Latest news with #Barnum&Bailey
Global News
12-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Global News
Taylor Swift subpoenaed in Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni legal battle
Taylor Swift could potentially be taking the stand in the legal battle between It Ends With Us co-stars Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni. Swift, who is close friends with Lively, had been mentioned in connection with the ongoing legal case between the co-stars when text exchanges were revealed that included her name in Baldoni's US$400-million defamation countersuit against Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds in January. On May 9, Baldoni's lawyer Bryan Freedman issued a subpoena to Swift in the lawsuit involving the 2024 film It Ends With Us. A spokesperson for Swift said the attempt to subpoena the pop star as a witness in the case is 'designed' to use Swift's 'name to draw public interest.' Swift's team told NBC News she wouldn't have any information relevant to the legal dispute and should not be involved in the case. Story continues below advertisement 'Taylor Swift never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film, she did not even see It Ends With Us until weeks after its public release, and was traveling around the globe during 2023 and 2024 headlining the biggest tour in history,' her spokesperson said on May 9. Swift's team said her only involvement in the film was licensing a song, which was My Tears Ricochet. 'Given that her involvement was licensing a song for the film, which 19 other artists also did, this document subpoena is designed to use Taylor Swift's name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case,' the spokesperson said. Lively's legal team released a statement after news of Swift's potential involvement in the case spread. Her team told CNN that Baldoni and his legal team 'continue to turn a case of sexual harassment and retaliation into entertainment for the tabloids.' 'This is a very serious legal matter, not Barnum & Bailey's Circus,' the spokesperson said. 'The defendants continue to publicly intimidate, bully, shame and attack women's rights and reputations.' 2:28 Blake Lively says past year was 'the highest of highs and the lowest of lows' Baldoni sued his co-star Lively, 37, and Reynolds, 48, for defamation in January. That lawsuit came the same day that Baldoni sued the New York Times for libel, alleging the paper worked with Lively to smear him. Story continues below advertisement In December 2024, Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment on the set of the movie as well as a subsequent effort to 'destroy' her reputation in a legal complaint. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy In the complaint, Lively accused Baldoni and the studio of embarking on a 'multi-tiered plan' to damage her reputation following a meeting in which she and Reynolds addressed 'repeated sexual harassment and other disturbing behaviour' by Baldoni and a producer on the movie. The plan, the complaint said, included a proposal to plant theories on online message boards, engineer a social media campaign and place news stories critical of Lively. Since the legal battle began, Baldoni's legal team has made text messages from Lively and Reynolds public on a website, titled The Lawsuit Info, created to help defend him. On the website, published in early February, Baldoni, 41, also shared an amended complaint in his case against Lively, Reynolds, Lively's PR firm and the New York Times, as well as a 168-page document, called 'Timeline of relevant events,' related to the case and the production of the film. Story continues below advertisement The timeline includes emails and text messages that were allegedly sent leading up to and during the movie's filming. Text messages between Lively and Baldoni, where she seemingly alludes to Swift as 'one of her dragons,' were released in February. Swift and Lively have been very close friends since 2015 and the pop star is the godmother of Lively's children. In the text messages between the pair, Baldoni goes into detail about the rooftop scene in the movie that Lively had allegedly reworked. His lawyers claim that the actor 'felt obliged to text Lively to say that he had liked her pages and hadn't needed Reynolds and her megacelebrity friend to pressure him.' According to the suit, Lively invited Baldoni to her penthouse in New York, where Reynolds and a 'megacelebrity friend' both praised Lively's version of the rooftop scene. 'Also was working on rooftop scene today, I really love what you did. It really does help a lot,' Baldoni wrote in the text message. 'Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan and Taylor). You really are a talent across the board. Really excited nd [sic] grateful to do this together.' In a text from Lively, according to the suit, she calls Reynolds and another person, whose name is redacted, 'absolute titans as writers and storytellers outside of their primary gig.' Story continues below advertisement 'They also know I'm not always as good at making sure I'm seen and utilized for fear of threatening egos, or fear of affecting the ease of the process. They don't give a sh-t about that. And because of that, everyone listens to them with immense respect and enthusiasm. So I guess I have to stop worrying about people liking me,' Lively allegedly wrote. Lively goes on to compare herself to Khaleesi, a Game of Thrones character played by Emilia Clarke. 'If you ever get around to watching Game of Thrones, you'll appreciate that I'm Khaleesi, and like her, I happen to have a few dragons. For better or worse, but usually for better. Because my dragons also protect those I fight for. So really we all benefit from those gorgeous monsters of mine. You will too, I can promise you,' Lively wrote. Story continues below advertisement Baldoni and Lively's legal trial is set for March 2026 in New York City. — With files from The Associated Press
