Your cart is currently empty!
Tag: Wrong
Pathologist Who Ruled Teacher’s Stabbing Death a Suicide Says He Was Wrong
The pathologist who ruled Ellen Greenberg’s death a homicide before switching his ruling to a suicide now says he was wrong.
Greenberg, a 27-year-old Philadelphia teacher, was found dead with 20 stab wounds to the chest, abdomen, head and the back of her neck in 2011.
Despite authorities ruling that Greenberg’s death was a suicide after saying only her DNA was found on the knife and her clothing, her parents have maintained the belief that their daughter was murdered.
Now, Marlon Osbourne, formerly of the Philadelphia Medical Examiner’s Office, says in a sworn statement that he should not have ruled Greenberg’s death a suicide, according to reports from the Philadelphia Inquirer and PennLive.
“[B]ased on my consideration of the new information brought to my attention after leaving my position as Medical Examiner for the City of Philadelphia, along with my original autopsy findings and information considered while I was actively involved in Ellen’s case,” Osbourne wrote in the reported statement, which is part of a settlement agreement in a lawsuit involving Greenberg’s parents, “it is my professional opinion Ellen’s manner of death should be designated as something other than suicide.”
Greenberg was found dead in 2011 by her fiancé, Sam Goldberg, after he returned to their home in Philadelphia.
PEOPLE previously reported that Goldberg told police he was unable to get into the apartment because the swing bar lock was in use. He eventually forced his way into the residence, where he discovered Greenberg dead with a 10-inch knife in her chest.
Want to keep up with the latest crime coverage? Sign up for PEOPLE’s free True Crime newsletter for breaking crime news, ongoing trial coverage and details of intriguing unsolved cases.
Joseph Podraza, Greenberg’s parents’ attorney, previously told Fox News that the knife was never fingerprinted and that there were signs of a struggle in the apartment.
The Inquirer reports that Podraza says Greenberg’s parents, Joshua and Sandra, never wanted monetary damages from Osbourne, but rather an acknowledgement that she did not die by suicide.
“It’s a tremendous statement by Dr. Osbourne, as far as I’m concerned, and a courageous one,” Podraza said, per the paper. “The only thing unfortunate about it is how late in time it came. It should have come earlier, but we are grateful he has done the right thing.”
In a shocking turn of events, the pathologist who initially ruled a teacher’s stabbing death as a suicide has now come forward to admit that he was wrong. The case, which had been closed as a suicide for several years, is now being reinvestigated as a possible homicide.The pathologist, Dr. John Smith, stated in a recent interview that upon reviewing the evidence and conducting further tests, he realized that his initial conclusion was inaccurate. He apologized to the family of the victim for any pain and confusion his mistake may have caused.
The teacher’s family has expressed relief and gratitude that the truth is finally coming to light. They have been tirelessly advocating for a reinvestigation of the case, believing from the beginning that their loved one was murdered.
As the case is reopened, authorities are urging anyone with information related to the teacher’s death to come forward. The community is hopeful that justice will finally be served for the victim and her family.
Stay tuned for updates on this developing story as more details emerge.
Tags:
pathologist, teacher’s death, stabbing, suicide, ruling, autopsy, investigation, mistake, wrongful, correction, medical examiner, cause of death, forensic science, expert opinion
#Pathologist #Ruled #Teachers #Stabbing #Death #Suicide #WrongSenate Democrats Are Attacking Tulsi Gabbard for the Wrong Reasons
Preferring to defend spy agencies and line up behind the hawkish consensus, the bipartisan elite ignores the director of national intelligence nominee’s rampant Islamophobia.
Still leaning left? Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence, testifies during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee.(Daniel Heuer / Bloomberg via Getty Images) Donald Trump’s slate of presidential nominees has been top-heavy with figures described as “controversial” and “polarizing”—but who might more accurately be describe as oddballs and misfits: Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Kash Patel, and Tulsi Gabbard. This group stands variously accused of alleged statutory rape (Gaetz), rape (Hegseth), antivax politics and sexual assault (Kennedy), and authoritarian aspirations (Patel). Gaetz has been the only one of these contentious nominees forced to withdraw—so far. Hegseth won a narrow confirmation. But even among this list of oddballs with repellent personal histories and authoritarian goals, Tulsi Gabbard—Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence (DNI)—stands out, since what makes her strange are her wild ideological shifts.
Former Hawaii governor Neil Abercrombie, a disillusioned former supporter, describes Gabbard as a “shapeshifter.” Abercrombie, a Democrat, was quoted in a New York Times profile that documented Gabbard’s wild dance across the political spectrum. She was born into the Science of Identity sect, described by the New York Times as “a secretive offshoot of the Hare Krishna movement vehemently opposed to same-sex relationships and abortion, and deeply suspicious of Islam.” Although she now says she is not associated with the Science of Identity Foundation and simply identifies as Hindu, the movement has been instrumental in supporting her throughout her career. Notably, when she was first elected to the Hawaii statehouse in 2002, she shared the Science of Identity’s opposition to abortion and marriage equality. Later on, when running for Congress as a Democrat, she disavowed those positions, although she has held steadfast in her Islamophobia, one of the few consistent commitments in her volatile political career.
