Latest news with #Why
Newsweek
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Elon Musk Weighs In on Potential Ghislaine Maxwell Trump Pardon
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Elon Musk has weighed in on the possibility of President Donald Trump issuing a pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell, the imprisoned associate of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. A user on X posted a meme that suggested Trump would pardon Maxwell after she "names a bunch of Democrats" and says Trump "did nothing wrong." Musk responded to the post early Monday with a bull's-eye emoji. Newsweek reached out to Musk and the White House via email for comment outside regular office hours. Why It Matters Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence in federal prison after being convicted of helping Epstein sexually abuse underage girls. She has appealed her case to the Supreme Court, which has not yet decided whether to take up the case. Maxwell was questioned by the Department of Justice last week as the Trump administration continues to face pressure to release the government's files on the investigation into Epstein, after the DOJ and FBI said in a July 7 memo that Epstein did not have a list of clients and that no additional records would be released to the public. Questioned by reporters on Friday, Trump did not rule out the possibility of pardoning Maxwell. Musk, once a staunch ally of Trump and the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, is among those calling for the release of the files. During his falling out with Trump last month, Musk said without evidence in a since-deleted social media post that the Epstein files had not been released because Trump was in them. The president dismissed that claim, saying he "had nothing to do with it." Elon Musk participates in a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025. Elon Musk participates in a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025. Allison Roberts/AFP via Getty Images What To Know Trump on Friday deflected reporters' questions about pardoning Maxwell, saying that "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about." He spoke as Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell at a Florida federal courthouse for a second day. Blanche said on social media last week that Maxwell would be interviewed because of Trump's directive to gather and release any credible evidence about others who may have committed crimes. Maxwell's attorney, David Markus, told reporters that Maxwell answered questions "honestly, truthfully, to the best of her ability." What People Are Saying House Speaker Mike Johnson said on NBC's Meet the Press, when asked if he was open to a pardon or commutation for Maxwell: "If you're asking my opinion, I think 20 years was a pittance. I think she should have a life sentence at least. "I mean, think of all these unspeakable hard to put into words how evil this was, and that she orchestrated it and was a big part of it, at least under the criminal sanction, I think is an unforgivable thing. So again, not my decision, but I have great pause about that as any reasonable person would." Maxwell's lawyer, David Markus, told reporters on Friday that Maxwell has endured "terrible, awful conditions for five years." "We just ask that folks, look at what she has to say with an open mind, and that's what Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has promised us, and everything she says can be corroborated, and she's telling the truth," Markus said. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Thursday on X: "Today, I met with Ghislaine Maxwell, and I will continue my interview of her tomorrow. The Department of Justice will share additional information about what we learned at the appropriate time." What Happens Next It's unclear whether Trump will issue a pardon or commutation for Maxwell, but he is likely to continue facing questions about it in the coming days.
Newsweek
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
MAGA Superintendent Ryan Walters Hits Out at Porn Claims
