Connect with us

News

Read the Statement from Justin Baldoni’s Attorney

Published

on

Read the Statement from Justin Baldoni’s Attorney

Statement to The New York Times from Bryan Freedman, attorney for Justin Baldoni,
Wayfarer Studios and all its representatives:
“It is shameful that Ms. Lively and her representatives would make such serious and
categorically false accusations against Mr. Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and its representatives, as
yet another desperate attempt to ‘fix’ her negative reputation which was garnered from her own
remarks and actions during the campaign for the film; interviews and press activities that were
observed publicly, in real time and unedited, which allowed for the internet to generate their own
views and opinions.
These claims are completely false, outrageous and intentionally salacious with an intent to
publicly hurt and rehash a narrative in the media. Wayfarer Studios made the decision to
proactively hire a crisis manager prior to the marketing campaign of the film, to work alongside
their own representative with Jonesworks employed by Stephanie Jones, due to the multiple
demands and threats made by Ms. Lively during production which included her threatening to
not showing up to set, threatening to not promote the film, ultimately leading to its demise during
release, if her demands were not met.
It was also discovered that Ms. Lively enlisted her own representative, Leslie Sloan with Vision
PR, who also represents Mr. Reynolds, to plant negative and completely fabricated and false
stories with media, even prior to any marketing had commenced for the film, which was another
reason why Wayfarer Studios made the decision to hire a crisis professional to commence
internal scenario planning in the case they needed to address.
The representatives of Wayfarer Studios still did nothing proactive nor retaliated, and only
responded to incoming media inquiries to ensure balanced and factual reporting and monitored
social activity.
What is pointedly missing from the cherry-picked correspondence is the evidence that there
were no proactive measures taken with media or otherwise; just internal scenario planning and
private correspondence to strategize which is standard operating procedure with public relations
professionals.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Can Germany spend its way out of industrial decline?

Published

on

Can Germany spend its way out of industrial decline?

It took just a few hours for Friedrich Merz to conduct one of the sharpest U-turns in recent political history.

At lunchtime last Friday, Germany’s chancellor-to-be received a sobering briefing on the state of the economy from finance minister Jörg Kukies.

Kukies explained that after two years of stagnation and with more clouds gathering over Europe’s largest economy, Berlin faced a €130bn budget shortfall over four years and dwindling growth potential, according to people with knowledge of the presentation.

Shortly afterwards, Donald Trump had a public shouting match in the Oval Office with Volodymyr Zelenskyy, accusing the Ukrainian leader of not wanting peace with Russia, Kyiv’s aggressor, and not being grateful for Washington’s support. For Washington’s allies in Europe, the extraordinary scenes were further evidence that the Trump administration had turned hostile.

Watching all this unfold, Merz decided “there was no time to lose”, says a person close to his thinking.

Advertisement
Volodymyr Zelenskyy with Donald Trump in the Oval Office last week. Within days of the meeting, Germany’s CDU and SPD parties agreed to inject hundreds of billions into the country’s military and ageing infrastructure © Pool/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Within days, the centre-right leader of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) struck a deal with the Social Democratic party (SPD), his likely coalition partner in the next government, which would transform the way Germany manages its economy.

The two parties agreed to loosen the country’s constitutional debt brake and inject hundreds of billions into Germany’s military and ageing infrastructure — a breakthrough upending more than two decades of conservative fiscal dogma.

Under the agreement, which still has to be approved by parliament with a two-thirds majority, Berlin would be able to raise as much debt as needed to equip the Bundeswehr. In return for its support on defence, the SPD secured the creation of a €500bn, 10-year infrastructure fund to modernise the country’s roads, bridges, energy and communications networks — one of the party’s flagship campaign pledges.

It was time to adopt a “whatever it takes” approach to defence in light of the “threats to freedom and peace” in Europe, Merz said on Tuesday when he announced the deal alongside the leaders of his Bavarian sister party CSU and the SPD.

Not only does the agreement represent a stark departure from the brand of economic orthodoxy that has been dominant in Germany, it also accelerates a move away from decades of military restraint after the second world war.