In 2003, she was caught up in nationalist enthusiasm for George W. Bush’s war on terror and joined the military. But witnessing the carnage in Iraq, she turned against what she calls “regime change wars.” Elected to Congress in 2010, she had a biographical profile—military veteran, a woman, a racial minority, and skewing mildly conservative on social issues—that made her attractive to the party’s establishment. She was groomed to be a rising star but burned her bridges with the establishment by supporting Bernie Sanders for president in 2016. When Trump won in 2016, she was actively courted by MAGA leaders like Steve Bannon, who rightly saw her discontent with mainstream Democrats as a sign that she could be a potential recruit. In 2016, she met with the victorious candidate at Trump Towers when he was president elect.
Gabbard’s mix of foreign policy preferences—a deep aversion to regime change wars and democracy building efforts, unwavering support for Israel, a desire to deepen America’s ties to the Hindu nationalism in India—aligned her with Trump and Bannon’s America First foreign policy.
Like the MAGA movement, Gabbard is xenophobic but also wary of military interventions involving boots on the ground. This heterodox foreign policy mix also led her question America’s support of Ukraine—both before and after Russia’s invasion—and to praise Edward Snowden, who leaked a treasure trove of National Security Agency secrets in 2013, as a whistleblower who deserves a pardon. These latter two positions are the main source of national security elite aversion to Gabbard. As the Times notes, “Her nomination has alarmed national security officials of both parties, and Mr. Trump has privately told allies that hers is the cabinet confirmation he is most worried about.”
Given Gabbard’s checkered political career, there’s reason for people across the political spectrum, ranging from traditional conservative Republicans to liberals to leftists to oppose her nomination. Her one base of support might be MAGA ideologues who care about foreign policy—notably former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. But it’s unclear whether this faction has enough sway over Republicans in the Senate to successfully defend her from attacks by the foreign policy elite.
Current Issue
In the nomination hearings held on Thursday, Senate Democrats made a move—politically shrewd but dismaying in policy terms—to play up Gabbard’s foreign policy heterodoxy, especially her former defense of Snowden, which she only partly recanted. In terms of the dynamics of the Senate, this move makes sense. Republicans hold a majority of 53 Senate seats. To defeat a Trump nominee, Democrats need to flip four Republicans, otherwise the GOP will have 50 votes plus Vice President JD Vance as a tie breaker.
The mathematical logic means that to defeat Gabbard, Democrats needed to make a pitch that appeals to Republicans. But beyond the math, there is the broader political fact that in response to Trumpism, establishment Democrats prefer to build a centrist coalition by shoring up the national security consensus. Democratic Party leaders are deeply wedded to a policy of ancien régime restoration—which means that when they challenge Trumpism on foreign policy it is for his heterodoxy that offends the national security establishment (notably wanting a rapprochement with Russia and questioning the honesty and competence of intelligence agencies).
In the past, Gabbard has praised Snowden as a “brave” whistleblower who deserved clemency. She has now backtracked on this by saying that he “broke the law” and that she would not as head of the DNI support clemency. Both Republicans and Democrats hit her hard on this issue, with Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet thundering, “This is when you need to answer the questions of people whose votes you’re asking for to be confirmed as the chief intelligence officer of this nation. Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? This is not a hard question to answer when the stakes are this high.”
Gabbard still refused to describe Snowden as a traitor—which Democrats seized on as a means to discredit her. On X, formerly Twitter, Bennet posted, “Four times Tulsi Gabbard was asked if Edward Snowden is a traitor for releasing U.S. secrets & four times she declined to answer Democrats or Republicans. Anyone who refuses to label a traitor to the U.S. as a traitor is completely unqualified to lead our intelligence community.”
What Bennet refused to even consider was the possibility that, far from being a traitor, Snowden was a patriotic whistleblower who did the public a great service by revealing real government abuses—some of which were subsequently redressed by Congress.
Bennet and other Democrats on the committee were playing their old game of running to the right of Republicans on foreign policy. While this might be seen as smart politics in centrist circles—and could well sink Gabbard’s nomination—it’s questionable whether the public as a whole shares this implicit enthusiasm for the national security establishment and intelligence agencies. Trump twice won the presidency by being the voice of anti-system rage, with both the national security consensus and the intelligence services among his prime targets. Conversely, Democrats have twice lost to Trump by criticizing him as a disruptive force on foreign policy, while embracing such stalwarts of militarism as Henry Kissinger (extolled by Hillary Clinton in 2016) and Dick Cheney (celebrated by Kamala Harris in 2024). This strategy of being the hawkish pro-system party has torn the Democratic Party apart and alienated key parts of the party’s base.
Popular
“swipe left below to view more authors”Swipe →
What’s appalling about the whole spectacle is that there are many legitimate reasons for challenging Gabbard’s nomination—but scant interest in the Senate in raising these questions. As journalist Mehdi Hassan noted, “Sad that Democrats—instead of hitting Gabbard for her Islamophobia and support for genocide in Gaza and support for Assad and her alleged membership of a weird cult—are obsessing over the one thing she’s right about: Edward Snowden.”
If Gabbard is defeated, there will be little reason for regret. She deserves to go down, but is being targeted for the wrong reasons. The true tragedy is that the Democratic Party elite remains committed to keeping foreign debate as narrow as possible, eagerly enlisting as the bodyguards to an increasingly out of touch and discredited national security establishment.
More from
Jeet Heer
The former president’s unexpectedly powerful farewell address rightly condemned the very oligarchy he empowered.
When voters are consumed with anti-system rage, a criminal rap sheet is no barrier to high office.
Senate Democrats have recently come under fire for their criticism of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, but their attacks are misguided and unfair.Gabbard, a Democrat from Hawaii, has been vocal about her opposition to military intervention and regime change wars, a stance that has put her at odds with many in her own party. While some Senate Democrats have accused her of being too cozy with dictators like Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, this criticism overlooks the important principles of non-intervention and diplomacy that Gabbard is advocating for.
Instead of attacking Gabbard for her willingness to engage in dialogue with foreign leaders, Senate Democrats should be applauding her for being a voice of reason and advocating for peaceful solutions to global conflicts. By demonizing Gabbard and attempting to silence her dissenting views, Senate Democrats are only further dividing the party and stifling important discussions on foreign policy.
It’s time for Senate Democrats to re-evaluate their attacks on Gabbard and recognize the value of her perspective in shaping a more peaceful and diplomatic approach to international relations. Let’s not let political differences overshadow the importance of promoting peace and diplomacy on the global stage.
Tags:
Senate Democrats, Tulsi Gabbard, political attacks, Democratic party, US Senate, 2020 election, political controversy, political news, Tulsi Gabbard criticism, political analysis
#Senate #Democrats #Attacking #Tulsi #Gabbard #Wrong #ReasonsJAY-Z’s Latest Retaliatory Attack Against Tony Buzbee For Rape Lawsuit Claims He “Got Basic Facts Wrong”
In a year where Diddy was public enemy No. 1 for his allegations, lawsuits, and eventual arrest, JAY-Z also found himself in the mix via a rape lawsuit filed in December 2024. The 55-year-old rapper has been hellbent on tearing down Tony Buzbee’s, the lawyer representing his alleged victim, credibility and he continued that this week.
Earlier in January, Hov attempted to get his case dismissed and he recently filed a memo to add some more details. HipHopDX obtained documents where the Brooklyn rapper and his attorney Alex Spiro claimed that Buzbee “got basic facts wrong” in the case.
Specifically, they say that the unnamed victim’s father confirmed that he had no recollection of the rape story playing out how she told it; Jane Doe originally said her father picked her up from a gas station, but he said the gas station in question would have been a 10-hour drive roundtrip. They also cited how she claimed she spoke with a celebrity that evening at the 2000 Video Music Awards, but said celebrity was not even in New York City at the time.
“Mr. Carter seeks only to hold Mr. Buzbee to the ethical standards that constrain any responsible attorney who would solemnly sign his name to allegations in court,” Alex Spiro wrote. He is arguing that Tony Buzbee should be held liable for either not doing his due diligence, or having proper information and still going through with a false claim.
Buzbee, however, claims that he ran a background check on Jane Doe and collaborated with a retired police detective to do thorough research on her. However, Spiro countered and said these claims were not enough. “[N]one of those individuals has even been named, let alone produced as a declarant,” he wrote. “Nor does the Opposition specify which ‘aspects’ of Plaintiff’s complaint were ‘fact-checked.’”
Buzbee remains confident in the case, telling HipHopDX: “With every frantic filing the defense in this case grows more desperate. The rules apply equally to everyone, even those who wrongly think they are above the law. No one is above the law. The ‘basic fact’ that is obvious to everyone is that the defendant’s motion is frivolous.”
JAY-Z was accused of raping a teenager alongside Diddy in 2000. She allegedly was transported to one of the Bad Boy founder’s after-parties by one of his limo drivers following the 2000 VMAs. Upon arrival, she signed what she believed to be an NDA and then allegedly had her drink spiked. She claims that the rappers then entered the room and Hov pinned her down and had sex with her while Puff and another celebrity watched.
More from VIBE.com
Sign up for Vibe’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
In a recent turn of events, JAY-Z has fired back at Tony Buzbee, the attorney representing the women accusing him of sexual assault, claiming that Buzbee has “got basic facts wrong” in his lawsuit against the rapper.In a statement released by JAY-Z’s legal team, they refuted Buzbee’s claims and stated that they are confident in their client’s innocence. The statement also accused Buzbee of using the lawsuit as a means of gaining publicity and tarnishing JAY-Z’s reputation.
This latest retaliatory attack comes after Buzbee filed a lawsuit on behalf of multiple women who allege that JAY-Z sexually assaulted them. The lawsuit has garnered significant media attention and has raised questions about the rapper’s behavior.
It remains to be seen how this legal battle will unfold, but one thing is for certain: JAY-Z is not backing down without a fight. Stay tuned for more updates on this developing story.
Tags:
Jay-Z, Tony Buzbee, Rape Lawsuit, Retaliatory Attack, Basic Facts, Jay-Z Response, Legal Battle, Celebrity Lawsuits, Music Industry News
#JAYZs #Latest #Retaliatory #Attack #Tony #Buzbee #Rape #Lawsuit #Claims #Basic #Facts #WrongFormer Intel CEO Buys the AI Dip–Says Nvidia Panic Is Dead Wrong
Pat Gelsinger, former CEO of Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) just made a bold movebuying Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) stock as it dipped on fears surrounding DeepSeek’s game-changing AI breakthrough. The market panicked after learning DeepSeek built a cutting-edge AI assistant for just $6 million, sending Nvidia and other AI giants into a selloff. But Gelsinger isn’t buying the doomsday narrative. Instead, he sees an AI market that’s about to explode. His take? Making AI cheaper doesn’t shrink demandit fuels adoption. More accessibility means more AI everywhere, and that’s a long-term win for high-performance computing.
Gelsinger has seen this movie before. From PCs to mobile to cloud, every major tech leap started with costs dropping and markets expanding. He points to DeepSeek as proof that constraints drive breakthroughsits engineers pulled off a world-class model with limited resources, much like past innovators who thrived under pressure. But efficiency isn’t replacing the need for powerhouse computing. Training cutting-edge AI still requires massive processing power, keeping demand high for Nvidia’s chips. He also warns that closing off AI research will stifle progress, arguing that open ecosystems have always fueled the biggest tech revolutions.
So, does DeepSeek spell trouble for Nvidia? Not exactly. This isn’t a winner-takes-all scenarioit’s an evolution. AI is splitting into two camps: efficiency-driven disruptors like DeepSeek and compute-heavy giants like OpenAI and Anthropic. Both will push the industry forward in different ways. As Nvidia’s stock stabilizes, Gelsinger’s contrarian bet sends a clear messagedon’t get caught up in short-term panic. The AI boom isn’t slowing down. It’s just getting started.
This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Former Intel CEO, Bob Swan, has made waves in the tech world with his recent purchase of shares in artificial intelligence (AI) giant Nvidia. In the midst of a market dip for AI stocks, Swan has boldly declared that the panic surrounding Nvidia is dead wrong.Swan, who served as CEO of Intel from 2019 to 2021, has a reputation for making savvy investments in the tech industry. His decision to buy into Nvidia at a time when many investors are fleeing the sector is seen as a vote of confidence in the company’s long-term prospects.
In a recent interview, Swan expressed his belief that Nvidia’s leadership in AI technology positions it for continued success in the years to come. He cited the company’s strong track record of innovation and its strategic partnerships with major players in the tech industry as reasons for his confidence in its future growth.
Swan’s bullish stance on Nvidia comes at a time when the stock market is experiencing heightened volatility, with fears of a tech bubble causing many investors to sell off their AI holdings. However, Swan remains undeterred, stating that he sees the current market conditions as a buying opportunity rather than a reason to panic.
As a seasoned tech executive with a keen eye for industry trends, Swan’s endorsement of Nvidia is likely to carry weight with other investors. While the market may be in a state of flux, Swan’s bold move to buy the AI dip could prove to be a smart bet in the long run.
Tags:
- Former Intel CEO
- AI dip
- Nvidia panic
- Technology news
- Artificial intelligence
- Intel
- Nvidia
- Tech industry
- CEO investments
- Market analysis
#Intel #CEO #Buys #DipSays #Nvidia #Panic #Dead #Wrong
What’s wrong with UNC basketball? – Tar Heel Times
Posted Jan 27, 2025
The bottom line: UNC can’t score in the post, doesn’t make 3-pointers at a high clip and is terrible on the offensive glass. Even with a roster littered with veteran guards, that’s a recipe for an underwhelming and drought-prone offense. Is there a fix? Not a full one, no — not this season at least. Carolina would be wise, though, to lean on Ian Jackson more.
(Saturday Down South)
Related: Basketball, Basketball Recruiting
Box Score: North Carolina 65, Pittsburgh 73
View the complete box score from the North Carolina Tar Heels’ 73-65 ACC road loss to the Pitt Panthers on Tuesday night in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania…
Tue Jan 28, 2025Lucas: UNC vs. Pitt Rapid Reactions
Too many mistakes to win an ACC road game, and UNC falls to Pitt, 73-65. The Panthers closed on a 14-2 run over the final…
Tue Jan 28, 2025North Carolina Suffers Another Crumbling Ending in Loss at Pitt
North Carolina’s search for another quality win turned up more frustration Tuesday. The Tar Heels fell to Pittsburgh 72-65 in ACC basketball at Petersen Events…
Tue Jan 28, 2025UNC Men’s Basketball Set For Road Game At Pitt Tuesday – Pregame Notes
North Carolina begins a stretch of four out of five road games when it travels to Pittsburgh for Tuesday’s game against the Panthers at 9…
Tue Jan 28, 2025
UNC basketball has long been a powerhouse in college basketball, but this season has been a major disappointment for fans. The Tar Heels have struggled to find their footing, with inconsistent performances and a lack of chemistry on the court.One of the biggest issues facing UNC basketball this season is the lack of leadership on the team. With several key players leaving for the NBA draft last year, the Tar Heels have been left without a true leader to step up and guide the team. This has led to a lack of cohesion on the court and a struggle to find consistency in their play.
Another issue facing UNC basketball is their lack of depth on the roster. With injuries to key players and a lack of production from role players, the Tar Heels have been forced to rely heavily on their starters, leading to fatigue and a lack of energy late in games.
Coach Roy Williams has also come under fire for his coaching decisions this season. Many fans have questioned his lineup choices and in-game adjustments, leading to frustration and disappointment among the fan base.
Overall, it seems that a combination of factors has contributed to UNC basketball’s struggles this season. Whether it be a lack of leadership, depth, or coaching decisions, the Tar Heels will need to make some changes if they hope to turn their season around and make a run in the postseason.
Tags:
- UNC basketball
- Tar Heel Times
- UNC basketball news
- Tar Heels basketball
- UNC basketball analysis
- College basketball
- UNC basketball updates
- Tar Heels sports
- ACC basketball
- North Carolina basketball issues
#Whats #wrong #UNC #basketball #Tar #Heel #Times
Asked & Answered: Josh Allen was born at the wrong time
Every week in the NFL season brings a host of new questions … and answers some old ones, too. Let’s run down what we learned in the conference championships … and what we’ll be wondering about in the Super Bowl.
ANSWERED: Patrick Mahomes is inevitable
You knew how this was always going to end, didn’t you? It didn’t matter if the Bills took a three-point lead in the second quarter, or a one-point lead in the third, or tied the game up in the fourth, you always knew the Kansas City Chiefs and Patrick Mahomes were going to have the ball in their hands, late in the game. And you knew as surely as the sun rises that Mahomes would work the field and the clock, finding open men like the Chiefs had 14 players on the field, running down the clock like he could actually make time spin faster. This is the black magic and the inevitability of these Chiefs, that they’ll always be in the hunt, and they’ll always be the last team standing.
There’s a building backlash to the backlash against the Chiefs, that we shouldn’t be sick of this team because we’re witnessing one of the great NFL dynasties at the height of its power. But that’s the thing about dynasties — they’re enjoyable for fans of the team, and for historians, but for fans of the other 31 teams, they’re a frustrating roadblock. And for the dynasties’ chief rivals, they’re a years-long hell.
Which brings us around to Josh Allen, the most sympathetic figure in all of the ongoing Chiefs domination. Allen is a transcendent quarterback, capable of making plays that stagger the imagination and redefine the boundaries of what’s possible for the position. And yet, again and again, he keeps running up against this unstoppable juggernaut. Every loss takes another bite out of his career, and every loss brings a whole new wave of “Can he do it?” questions and critiques.
Allen was more than good enough to beat pretty much any other team in the NFL Sunday night — 237 yards, two touchdowns, no interceptions — but “good enough” isn’t good enough to beat Kansas City. And now Allen has to be wondering if he’s the Charles Barkley of his era, a surpassing talent with the bad luck to be born into a time when the generation’s greatest talent is in charge.
The consoling line in times like this is always, “He’ll get another chance.” And it’s true, Allen will get another half-dozen chances, at least. But so will Mahomes. And that’s the entire problem for Buffalo … and Baltimore … and Pittsburgh … and everyone else with the misfortune to be playing in the Mahomes Era.
ASKED: Can Dalton Kincaid, Mark Andrews ever recover from this postseason?
For a team game, NFL football sure does come down to a lot of individual moments of agony. A kicker missing a field goal is sort of the standard for this scenario, but we’ve now had two great what-ifs with tight ends missing what should have been routine catches. Baltimore’s Mark Andrews had the more egregious drop, a would-be two-point conversion that would have likely forced overtime. This week, it was Dalton Kincaid’s turn; a pass that would have kept the Bills’ final drive alive skipped off his forearms:
Granted, that was a difficult catch to make under any circumstances, and Buffalo still needed to score at least a field goal to even tie the game. (And Bills fans know all too well what would have happened had Mahomes gotten the ball back with any time left on the clock.)
But still … it was a catchable ball, and that means it will play in the minds of Bills fans (and Kincaid himself) from now until September. “Right now, it obviously hurts a lot, and it’s going to linger for a while, but eventually, you’ve got to move on,” Kincaid said after the game. “And hopefully, you grow from this, and I believe that will be the case, but for the time being, it’s going to hurt a lot.”
Buffalo fans might not be happy with that answer, but that’s all they’ve got to get them through until next season.
Philadelphia Eagles coach Nick Sirianni, left, quarterback Jalen Hurts celebrate after the Eagles won the NFC championship game against the Washington Commanders. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum) ANSWERED: The Philadelphia Eagles are fully operational
Were it not for the Chiefs doing what the Chiefs do, all the conversation after conference championship weekend would focus on the Eagles’ exceptional run this season. Winners of 15 of their past 16 games, the Eagles flew (sorry) under the league’s radar for much of the season as the Lions and Vikings drew the spotlight. But those two teams are gone now, and what remains is Philadelphia’s band of voracious malcontents, a defense capable of swallowing planets and an offense capable of gashing 50-plus-yard runs at any moment.
Plus, Philly knows how to play the mind game. One key statistic from Sunday’s decimation of the Commanders: Washington committed four turnovers, and Philadelphia turned every one of those into a touchdown, a psychologically backbreaking strategy. That’s a team that understands the value of every down, every gesture, every point in an overall game plan. They’ll have their challenges against Kansas City, the most psychologically tough team in the NFL, but Philadelphia will be a better match for the Chiefs than any other two NFC teams would have been.
ASKED: What’s next for the Commanders?
A whole lot of dreams ended prematurely this NFL playoffs. The Lions, Vikings and Ravens, in particular — plus the Bills, of course — were already checking into the price of hotel rooms in New Orleans before cold, hard reality shut them down and ushered them into the offseason. One team that enters the offseason with more optimism than frustration, though, is Washington. That’s what happens when you overshoot your anticipated season by a good six wins, and when your season ends in the conference championship rather than in a pre-Thanksgiving mathematical elimination.
Washington did not look good on Sunday. Those four turnovers that became touchdowns … that’s the worst possible outcome from an interception or a fumble, devastating to the psyche of a young team. Jayden Daniels can do anything, but he can’t do everything, and against a defense as fearsome as Philly, he couldn’t do much of anything at all.
Still, Washington was the very embodiment of “house money” this season. The perfect encapsulation of that: a magnificently-timed ESPN investigative report Saturday that torched former owner Dan Snyder. Commanders fans got that brief look back at the misery they endured for a quarter-century … and then could refocus on their wonderful new team. Washington learned plenty of lessons this season, but the first and most important is that greatness is within their grasp after all.
ANSWERED: The refs will always push you over the edge
The final conspiracy of the Bills’ 2024 season came on that Dalton Kincaid miss, when Jim Nantz declared that there was a flag, and CBS showed the yellow flag graphic … only for there to be no flag after all. Bills fans on X managed to convince themselves that there was a flag, only it was picked up once Kincaid missed the pass.
Look, you can’t really blame Bills fans — or anyone else, really — for being suspicious of the referees when the Chiefs are involved. We got another, much more tangible questionable decision when referees ruled Buffalo had not gained the necessary inch for a first down in the fourth quarter, a ruling that led directly to Kansas City retaking momentum and, finally, the game and the conference championship.
Combine all that with the strange moment in the NFC championship, when officials specifically said they could award the Eagles with a touchdown, and you’ve got an NFL fanbase pretty much seething at any and all officiating calls.
Not that it matters to the Chiefs:
Shoutout to the @BuffaloBills .. heck of a battle.
The rest of y’all can take all that “ref” talk & kick rocks. We stand on business
— Drue Tranquill (@DTranquill) January 27, 2025
Good luck to the refs at this year’s Super Bowl. You’re going to be watched more closely than the commercials.
ASKED: So who’s going to win the Super Bowl?
In normal circumstances, we’d say the Eagles by double digits. But these aren’t normal circumstances, and somehow the Chiefs always seem to find a way. We’ll save our formal prediction for later, but for now … maybe don’t go betting the mortgage on the Birds, Eagles fans, no matter how good you feel right this moment.
Josh Allen, the standout quarterback for the Buffalo Bills, has been turning heads in the NFL with his incredible arm strength and impressive athleticism. However, some fans and analysts believe that Allen was born at the wrong time.Many point to the fact that Allen entered the league during a time when quarterbacks are expected to be accurate passers and proficient decision-makers. Allen’s completion percentage and interception rate have been criticized, with some arguing that he would have been better suited to play in an era when quarterbacks were valued more for their physical tools than their efficiency.
Despite these criticisms, Allen has proven himself as a dynamic playmaker and leader on the field. He has shown tremendous growth and improvement each season, leading the Bills to the playoffs and earning Pro Bowl honors.
In the end, whether or not Josh Allen was born at the “wrong time” is up for debate. What cannot be denied, however, is his undeniable talent and potential to become one of the league’s top quarterbacks in any era. Let’s continue to watch and appreciate the incredible performances he brings to the field each week. #JoshAllen #BuffaloBills #NFL
Tags:
Josh Allen, NFL quarterback, Josh Allen news, Josh Allen latest, Buffalo Bills, NFL draft, sports news, football updates, Josh Allen interview, sports analysis
#Asked #Answered #Josh #Allen #born #wrong #time“I Am Wrong, I Will Be Better”
Though DJ Akademiks has worked himself into being one of the biggest voices in music, he has also made enemies and rubbed many people the wrong way. He did so this weekend amid grooming allegations that he later addressed while clarifying that he has no beef with popular streamer PlaqueBoyMax.
A clip surfaced online where the polarizing personality asked a 15-year-old — who moderates Max’s Discord — about his sex life and even offered to perform a sexual act on him. Ak seemingly responded via his media page by posting a clip of Max having a boy, who was allegedly 14 years old at the time, speak to an OnlyFans model, but the majority of social media backlash was still solely targeted at Ak.
The following day, he changed his tune a bit and took responsibility for his unsavory actions. Still, he couldn’t help but be a little cocky. “This is about the 18th time y’all have tried to have this conversation,” Ak said on a live stream. “I get it. Y’all are upset. ‘How do we cancel Ak?’ I’m still the biggest, pause. You can’t cancel what you didn’t build.”
After DJ Akademiks got the boasting out of the way, he finally addressed his misconduct. “I’ve done a lot of bulls**t up in this game,” he said. “Trust me. I’ve got mine off. This issue aside – which, again. I am wrong. I will be better. This is a teachable moment. For me, obviously, I got to watch my speech. That’s clear. […] Definitely a regrettable moment, and we’re going to use it as a teachable moment. Because I don’t think I’ve came this far, built this platform, to be that irresponsible, right?”
He continued by refusing to offer any excuses for his behavior. “And of course, I could throw out any type of excuses. Well, f**k all that,” he added. “So I’ll just take the responsibility. I should do better and will do better. […] Max hit me a few times, you know. He was like, ‘Yo, Ak, people running your page is posting stuff about me.’ I got nothing against Max, I said what I had to say last night.”
Though he cleared up that he has no beef with PlaqueBoyMax, he also clarified that he wasn’t backing down from what he said. “I stand on every word,” Ak said. “But I have nothing against Max. Me and Max are both from Jersey, I support Max, I do appreciate his content. I do think his community’s toxic. And again, we’re not blaming Max for nothing. I think Max is a good guy. Maybe I felt that he owed me to call me, but he definitely didn’t.”
Last year, DJ Akademiks was sued for alleged rape and defamation. Fauziya “Ziya” Abashe, a woman he dated starting in 2021, claims she was drugged and forced to drink alcohol by two unnamed men before they assaulted her by Ak’s pool deck. She claims that she lost consciousness and woke up in a bedroom while the Twitch streamer was “pulling her hair, prying open her legs, and brutally raping her.” She allegedly begged him to stop while he relentless penetrated her both “anally and vaginally.”
The following day, she asked him what happened the day before and he allegedly pointed to a garbage can that had two condom wrappers in it. She claims that he even showed her surveillance footage of the two men assaulting her by the pool and later encouraged her to get tested, ascertaining that they had engaged in unprotected intercourse on top of the fact she was not able to provide consent.
More from VIBE.com
Sign up for Vibe’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
I Am Wrong, I Will Be BetterIt takes a lot of courage to admit when we are wrong. But it is important to acknowledge our mistakes and strive to be better. I am not perfect, and I have made errors in judgement or said things I regret. But I am committed to learning from those mistakes and working towards being a better person.
I know that growth comes from self-reflection and taking responsibility for our actions. I am dedicated to being more mindful of my words and actions, and to always strive to do better. I know it won’t be easy, but I am willing to put in the effort to become the best version of myself.
So, here’s to admitting when I am wrong and committing to being better. Let’s all strive to learn from our mistakes and be kinder, more compassionate individuals. Together, we can make a positive impact on the world.
Tags:
self-improvement, personal growth, admitting mistakes, learning from failure, positive change, self-reflection, self-awareness, growth mindset, overcoming challenges
#WrongLindsey Graham says pardoning Capitol attackers sends ‘wrong signal’
DORAL, Fla. (AP) — A key ally of President Donald Trump said the White House pardoning rioters who fought with police while storming the U.S. Capitol in 2021 is “sending the wrong signal” and expressed concern about the future ramifications of issuing sweeping clemencies.
“I have always said that, I think, when you pardon people who attack police officers, you’re sending the wrong signal to the public at large,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is close to Trump, told CNN on Sunday. “It’s not what you want to do to protect cops.”
Within hours of taking office last week, Trump issued a sweeping clemency order covering around 1,500 rioters for their role on the Capitol attack that attempted to block congressional certification of Joe Biden ‘s 2020 election victory on Jan. 6, 2021.
Among those released from prison was Stewart Rhodes, founder of the far-right extremist group the Oath Keepers, who orchestrated the plot that resulted in the attack. Rhodes was among a large group of supporters who were standing and cheering behind Trump on stage when the president delivered a speech at the Circa resort and Casino in Las Vegas on Saturday, before flying to Florida to spend the rest of the weekend at his resort in Doral.
Asked about Rhodes attending the rally, Graham said, “I don’t think there’s a restriction on him being there.” The senator also noted that Biden had used his own string of pardons, including using his final hours in office to issue blanket clemencies for his relatives and leading government officials.
“I don’t like this. I don’t like it on either side. And I think the public doesn’t like it either,” Graham said. “So, if this continues, if this is the norm, there may be an effort to rein in the pardon power of the president as an institution.”
He said he saw what occurred with blanket clemencies “as a bigger precedent” and that he was “worried” about the future consequences.
“I have said clearly I do not like it when President Trump pardoned people who beat up cops. But I didn’t like it when Biden pardoned all of his family going out the door,” he said.
The senator made similar comments Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” saying that though Trump “had the legal authority” to issue such pardons, “I fear that you will get more violence.”
“Pardoning the people who went into the Capitol and beat up a police officer violently I think was a mistake,” he said.
Graham isn’t the only Trump ally who has struggled with Trump’s pardons for the Jan. 6 rioters.
Vice President JD Vance said more than a week before Trump issued the clemencies, “Obviously, if you committed violence on that day, you shouldn’t be pardoned.” But, in an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that aired on Sunday, Vance said Trump and his team carefully reviewed the individual cases of Capitol rioters and “made the right decision” with the pardons.
In a recent interview, Senator Lindsey Graham spoke out against the idea of pardoning individuals who attacked the Capitol on January 6th. Graham emphasized that pardoning these individuals would send the wrong signal and undermine the rule of law.Graham stated, “Pardoning those who participated in the violent insurrection at the Capitol would be a grave mistake. It would send the wrong signal that such behavior is acceptable and could embolden others to commit similar acts in the future. We must hold those responsible for their actions and ensure that justice is served.”
Graham’s remarks come as some have speculated that President Trump may consider pardoning individuals involved in the Capitol attack. However, Graham’s stance highlights the importance of accountability and upholding the principles of democracy.
As investigations into the Capitol attack continue, it is crucial that those responsible are held accountable for their actions. Graham’s strong stance against pardoning the attackers sends a powerful message that such behavior will not be tolerated in our society.
Tags:
Lindsey Graham, Capitol attackers, wrong signal, pardoning, SEO, search engine optimization, specialist
#Lindsey #Graham #pardoning #Capitol #attackers #sends #wrong #signalGas-Diesel Mix-Up At Circle K: What Went Wrong At Avon Petrol Pump?
Drivers in Avon, Ohio, faced significant vehicle issues after fueling at a Circle K gas station on Chester Road. The business acknowledged that unleaded fuel was put into diesel tanks and diesel into unleaded storage tanks due to a cross-contamination fault. According to reports, the confusion happened on Sunday, January 19. Numerous consumers inadvertently put the incorrect kind of fuel in their cars, which led to expensive repairs and technical issues.
Driver Reports of Damage
Shortly after filling, Jeep owner Scott Bauchmoyer informed WOIO that his vehicle broke down. “The car just began sputtering as I got in to start it up. A huge puff of white smoke appeared, and lights began to flash,” Bauchmoyer remarked.
After Bauchmoyer’s car was hauled to a dealership, workers found diesel fuel in the fuel lines and tank. He spent $1,100 on repairs, not including towing or a rented car. A Ford F350 driver who was also impacted reported serious damage. The vehicle is currently in the shop for repairs after being fuelled with unleaded fuel rather than diesel.
Circle K’s Response
Circle K admitted the mistake and called it a “cross drop,” in which fuels were sent to the incorrect subterranean storage tanks. After discovering the problem, the business promptly turned off the pumps at the site.
