An early voting station is set up in the atrium of the State Office Building in Juneau, Alaska on Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, the first day of early voting for the 2024 Alaska primary election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
(Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
NOTN- Ballots for the 2025 City and Borough of Juneau municipal election are being mailed today to all registered voters, marking the official start of the election period that runs through Oct. 7.
Voters can return their ballots by mail, deposit them in one of five secure drop boxes located around Juneau, or vote in person at City Hall or the Mendenhall Valley Public Library.
Drop boxes open today and will remain available 24 hours a day until 8 p.m. on Election Day.
This year’s ballot includes races for three Assembly seats, an areawide member, and representatives from Districts 1 and 2 , along with three Board of Education positions.
Ballots must be postmarked by Oct. 7 to be counted.
Official results are scheduled to be certified and published Oct. 21, following the review of ballots.
This satellite image provided by NASA Earth Observatory shows the retreat of Alsek Glacier in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in Alaska, as it loses contact with a land mass known as Prow Knob, center right, revealing an island, Aug. 6, 2025. (NASA Earth Observatory via AP)
AP- A retreating glacier revealed a new island in Alaska this summer, as lake water filled in to surround a land mass once hugged by ice.
Mauri S. Pelto, a glaciologist at Nichols College in Massachusetts, had anticipated for some time that the Alsek Glacier in southeast Alaska’s Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve would detach from the land mass referred to as Prow Knob. As the glacier has retreated, it has eroded a basin now filled by Alsek Lake, which is fed by the nearby Alsek River, glacier melt and icebergs, he said.
Pelto for years has used satellite imagery as part of his work chronicling changes in glaciers, and he had been checking images of the area at least once a month as he watched for the separation to occur, he said. It appears to have happened sometime between late July and early August.
Glacier Bay has over 1,000 glaciers, according to the park. While many glaciers in Alaska are retreating, not many new islands of size are revealed by their retreat, Pelto said. Prow Knob is roughly 2 square miles (5 square kilometers), and its highest point is just over 1,000 feet (304.8 meters), he said.
Imagery from the early 1980s, shared by NASA Earth Observatory, shows the Alsek Glacier largely surrounding Prow Knob, with Alsek Lake on one side. The glacier at that time shared a connection with Grand Plateau Glacier, the images show.
Over time, the lake has expanded as the glaciers have retreated. Alsek Lake is one of three lakes next to glaciers in the region that has seen marked growth since the 1980s, Pelto said.
Cook Inlet waves roll onto the beach at Kenai on Aug. 14, 2018. The U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is preparing a supplemental environmental impact statement to address legal deficiencies in a 2022 lease sale. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
Federal regulators will accept no public comments on a pending environmental study of oil leasing in Alaska’s Cook Inlet, a U.S. Department of the Interior agency announced through a Federal Register notice published Thursday.
There will be no public comment period and no public hearing on a draft supplemental environmental impact statement for a Cook Inlet lease sale that was held in 2022 but found to be legally flawed, said U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which manages oil and gas development in federal offshore areas.
The rejection of public comments is in accordance with Trump administration changes to the National Environmental Policy Act, the 55-year-old law that guides federal decisions about activities that may have environmental impacts. The changes are aimed at speeding up environmental reviews and developing infrastructure projects.
BOEM is following the administration’s updated NEPA regulations and a new department handbook on the law, which went into effect on July 3, said Elizabeth Pearce, a U.S. Department of the Interior senior public affairs specialist.
“This Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is narrowly focused on addressing the court’s concerns, without a separate public-comment round – streamlining what is typically a protracted, multi-year process down to a few months.” Pearce said by email on Thursday.
Although no public comments will be accepted, the public will be able to read the new environmental impact statement when it is finished, Pearce added. “The completed Supplemental EIS will be posted online so Alaskans and other stakeholders can see exactly how we addressed the court’s limited concerns,” she said.
The Cook Inlet environmental study stems from a federal lease sale that was held on Dec. 30, 2022. It drew only one bid.
Earlier in the year, the Biden administration had planned to cancel the sale because of lack of industry interest. But at the urging of former Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the Inflation Reduction Act that narrowly passed Congress that year included a mandate for the sale to take place. Hilcorp Inc., the dominant oil and gas operator in Cook Inlet, submitted the only bid.