Advertisement
Line chart of Defence spending as a % of GDP showing German military spending has long been relatively low, but rose after the Russian invasion of Ukraine

“It is a huge shift away from this stance of ‘You make do with the money you’ve got, rather than borrow’ that has been the pillar of the modern German economy, and has been something Germans have really prided themselves in,” says historian Katja Hoyer.

“It signals that Germany is going to play a bigger role on the world stage, but also that Germany will look more after its own interests.”

The prospect of huge investments into the defence sector has also fuelled hopes Germany could halt its industrial and technological decline by helping manufacturers and engineers find a new purpose and new markets — with positive effects rippling through the Eurozone.

This is “one of the most important shifts in German economic policy” since the second world war, says Vikram Aggarwal, investment manager at Jupiter Fund Management, as Germany adapts to a “multipolar word” where countries and regions “will have to increasingly provide for their own defence”.

According to Joe Kaeser, former chief of German engineering giant Siemens, now chair of Siemens Energy and Daimler Truck: “It means we are going to be back, Germany — we don’t know exactly how, but this is what we are going to achieve.”


With potentially more than €1tn in additional debt over the next decade, economists have compared the fiscal stimulus to the country’s reunification in 1990, when the government led by CDU chancellor Helmut Kohl poured billions into the former eastern communist states.

Advertisement

The effects on Germany’s industry should be significant, economists, policymakers and business executives believe, as defence contractors help replace part of the shrinking automotive base and infrastructure projects jolt the construction sector back into life.

“One should not underestimate what confidence does on decision-making for investment and employment,” says Kaeser. “This [deal] is a priceless effort to set out a mission — to say this is what we’re going to do: this landing on the moon.”

BNP says that the announcement can deliver “a positive confidence shock”, galvanising consumers and companies. The German economy — stuck in a rut for the past two years — could expand 0.7 per cent as soon as 2025, compared to 0.2 per cent growth in a previous scenario, the bank estimates.

Economists predict the debt-to-GDP ratio, currently at 63 per cent, will still be far lower than that of France or Italy. While German stocks soared, the country’s borrowing costs, traditionally the lowest in the Eurozone, jumped by the most since the 1990s, as investors adjusted to Berlin’s newfound boldness.

The new package would accelerate industrial shifts already under way since outgoing chancellor Olaf Scholz set up a special €100bn military fund in 2022, in the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. At the time, he described the move as Zeitenwende — historic turning point — in his nation’s approach to defence and security. Germany is the second largest supplier of arms to Ukraine behind the US.

Advertisement

The race to re-arm could be a much-needed boost for German manufacturing, which has been hit by the crisis in carmaking, looming trade wars, and growing competition from cheap Chinese steel and car imports.

Rheinmetall workers refurbish a Leopard tank in Unterluess, Germany. the weapons maker, whose stock has nearly doubled this year, is converting some of its car plants to produce military equipment
Rheinmetall workers refurbish a Leopard tank in Unterluess, Germany. the weapons maker, whose stock has nearly doubled this year, is converting some of its car plants to produce military equipment © Hannibal Hanschke/EPA-EFE

German weapons maker Rheinmetall, whose stock has nearly doubled this year, is converting some of its own domestic car-part plants to produce military equipment. Last month Franco-German tank maker KNDS agreed to take over and convert a train-making factory from Alstom in the eastern town of Görlitz to produce parts for battle tanks and other military vehicles.

Hensoldt, a state-owned maker of sensors and radars, is in talks to hire teams of software engineers from Continental and Bosch, two of Germany’s largest automotive suppliers, which together have announced over 10,000 job cuts in the past year.

Excitement spread among Deutsche Bahn staff this week, at the thought that the state-owned railway known for its delayed trains and signalling failures would receive the money to implement a €53bn renovation plan stuck in limbo since the collapse of Scholz’s coalition in November.

Boris Pistorius, SPD defence minister, has been one of the most vocal advocates for debt brake reform. German’s most popular politician, who hopes to remain in his post under a Merz-led coalition, described this week’s announcement as “a truly far-reaching, historic decision”, saying: “We are taking responsibility for our security not only as Germany, but also for our Nato partners.”