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Oklahoma Superintendent Ryan Walters has hit back after colleagues alleged they saw images of nude women on a TV during a meeting in his office. Walters, a Republican, issued a statement on X on Sunday denying the claims as an investigation into the matter is reported to be underway. Newsweek has contacted Walters for comment. Why It Matters Walters has spoken out against showing what he deems to be "pornography" in schools and has pushed to remove books he says contain sexual content, including Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner. He also made headlines for his endorsements of pro-religious policies in Oklahoma's public schools, including putting Bibles that mimicked the "God Bless the USA Bibles" endorsed by President Donald Trump in 2024, into classrooms. State Superintendent Ryan Walters speaks to members of the State Board of Education at a meeting in Oklahoma City on August 24, 2023. State Superintendent Ryan Walters speaks to members of the State Board of Education at a meeting in Oklahoma City on August 24, 2023. Daniel Shular/Tulsa World via AP What To Know Two board members who attended the executive session of the Oklahoma State Board of Education on July 24, chaired by Walters, told The Oklahoman that images of naked women were displayed on a TV screen. The allegations came from Ryan Deatherage of Kingfisher and Becky Carson of Edmond, who described the ordeal as "really bizarre." The newspaper reported that it was not clear who was responsible for the alleged images, and that Deatherage said Walters was sitting with his back to the TV screen, so it wasn't in Walters' direct view. The superintendent allegedly turned off the TV after Carson alerted him to the matter. On X, Walters said the claims were "politically motivated attacks" as he is leading the charge for a "bold overhaul of education" in the state. "Any suggestion that a device of mine was used to stream inappropriate content on the television set is categorically false," he wrote, adding that there was "absolutely no truth" to the allegations. Earlier, in a statement to The Oklahoman, Quinton Hitchcock, a spokesperson for Walters, described the story as a "junk tabloid lie." "Any number of people have access to these offices. You have a hostile board who will say and do anything except tell the truth, and now, the Woklahoman is reporting on an alleged random TV cable image," he said, using a term for the newspaper often adopted by Walters. The closed meeting was being held to discuss teacher licensing, student attendance appeals and other sensitive issues, the newspaper reported. "I was like, 'Those are naked women,'" Carson told The Oklahoman. "And then I was like, 'No, wait a minute. Those aren't naked, surely those aren't naked women. Something is playing a trick on my eye. Maybe they just have on tan body suits. … This is just really bizarre.'" "I saw them just walking across the screen, and I'm like, 'no.' I'm sorry I even have to use this language, but I'm like, 'Those are her nipples,'" she continued. "And then I'm like, 'That's pubic hair.' What in the world am I watching? I didn't watch a second longer." What People Are Saying Oklahoma Superintendent Ryan Walters wrote on X: "As I lead the charge for a bold overhaul of education in Oklahoma, putting parents back in control, rejecting radical agendas, and demanding excellence: it's no surprise to face politically motivated attacks. "Any suggestion that a device of mine was used to stream inappropriate content on the television set is categorically false. I have no knowledge of what was on the TV screen during the alleged incident, and there is absolutely no truth to any implication of wrongdoing. "These falsehoods are the desperate tactics of a broken establishment afraid of real change. They aren't just attacking me, they're attacking the values of the Oklahomans who elected me to challenge the status quo. "I will not be distracted. My focus remains on making Oklahoma the best state in the nation, in every category." Board member Becky Carson said in a statement, according to KOCO 5 News: "I was appointed to the State Board of Education to serve Oklahoma students to the best of my ability. The images that board members were exposed to yesterday in this meeting were inappropriate to say the least. There has to be accountability." Board member Ryan Deatherage said in a statement, according to KOCO 5 News: "As an appointed member of the Oklahoma School Board, it is my top priority to protect the well-being of Oklahoma students. We hold educators to the strictest of standards when it comes to explicit material. The standard for the superintendent should be no different." What Happens Next An investigation is underway into the matter, according to reports.
Yahoo
25-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Investing $1,544 for your baby can help them retire with $1 million, financial pros say. Could it be that simple?
Amassing $1 million by retirement is a feat most Americans will never achieve for themselves, let alone for their kids. But it doesn't need to be this way, financial experts say. In a recent episode of the 'Money Guy Show,' podcast hosts Brian Preston and Bo Hanson, both financial planners, outlined three 'straightforward' ways parents can help their children retire with $1 million. The strategies require relatively modest contributions from the parents, provided they get started early enough, of roughly $1,500 as a lump sum at birth or $9,200 gradually invested by age 18. The younger the child is when they get started, the less the family needs to contribute to eventually reach seven figures. Wall Street braces for deluge of Treasury bills, a crucial test of market demand Why Tesla analysts are mostly upbeat about earnings, but investors aren't happy 'If I was writing the checks at Coke, I wouldn't write the check for this,' one expert says about cane-sugar Coke The strategies outlined by Preston and Hanson assume aggressive growth — and require an extreme level of patience. Parents must start investing for their children as soon as possible, and the children must allow that money to grow, untouched, for five to six decades, leaning on the power of compound growth to gradually get to $1 million. Implementing just one of these strategies could get a child to $1 million — an amount that will, of course, be worth a lot less in 60 years than it is today, due to inflation. But if parents can implement more than one of the strategies, their kids could be on a path to being multimillionaires by retirement age. The current reality for most retirees, meanwhile, is nowhere close to this. While many people say they'll need more than $1 million to retire, the median household financial assets of Americans ages 65 to 74 totaled $120,300 in 2022, according to the Federal Reserve. Lawmakers who met with President Donald Trump last month are interested in getting Americans invested in the markets as early as possible so they can 'experience the miracle of compounded growth and set [themselves] on a course for prosperity from the very beginning,' according to a White House statement. Tax-deferred 'Trump accounts' for babies, a provision of the new One Big Beautiful Bill Act, will be seeded with $1,000 from the federal government for U.S. citizens born between Jan. 1, 2025, and Dec. 31, 2028. Family members and employers can make additional contributions, and the money must be invested in a mutual fund tracking a stock index. The funds can be withdrawn penalty-free when the owner turns 59½. MarketWatch asked financial planners whether putting a child on the path to being a millionaire retiree could really be this simple. While they agreed that extremely early investments on a child's behalf can help them reach this target with far smaller contributions than if they began investing after starting to work full time in their 20s, some said the dollar amounts parents put in would likely need to be higher than those outlined on the 'Money Guy Show,' to account for slower growth rates than those used by Preston and Hanson. They also noted that parents as well as kids must stay committed to this extremely long-term plan. 'This approach depends entirely on staying invested through multiple recessions, wars, bubbles and panics,' Christopher Haigh, a financial planner and co-founder of Iconoclastic Capital in Rochester, N.Y., told MarketWatch. Parents and their children must be psychologically ready to not touch that money for six decades, and their children need to be committed 'to not mess with the plan.' Dan Honsberger, a financial planner and founder of Reel Financial Planning in Virginia, told MarketWatch that the growth assumptions of the 'Money Guy Show' were aggressive, and in reality, it is likely that the 'savings levels need to be higher' to reach $1 million by age 65. He estimates parents' contributions would need to be closer to $10,700 at birth or $37,600 by age 18, amounts that would be far more challenging for the typical family to set aside. 'I think the message here is still good and valid,' Honsberger said. 'If you can set aside and invest a chunk of money early in a child's life, letting it grow over a long time period, it will set them up for success later in life.' Preston and Hanson declined to comment. Assuming investments made during the first 20 years of a child's life grow 10% annually, on average, until age 65, with returns compounded monthly (read more about the assumptions used on the 'Money Guy Show' here), parents need only invest $1,544 when their child is born. Over the next 65 years, that $1,544 investment has the potential to grow to $1 million, Preston and Hanson said on the show. 'Almost 100% is specifically coming from the growth,' Preston said. Parents who get started later will need to invest a larger lump sum, because the money has less time to compound. For example, by age 5, the initial amount needed to grow to $1 million by age 65 would be $2,541; by age 10, the amount needed would be $4,181. Such estimates may be optimistic. Honsberger said he would assume a lower annual growth rate of 7%, which would mean a lump-sum investment of $10,708 at birth would be needed to grow to $1 million by age 65. The assumption that the compounding would happen monthly — meaning the returns are added to the principal every month so that the next month's growth is based on the new, larger balance — is 'reasonable,' he said, because growth and dividends get reinvested and compounded more than once per year. It's possible the investment would grow at a faster rate than 7% annually, he said, 'but I just wouldn't count on it.' Most parents likely cannot invest thousands of dollars all at one time during their children's first years. Only about half of parents even have three months' worth of living expenses saved for an emergency, according to the Federal Reserve. Still, that does not mean they can't incrementally set the foundation for their child to one day have a $1 million nest egg. Instead of investing a large lump sum, parents can gradually invest a total of $9,274 by the time their children turn 18, averaging $15.44 per month over 18 years, according to Hanson. Again, the assumption is that investments made before age 20 will grow at an average annual rate of 10%. 'We're talking about maybe the cost of a coffee, maybe two coffees a month to get you or to get your child to millionaire status by the time they retire,' Hanson said on the show. Assuming a more conservative 7% rate of return through age 65, however, parents would need to invest much more, Honsberger said: $37,612 by age 18, which averages out to $87 per month from the time of the child's birth. These gradual contributions can give a young person a big head start on retirement. The median net worth of people in their 20s is $6,511, according to data from the financial-services company Empower, based on its 'typical dashboard user' this month. 'We love this strategy for its simplicity and teachability,' Gene Thompson, a financial planner at Iconoclastic Capital, told MarketWatch. Modest gifts from relatives can help kids reach this goal, and 'it also reinforces the lesson that small, consistent actions can lead to big results.' The key is not fizzling out before reaching the 18-year goal. Many financial experts recommend automating investments to ensure contributions are made without having to rely on a person remembering to make them. The 'Money Guy Show' goal is to have $9,274 invested for a child by age 18. Parents of teenagers who may be too far behind to save this amount on their own can still catch up if their teen pitches in by working and making contributions to a tax-advantaged Roth IRA, and the parents accelerate those savings by matching their child's contributions. If a teen can start working at age 15, for instance, they would need to invest $111 in earnings each month for three years, along with a matching $111 investment from their parents, in a custodial Roth IRA. (Be mindful that the total contributions to a Roth IRA cannot exceed what the teen earned at their job and are also capped at $7,000 for 2025.) By the time the child is age 18, these investments can grow to about $9,200. 'A dollar-for-dollar parental match is a smart way to create real skin in the game for the child and turn short-term summer jobs into long-term assets,' said Iconoclastic Capital's Thompson. He said a broadly diversified, low-cost exchange-traded fund that doesn't require constant monitoring, like the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF VTI, could be appropriate for this strategy. Honsberger's more conservative calculations require investing $942 each month — or $471 each from the teen and their parents — in order to hit $37,612 by age 18. That annual total exceeds the yearly IRS limit for IRAs, so some of those contributions would have to be invested in other accounts. Younger generations are more open to discussing money and wealth than previous generations were, and about 45% of parents say they are encouraging their children to set savings goals, according to a 2025 NerdWallet survey. While many parents prioritize saving for college, some are considering their kids' financial needs beyond school, because a college degree does not guarantee financial security. MarketWatch recently spoke to financial planners about yet another strategy for parents to help their children retire with $4 million without needing a college degree. It involves letting them live at home for three years after they graduate from high school so they can invest $25,000 annually while working full time from ages 18 to 21. They would then allow those savings to grow for decades. More on this: A TikTok hack claims to help kids retire with $4 million — if their parents can stomach some major sacrifices Marc Schindler, a financial planner with Pivot Point Advisors in Bellaire, Texas, said that while the strategies presented on the 'Money Guy Show' can technically make a child a millionaire by retirement, the value of $1 million will not be the same decades from now due to inflation. Assuming annual inflation of 2.5%, in 65 years, $1 million would have the same value as roughly $200,000 today. He also cautioned that if a child is planning to attend college, investing money into a regular brokerage account could reduce the amount of financial aid a child is eligible for and therefore increase college costs. To help offset some of the effects of inflation, Schindler suggests putting as much money as possible into tax-advantaged accounts such as a Roth IRA or 529 college savings account. Up to $35,000 in a 529 plan can be gradually rolled over into an IRA over several years without incurring taxes or penalties under certain conditions. 'The tax benefits of a Roth IRA and 529 plan are far more compelling than a regular brokerage account,' Schindler said. It's also possible, as Honsberger pointed out, that parents would need to invest more than Preston and Hanson suggest in order for their contributions to actually grow to $1 million. Still, no matter how much parents can invest or what types of accounts they choose, what they can take away from these scenarios, Haigh said, is that 'compounding interest is really powerful, and early habits always win.' 'I'm already up $45,000 in about an hour' — Reddit traders boast about wins as meme-stock mania returns Dow cuts dividend in half in reaction to 'lower-for-longer' earnings The S&P 500 just did something it's only done four times in 50 years. Here's what happened next. Sign in to access your portfolio
Time of India
23-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Time of India
VShojo controversy timeline: What led to the community backlash?
Image via: On 21st July, Ironmouse in the VShojo-originals line announced to the world that she had terminated her agency contract through the YouTube channel, in an uneasy style. The video, titled "Why I Left VShojo," was not just a farewell statement. It was also an accusation. Ironmouse claimed in the video that the agency had not only withheld her own paychecks but had also withheld charity fundraising amounts of over $500,000, intended for IDF, the Immune Deficiency Foundation. It was a turning point for many fans in what had, until that day, seemed a model partnership between one of the Internet's most beloved creators and a talent agency that helped give the VTubers mainstream visibility. Yet, the fissures had apparently been forming months ago. Signs of Trouble: Cryptic Posts and Silence Before the video was released, there were already some quiet alarms raised by Ironmouse. On July 17, Ironmouse shared a cryptic update on social media saying, I'm so sorry for not streaming as much these past two weeks. I have been going through a lot…' Four days later, when the video was released, fans put two and two together. Her recent absence was not just due to health issues and Ironmouse has been pretty open about living with Common Variable Immunodeficiency, she said-but due to mounting frustrations against VShojo over alleged money wrongdoing. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo More Voices Join the Chorus The Ironmouse video acted as somewhat of a breaking point. On that same day, a whole wave of allegations started pouring in on behalf of other creators and collaborators. An artist known as @vortoxy stepped out his silence and gave his account on X, alleging it took VShojo two months to pay $500 for a commission, suggesting he felt he would have been forgotten if he had not persistently followed up. Why I left VShojo Following this, Ironmouse's composer for music came out, stating the company had turned a deaf ear to invoices amounting to "thousands of dollars." These accounts-range in severity-paint a larger picture: Maybe VShojo has a systemic financial issue. Trust and Transparency in VTubing Certainly, this controversy goes much deeper than just one fallout between a creator and an agency. A Western agency first-ever to bestow VTubers with an influencing platform and professional infrastructure, VShojo always stood at the apex. Ironmouse was not just a client but also a co-founder and the very heart of the agency brand. These charity misappropriation claims are just the worst to handle. The IDF, an organization that aids those with immunodeficiencies like Ironmouse herself, was supposed to benefit from donations raised through campaigns directly promoted by her. If this is found to be true, this betrayal just goes deeper than money, it is about values. What's Next for VShojo? As things stand, VShojo has still not made a full-fledged public response to the money accusations. The agencies have reportedly been asking for their side of the story from various media outlets as well as the IDF, but nothing has yet come back. The VTubing community established for the longest time upon social bonds and creator trust is now watching. For VShojo, the road ahead is going to require a lot more than just legal closure, it is going to require transparency, accountability, and a genuine bid to repair the fractured relationship with fans and talent alike. For real-time updates, scores, and highlights, follow our live coverage of the India vs England Test match here. Catch Rani Rampal's inspiring story on Game On, Episode 4. Watch Here!