Gulf Today
21-02-2025
- Politics
- Gulf Today
Real motive behind Trump renaming Gulf of Mexico
Gustavo Arellano, Tribune News Service Before President Donald Trump, the most high-profile call to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico came from Stephen Colbert, who joked on his Comedy Central show in 2010 that the body of water should be referred to as the Gulf of America in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill because 'we broke it, we bought it.' Almost 15 years later, it could have been worse: Trump could have decreed the Gulf of Mexico be renamed the Gulf of MAGA. (Don't anyone give him any ideas!) But Trump's arrival at changing the name to the Gulf of America retains none of the jocular tinge of Colbert's sarcastic suggestion. When William Nericcio first heard about Trump's executive order to do just that, the San Diego State English professor dismissed it as 'a big publicity stunt to mask more nefarious stuff.' It certainly was received that way in the weeks leading up to Inauguration Day, when Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reacted to news of Trump's plans by suggesting the American Southwest, which belonged to Mexico until the 1848 Mexican-American War, be renamed 'América Mexicana.' The laughs continued as Trump mentioned the Gulf of America during his inaugural address, then signed the change into law along with 25 other executive orders that included a ban on birthright citizenship, withdrawing from the Paris climate accords and ending all federal diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programmes. Rebranding the body of water bounded by the US, Mexico and Cuba as the Gulf of America — which Trump justified by stating in his order it 'has long been an integral asset to our once burgeoning Nation and has remained an indelible part of America' — was seen as a random piffle, namely because cartographers and governments across the world have used 'Gulf of Mexico' for nearly 475 years. But the more that Nericcio thought about a gesture he felt was 'straight out of Barnum & Bailey,' the more he began to worry. He's the author of 'Tex(t)-Mex: Seductive Hallucinations of the 'Mexican' in American,' a hilarious yet insightful 2007 book abut the history of anti-Mexican sentiment in the United States. It tracks the depiction of Mexicans in popular culture through postcards depicting the Mexican Revolution, Hollywood stereotypes, racist songs and more — efforts Nericcio argued have fuelled anti-Mexican laws and sentiment in this country for decades. 'The speaking of the Spanish language on Mexican soil can trigger the most jingoistic attitudes,' Nericcio told me, 'so why not pave over five centuries of history and call it the Gulf of America?' He fretted as Trump declared Feb. 9 to be Gulf of America Day, saying it was part of restoring 'American pride in the history of American greatness,' and as the US Board on Geographic Names officially complied with Trump's order and announced all federal agencies were 'currently in the process of updating their maps, products, and services to reflect the Gulf of America name change.' Nericcio groaned when the White House blocked Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office in retaliation for the news organisation — whose style guide is regarded as the gold standard in American journalism, including by the L.A. Times — announcing they would continue to use 'Gulf of Mexico' in its stories while acknowledging Trump's name change. But what put the profe in full despair mode was when Apple and Google updated their map services last week so that American users will now see 'Gulf of America.' The decision prompted the Mexican government to write a letter to Google stating that 'under no circumstance will Mexico accept the renaming of a geographic zone within its own territory and under its jurisdiction,' and threatening a lawsuit. Nericcio is usually quick to a bon mot, but his worrisome tone when we talked was something I had never heard in the 15 years we've known each other. 'We know the history of America is empire, but this is America showing its empire tattoos,' he said. 'It's bald, naked imperialism, and it's on the order of Stalin.' It's easy to dismiss Nericcio as a wild-eyed academic wokoso, but he's not wrong at all. The name change isn't a punchline or weird Trump quirk a la ketchup on steak or his weak-salsa YMCA dance. It's indicative of a commander in chief hellbent on continuing his efforts at a modern-day Manifest Destiny against our ultimate frenemy in any way, shape or form. Trump is convinced the American public will largely accept anything he does against Mexico, because guess what? It's just Mexico. Critics and supporters have long said to take Trump at his word, and few things have shown this to be truer than his vendetta against the country of my parents. It was right there in the speech announcing his first successful presidential run a decade ago this June. Within the opening three minutes of his speech, Trump uttered the line: 'When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. ... They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.' That's the viral part of his anti-Mexican screed. But there was more. Trump mentioned Mexico 13 times in that speech, his pronunciation dripping with disdain every time. He promised to build a 'great, great wall' to seal it off from us, and labelled our southern neighbour 'the new China.' He whined that Mexico is 'laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they're killing us economically.' So much bile against our second-largest trading partner and the ancestral country of millions of American citizens — and yet the crowd cheered him on. Trump has kept to his saber-rattling words. He has never ceased to describe people crossing into this country from Mexico as an 'invasion,' and is vowing to severely limit legal migration and deport immigrants in the country without legal documentation in a way this country has never seen. He's still threatening to impose steep tariffs against Mexico, while his team is salivating at the idea of channeling their inner Gen. Pershing and launching military incursions into the country under the guise of combating drug cartels. Last month, Defence secretary Pete Hegseth told Fox News that 'all options will be on the table.' Wiping off the Gulf of Mexico from US maps isn't a lark; it's a promise of more to come. It's a move out of the Latin American strongmen that have long plagued the Western Hemisphere but now have an eager copycat at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I asked Nericcio to find a silver lining in all this, or at least advice on how to fight back. 'We don't own the engines of legitimacy and power — unfortunately, he does,' Nericcio replied. 'We're speaking in the past tense, Gustavo. It's done.' He laid out the following scenario: the next time American schoolchildren have to do a geography assignment involving the Gulf of Mexico, they'll look up the maps of Google, Apple or websites run by the federal government. 'They'll see Gulf of America and think, 'Oh, that's the right answer for my homework because the Internet says so. And voila, you now have a whole generation calling it by a name with no historical basis.'
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Column: The real motive behind Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico to 'Gulf of America'
Before President Trump, the most high-profile call to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico came from Stephen Colbert, who joked on his Comedy Central show in 2010 that the body of water should be referred to as the Gulf of America in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill because 'we broke it, we bought it.' Almost 15 years later, it could have been worse: Trump could have decreed the Gulf of Mexico be renamed the Gulf of MAGA. (Don't anyone give him any ideas!) But Trump's arrival at changing the name to the Gulf of America retains none of the jocular tinge of Colbert's sarcastic suggestion. When William Nericcio first heard about Trump's executive order to do just that, the San Diego State English professor dismissed it as 'a big publicity stunt to mask more nefarious stuff.' Read more: What's in a name? Gulf of America? Mexican America? It certainly was received that way in the weeks leading up to Inauguration Day, when Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reacted to news of Trump's plans by suggesting the American Southwest, which belonged to Mexico until the 1848 Mexican-American War, be renamed "América Mexicana." The laughs continued as Trump mentioned the Gulf of America during his inaugural address, then signed the change into law along with 25 other executive orders that included a ban on birthright citizenship, withdrawing from the Paris climate accords and ending all federal diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs. Rebranding the body of water bounded by the U.S., Mexico and Cuba as the Gulf of America — which Trump justified by stating in his order it 'has long been an integral asset to our once burgeoning Nation and has remained an indelible part of America' — was seen as a random piffle, namely because cartographers and governments across the world have used 'Gulf of Mexico' for nearly 475 years. But the more that Nericcio thought about a gesture he felt was "straight out of Barnum & Bailey," the more he began to worry. He's the author of 'Tex[t]-Mex: Seductive Hallucinations of the 'Mexican' in American,' a hilarious yet insightful 2007 book abut the history of anti-Mexican sentiment in the United States. It tracks the depiction of Mexicans in popular culture through postcards depicting the Mexican Revolution, Hollywood stereotypes, racist songs and more — efforts Nericcio argued have fueled anti-Mexican laws and sentiment in this country for decades. 'The speaking of the Spanish language on Mexican soil can trigger the most jingoistic attitudes,' Nericcio told me, 'so why not pave over five centuries of history and call it the Gulf of America?' He fretted as Trump declared Feb. 9 to be Gulf of America Day, saying it was part of restoring "American pride in the history of American greatness," and as the U.S. Board on Geographic Names officially complied with Trump's order and announced all federal agencies were 'currently in the process of updating their maps, products, and services to reflect the Gulf of America name change.' Nericcio groaned when the White House blocked Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office in retaliation for the news organization — whose style guide is regarded as the gold standard in American journalism, including by the L.A. Times — announcing they would continue to use 'Gulf of Mexico' in its stories while acknowledging Trump's name change. But what put the profe in full despair mode was when Apple and Google updated their map services last week so that American users will now see 'Gulf of America." The decision prompted the Mexican government to write a letter to Google stating that 'under no circumstance will Mexico accept the renaming of a geographic zone within its own territory and under its jurisdiction,' and threatening a lawsuit. Nericcio is usually quick to a bon mot, but his worrisome tone when we talked was something I had never heard in the 15 years we've known each other. 