In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups days before the lease sale was held, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason ruled in 2024 that the lease sale had been held without adequate study of impacts to endangered Cook Inlet beluga whales. Her ruling put the lease sale results on hold, and she ordered BOEM to conduct a new review addressing impacts to the belugas.
BOEM’s announcement about the lack of public comment opportunities was blasted by environmental plaintiffs in the case.
“BOEM’s decision to exclude the public from its supplemental environmental statement is unacceptable. Public participation is not a box to check — it is the heart of NEPA,” Loren Barrett, co-executive director the water conservation non-profit Cook Inletkeeper, said in an emailed statement.
BOEM’s earlier lapses concerning Cook Inlet belugas were “not minor oversights; they are serious errors that must be corrected with rigor and transparency and a proper review that allows the time for public input,” Barrett added.
Kristen Monsell, oceans legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity, also cited risks to the endangered beluga population, which is estimated to number a little over 300.
“This secrecy around exploiting public waters for fossil fuels is completely unacceptable. It would only take one oil spill to devastate Cook Inlet and its beluga whales, which is why the law requires transparency for these dangerous sales,” Monsell said in a statement. “The court found that federal officials failed to look at several important factors that could harm endangered belugas, including vessel noise. If the agency hides its analysis, we won’t know whether these critical issues have been addressed to better protect the belugas.”
Hilcorp currently holds eight federal leases in Cook Inlet, including the sole lease acquired in the disputed 2022 sale. The company relinquished seven other federal leases in Cook Inlet. The BOEM website does not list any Hilcorp plans for exploring its remaining leases in the inlet.
Kirk, who was 31 when he died, founded and led Turning Point USA, a conservative nonprofit that counted hundreds of thousands of young Americans among its members. Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old Utah man, is accused of killing Kirk with a single bullet at a crowded outdoor debate. He was, according to many accounts, raised by Republican parents in a conservative community. Although Robinson reportedly had recently adopted different political views, his precise motives remain unclear.
The Conversation U.S. asked Beth Gazley, an Indiana University scholar of nonprofits, local governance and civil society, to explain the significance of the Trump administration’s response to Kirk’s death in terms of free speech and nonprofit norms.
What are the Trump administration’s allegations?
High-ranking members of the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance and Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, are accusing certain progressive organizations of encouraging violence against right-wing public figures and suggesting they played a role in Kirk’s death.
Vance has said the government will “go after the NGO network that foments, facilitates and engages in violence,” in a reference to nonprofits he alleges are supporting illegal activities.
But, to be clear, the Trump administration has not yet produced evidence to support any of its allegations of wrongdoing by nonprofits and their funders.
A video feed is displayed in the White House briefing room on Sept. 15, 2025, as U.S. Vice President JD Vance hosts a podcast episode of ‘The Charlie Kirk Show’ at the White House, following the assassination of the show’s namesake. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
What organizations are being targeted?
Some conservative media outlets and Trump administration members have singled out specific nonprofits and funders.
Their targets include billionaire George Soros, whose Open Society Foundations are among the country’s largest philanthropies, and the Ford Foundation, another of the nation’s top grantmakers. The outlets and officials claim that both foundations allegedly provided money to as-of-yet unnamed groups that “radicalized” Tyler Robinson and led to what the White House has called “organized agitation.”
Another target is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that regularly reported comments Kirk made disparaging Black, LGBTQ and other people.
Most but not all of the organizations Trump and his officials have accused of wrongdoing are charitable nonprofits and foundations. These organizations operate in accordance with the rules spelled out in Section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. tax code.
The rights of nonprofits are also protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which entitles them to freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and the right to assemble and “petition the government for a redress of grievances” – which cements their right to participate in public policy advocacy.
Obviously, institutions – including nonprofits – and the people who lead them can’t promote criminal activity or incite political violence without breaking the law. U.S. Supreme Court precedents have set the bar very high on what counts as an incitement to violence.
Are there any precedents for this?
The Republican Party has previously attempted, and failed, several times in the past few years to expand the executive branch’s power to deregister charities for partisan purposes.
Most recently, GOP House members drafted an amendment that was cut from the final version of the big tax-and-spending bill Trump signed on July 4.
Are there precedents for the repression of US nonprofits and their funders?
Under the Bill of Rights, the U.S. has strong protections in place that shield nonprofits from partisan attacks. Still, there are some precedents for attempts to repress them.
The Johnson Amendment to a tax bill passed in 1954 is a well-known example. This law ended the ability of 501(c)(3) charities, private foundations and religious organizations to interfere in political campaigns.
The Republican Party has also claimed in recent years that conservatives have been victims of efforts to suppress their freedom to establish and operate charitable nonprofits. A notable case was the GOP’s accusation during the Obama administration that the Internal Revenue Service was unfairly targeting Tea Party groups for extra scrutiny. Following years of outrage over that alleged partisanship, however, it later turned out that the IRS had applied extra scrutiny to progressive groups as well.
Some political observers have suggested that the Trump administration’s inspiration for targeting certain nonprofits and their funders comes from what’s going on in other countries. Hungary, Russia, Turkey and other countries have punished the activities of their political opponents and nongovernmental organizations as crimes.
What do you think could ultimately be at stake?
The economic and political freedoms that are the bedrock of a true democracy rely on a diversity of ideas. The mechanism for implementing that ideal in the U.S. relies heavily on a long-standing Supreme Court doctrine that extends constitutional rights to individuals and organizations alike. Nonprofits, in other words, have constitutional rights.
What this means for American society is a much greater proliferation of nonprofit activity than you see in many other countries, with the inevitable result that many organizations espouse unpopular opinions or views that clash with public opinion or the goals of a major political party.
That situation does not make their activities illegal.
Even Americans who disagree with the missions of Turning Point USA or the Southern Poverty Law Center should be able to agree that both institutions contribute to what Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas once called the “market place of ideas” necessary for an open democracy.
Is it easy to see what donors fund and what nonprofits do with their money?
This situation leaves open the question of whether the public has a right to know who is bankrolling a nonprofit’s activity.
Following the money can be frustrating. Federal law is somewhat contradictory in how far it will go to apply democratic ideals of openness and transparency to nonprofit activity. A key example is the long-standing protection of donor privacy in U.S. law, a principle that conservatives generally favor.
The courts have established that making a charitable gift is a protected free speech activity that entitles donors to certain privacy rights. In fact, the most recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling related to charitable giving, handed down in 2021, upheld a conservative nonprofit’s right to strip donors’ names from reporting documents.
This privacy right extends to foundations: They can decide whether to disclose the names of their grant recipients. Still, all nonprofits except churches need to make some disclosures regarding their finances on a mandatory form filed annually.
Looking forward, organizations that advocate for the charitable sector as a whole, such as the National Council of Nonprofits, are closely following the efforts of the Trump administration. Their role is to remind the public that nonprofits on both the right and left side of the political spectrum have strong advocacy rights that don’t disappear when bad things happen.
Beth Gazley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
If you’d tuned into Comedy Central on Wednesday night hoping to see a new episode of South Park, you would’ve been disappointed.
Despite the fact that the show’s 27th season kicked off in July, a rerun of the season premiere aired in place of the new episode that had been scheduled for last night.
Viewers were left scratching their heads, and many wondered if the last-minute change had anything to do with the recent murder of Charlie Kirk.
Conservative political activist and founder of Turning Point Action Charlie Kirk takes the stage during a Turning Point Action ‘United for Change’ campaign rally for former US President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at Thomas & Mack Center in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 24, 2024. (Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images)
Charlie Kirk-based South Park episode creates controversy
As you’ve no doubt heard by now, Kirk was shot and killed during a speaking engagement at Utah Valley University last week.
The August 6 episode of South Park satirized Kirk’s public persona and his habit of engaging in tense debates with college students whose views did not align with his own.
Kirk stated that he was not offended by the portrayal, and he even changed the profile picture on some of his social media accounts to a screenshot of Eric Cartman as a Kirk-like firebrand.
But the episode became a source of controversy in the wake of Kirk’s death, and Variety has now confirmed that Comedy Central will not re-air it.
Cartman as a Charlie Kirk-like figure on South Park. (Paramount+)
(The episode is still available for streaming on Paramount+.)
In a statement, Comedy Central attributed the last-minute change in plans to a “production delay” — which actually makes perfect sense.
After all, South Park runs on a notoriously tight schedule that enables showrunners Trey Parker and Matt Stone to address the week’s top news stories.
The process was detailed in a 2011 documentary titled 6 Days to Air, which revealed that episodes are often completed at the last minute.
But Parker and Stone don’t usually miss deadlines, and given the current political climate, it’s not surprising that some fans believe there’s more to this story.
Jimmy Kimmel attends the 2023 Eastern Congo Initiative Poker and Blackjack Tournament hosted by TAO Group Hospitality at LAVO Restaurant & Nightclub at The Palazzo at The Venetian Resort Las Vegas on November 17, 2023 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Photo by Mindy Small/Getty Images)
Will ‘South Park’ meet the same fate as ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live’?
The surprising move came after FCC Chairman Brendan Carr encouraged owners of local ABC affiliates to pull Kimmel’s show from their stations in response to his comments about Kirk.
“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,” Kimmel said.
Asked about the move today, President Trump, who is currently on a state visit to the UK, told the British media that Kimmel “said a horrible thing about a great gentleman known as Charlie Kirk, and Jimmy Kimmel is not a talented person.”
“He had very bad ratings, and they should have fired him a long time ago. So, you know, you can call that free speech or not,” Trump added. “He was fired for lack of talent.”
We will have further updates on this developing story as new information becomes available.
Ostensibly, this craven move was due to his statements in the aftermath of far-right podcaster Charlie Kirk’s death.
Few seem to take more delight at this development than disgraced comedian Roseanne Barr.
ABC fired her back in 2018. Some are equating the Disney-owned network’s choices in both instances.
In March of 2018, Roseanne Barr and Jimmy Kimmel were two ABC employees chatting amicably on the latter’s talk show. (Image Credit: ABC)
The Jimmy Kimmel firing is setting off alarm bells
As we noted when CBS canceled Stephen Colbert’s show, one of the key indicators of a free society is whether you can make fun of a country’s leader without consequence.
Many believe that Jimmy Kimmel’s years of poking fun at Donald Trump — for his embarrassing moments, for his many crimes, and for his scandals — is the true motive behind the silencing of his show.
If you watch Kimmel’s comments in full, it’s difficult to believe that his statements about Kirk are the problem.
TV station operators like Nextar Media Group and the infamous Sinclair Broadcast Group were unsurprisingly quick to push for reprisal against Kimmel.
Most alarmingly, Donald Trump’s hand-picked head of the FCC mused openly about revoking ABC’s broadcasting license over the imagined offense over Kimmel’s words.
From what we can tell, Kimmel ignited this firestorm by acknowledging:
“The Maga gang are desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”
In a tweet, Roseanne Barr accused former President Barack Obama over personally causing her firing in 2018. If there is evidence to support this wild accusation, Barr did not choose to share it. (Image Credit: Twitter)
How does this compare to ABC firing Roseanne Barr?
In May 2018, Roseanne Barr tweeted: “Muslim Brotherhood & Planet of the Apes had a baby = VJ.”
The “VJ” referred to Valerie Jarrett, who had been a senior advisor to President Obama. (Just a reminder, for full context, that Donald Trump occupied the White House at this time)
Barr insisted that she had not intended her tweet to be racist, but merely political.
She also very memorably blamed Ambien, inviting pushback from everyone from pharmaceutical companies to the general public. ABC fired her and replaced the Roseanne revival with The Connors, featuring most of the original cast.
Roseanne Barr participates in “Is America a Forgiving Nation?,” a Yom Kippur eve talk on forgiveness hosted by the World Values Network and the Jewish Journal at Saban Theatre on September 17, 2018. (Photo Credit: Rachel Luna/Getty Images)
“Yeah imagine an administration putting pressure on a television channel to fire a comedian they didn’t like,” Roseanne Barr tweeted on Wednesday, September 17. (Again, Trump was in office in 2018)
We have to acknowledge that Barr has a history of posting (or otherwise sharing) unsubstantiated or false claims.
She has even retweeted QAnon conspiracy theorists like Liz Crokin, who once blamed a surfing injury on Hillary Clinton practicing sorcery against her.
However, even Barr pushes back at the idea that her firing is similar to Kimmel’s suspension.
Unfortunately, it’s not because she’s come to her senses. It’s because her idea of reality appears to be heavily skewed.
Quote-tweeting alt-right conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec, Roseanne Barr claims that her firing amidst a racism scandal was actually a firing for “telling the truth.” (Image Credit: Twitter)
Firing after a racism scandal is not the same as suspending a show to appease a despot
Interestingly, Roseanne Barr predicts that Jimmy Kimmel will “get an entire PR tour.”
That would be nice. We certainly wish him and his team well, as they are the victims of authoritarian overreach that threatens to destroy our very society.
We are not even ten months into the erosion of sacred American rights and freedoms.
It’s a little odd for Barr to make this prediction. After all, she got her very own Cancel This! comedy special on Fox Nation in 2023.
Roseanne claims her being kicked off her show was the same as Jimmy Kimmel being cancelled. No Roseanne, that show ran for 7 seasons without you, and I don’t think Jimmy Kimmel ever dressed up as Hitler baking cookies or called a black woman “Planet of the Apes” pic.twitter.com/ahEbu0cDAP
Unlike in 2018, this move by ABC is not simply a business decision.
Jimmy Kimmel did not actually say anything incendiary. He has been compassionate in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s shooting, regardless of what the late podcaster stood for.
Rather, large businesses are collaborating with the Trump administration to silence his critics. And, as with Colbert and CBS, it’s working. Whatever pretext, it’s working.
At some point, America will be able to begin the long, difficult road of rebuilding. Things may get worse before that work can begin.
At that time, our society can take a hard look and determine which companies merely bowed down to government pressure out of fear, and which were willing collaborators with an authoritarian agenda.
But for all the hot takes on social media, it seems that some of Kimmel’s closest allies are choosing to remain silent on the subject.
For starters, fellow late night host Jimmy Fallon canceled a scheduled appearance in New York City today, and to be fair, we don’t know for certain that the decision was related to Kimmel’s suspension.
But the comic is currently taking quite a bit of flak on social media.
Jimmy Fallon hosts “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” at Rockefeller Center on March 1, 2011 in New York City. (Photo by Theo Wargo/Getty Images)
Fallon’s sudden cancellation receives scrutiny on social media
According to a new report from Ad Week journalist Marc Stenberg, Fallon “abruptly cancelled” his appearance at an event hosted by business magazine Fast Company.
“Scooplet: It looks like Jimmy Fallon, who was supposed to speak this morning at Fast Company’s Innovation Festival, has abruptly cancelled his appearance,” Stenberg tweeted this morning.
Stenberg did not speculate as to the cause of the cancellation, but his tweet was picked up by TMZ, the New York Post, and other outlets, obviously under the assumption that Fallon’s decision was related to the Kimmel situation.
Fallon has since received a fair bit of criticism, but even more condemnation has gone to the hosts of The View.
US President Joe Biden attends a live interview on ABC’s “The View” in New York on September 25, 2024. The hosts are Whoopi Goldberg, Sara Haines, Ana Navarro, Joy Behar, Sunny Hostin, and Alyssa Farah Griffin. (Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)
‘The View’ hosts slammed by fans for failure to address Kimmel situation
The long-running daytime show generally features discussions of the day’s top issues, and today, the Kimmel firingshould have been at the top of that list.
But the hosts — who, like Kimmel, are employed by ABC, a subsidiary of Disney — chose to steer clear of the subject.
“Welcome to The View,” longtime View panelist Whoopi Goldberg said at the beginning of the episode, adding, “But before we do anything, it’s Sara’s birthday!”
From there, Goldberg introduced the current events portion of the show by stating, “Let’s tell you what’s been going on.”
Jimmy Kimmel speaks onstage at The Alliance For Women In Media Foundation’s 50th Annual Gracie Awards Gala at Beverly Wilshire, A Four Seasons Hotel on May 20, 2025 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Kevin Winter/Getty Images)
As People reports, the day’s slate of topics included “Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Centers for Disease Control, Eugene Levy’s new show The Reluctant Traveler (featuring an interview with the Schitt’s Creek alum), and Terry Bradshaw and wife Tammy’s new cookbook.”
But there was no mention of Kimmel.
It’s unclear why the show chose to steer clear of the day’s hottest topic, but naturally, many social media users assumed that the decision had to do with the hosts’ ties to ABC.
“I can’t believe you guys aren’t bringing up Jimmy Kimmel… is it because Disney and ABC owns you too? Speak up, ladies,” one viewer wrote on social media (via Too Fab), adding, “Disappointed. No mention of Jimmy Kimmel,” wrote another, as someone else added, “They seem worried and anxious today.”
“Too scared to mention Jimmy? I’m done with your show,” read another response, while a third viewer chimed in, “I was expecting something on free speech today, but was disappointed. Hopefully you are getting your ducks in order and will stand up for Jimmy and Free Speech very damned soon.”
We’ll see if the hosts decide to address that criticism on tomorrow’s show — but we’re guessing they’ll continue to give the Kimmel scandal a wide berth.
Fear not — Bravo offered further details in a press release.
“In the city that never sleeps, a group of New Yorkers navigates the biggest transitions of their lives – marriage, parenthood, reinvention, and the reality of growing up without growing apart,” Bravo described.
“Can they have it all,” the release asked, “or will they need to choose between the lives they’ve built and the futures they never saw coming?”
During a heated dinner scene on ‘Summer House’ Season 9, Paige DeSorbo absolutely heard what you said about her. (Image Credit: Bravo)
Who will appear on the ‘Summer House’ spinoff?
People reports that Bravo fans can expect to see Lindsay Hubbard, Amanda Batula, and Kyle Cooke all make the leap from Summer House to In The City.
However, don’t expect to be seeing Paige DeSorbo or Lexi Wood.
Both Summer House stars departed from the series after the Season 9 finale.
They won’t be on Season 10 or on In The City, it seems.
On ‘Summer House’ Season 9, Paige DeSorbo makes quite the face at her then-boyfriend. (Image Credit: Bravo)
In a new interview with Byrdie this week, Paige DeSorbo spoke about her Summer House exit after 7 years.
“I just had this overwhelming sense that I couldn’t go back,” she explained of her departure, three months after the June announcement.
“I know I would’ve been doing a disservice to [the show],” Paige admitted.
“They expect a certain level of showing up and I couldn’t give them that.”
Paige DeSorbo chose a very interesting outfit to survey ongoing construction on Southern Charm Season 9. (Image Credit: Bravo)
Reframing her thoughts to film reality TV felt like ‘brainwashing’
“I definitely had to get over the [feeling] that my career would be over,” Paige emphasized.
“There’s an element of thinking you need that show and network,” she then admitted.
A lot of jobs seem to work that way in the entertainment industry, where one gig is all part of an unending hustle.
At the end of the Season 9 teaser after the ‘Summer House’ premiere, Paige DeSorbo drops a bombshell about her ex. (Image Credit: Bravo)
“Being on reality TV, there’s a level — this is a harsh word — of, like, brainwashing,” Paige DeSorbo characterized after her time on both Summer House and Southern Charm.
“That’s not real life,” she reasoned. “You’re not stopping people on the street and being like, ‘I just had a thought that I hate my boyfriend.’”
It is very normal for jobs to re-frame how we think.
But reality TV intersects with a personal life more than almost any other job. If Paige needs a break, we hope that she enjoys whatever she does with her free time.
D4vd was on tour at the time of the discovery, and it’s unclear of he ever drove the car himself, or if it was merely registered in his name.
d4vd poses with 5 Gum during Interscope and Capitol Records Coachella Party 2025 on April 12, 2025 in Palm Springs, California. (Photo by Rich Polk/Getty Images for Interscope/Capitol)
Now, D4vd appears to have paused his tour, as TMZ reports that a show scheduled for Seattle earlier this week was abruptly canceled.
The residence was reportedly rented by Josh Marshall, D4vd’s manager, who presumably allowed the singer to reside there.
It’s unclear how long D4vd lived there, but it seems he entertained at least one celebrity friend.
Footage obtained by TMZ reveals that D4vd and pal/producer Benny Blanco once hosted a livestream from the residence.
d4vd attends the Amiri Menswear Spring/Summer 2026 show as part of Paris Fashion Week on June 26, 2025 in Paris, France. (Photo by Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images)
Blanco, of course, is one of the most in-demand producers in the music industry.
He’s as well known for his charisma as for his abilities in the studio, so it comes as no surprise that he would’ve befriended an up-and-coming artist like D4vd.
Obviously, the situation involving D4vd’s Tesla is one of the most bizarre celebrity scandals in recent memory.
d4vd performs at Gobi Tent during the 2025 Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival on April 20, 2025 in Indio, California. (Photo by Arturo Holmes/Getty Images for Coachella)
But it’s important to note that the singer has not been arrested or even named as a person of interest in the disappearance of Rivas.
Rivas reportedly went missing more than a year ago. Her family recently broke their silence on a GoFundMe page launched in order to cover funeral expenses.
“As many of you know, Celeste Rivas Hernandez has been identified as the body found last week,” organizers Esmeralda Lozano and Gisel Vera wrote on the fundraising page. “She was a beloved daughter, sister, cousin, and friend.”
“Her family is heartbroken and devastated by this tragic loss. They are seeking help to lay her body to rest. Any funds you are able to donate are greatly appreciated,” they added.
Rivas’ loved ones have raised over $5,000 toward their eventual goal of $20,000.
We will have further updates on this developing story as new information becomes available.
Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension from the late-night airwaves has thrust lawmakers, government officials and the president to the forefront of the debate over free speech while also deepening the partisan divide amid the fallout over conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s killing.
Since Disney announced Wednesday night that it would pull Kimmel’s show indefinitely over the comedian’s comments about Kirk’s slaying, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr — who last night pressured ABC and local broadcasters to “to take action” against Kimmel — on Thursday morning defended his decision and accused the late-night show host of misleading Americans; House Democratic leadership in turn called on him to resign; and President Donald Trump told reporters in the U.K. that Kimmel was fired over bad ratings.
“They should have fired him a long time ago,” Trump said. “You can call that free speech or not. He was fired for lack of talent.”
Even former Vice President Mike Pence weighed in during an early Thursday morning appearance on CNBC to chide Kimmel for his comments while also expressing discomfort with Carr’s pressure campaign.
“The First Amendment doesn’t protect entertainers from being fired by their employers,” he said, adding, “I would have preferred that the FCC didn’t weigh in in the wake of this.”
The furor over Kimmel’s comments highlights how deeply divided America has become and how somewhat insensitive or even offensive remarks by public figures — and even the general public — have become fuel for those seeking to quelch opposing views.
Carr on Thursday accused Kimmel of upsetting “lots and lots of people” and hinted at going even further though, telling CNBC “we’re not done yet.”
“We’re in the midst of a very disruptive moment right now, and I just, frankly, expect that we’re going to continue to see changes in the media ecosystem,” Carr said.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Thursday was among those demanding Carr resign.
“I can’t think of a greater threat to free speech than Carr in many, many years,” Schumer told POLITICO. “He’s despicable. He’s anti-American. He ought to resign, and Trump ought to fire him.”
Trump Wednesday night celebrated Kimmel’s show being pulled before calling on NBC to cancel “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” and “Late Night with Seth Meyers.”
Former President Barack Obama on Thursday called the administration’s involvement in Kimmel’s cancellation “dangerous.”
“After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like,” Obama said in a post on X on Thursday.
His comments follow remarks he made on Tuesday night during an event in Pennsylvania, where the former president called Kirk’s killing “horrific,” though he added that he disagreed with many of the conservative activist’s statements.
“We can also, at the same time, say that I disagree with the idea that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a mistake,” Obama said. “I can say that I disagree with the suggestion that my wife or Justice Jackson does not have adequate brain processing power. I can say that I disagree that Martin Luther King was awful.”
The Trump administration has also faced backlash from Democrats and some conservatives after Attorney General Pam Bondi proposed the idea of cracking down on “hate speech” in the aftermath of Kirk’s shooting.
“We’ve got the Trump administration literally targeting individuals — you saw it with [Stephen] Colbert, now you’re seeing it with Kimmel — anybody that’s criticizing this administration,” Pritzker said. “They’re using the power of government to intimidate companies to fire people.”
Back in Washington, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) said her Republican colleagues have “selective outrage.”
“Republicans scream ‘free speech’… until the truth hurts their fragile politics,” she wrote on X. “Jimmy Kimmel gets suspended, but hate, lies, and conspiracy theories run free.”