Los Angeles Times
20-07-2025
- Sport
- Los Angeles Times
A new film about the Ohio State wrestling team sex abuse scandal indicts those who looked away
For more than 30 years, Fred Feeney refereed matches for the Ohio State University's powerhouse wrestling team. Unlike the dozens of young men whose athletic scholarships depended on staying in the good graces of the team doctor, Richard Strauss, who could withhold permission for them to compete, Feeney didn't have to persuade himself that what Strauss did was OK. He didn't have to pretend it was OK that Strauss was constantly taking showers with athletes. Or that it was OK when, after a match, Strauss masturbated next to Feeney in the shower, then grabbed the ref's ass. A visibly shaken Feeney recounts in the new documentary, 'Surviving Ohio State,' that he left the locker room that day in distress and immediately told wrestling coach Russ Hellickson and assistant wrestling coach Jim Jordan what had happened. Both coaches shrugged, said Feeney, who added that Jordan told him, 'It's Strauss. You know what he does.' Dan Ritchie, who quit the wrestling team in his third year because he could no longer tolerate Strauss' sexual abuse — which included forcing athletes to drop their pants and endure genital and rectal exams when they saw him, for even the most minor complaint — said that Jordan once told him, 'If he ever did that to me, I'd snap his neck like a stick of dry balsa wood.' But Jordan, now the powerful chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and an unwavering ally of President Trump, has assiduously denied ever seeing or knowing about assaults committed by Strauss during Jordan's eight years with the team. He emerges as one of the bad guys in the new film, which is based on the Sports Illustrated 2020 investigation, 'Why Aren't More People Talking About the Ohio State Sex Abuse Scandal?' Produced by the Oscar-winning documentarian Eva Orner and George Clooney's production company, it debuted on HBO Max in June. 'To say that [Jordan] knew nothing, that nothing ever happened, it's a flat out lie,' Ritchie says in the documentary. A callous response to reports of sexual assault was the norm at Ohio State. While administrators deflected reports about Strauss for years, claiming they were just rumors, the university's 2019 investigation, performed by an outside law firm, found that during his 1978-1996 tenure in the athletics department and at the student health center, Strauss assaulted at least 177 students thousands of times. The school's fencing coach, Charlotte Remenyik, complained about Strauss for 10 years until he was finally removed as her teams' doctor. (In response to her efforts to protect her athletes, Strauss accused her of waging a vendetta against him.) A complaint finally caused the university to remove him as a treating physician at OSU in 1996, but he was still a tenured faculty member when he retired, with 'emeritus' status, in 1998. He died by suicide in 2005. It was not until the Larry Nassar gymnastics abuse scandal exploded between 2016 and 2018 that the former Ohio State wrestlers understood that they, too, had been victimized by their team doctor, and that there were probably a lot more of them than anyone realized. 'I said, 'Wow, that's us,'' said former OSU wrestler Michael DiSabato, one of the first to go public. 'It unlocked something in me.' A group of former teammates met in 2018, then later sat down with their old coach, Hellickson, in an emotional encounter. Hellickson promised to write letters supporting them, the wrestlers said, then ghosted them. He did not respond to filmmakers' requests to be interviewed. Likewise, Jordan shunned requests for interviews, and he has appeared exasperated in news clips when questioned about what he knew. He's not a defendant in any of the abuse lawsuits filed against OSU. In 2020, Michael DiSabato's brother, Adam, a former wrestler and team captain, testified under oath during a hearing on an Ohio bill that would have allowed Strauss' victims to sue OSU for damages, that Jordan called him 'crying, groveling … begging me to go against my brother.' Jordan has denied that conversation took place. It seems to me that a normal human being, operating from a place of empathy, might express feelings of sorrow that the young male athletes in his charge were abused to the point that some considered suicide and others quit sports altogether, instead of accusing them of lying. Ritchie, for example, said his father was so disappointed about his decision to quit wrestling — he could not bring himself to tell his father why — that it permanently overshadowed their relationship. I find no evidence that Jordan ever expressed feelings of regret for his wrestlers, though he did insist to Politico in 2018, 'I never knew about any type of abuse. If I did, I would have done something about it. And look, if there are people who are abused, then that's terrible and we want justice to happen.' If? Although the explosive new documentary has been overshadowed by the implosion taking place in MAGA world over the 'Jeffrey Epstein files' and questions about Trump's relationship with the serial sexual predator, the OSU scandal is far from being yesterday's news. So far, OSU has settled with nearly 300 abuse survivors, each receiving an average of $252,000. But many are not willing to settle for what they consider peanuts and note that the average payout to Nassar's victim is more than $1 million. On Friday, as part of a federal civil lawsuit filed by some of them, Jordan was reportedly due to be deposed under oath for the first time about the allegations that he knew about the abuse and failed to protect his wrestlers. Steve Snyder-Hill, one of the first OSU non-athletes to report that he'd been assaulted by Strauss in 1995, told NBC that he planned to be present for Jordan's deposition. 'I expect him to lie under oath,' said Snyder-Hill. 'I don't know a nicer way to put it.' Bluesky: @rabcarian Threads: @rabcarian