'We know the history of America is empire, but this is America dropping its pants and showing its empire tattoos,' he said. 'It's bald, naked imperialism, and it's on the order of Stalin.' It's easy to dismiss Nericcio as a wild-eyed academic wokoso, but he's not wrong at all. The name change isn't a punchline or weird Trump quirk a la ketchup on steak or his weak-salsa YMCA dance. It's indicative of a commander in chief hellbent on continuing his efforts at a modern-day Manifest Destiny against our ultimate frenemy in any way, shape or form. Trump is convinced the American public will largely accept anything he does against Mexico, because guess what? It's just Mexico. Read more: Letters to the Editor: If Trump says it's the Gulf of America, I can call my hometown Disneyland Critics and supporters have long said to take Trump at his word, and few things have shown this to be truer than his vendetta against against the country of my parents. It was right there in the speech announcing his first successful presidential run a decade ago this June, when he descended down a golden staircase at his Manhattan tower like the decrepit yet all-powerful Padishah Emperor in the 'Dune' franchise. Within the opening three minutes of his speech, Trump uttered the line: 'When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. … They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.' That's the viral part of his anti-Mexican screed. But there was more. Trump mentioned Mexico 13 times in that speech, his pronunciation dripping with disdain every time. He promised to build a "great, great wall" to seal it off from us, and labeled our southern neighbor "the new China." He whined that Mexico is 'laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they're killing us economically.' So much bile against our second-largest trading partner and the ancestral country of millions of American citizens — and yet the crowd cheered him on. Trump has kept to his saber-rattling words. He has never ceased to describe people crossing into this country from Mexico as an 'invasion,' and is vowing to severely limit legal migration and deport immigrants in the country without legal documentation in a way this country has never seen. He's still threatening to impose steep tariffs against Mexico, while his team is salivating at the idea of channeling their inner Gen. Pershing and launching military incursions into the country under the guise of combating drug cartels. Last month, Defense secretary Pete Hegseth told Fox News that "all options will be on the table." Wiping off the Gulf of Mexico from U.S. maps isn't a lark; it's a promise of more to come. It's a move out of the Latin American strongmen that have long plagued the Western Hemisphere but now have an eager copycat at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I asked Nericcio to find a silver lining in all this, or at least advice on how to fight back. 'We don't own the engines of legitimacy and power — unfortunately, he does,' Nericcio replied. 'We're speaking in the past tense, Gustavo. It's done.' He laid out the following scenario: the next time American schoolchildren have to do a geography assignment involving the Gulf of Mexico, they'll look up the maps of Google, Apple or websites run by the federal government. 'They'll see Gulf of America and think, 'Oh, that's the right answer for my homework because the Internet says so. And voila, you now have a whole generation calling it by a name with no historical basis." Nericcio sounded forlorn. 'What gets me is the anemic pushback. Anemic. Almost like, 'Yes, daddy.' It's like watching a movie with a supervillain who keeps winning and winning, and I don't think this one's going to have a happy ending.' Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Column: The real motive behind Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico to ‘Gulf of America'
Before President Trump, the most high-profile call to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico came from Stephen Colbert, who joked on his Comedy Central show in 2010 that the body of water should be referred to as the Gulf of America in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill because 'we broke it, we bought it.' Almost 15 years later, it could have been worse: Trump could have decreed the Gulf of Mexico be renamed the Gulf of MAGA. (Don't anyone give him any ideas!) But Trump's arrival at changing the name to the Gulf of America retains none of the jocular tinge of Colbert's sarcastic suggestion. When William Nericcio first heard about Trump's executive order to do just that, the San Diego State English professor dismissed it as 'a big publicity stunt to mask more nefarious stuff.' It certainly was received that way in the weeks leading up to Inauguration Day, when Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reacted to news of Trump's plans by suggesting the American Southwest, which belonged to Mexico until the 1848 Mexican-American War, be renamed 'América Mexicana.' The laughs continued as Trump mentioned the Gulf of America during his inaugural address, then signed the change into law along with 25 other executive orders that included a ban on birthright citizenship, withdrawing from the Paris climate accords and ending all federal diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs. Rebranding the body of water bounded by the U.S., Mexico and Cuba as the Gulf of America — which Trump justified by stating in his order it 'has long been an integral asset to our once burgeoning Nation and has remained an indelible part of America' — was seen as a random piffle, namely because cartographers and governments across the world have used 'Gulf of Mexico' for nearly 475 years. But the more that Nericcio thought about a gesture he felt was 'straight out of Barnum & Bailey,' the more he began to worry. He's the author of 'Tex[t]-Mex: Seductive Hallucinations of the 'Mexican' in American,' a hilarious yet insightful 2007 book abut the history of anti-Mexican sentiment in the United States. It tracks the depiction of Mexicans in popular culture through postcards depicting the Mexican Revolution, Hollywood stereotypes, racist songs and more — efforts Nericcio argued have fueled anti-Mexican laws and sentiment in this country for decades. 'The speaking of the Spanish language on Mexican soil can trigger the most jingoistic attitudes,' Nericcio told me, 'so why not pave over five centuries of history and call it the Gulf of America?' He fretted as Trump declared Feb. 9 to be Gulf of America Day, saying it was part of restoring 'American pride in the history of American greatness,' and as the U.S. Board on Geographic Names officially complied with Trump's order and announced all federal agencies were 'currently in the process of updating their maps, products, and services to reflect the Gulf of America name change.' Nericcio groaned when the White House blocked Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office in retaliation for the news organization — whose style guide is regarded as the gold standard in American journalism, including by the L.A. Times — announcing they would continue to use 'Gulf of Mexico' in its stories while acknowledging Trump's name change. But what put the profe in full despair mode was when Apple and Google updated their map services last week so that American users will now see 'Gulf of America.' The decision prompted the Mexican government to write a letter to Google stating that 'under no circumstance will Mexico accept the renaming of a geographic zone within its own territory and under its jurisdiction,' and threatening a lawsuit. Nericcio is usually quick to a bon mot, but his worrisome tone when we talked was something I had never heard in the 15 years we've known each other. 'We know the history of America is empire, but this is America dropping its pants and showing its empire tattoos,' he said. 'It's bald, naked imperialism, and it's on the order of Stalin.' It's easy to dismiss Nericcio as a wild-eyed academic wokoso, but he's not wrong at all. The name change isn't a punchline or weird Trump quirk a la ketchup on steak or his weak-salsa YMCA dance. It's indicative of a commander in chief hellbent on continuing his efforts at a modern-day Manifest Destiny against our ultimate frenemy in any way, shape or form. Trump is convinced the American public will largely accept anything he does against Mexico, because guess what? It's just Mexico. Critics and supporters have long said to take Trump at his word, and few things have shown this to be truer than his vendetta against against the country of my parents. It was right there in the speech announcing his first successful presidential run a decade ago this June, when he descended down a golden staircase at his Manhattan tower like the decrepit yet all-powerful Padishah Emperor in the 'Dune' franchise. Within the opening three minutes of his speech, Trump uttered the line: 'When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. … They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.' That's the viral part of his anti-Mexican screed. But there was more. Trump mentioned Mexico 13 times in that speech, his pronunciation dripping with disdain every time. He promised to build a 'great, great wall' to seal it off from us, and labeled our southern neighbor 'the new China.' He whined that Mexico is 'laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they're killing us economically.' So much bile against our second-largest trading partner and the ancestral country of millions of American citizens — and yet the crowd cheered him on. Trump has kept to his saber-rattling words. He has never ceased to describe people crossing into this country from Mexico as an 'invasion,' and is vowing to severely limit legal migration and deport immigrants in the country without legal documentation in a way this country has never seen. He's still threatening to impose steep tariffs against Mexico, while his team is salivating at the idea of channeling their inner Gen. Pershing and launching military incursions into the country under the guise of combating drug cartels. Last month, Defense secretary Pete Hegseth told Fox News that 'all options will be on the table.' Wiping off the Gulf of Mexico from U.S. maps isn't a lark; it's a promise of more to come. It's a move out of the Latin American strongmen that have long plagued the Western Hemisphere but now have an eager copycat at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I asked Nericcio to find a silver lining in all this, or at least advice on how to fight back. 'We don't own the engines of legitimacy and power — unfortunately, he does,' Nericcio replied. 'We're speaking in the past tense, Gustavo. It's done.' He laid out the following scenario: the next time American schoolchildren have to do a geography assignment involving the Gulf of Mexico, they'll look up the maps of Google, Apple or websites run by the federal government. 'They'll see Gulf of America and think, 'Oh, that's the right answer for my homework because the Internet says so. And voila, you now have a whole generation calling it by a name with no historical basis.' Nericcio sounded forlorn. 'What gets me is the anemic pushback. Anemic. Almost like, 'Yes, daddy.' It's like watching a movie with a supervillain who keeps winning and winning, and I don't think this one's going to have a happy ending.'