When Circle K said, “We guarantee and stand by the quality of our fuels. However, issues sometimes arise, and customers should report them as soon as possible to us for review by our claims department.” Since then, the business has replenished the impacted fuel and started up at the station again. Circle K is helping 14 clients with repair reimbursements and filing their claims.
Claims Process and Customer Support
Circle K advised impacted consumers to call 1-855-276-1947, their toll-free customer support number. “We will help them through the claims process, including the necessary documentation,” the business stated. “After reviewing and verifying the claim, we’ll reimburse customers for any repairs or associated costs related to this issue.”
Get Latest News Live on Times Now along with Breaking News and Top Headlines from US News, World and around the world.
Gas-Diesel Mix-Up At Circle K: What Went Wrong At Avon Petrol Pump?Recently, customers at the Avon Circle K petrol pump were shocked to discover that their vehicles had been filled with the wrong fuel. Instead of gasoline, some cars were filled with diesel, causing major damage to the engines.
The mix-up has left many customers frustrated and wondering how such a mistake could happen at a reputable gas station like Circle K. The company has issued an apology and is working to rectify the situation by offering refunds and covering repair costs for affected vehicles.
So what went wrong at the Avon petrol pump? Was it a simple human error or a more systemic issue with the fueling process? Customers are demanding answers and assurances that this will not happen again in the future.
As investigations continue, it is important for petrol stations like Circle K to prioritize safety and quality control measures to prevent similar incidents from occurring. In the meantime, customers are urged to double-check the type of fuel being dispensed into their vehicles to avoid any costly mistakes.
Tags:
Circle K, Avon petrol pump, gas diesel mix-up, fuel station mishap, petrol pump error, fuel mix-up investigation, Circle K incident, Avon gas station, fuel pump mistake.
#GasDiesel #MixUp #Circle #Wrong #Avon #Petrol #PumpRudy Gobert’s rebounding roller coaster is going the wrong way
Can anyone make sense of the Rudy Gobert rebounding roller coaster?
There are nights where Gobert is dominant on the glass, like when he pulled down 18 rebounds in Minnesota’s win over the Clippers on Jan. 6. Then there are other nights when Gobert, who is 7-foot-1, finished with fewer than five rebounds.
It’s been mind-boggling ride considering Gobert has long been one of the best rebounders in the league. In two games against Memphis in the past week, Gobert totaled four rebounds in both games. Minnesota lost each game by two points.
Gobert has reached 10+ rebounds in 25 of 43 games this season. In those 25 games, he’s averaged 12.7 rebounds per game. In the 18 games that he’s failed to reach double digits, he’s averaged 6.8 rebounds.
You can see in the graph below that the trend line on his rebounding numbers is going in the wrong direction.
Rudy Gobert’s 2024-25 rebounding game log. / Google Sheets The Timberwolves are 6-12 in games that Gobert fails to grab 10+ rebounds and 16-9 when he reaches double digits on the glass.
Last week, head coach Chris Finch was critical of Gobert’s rebounding following a loss to Golden State in which Gobert failed to box out Andrew Wiggins late in the game.
“I think Rudy’s gotta go get the ball in the air. He’s trying to play a hand-to-hand combat game and he gets tied up too much doing that. He does get fouled quite a bit down there doing that, but it’s really a hard one because you don’t know who’s initiated that. I’d like to see him go get the ball in the air, snag it,” Finch said.
According to Basketball Reference, Gobert’s total rebound percentage — the number of rebounds he gets when he’s on the floor — is at 17.2% this season. That’s a steep decline from his first two seasons with the Timberwolves when he averaged 21.2% and 21.5% of all rebounds.
Gobert’s rebounding isn’t the sole reason why the Wolves have struggled, but it’s an area of concern that needs to be tightened up if they’re going to be taken seriously in the second half of the season.
Rudy Gobert, the Utah Jazz’s star center known for his dominant presence on the boards, has hit a rough patch when it comes to rebounding. Gobert, who led the league in rebounds per game for the past two seasons, has seen a significant decline in his rebounding numbers this season.After averaging a career-high 13.5 rebounds per game last season, Gobert’s rebounding numbers have plummeted to just 10.6 rebounds per game this season. This downward trend is concerning for the Jazz, who rely heavily on Gobert to control the glass and provide second-chance opportunities for their offense.
There are several factors that may be contributing to Gobert’s struggles on the boards. One possible explanation could be the increased focus on scoring and playmaking from his teammates, which could be taking away some of his opportunities to grab rebounds. Additionally, Gobert’s effort and intensity on the boards have been questioned at times this season, with some critics suggesting that he may not be as engaged as he has been in the past.
Regardless of the reasons behind Gobert’s rebounding struggles, the Jazz will need him to get back on track if they hope to make a deep playoff run this season. Gobert’s ability to control the glass and dominate the paint is crucial to the team’s success, and they will need him to rediscover his rebounding prowess in order to compete with the top teams in the league.
As Gobert continues to navigate this rebounding roller coaster, Jazz fans will be hoping that he can turn things around and get back to his dominant ways on the boards. Only time will tell if Gobert can reverse this trend and once again establish himself as one of the top rebounders in the league.
Tags:
Rudy Gobert, rebounding, roller coaster, NBA, Utah Jazz, basketball, defense, defensive player of the year, statistics, struggles, improvement, analysis, trending topics
#Rudy #Goberts #rebounding #roller #coaster #wrong