That Merz, of all German politicians, would orchestrate such a dramatic policy shift, has startled many in Germany. A staunch Atlanticist in the tradition of postwar chancellor Konrad Adenauer, the 69-year-old former BlackRock senior adviser has built a reputation as a supply-side conservative sceptical of state intervention.

Advertisement

During the campaign, he vowed to cut taxes, regulation and welfare benefits. While he did not rule out a reform of the borrowing limits, he insisted that budget priorities first be set and cuts decided.

“It’s a typical ‘Nixon-goes-to-China’ moment,” says a person close to the negotiations.

“You don’t choose the historic moments in which you live,” says Sophia Besch, senior fellow in the Europe Program at the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “Merz, as a transatlantacist, would not have chosen to be the chancellor overseeing the divorce with the US.”

Line chart of General government gross debt as a % of GDP showing Years of fiscal caution have left Germany with a much lower public debt burden than France or Italy

Merz has no choice but to act quickly, his allies argue. His only chance of securing a supermajority to pass the constitutional amendments is to use the outgoing parliament, which can be reconvened until March 25.

Beyond that date, the far-right Alternative for Germany and far-left Die Linke, which oppose reforming the debt brake to fund more defence spending, will enjoy a blocking minority. Merz still needs to win over the Greens to pass the bills.

“Merz is totally convinced that we need money for defence. We don’t know how much, but we know that after March 25, a minority of Putin-friendly parties can stop any kind of additional defence money for the foreseeable future,” says Roland Koch, a veteran CDU politician and close ally of Merz. “Only the Social Democrats and the Greens can be allies, and you have to pay a price — the €500bn fund for infrastructure is the price.”

Advertisement

Merz succeeded in sealing a defence pact with the SPD before a meeting of EU leaders in Brussels on Thursday. As chancellor-in-waiting he could not officially attend the gathering, which was designed to co-ordinate the bloc’s response to Trump’s efforts to negotiate a settlement with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine — Scholz is still Germany’s caretaker chancellor.

But Merz managed to steal the show, flying to the Belgian capital the day before to meet Nato chief Mark Rutte, EU diplomatic head Kaja Kallas and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen.

On Thursday in Brussels, when asked about his government talks with the SPD on the sidelines of a meeting of Europe’s centre-right leaders, he quipped: “We are on good speaking terms . . . when it comes to spending money!”

Friedrich Merz, left, with Nato secretary general Mark Rutte in Brussels. While German stocks soared after the CDU-SPD deal, the country’s borrowing costs jumped by the most since the 1990s
Merz, left, with Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte in Brussels on Wednesday. While German stocks soared after the CDU-SPD deal, the country’s borrowing costs jumped by the most since the 1990s © NATO/dpa

Back home however, Merz is facing two weeks of tricky legislative hurdles and institutional obstacles.

“A lot of people are very sceptical,” says a senior Bundeswehr commander, who warned of sluggish procurement and vast manpower deficiencies. Addressing those problems, he said, was “not going to take months, it’s going to take years”.

Merz’s package includes a plan to overhaul defence procurement. But Christian Mölling, Europe director at the Bertelsmann Foundation, a think-tank, says that trying to enact structural reforms while also spending much larger sums of money would be like performing open heart surgery. “While it is pumping you’re also trying to change something — and that’s an enormous stress.”

Advertisement

The same logic applies to infrastructure projects, says Jens Südekum, a professor of economics at Düsseldorf’s Heinrich Heine University. Not only must policymakers allocate the money wisely to maximise impact on growth, they also needed to speed up implementation.

There could be more immediate political snags. The Greens, furious at Merz’s sudden conversion after years of opposing their calls for debt brake reform, have decided to make him sweat, heralding hard bargaining until the old Bundestag is reconvened next week.

But most analysts expect the Greens to support the package in return for assurances that part of the money will go towards the green transition.

Another difficulty for the CDU/CSU and the SPD will be to re-mobilise all their outgoing MPs, who may have little incentive to abide by party discipline when it comes to attendance or voting.

Hoyer believes that the increasing pressure — external from Trump, internal with a resurgent far right and far left — is likely to unite Germany’s mainstream parties.

Advertisement

“This grand coalition that isn’t so grand any more is keen to prove that this is a new start,” she says. “Domestically, they’re quite aware that they’ve only got four years. And if they don’t do anything, then the AfD and Die Linke will probably increase [their support] further.”

Additional reporting by Patricia Nilsson in Frankfurt and Ben Hall in Brussels

Data visualisation by Keith Fray

Continue Reading

News

A South Carolina man executed by firing squad is the first US prisoner killed this way in 15 years

Published

on

A South Carolina man executed by firing squad is the first US prisoner killed this way in 15 years

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A South Carolina man who killed his ex-girlfriend’s parents with a baseball bat was executed by firing squad Friday, the first U.S. prisoner in 15 years to die by that method, which he saw as preferable to the electric chair or lethal injection.

Three volunteer prison employees used rifles to carry out the execution of Brad Sigmon, 67, who was pronounced dead at 6:08 p.m.

Sigmon killed David and Gladys Larke in their Greenville County home in 2001 in a botched plot to kidnap their daughter. He told police he planned to take her for a romantic weekend, then kill her and himself.

Sigmon’s lawyers said he chose the firing squad because the electric chair would “cook him alive,” and he feared that a lethal injection of pentobarbital into his veins would send a rush of fluid and blood into his lungs and drown him.

Advertisement

Vivian Lovingood protests the scheduled execution of South Carolina inmate Brad Sigmon, Friday, March 7, 2025, in Columbia, S.C. For the first time in 15 years a death row inmate in the U.S. will be executed by a firing squad. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Advertisement

The details of South Carolina’s lethal injection method are kept secret in South Carolina, and Sigmon unsuccessfully asked the state Supreme Court on Thursday to pause his execution because of that.

On Friday, Sigmon wore a black jumpsuit with a hood over his head and a white target with a red bullseye over his chest.

The armed prison employees stood 15 feet (4.6 meters) from where he sat in the state’s death chamber — the same distance as the backboard is from the free-throw line on a basketball court. Visible in the same small room was the state’s unused electric chair. The gurney used to carry out lethal injections had been rolled away.

The volunteers all fired at the same time through openings in a wall. They were not visible to about a dozen witnesses in a room separated from the chamber by bullet-resistant glass. Sigmon made several heavy breaths during the two minutes that elapsed from when the hood was placed to the shots being fired.

Advertisement

The shots, which sounded like they were fired at the same time, made a loud, jarring bang that caused witnesses to flinch. His arms briefly tensed when he was shot, and the target was blasted off his chest. He appeared to give another breath or two with a red stain on his chest, and small amounts of tissue could be seen from the wound during those breaths.

A doctor came out about a minute later and examined Sigmon for 90 seconds before declaring him dead.

Witnesses included three family members of the Larkes. Also present were Sigmon’s attorney and spiritual advisor, a representative from the prosecuting solicitor’s office, a sheriff’s investigator and three members of the news media.

Capital punishment protesters pray on the grounds of Riverbend Maximum Security Institution before the scheduled execution of inmate Oscar Smith, Thursday, April 21, 2022, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/Mark Humphrey, File)

Capital punishment protesters pray on the grounds of Riverbend Maximum Security Institution before the scheduled execution of inmate Oscar Smith, Thursday, April 21, 2022, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/Mark Humphrey, File)

Advertisement

Sigmon’s lawyer read a closing statement that he said was “one of love and a calling to my fellow Christians to help us end the death penalty.”

Advertisement

Prison spokeswoman Chrysti Shain said Sigmon’s last meal was four pieces of fried chicken, green beans, mashed potatoes with gravy, biscuits, cheesecake and sweet tea.

The firing squad is an execution method with a long and violent history in the U.S. and around the world. Death in a hail of bullets has been used to punish mutinies and desertion in armies, as frontier justice in America’s Old West and as a tool of terror and political repression in the former Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.

Since 1977 only three other prisoners in the U.S. have been executed by firing squad. All were in Utah, most recently Ronnie Lee Gardner in 2010. Another Utah man, Ralph Menzies, could be next; he is awaiting the result of a hearing in which his lawyers argued that his dementia makes him unfit for execution.

In South Carolina on Friday, a group of protesters holding signs with messages such as “All life is precious” and “Execute justice not people” gathered outside the prison before Sigmon’s execution.

Supporters and lawyers for Sigmon asked Republican Gov. Henry McMaster to commute his sentence to life in prison. They said he was a model prisoner trusted by guards and worked every day to atone for the killings and also that he committed the killings after succumbing to severe mental illness.

Advertisement
Bill Scicchitano prays outside the execution of South Carolina inmate Brad Sigmon, Friday, March 7, 2025, in Columbia, S.C. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Bill Scicchitano prays outside the execution of South Carolina inmate Brad Sigmon, Friday, March 7, 2025, in Columbia, S.C. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

Advertisement

But McMaster denied the clemency plea. No governor has ever commuted a death sentence in the state, where 46 other prisoners have been executed since the death penalty resumed in the U.S. in 1976. Seven have died in the electric chair and 39 others by lethal injection.

Gerald “Bo” King, chief of the capital habeas unit in the federal public defender’s office, said Sigmon “used his final statement to call on his fellow people of faith to end the death penalty and spare the lives of the 28 men still locked up on South Carolina’s death row.”

“It is unfathomable that, in 2025, South Carolina would execute one of its citizens in this bloody spectacle,” King said in a statement. “But South Carolina has ended the life of a man who has devoted himself to his faith, and to ministry and service to all around him. Brad admitted his guilt at trial and shared his deep grief for his crimes with his jury and, in the years since, with everyone who knew him.”

In the early 2000s, South Carolina was among the busiest death penalty states, carrying out an average of three executions a year. But officials suspended executions for 13 years, in part because they were unable to obtain lethal injection drugs.

Advertisement

The state Supreme Court cleared the way to resume them in July. Freddie Owens was the first to be put to death, on Sept. 20, after McMaster denied him clemency. Richard Moore was executed on Nov. 1 and Marion Bowman Jr. on Jan. 31.

Going forward the court will allow an execution every five weeks.

South Carolina now has 28 inmates on its death row including two who have exhausted their appeals and are awaiting execution, most likely this spring. Just one man has been added to death row in the past decade.

Before executions were paused, more than 60 people faced death sentences. Many of those have either had their sentences reduced to life or died in prison.

___

Associated Press writer Adrian Sainz in Memphis, Tennessee, contributed.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

News

Trump ‘Strongly Considering’ New Sanctions on Russia to Force Cease-Fire Deal

Published

on

Trump ‘Strongly Considering’ New Sanctions on Russia to Force Cease-Fire Deal

President Trump said on Friday that he was “strongly considering” imposing sanctions and tariffs on Russia until a cease-fire and permanent peace deal was reached in its war with Ukraine.

In his announcement, which was posted on his social media site, Truth Social, Mr. Trump said he was “strongly considering” imposing what he described as “large scale” sanctions, including on banks, because of the perilous state of the war, now in its fourth year.

His post came as Russia unleashed a furious bombardment aimed at critical Ukrainian infrastructure overnight on Thursday and on Friday. Ukraine’s energy minister, German Galushchenko, said Russian forces launched a “massive missile and drone” assault on power and gas facilities across the country.

“Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely “pounding” Ukraine on the battlefield right now, I am strongly considering large scale Banking Sanctions, Sanctions, and Tariffs on Russia until a Cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED,” Mr. Trump wrote. “To Russia and Ukraine, get to the table right now, before it is too late.”

New sanctions would be the latest turnabout for Mr. Trump’s management of the war in Ukraine. He has spent weeks aligning himself with President Vladimir V. Putin’s narrative of the war, criticizing Ukraine for being invaded by Russia, and accusing President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine of being the “dictator” who didn’t want peace.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky have spent recent days smoothing over tensions after an explosive Oval Office meeting last week, which resulted in Mr. Zelensky’s leaving the White House without signing a deal that would grant the United States a share of its revenues from mining rare earth metals.

Following the meeting, the United States halted military aid to Kyiv, as well as intelligence sharing, in an effort to pressure Ukraine to resume negotiations. In his post on Friday, Mr. Trump urged Mr. Putin and Mr. Zelensky to “get to the table right now, before it is too late.”

But Mr. Trump has basically ignored Russia’s role as the aggressor in the war, and been elusive about what Moscow ultimately wants to broker a peace deal.

Speaking from the Oval Office on Friday, Mr. Trump said he believed that Mr. Putin wanted to end the war and would “be more generous than he has to be.” Mr. Trump then suggested that it was Ukraine that would be more difficult to work with.

“In terms of getting a final settlement, it may be easier dealing with Russia,” he said, “which is surprising, because they have all the cards, and they’re bombing the hell out of them right now.”

Advertisement

Asked whether he believed Mr. Putin was taking advantage of the U.S. pause of military aid to Ukraine, Mr. Trump appeared to defend his decision to do so, saying that he thought “he’s doing what anybody else would do.” Mr. Trump also said he would not provide air defenses to stop Russia’s “pounding” until he knew that Ukraine would “settle.”

“If they don’t want to settle, we’re out of there,” he said, “because we want them to settle.“

Russian officials met last month with top Trump officials in Saudi Arabia, though Russia has not given any public indication that it would accept any truce, cease-fire or end to the war it started three years ago.

But U.S. officials have said Russia has shown openness to continuing discussions. On Thursday Mr. Trump said that he believed they would make a deal because “in a certain different way — a different way that only I know, only I know — they have no choice.”

The Biden administration imposed numerous sanctions on Moscow, seeking to cripple the Russian economy and choke off its funding for its invasion, most recently targeting Russia’s energy sector and its “shadow fleet” of oil tankers.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump’s announcement on Friday came as many business leaders and government officials in Moscow have been expressing optimism that American sanctions would be lifted soon.

The head of Russia’s main industrial lobbying group said on Friday that he had discussed the lifting of sanctions with the head of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia. Sanctions against Russia’s aviation industry and the potential return of Russian banks into the Western-led global bank transfer system were discussed, Aleksandr Shokhin, the head of the lobbying group, told Tass, a Russian state news agency.

But Oleg Kouzmin, chief economist at Renaissance Capital, a Moscow investment bank, said that Mr. Trump’s Friday threats made it clear that “the situation remains very uncertain, and the future is unwritten.”

Ever since the United States first imposed sanctions on Russia more than a decade ago, Moscow has honed the art of circumventing them. Russian cities are full of Western goods, be they luxury cars or everyday consumer items. And with the help of third countries — most of all China, Turkey and Central Asian states — Russian companies, including airlines, have been able to buy new equipment and service their old parts.

The United States could still try to target Russia’s “shadow fleet” of tankers Moscow has been using to deliver oil to its customers. But such a move would also likely increase the price of oil, as has happened before. For any oil sanctions to be fully effective, the United States would need to solicit cooperation from China and India, which have emerged as the top buyers of Russian crude.

Advertisement

U.S. and Ukrainian officials confirmed Thursday that Ukraine would send a delegation to meet with “military representatives of countries that are ready to make greater efforts to reliably guarantee security within the framework of ending this war.”

Mr. Zelensky said the Ukrainians would insist at next week’s meeting on a number of commitments from Russia to test whether a lasting peace could ultimately be reached. Those demands include Russian pledges not to attack Ukraine’s energy or other civilian infrastructure; a truce for missiles, bombs and long-range drones; and no military operations in the Black Sea. Mr. Zelensky said the meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, but did not specify who would attend.

“Ukrainians truly want peace, but not at the cost of giving up Ukraine,” Mr. Zelensky said. “The real question for any negotiations is whether Russia is capable of giving up the war.”

Ivan Nechepurenko contributed reporting from Tbilisi, Georgia, and Nataliya Vasilyeva from Istanbul.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending