50 Cent Deems Chris Brown The 'Best Overall Artist Out'
'CB out he made bond, I'm only saying sh*t about him because I think he is the best overall artist out,' the Queens rapper, 49, declared. 'I watched his whole run!' See the post below.
Brown, 36, was arrested and taken into custody at The Lowry Hotel in Manchester on Thursday, May 15. The arrest stems from a 2023 incident where the singer allegedly assaulted producer Abe Diaw with a bottle of alcohol at Tape nightclub.
'A 36-year-old man was arrested at a hotel in Manchester shortly after 02:00hrs on Thursday, 15 May on suspicion of grievous bodily harm,' a Metropolitan Police spokesperson confirmed. 'He has been taken into custody where he remains. The arrest relates to an incident at a venue in Hanover Square on 19 February 2023. The investigation is being led by detectives from the Central West Area Basic Command Unit.'
After being denied bail once, Brown was released on $6.7M bail following a hearing on Wednesday (May 21), with the amount being forfeited if certain conditions are not met or if he does not make it to his next court appearance, the British Press Association reported.
Brown is now free to begin the European leg of his Breezy Bowl Tour. Between shows at Cardiff's Principality Stadium and London's Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, however, the 'Sensational' artist has a court date of June 20. He has also been ordered by Judge Tony Baumgartner to surrender his passport unless it is being used for tour purposes.
More from VIBE.com
Chris Brown Released On $6.7M Bail After U.K. Arrest, Europe Tour Allowed To Begin
50 Cent Reacts To People Allegedly Being Paid To Wear "Free Diddy" Shirts At Federal Trial
50 Cent Clowns Floyd Mayweather Jr.'s $100M Defamation Lawsuit
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
4 hours ago
- CNN
Analysis: The thing Trump's generals feared about him could now be arriving
A big unknown with President Donald Trump's move Monday to federalize the DC Metropolitan Police Department and deploy the National Guard in the nation's capital is how much he wants a crackdown versus the appearance of one. Trump's mobilization of the military two months ago in Los Angeles seemed to fit the latter category. Maybe Trump just wants to look like he's getting tough on crime in DC. But with Trump's now-repeated and historically extraordinary deployment of the Guard – and his comments about bringing this approach to other cities – he's doing what he often does: gradually pushing the envelope and getting ever closer to what seems to be his desired outcome, which is a fuller militarization of the homeland. That might sound overwrought to some. But it's worth emphasizing that this is precisely the outcome that multiple top generals and military officials who served in Trump's first term worried about – and warned about. For years, they've cast Trump's desire to dispatch the military on US soil as one of his most troubling tendencies – and even case-in-point evidence of his authoritarianism. This issue was raised in one form or another by two Trump defense secretaries (Jim Mattis and Mark Esper), his top general (Mark Milley) and his chief of staff (John Kelly, also a retired general). All of them have cast this as a line that is not to be crossed and indicated they feared Trump would indeed cross it. Some even recalled multiple instances when Trump tried to do so or suggested it. The flashpoint for many of their comments was the scene in June 2020 when federal law enforcement cleared Lafayette Square near the White Houe of racial-justice protesters. They did so right before Trump strolled through for a photo-op featuring both Milley and Esper. (Both later expressed regret for participating.) Mattis responded with a blistering – and unusual, for him – statement that warned of what the scene portended. 'Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, DC, sets up a conflict — a false conflict — between the military and civilian society,' he said. 'It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.' Mattis said the military should be used on US soil 'only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.' (Notably, Trump's deployments of the military this summer – in Los Angeles and DC – came without requests from the governor and mayor, respectively.) Esper has described a scene in which Trump asked him and Milley why the protesters couldn't simply be shot 'in the legs or something.' And in his 2022 book, he said a large part of his job that summer was 'making sure to blunt or redirect any efforts that could politicize the military, misuse the force, or undermine the nation's security.' In a CNN interview in October, Esper even invoked the Kent State massacre, where the National Guard killed four Vietnam War protesters. 'We don't want to go back to that,' Esper said. Kelly likewise has said Trump had to be told repeatedly why he shouldn't use the military against American citizens, dating back to his first year in office. But he said Trump would just keep pressing the issue. 'And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it's a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,' Kelly told the New York Times last year. In the same interview, Kelly mentioned Trump's penchant for this while saying he met the definition of a fascist. That's a description Milley, too, has applied to Trump. And at one point, he reportedly so feared Trump's willingness to misuse the military that he worried Trump might launch a coup after the 2020 election. (Trump denied ever considering such a thing.) In their 2021 book, 'I Alone Can Fix it,' Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker reported that Milley believed Trump was stoking unrest with his false claims about voter fraud in possible hope of being able to call in the military. (Rucker is now senior vice president for editorial strategy and news at CNN.) 'This is a Reichstag moment,' Milley reportedly told aides, recalling the episode the Nazis used as a pretext to cripple the opposition and consolidate power. Milley didn't confirm the account in the book, but a defense official close to him suggested to CNN in 2021 that Milley was indeed quite concerned about Trump mobilizing the military for nefarious purposes. 'He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans,' the official said. Trump's time in politics has featured no shortage of former administration officials who warn in pretty stark terms about his tendencies. But what's particularly notable here is the positions these men held. These are precisely the kinds of people who would be most aware of Trump's desire to misuse the military. And the fact that they've suggested he's pushed for these things privately indicates it isn't just bluster when Trump talks openly about calling in active duty military in addition to the National Guard in DC, as he did Monday. That doesn't mean all of that will come to pass. The guardrails have held before, even as they've clearly receded in his second term. And Trump's legal authorities are more limited outside DC. But the president appears more and more intent on pressing the issue. And that makes the comments of these four men more relevant than ever.
CNN
4 hours ago
- CNN
Analysis: The thing Trump's generals feared about him could now be arriving
A big unknown with President Donald Trump's move Monday to federalize the DC Metropolitan Police Department and deploy the National Guard in the nation's capital is how much he wants a crackdown versus the appearance of one. Trump's mobilization of the military two months ago in Los Angeles seemed to fit the latter category. Maybe Trump just wants to look like he's getting tough on crime in DC. But with Trump's now-repeated and historically extraordinary deployment of the Guard – and his comments about bringing this approach to other cities – he's doing what he often does: gradually pushing the envelope and getting ever closer to what seems to be his desired outcome, which is a fuller militarization of the homeland. That might sound overwrought to some. But it's worth emphasizing that this is precisely the outcome that multiple top generals and military officials who served in Trump's first term worried about – and warned about. For years, they've cast Trump's desire to dispatch the military on US soil as one of his most troubling tendencies – and even case-in-point evidence of his authoritarianism. This issue was raised in one form or another by two Trump defense secretaries (Jim Mattis and Mark Esper), his top general (Mark Milley) and his chief of staff (John Kelly, also a retired general). All of them have cast this as a line that is not to be crossed and indicated they feared Trump would indeed cross it. Some even recalled multiple instances when Trump tried to do so or suggested it. The flashpoint for many of their comments was the scene in June 2020 when federal law enforcement cleared Lafayette Square near the White Houe of racial-justice protesters. They did so right before Trump strolled through for a photo-op featuring both Milley and Esper. (Both later expressed regret for participating.) Mattis responded with a blistering – and unusual, for him – statement that warned of what the scene portended. 'Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, DC, sets up a conflict — a false conflict — between the military and civilian society,' he said. 'It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.' Mattis said the military should be used on US soil 'only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.' (Notably, Trump's deployments of the military this summer – in Los Angeles and DC – came without requests from the governor and mayor, respectively.) Esper has described a scene in which Trump asked him and Milley why the protesters couldn't simply be shot 'in the legs or something.' And in his 2022 book, he said a large part of his job that summer was 'making sure to blunt or redirect any efforts that could politicize the military, misuse the force, or undermine the nation's security.' In a CNN interview in October, Esper even invoked the Kent State massacre, where the National Guard killed four Vietnam War protesters. 'We don't want to go back to that,' Esper said. Kelly likewise has said Trump had to be told repeatedly why he shouldn't use the military against American citizens, dating back to his first year in office. But he said Trump would just keep pressing the issue. 'And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it's a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,' Kelly told the New York Times last year. In the same interview, Kelly mentioned Trump's penchant for this while saying he met the definition of a fascist. That's a description Milley, too, has applied to Trump. And at one point, he reportedly so feared Trump's willingness to misuse the military that he worried Trump might launch a coup after the 2020 election. (Trump denied ever considering such a thing.) In their 2021 book, 'I Alone Can Fix it,' Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker reported that Milley believed Trump was stoking unrest with his false claims about voter fraud in possible hope of being able to call in the military. (Rucker is now senior vice president for editorial strategy and news at CNN.) 'This is a Reichstag moment,' Milley reportedly told aides, recalling the episode the Nazis used as a pretext to cripple the opposition and consolidate power. Milley didn't confirm the account in the book, but a defense official close to him suggested to CNN in 2021 that Milley was indeed quite concerned about Trump mobilizing the military for nefarious purposes. 'He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans,' the official said. Trump's time in politics has featured no shortage of former administration officials who warn in pretty stark terms about his tendencies. But what's particularly notable here is the positions these men held. These are precisely the kinds of people who would be most aware of Trump's desire to misuse the military. And the fact that they've suggested he's pushed for these things privately indicates it isn't just bluster when Trump talks openly about calling in active duty military in addition to the National Guard in DC, as he did Monday. That doesn't mean all of that will come to pass. The guardrails have held before, even as they've clearly receded in his second term. And Trump's legal authorities are more limited outside DC. But the president appears more and more intent on pressing the issue. And that makes the comments of these four men more relevant than ever.
CNN
4 hours ago
- CNN
Analysis: The thing Trump's generals feared about him could now be arriving
A big unknown with President Donald Trump's move Monday to federalize the DC Metropolitan Police Department and deploy the National Guard in the nation's capital is how much he wants a crackdown versus the appearance of one. Trump's mobilization of the military two months ago in Los Angeles seemed to fit the latter category. Maybe Trump just wants to look like he's getting tough on crime in DC. But with Trump's now-repeated and historically extraordinary deployment of the Guard – and his comments about bringing this approach to other cities – he's doing what he often does: gradually pushing the envelope and getting ever closer to what seems to be his desired outcome, which is a fuller militarization of the homeland. That might sound overwrought to some. But it's worth emphasizing that this is precisely the outcome that multiple top generals and military officials who served in Trump's first term worried about – and warned about. For years, they've cast Trump's desire to dispatch the military on US soil as one of his most troubling tendencies – and even case-in-point evidence of his authoritarianism. This issue was raised in one form or another by two Trump defense secretaries (Jim Mattis and Mark Esper), his top general (Mark Milley) and his chief of staff (John Kelly, also a retired general). All of them have cast this as a line that is not to be crossed and indicated they feared Trump would indeed cross it. Some even recalled multiple instances when Trump tried to do so or suggested it. The flashpoint for many of their comments was the scene in June 2020 when federal law enforcement cleared Lafayette Square near the White Houe of racial-justice protesters. They did so right before Trump strolled through for a photo-op featuring both Milley and Esper. (Both later expressed regret for participating.) Mattis responded with a blistering – and unusual, for him – statement that warned of what the scene portended. 'Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, DC, sets up a conflict — a false conflict — between the military and civilian society,' he said. 'It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.' Mattis said the military should be used on US soil 'only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.' (Notably, Trump's deployments of the military this summer – in Los Angeles and DC – came without requests from the governor and mayor, respectively.) Esper has described a scene in which Trump asked him and Milley why the protesters couldn't simply be shot 'in the legs or something.' And in his 2022 book, he said a large part of his job that summer was 'making sure to blunt or redirect any efforts that could politicize the military, misuse the force, or undermine the nation's security.' In a CNN interview in October, Esper even invoked the Kent State massacre, where the National Guard killed four Vietnam War protesters. 'We don't want to go back to that,' Esper said. Kelly likewise has said Trump had to be told repeatedly why he shouldn't use the military against American citizens, dating back to his first year in office. But he said Trump would just keep pressing the issue. 'And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it's a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,' Kelly told the New York Times last year. In the same interview, Kelly mentioned Trump's penchant for this while saying he met the definition of a fascist. That's a description Milley, too, has applied to Trump. And at one point, he reportedly so feared Trump's willingness to misuse the military that he worried Trump might launch a coup after the 2020 election. (Trump denied ever considering such a thing.) In their 2021 book, 'I Alone Can Fix it,' Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker reported that Milley believed Trump was stoking unrest with his false claims about voter fraud in possible hope of being able to call in the military. (Rucker is now senior vice president for editorial strategy and news at CNN.) 'This is a Reichstag moment,' Milley reportedly told aides, recalling the episode the Nazis used as a pretext to cripple the opposition and consolidate power. Milley didn't confirm the account in the book, but a defense official close to him suggested to CNN in 2021 that Milley was indeed quite concerned about Trump mobilizing the military for nefarious purposes. 'He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans,' the official said. Trump's time in politics has featured no shortage of former administration officials who warn in pretty stark terms about his tendencies. But what's particularly notable here is the positions these men held. These are precisely the kinds of people who would be most aware of Trump's desire to misuse the military. And the fact that they've suggested he's pushed for these things privately indicates it isn't just bluster when Trump talks openly about calling in active duty military in addition to the National Guard in DC, as he did Monday. That doesn't mean all of that will come to pass. The guardrails have held before, even as they've clearly receded in his second term. And Trump's legal authorities are more limited outside DC. But the president appears more and more intent on pressing the issue. And that makes the comments of these four men more relevant than ever.
