the most TRUSTED, most PROFESSIONAL & most EFFECTIVE Chief of Staff of my lifetime,’ Hegseth said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘Absolutely nobody better!’ 

United Nations Ambassador Mike Waltz, who previously served as the national security advisor at the White House, said he’d known Wiles for over a decade and that she ‘exemplifies integrity & dedication to our incredible President and country.’

‘The Queen of Florida politics – the architect of multiple successful governor’s and Presidential campaigns – she’s calm under fire, forthright, & results focused. Period,’ Waltz said in a post on X on Tuesday.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also weighed in, describing Wiles as ‘the single most effective operator whom I have ever met.’ 

‘Susie is an exceptional Chief of Staff, and her tireless dedication, loyalty, and commitment to the President are beyond reproach,’ Bessent said in a post on X on Tuesday. ‘Powerful leadership often works quietly – never seeking credit and always relentlessly driving results. Our Chief exemplifies that.’

‘No one is more insightful, effective, and loyal,’ Bessent said. ‘She never loses sight of the big picture while managing the daily agenda.’ 

Bessent also challenged Vanity Fair’s portrayal of the Trump administration in the piece, claiming that the faulty characterization is ‘precisely why the insular chattering classes in America lose their minds as we notch victory after victory for the American people.’

Musk did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Conde Nast, which owns Vanity Fair, did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Sen. Lindsey Graham warned that the U.S. mission in Venezuela must end with Nicolás Maduro removed from power, arguing that leaving the embattled leader in place after a major U.S. show of force would be a ‘fatal mistake to our standing in the world.’

‘If after all this, we still leave this guy in power… that’s the worst possible signal you can send to Russia, China, Iran,’ Graham, R-S.C., told reporters after a classified all-senator briefing with War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Trump administration officials did not say whether a series of narco-strikes in the Caribbean could escalate into direct strikes against Venezuelan territory or a broader campaign to oust Maduro. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital the briefing was ‘absent of specificity and detail’ and left ‘more questions than answers.’

‘I want to reassert, again, you cannot allow this man to be standing after this display of force, and I did not get a very good answer as to what happens,’ Graham said. ‘What I want is some clarity going forward. Is that in fact the goal?… If it’s not the goal, it is a huge mistake.’

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., said he heard from briefers that there is a ‘very good process of determining if something’s a target or not’ before striking narco-trafficking boats, but the administration did not clarify its broader strategy toward the Maduro regime. 

‘Right now the focus has been on the boats,’ Bacon said. ‘I don’t know what we’re doing yet with Venezuela writ large.’

Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., said the classified session also failed to address core questions. 

‘I actually think that was, for me, more of an exercise in futility. I really have no answers. Really didn’t gain anything more than what the public already has gotten,’ he said. He added that there was ‘really no conversation about why… we got 15,000 troops there,’ arguing the deployment ‘doesn’t seem to be just about narcotics trafficking.’ 

Meeks said briefers provided ‘no real rational decision or real answers’ about whether the U.S. is preparing for ‘a war in Venezuela,’ raising what he described as a pressing war powers issue. He said he plans to bring forward legislation this week addressing the recent strikes ‘in the Pacific, in the Caribbean’ as well as any potential move by Trump ‘to go into Venezuela.’

Rubio told reporters the mission is ‘focused on dismantling the infrastructure of these terrorist organizations that are operating in our hemisphere, undermining the security of Americans, killing Americans, poisoning Americans.’

Hegseth told reporters the War Department would not release video footage of the Sept. 2 narco-strikes — in which Adm. Frank Bradley ordered a ‘double tap’ strike to kill survivors — to the public. The video will instead be shown to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

Graham dismissed the footage as ‘the least of my concerns’ but said he urged Hegseth to release it so Americans could ‘make your own decisions.’

Hegseth and Rubio’s briefing came as the U.S. undertakes its largest military buildup in the region in decades: 15% of all naval assets are now positioned in the Southern Command theater. Graham cited the deployment as evidence that anything short of Maduro’s removal would undermine U.S. credibility. 

‘It got, yeah, 15% of the Navy pointed to this guy,’ he said.

Graham also pointed to historical precedent, arguing the U.S. has acted similarly when confronting hostile or destabilizing regimes. 

‘We have legal authority, in my view, to do in Venezuela what we did regarding Panama and Haiti,’ he said, recalling that in 1989 the U.S. ‘literally invaded Panama… took the president in power and put him in jail.’

He said he believes Trump intends a comparable outcome. 

‘Every indication by President Trump is that the purpose of this operation is to shut down the (Maduro) regime and replace it with something less threatening to the United States,’ Graham said.

Pressed on whether he meant regime change or lethal force, Graham replied: ‘I don’t care as long as he leaves.’

The public is now waiting to see whether the Trump administration will turn to direct strikes on Venezuelan territory as a means of pressuring Maduro to leave power — a step Graham argued is necessary for the operation to succeed.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS