Elayna Cunningham, a college student interning at Koahnic Broadcast Corp., records a program on July 10, 2025, at the Anchorage, Alaska, studios of KNBA, the flagship station for National Native News. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen)
Elayna Cunningham, a college student interning at Koahnic Broadcast Corp., records a program on July 10, 2025, at the Anchorage, Alaska, studios of KNBA, the flagship station for National Native News. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen)
NOTN- Months after Congress eliminated federal funding for public broadcasting, 14 Alaska stations have been granted temporary relief.
Eligible stations were then presented with two potential funding options: they could partner with a Tribe, either through a 638 compact or 638 contract, or they could go through a grant process.
Stations will likely be funded through a program that supports tribal stations, but they won’t receive the temporary funding until after the federal government Shutdown.
In a press release, Senator Lisa Murkowski announced the funding, calling it a critical but short-term measure to keep rural stations operating after Congress rescinded $1.1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
“This funding will help some of Alaska’s most rural radio stations make ends meet for now.” Murkowski said, “But it is one-time funding, and the job isn’t done until every station in Alaska has stable, long-term support.”
Stations set to receive funding include KNBA in Anchorage, KBRW in Barrow, KYUK in Bethel, KDLG in Dillingham, KUCB in Unalaska, and others serving communities from the Aleutians to the Arctic.
U.S. Senate Democrats and Republicans remained at a stalemate Wednesday as government offices closed and hundreds of thousands of federal workers faced furloughs on the first day of a government shutdown that showed no sign of ending.
Proposals from each side of the aisle to fund and reopen the government failed again during morning Senate votes, mirroring the same vote breakdowns as Tuesday evening, when lawmakers could not reach a deal hours before the government ran out of money.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected up to 750,000 federal workers could be furloughed, leading to a $400 million per day impact on the economy.
Locked in their positions, Republicans failed to pick up enough Democrats to reach the 60 votes needed to advance their plan to fund the government until Nov. 21.
Senators will break Thursday to observe Yom Kippur but will return Friday to again vote on the funding proposals.
Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, along with independent Angus King of Maine, again joined Republicans in the 55-45 vote for the House-passed stopgap spending bill. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted no.
Democrats also failed to find support to move forward their bill to fund the government through Oct. 31, roll back GOP cuts on Medicaid and permanently extend subsidies that tie the cost of Affordable Care Act health insurance premiums to an enrollee’s income level.
The Democrats failed to advance their plan in a party-line 47-53 vote. King, who caucuses with Democrats, voted in favor.
Shutdown tied to health care tax credits
Senate and House Democrats say they will not support a GOP path to reopen the government unless Republicans agree to negotiate on rising health care costs.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said at a press conference that Democrats are “ready to sit down with anyone at any time and at any place in order now to reopen the government, to enact a spending agreement that meets the needs of the American people and to address the devastating Republican health care crisis that has caused extraordinary harm on people all across the country.”
The New York Democrat pointed to harms in “rural America, working class America, urban America, small-town America, the heartland of America and Black and brown communities throughout America.”
Democratic leaders blitzed Capitol Hill with their message on health care, holding press conferences and attending an evening rally Tuesday on the lawn outside the U.S. House.
U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks during a press conference inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025. Also pictured from left are Washington Sen. Patty Murray, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
They pointed to new data published this week showing annual insurance premiums could double on average in 2026 if the subsidies expire at year’s end, according to an analysis from the nonprofit health policy research organization KFF.
Open enrollment for next year’s ACA health insurance plans opens Nov. 1 in most states, and Oct. 15 in Idaho.
Uptake of ACA health insurance plans has more than doubled to over 24 million, up from 11 million, since the introduction of the subsidies in 2021, according to KFF.
During their own budget reconciliation deal in 2022, Democrats extended the insurance premium tax credits until the end of 2025. The majority of ACA enrollees currently rely on the credits.
Democrats also want assurances that the White House and Senate Republicans will not cancel any more funds that have already been approved by Congress, as was the case this year when the administration and GOP lawmakers stripped funding for medical research, foreign aid and public broadcasting, among other areas.
‘This can all end today’
GOP leaders in the House and Senate continued to blame Senate Democrats for the government shutdown at the expense of furloughed federal workers and Americans who rely on their services.
At a Wednesday morning press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson said “troops and border patrol agents will have to go to work, but they’ll be working without pay.”
Johnson also claimed at the press conference that veterans benefits would stop. The claim is false, as Veterans Administration medical care will continue uninterrupted and vets will also continue to receive benefits, including compensation, pension, education and housing.
House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana speaks at a press conference outside the U.S. Capitol on Oct. 1, 2025, in Washington, D.C., alongside fellow GOP leadership in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
“As we speak here this morning, there are hundreds of thousands of federal workers who are getting their furlough notices. Nearly half of our civilian workforce is being sent home — these are hard-working Americans who work for our federal government,” the Louisiana Republican said, flanked by fellow GOP leaders on the Upper West Terrace of the U.S. Capitol overlooking the National Mall.
Johnson decided in late September the House will be out until Oct. 6, canceling this week’s votes.
The speaker said he will bring House members back next week, even if the government is still shut down.
“They would be here this week, except that we did our work — we passed the bill almost two weeks ago out of the House, sent it to the Senate,” Johnson said. “The ball is literally in (Senate Minority Leader) Chuck Schumer’s court, so he determines that.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said “this can all end today” and “needs to end today.”
The South Dakota Republican said the funding lapse can cease when Senate Democrats vote for the GOP’s “clean” short-term funding bill.
“We will continue to work together with our House counterparts, with the president of the United States, to get this government open again on behalf of the American people,” Thune said.
Bipartisan deal and Trump
Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine said later in the day that a bipartisan group huddled on the floor during votes to talk about a possible path forward on “health care fixes” and ensuring that if a bipartisan deal is brokered, the Trump administration will stick to it.
Republican senators, he said, could give Democrats assurances they won’t vote for any more rescissions requests from the White House, which ask Congress to cancel already approved government spending. But other issues, like laying off federal workers by the hundreds or thousands, have to be a promise from the president.
“If I find a deal, should Congress have to follow it? Yes. Should the president have to follow it? Yes. Well, what if the president won’t follow it? Oh, yeah, you got a problem,” Kaine said. “So you know, rescission, impoundment, those are Senate words. But a deal is a deal — people get that.”
Kaine also emphasized that it’s not a “clean” stopgap funding bill if the Trump administration unilaterally cancels some of the spending.
“In the past, we voted for clean (continuing resolutions), but the president has shown that he’ll take the money back,” Kaine said, referring to the technical name for a short-term funding bill. “I mean, just in Virginia, canceling $400 million to our public health, $40 million economic projects just pulled off the table, firing more Virginians than any president.
“So we just want you to agree, if we do a deal, then you’ll honor the deal,” Kaine said. “It’s not that much to ask.”
‘People are suffering’
North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said he doesn’t expect the shutdown will have long-term ramifications for senators’ ability to negotiate bipartisan deals — a necessity in the upper chamber, which has a 60-vote threshold to advance legislation.
“It’s all transactional,” Tillis said. “I think there’s going to be opportunities for some bipartisan work, but none of that happens, you can’t even really consider it when you’re in a shutdown posture.”
Cortez Masto, who voted to advance Republicans’ seven-week stopgap bill, said the GOP “created this crisis” on health care and “need to address it.”
“They have no moral standing — no moral standing —- to say that this is all on the Democrats. They are in control. They’ve created this crisis,” Cortez Masto said. “People are suffering and they need to come to the table.”
Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who was sworn in for the first time during the last shutdown, said he worries about longer-term effects.
“My concern is it’s going to poison the well on negotiations going forward on a lot of things,” Hawley said. “I can’t speak for anybody but myself, but I would just say that these tactics are very destructive. And it’s destructive, not just for relationships, but for real people.”
President Donald Trump signs a series of executive orders on Feb. 10, 2025, including an order relating to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Under the Trump administration, however, expectations are changing. In February 2025, an executive order froze new investigations for 180 days, arguing that the act has been “stretched beyond proper bounds” and “harms American economic competitiveness.” The president ordered a review of enforcement guidelines to ensure they advance U.S. interests and competitiveness.
The Department of Justice’s revised guidelines, issued in June 2025, prioritize cases that are tied to cartels and other transnational criminal organizations, harm U.S. companies or their “fair access to compete,” or involve “infrastructure or assets” important for national security.
Whatever impact the new guidelines will have on anti-corruption prosecutions globally, which is still unclear, the impact on the actual level of corruption will likely be small. Legal rules and sanctions designed to deter, find and punish “bad apples” have had limited success in many parts of the world. Yet the United States’ retreat from leadership could set back momentum for addressing the root causes of corruption.
New anti-corruption norm, but limited change
In 1977, when the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was signed into law, the U.S. was alone in criminalizing bribery of foreign officials. Since then, and especially since the end of the Cold War, there’s been a paradigm shift.
Yet global trends in corruption, widely defined as the “abuse of entrusted power for personal gain,” are not improving. On the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, the most widely used global ranking of public sector corruption, two-thirds of countries scored below 50 on a scale where 0 is “very corrupt” and 100 is “very clean.” And while 32 countries had reduced corruption since 2012, 148 had either stayed the same or gotten worse.
A few examples illustrate this “whack-a-mole” dynamic. Medical personnel in Ugandan hospitals began to solicit “gifts” and “appreciation” after the government imposed greater oversight and penalties for bribery. A study of World Bank efforts in over 100 developing countries to clean up procurement corruption found that gains in one area were canceled out when government buyers started to use procedures not subject to the new rules. In my own research, my co-authors and I found that civil servants developed innovative ways to avoid enforcing a law requiring public employees convicted of corruption to be fired.
More than ‘bad apples’
I have spent the past 10 years trying to understand this paradox. One key factor we (and many others) found is that most conventional anti-corruption tools are addressing the wrong problem.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar measures focus on preventing, detecting and punishing individual acts of corruption. Rules requiring reporting and asset declarations, monitoring and oversight, and criminal penalties for corruption belong to this category. These tools try to limit the power people have over decisions and resources and increase accountability and transparency.
This approach works where corrupt acts are sporadic, opportunistic deviations from the norm by “bad apples” acting to enrich themselves. It also assumes that rule of law and robust institutions exist.
Filipinos protest on Sept. 21, 2025, in Manila after corruption was uncovered in flood control projects that have embroiled officials, engineers, contractors and politicians. Ezra Acayan/Getty Images
This is not the case in much of the world – especially in fragile and conflict-affected states where corruption is endemic. By “endemic,” I mean not just that corruption is widespread, but that it is embedded in politics and the economy – a “team effort” within broad networks, with informal rules of the game. As an Afghan official reportedly told U.S. Embassy officials in 2010, endemic corruption “is not just a problem for the system of governance … it is the system of governance.”
What makes the conventional anti-corruption tool kit so ineffective in contexts of endemic corruption?
#1. It does not pay to follow the rules. Without trusted leaders and institutions to implement the law, it is difficult for people to behave honestly, as they don’t trust that others will do the same. Corruption, in this sense, is a “collective action” problem. If corruption is the norm, not the exception, the short-term costs of sticking to the rules are too high.
#2. Corruption serves a useful function – even when it undermines the public good. Even when people believe it’s wrong, corruption can solve problems that seem unsolvable in their current system. For example, health workers in Nigeria often ask for bribes because their salaries are low and clinics lack needed supplies. The money helps them fulfill family obligations and make clinics work. Similarly, politicians often practice patronage because it helps them redistribute wealth to retain supporters and stabilize conflict. Unless dysfunction is addressed, incentives to bypass the rules remain.
#3. Informal institutions prevail over formal rules. When a government cannot be relied upon to provide security, services or livelihoods, people rely on their personal networks to survive. As a judge in the Central African Republic told our research team, “If someone [within your social network] asks for a service, you are required to do it, even if it goes against your own ethics. To refuse is to put oneself in opposition [to one’s clan] and this can be dangerous.”
Loss of leadership
This does not mean that conventional anti-corruption approaches are completely ineffective or irrelevant.
But they aren’t enough on their own. They work best hand in hand with interventions that address motivating factors – from low pay to a lack of livelihoods not dependent on corruption, to social norms that motivate people to seek bribes or make them hesitate to enforce the rules.
The limitations of existing anti-corruption approaches suggest that more limited enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is not likely, by itself, to worsen global corruption. But the loss of U.S. leadership may.
The U.S. role in anti-corruption progress cannot be understated – as a leader in “policing” foreign corruption, a model for other countries’ laws and institutions, and a leading donor. It is still unclear whether others – such as the U.K., the most likely and dedicated candidate – can fill the gap.
Equally concerning, in my view, is the danger that the U.S. turn to a more self-serving view of anti-corruption efforts may encourage a corrupt use of anti-corruption enforcement. Many authoritarian governments have weaponized anti-corruption laws to target political opponents through selective prosecutions.
If the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act is used this way, this could not only undermine the legitimacy of global anti-corruption norms but exacerbate conflict and fuel democratic backsliding at home and abroad.
Diana Chigas receives funding for her research from The MacArthur Foundation, Transparency International Canada and the Wellspring Philanthropic Fund through Besa Global, Inc., a social enterprise in Canada dedicated to improving anti-corruption effectiveness in fragile and conflict-affected contexts.
Congress failed to meet an Oct. 1 deadline to adopt a spending measure and keep the federal government open, resulting in the first government shutdown in nearly seven years. With both Democrats and Republicans seemingly prepared for a long fight, Alfonso Serrano, a politics editor at The Conversation, interviewed Charlie Hunt, a congressional expert at Boise State University, about the prospects of a compromise and what’s at stake for both parties.
Both sides appear to be dug in. Do you see a path to a quick compromise?
Not at this point. The Democrats have made clear at least what their stated sticking point is: these health care subsidies that are set to expire at the end of this year that were part of the Obamacare legislation. Politically speaking, this is part of a larger tactic of pushing back broadly and finally having some point of leverage against the Trump administration. The Democrats are going to use this moment to draw attention to what they see as abuses in the administration.
There have been a number of incidents like the spectacle at the Department of Defense (on Sept. 30), the use of the military in cities, and a lot of the other uses or abuses of the Justice Department or the Trump administration. Even though those all are technically separate from the shutdown issue, it’s impossible to talk about the Democrats’ strategy without making reference to those as things that a lot of folks of the left are really upset about. And this is a vehicle by which the Democrats can push back politically and actually use some of their power to stop momentum and draw attention to what the administration is doing.
But on the Republican side of things, they have a pretty simple argument, which is they want to continue funding the government at current levels and the Democrats do not. Until those dynamics change, or until enough Democratic senators get nervous about the optics of what is going on, no, I don’t see a pathway out.
How does the White House’s power over government spending, in the form of impoundment, affect negotiations?
The process of impoundment is basically the executive branch declining to spend money that Congress has appropriated. Technically speaking, that is not legal under the Impoundment Act that was passed following Richard Nixon practicing this method in the 1970s. If you’re the Democrats and you’re trying to negotiate for some kind of spending, for instance on these health care subsidies, and say you win a concession from the Republicans, then the Democrats might rightfully say, “Why would we even agree to this when we think there’s a chance that you’re either going to impound these funds that we’re appropriating for these subsidies, or you’re just going to have another rescissions package and the Republican-led Congress, with a simple majority, is just going to take these funds back? And then we haven’t won any concessions.”
Who are key players and groups of senators and representative who might decide how long this shutdown lasts?
You have people like GOP Sen. Rand Paul who are sort of the Tea Party or Freedom Caucus wing of the party, who want to see less government spending overall, and on principal tend to oppose these continuing resolutions. He was the only Republican who voted against the GOP bill last night. I have the feeling that if Republicans like the Senate Majority Leader John Thune manage to peel off a few more Democrats, and Rand Paul ends up being the deciding vote, they might be able to get him on board to pass this package.
In terms of the Senate, the real sticking points are the Democrats. You’ve got a shrinking number of moderate Democrats who could end up joining the Republicans on future votes to pass their spending bill. (You have) John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, who has been a bit of a wild card for the Democrats ever since he took office in 2023. Then you’ve got other more moderate Democrats from middle-of-the-road states. People like Catherine Cortez Masto in Nevada and others from states like Arizona or Pennsylvania, or maybe Wisconsin. But, for the most part, the Democrats have held the line.
To me, at the end of the day it’s a question of how much leadership in these two parties can hold together their caucus. I think both Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leaders in the Senate and House, respectively, have faced a ton of blowback from Democratic voters, who have made it really clear that their strategy last time was not something the left supported. So I think there’s a lot more political pressure on them this time. And (Schumer and Jeffries) are going to sort of use that pressure a lot more with their caucus members than they did last time.
The dome of the U.S. Capitol is seen before dawn on Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2025, in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein
Which party stands to lose more from the political backlash of the shutdown?
It’s perfectly possible that we end up having this fight and there are no winners. A lot of times in these negotiations it ends up being who can save the most face. Who can get away from the fight without having lost the respect of their own supporters.
I have the feeling that most Democratic senators understand that Republicans are not going to suddenly give in on these health care subsidies, or that Donald Trump is going to suddenly say, “You know what, you’re right. We shouldn’t use the military in American cities.” Or that (Director of the Office of Management and Budget) Russell Vought is suddenly going to say, “You’re right. The executive branch should really stop impounding funds and we’re just going to give you what you want.” The Democrats understand that, but they are trying to demonstrate to their voters that they are going to do some kind of fighting and use whatever small leverage they do have.
I think there is more on a policy basis for the Democrats to lose just based on their ideological principles. There are plenty of Republicans that, frankly, are happy to see the government shut down, to demonstrate to the American people that “hey, look, you don’t need this much government, you can get away with less, this is a good opportunity maybe to cut a bunch of government programs, do mass firings of federal workers, as the OMB director has suggested.” Whereas the Democrats favor more robust social safety net programs and more government spending to achieve their goals.
So the longer the government stays shut down, the less funding those programs are going to get. In that sense, the Democrats have more to lose. On the other hand, the Republicans can lose a lot in terms of public relations because of who is leading their party.
I think Donald Trump demonstrated in the last shutdown, back in 2018-2019, that he has a great deal of difficulty not making these fights all about him, at least from a public perspective. That doesn’t tend to go well for him because he’s a pretty unpopular president, because he tends to bite off more than he can chew in fights like these. And that’s something the Democrats can use to their advantage from a public relations or communications perspective, in terms of talking to their voters.
But the question is going to be: How much of that is worth the losses that are going to be incurred if we’re talking about a government that is shut down for weeks or even months? That’s going to be a lot of pain for Americans. Then it just turns to who ends up getting the blame. And I don’t think we know enough yet.
Charlie Hunt 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.
Kate Gosselin has revealed the reason she was hospitalized this week and even had to undergo surgery.
And we must say:
We did NOT see this coming…
(TikTok)
In a TikTok video filmed by the reality star and shared by a friend on Tuesday, we learned that the reality star was seriously injured over the weekend by one of her dogs.
“Meika, my puppy, ran into me full-speed ahead and I ended up with a tibial plateau fracture and surgery with plates and pins in my leg,” she told fans, referring to an injury of the knee.
Gosselin’s explanation came after she shared a cryptic photo the day before of her arm with an IV attached to it.
Her original post did not disclose the reason behind her hospitalization, but did include the following caption:
“Please pray for me tonight and tomorrow. I will be fine, but I’m scared and would appreciate your prayers! Thanks, guys.”
Kate Gosselin attends the Discovery Upfront 2018 at the Alice Tully Hall at Lincoln Center on April 10, 2018 in New York City. (Photo by Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Discovery)
In her latest medical update, Gosselin detailed how an “ice machine,” referring to a cold therapy system, is offering pain relief.
She also noted that a doctor had described her injury as “life-altering.”
“My leg is really hurting, I’m going to need to say something,” she added. “It’s, like, unable to be ignored.”
We truly do feel bad for Kate Gosselin, but we’re confident that she won’t have a problem complaining about pretty much anything on her mind.
Kate Gosselin speaks during the HGTV segment of the 2019 Winter Television Critics Association Press Tour at The Langham Huntington, Pasadena on February 12, 2019 in Pasadena, California. (Photo by Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images)
It’s worth noting that, during the most video, a fan asked whether Gosselin’s “boyfriend” was at her bedside, but Gosselin did not respond to the question.
The inquiry was a reference to Steve Neild, Gosselin’s former bodyguard who we strongly believe is now her long-time lover — and who both her son and her ex-husband have said she was sleeping with during her marriage.
“What about when we’d go on vacation and you made me sleep on the hotel cot while you and Steve were together?” Collin asked on his Instagram Story on last Wednesday night in response to this news.
“Or when I’d be in a connected room while you shared one with him?” he also asked.
“What about when you were on Kate Plus Date, but Steve’s home address was the same as yours? You told me I broke our family when you couldn’t stay true to my dad.”
Amy Duggar didn’t always hate her widely reviled cousin.
As we previously reported, Amy’s memoir will soon be upon us.
She is one of disgraced cousin Josh Duggar’s most outspoken critics.
But, bizarrely, that was not always the case. They remained close right up until his arrest.
In 2017, Amy Duggar appeared on Marriage Boot Camp alongside her husband. (Image Credit: WEtv)
‘Growing up’ with Josh was ‘so much fun’ for Amy Duggar
On Wednesday, October 1, Amy Duggar King spoke toUs Weekly about how her childhood memories of Josh are so different from the man that he chose to be as an adult.
“Growing up … we had so much fun,” the 39-year-old recalled of her incarcerated cousin.
“He was such a fun kid,” Amy characterized.
“There [were] all kinds of pranks he pulled and jokes. We just had this connection.”
Elaborating, Amy shared that she and Josh “very much kept in touch” as adults.
“He texted me two weeks before he was arrested, sending me memes,” she revealed.
It is unnerving to think of monsters who communicate with friends and family the same way that the rest of us do.
But that’s the reality.
For ‘Shiny Happy People’ Season 2, Amy Duggar King acknowledges that she received blowback for her participation in the first season. (Image Credit: Prime Video)
Does she ‘miss’ her evil cousin, in light of his crimes?
“I don’t know that person,” Amy Duggar said of Josh and his crimes of receiving and possessing child sex-abuse material (CSAM).
“So I do not miss that person,” she reasoned.
“That is the scariest thing,” Amy observed.
“To know that you’ve known someone your whole life, and yet, you don’t know them at all.”
Josh Duggar will be stuck behind federal bars for a VERY long time. No one feels sorry for him. (Image Credit: NBC)
Of course, many outside of the Duggar family did not feel surprised at Josh’s CSAM arrest and conviction.
Why? Because he had molested five young girls as a teenager.
That because public knowledge several years before Homeland Security raided his workplace.
How did Amy feel about that horror?
‘Everything was so healthy and good’ after the 2015 revelations about Josh
Amy Duggar admitted that it felt “really hard” to move forward after she learned what Josh had done to four of his own sisters.
“But then … it felt like everyone was [trying to] apologize. Everything was so healthy and good,” she shared.
(Remember, Amy grew up in an extreme lifestyle and belief system, even if she was not a cultist like her cousins)
Amy Duggar appeared on Marriage Boot Camp with her husband, Dillon King. (Image Credit: WEtv)
“And so I was like, ‘Why am I holding this against this person?’ You know, everyone’s human,” Amy confessed.
“And so I reconciled in my mind,” she explained. “Like, ‘OK, if everyone else can forgive, I can, too.’”
Amy concluded: “I still loved him, regardless of the crap he did.”
Thankfully, that no longer seems to be the case. And she has no interest in making nice with Josh ever again.
And as usual, Kanye West has found a way to involve himself in the drama.
On a new trailer for The Kardashians, Kim claims that a member of her inner circle “put out a hit” on her.
Kim Kardashian films a confessional segment for ‘The Kardashians.’ (Image Credit: Hulu)
Kim Kardashian says she’s ‘terrified’ following news of attempted ‘hit’
“I am terrified out of my mind,” Kim tells the camera in a confessional segment, adding:
“I got a call from investigators. Someone extremely close to me put a hit out on my life.”
Thankfully, it seems that the situation has been resolved with no harm coming to Kim or her loved ones.
“I’m happy it’s over,” she says in the clip.
The drama from that scene — which was likely filmed several months ago — promptly spilled over into the present, as social media users pointed out Kim’s ex-husband Kanye West claims she accused him of putting out a hit.
Kim Kardashian and Kanye West attend the 2020 Vanity Fair Oscar Party hosted by Radhika Jones at Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts on February 09, 2020 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images)
Kanye West claims Kim was accusing him of
“YESTERDAY KIM ACCUSED ME OF PUTTING A HIT OUT ON HER,” West wrote on his Instagram page while he was still married to Kim, according to Page Six.
Now, Kim and Kanye finalized their divorce back in 2022, so it’s not clear why Kim would be talking about her hitman suspicions on the most recent season of The Kardashians.
Maybe investigators uncovered new information. Or maybe Kim is talking about a different hit entirely.
We guess we’ll have to tune into the new season of The Kardashians to find out!
Kim Kardashian speaks to the camera in a confessional segment from ‘The Kardashians’ Season 7. (Hulu/YouTube screenshot)
The trailer also teases that The Kardashians Season 7 will address the issue of Kim’s stalker.
“Everybody’s kind of on edge,” Kendall Jenner says of the concerns surrounding her sister’s safety.
Kylie Jenner then reveals that she endured a frightening incident, telling her family, “I heard footsteps walking into my room.”
As a reminder that Kim has endured quite a few scary moments over the years, we also see her attending the sentencing hearing of the men who robbed her at gunpoint in Paris.
“I want to be who I want to be,” Kim tells Kris Jenner of her decision to arrive at the courtroom blinged out.
Hopefully, all of these terrifying incidents won’t do anything to dull Kim’s shine.
The beloved conservationist has been a household name for generations.
Her impacts upon zoology, environmental science, and popular culture have few parallels.
Now, the world’s foremost expert on chimpanzees has died. She was 91.
British ethologist and primatologist Jane Goodall poses during a photo session on October 18, 2024. (Photo Credit: JOEL SAGET/AFP via Getty Images)
Dr. Jane Goodall has passed away
On Wednesday, October 1, the Jane Goodall Institute released a somber statement.
“The Jane Goodall Institute has learned this morning, Wednesday, October 1, 2025, that Dr. Jane Goodall DBE, UN Messenger of Peace, and Founder of the Jane Goodall Institute has passed away.”
This statement revealed the cause of death, adding that her passing was “due to natural causes.”
“She was in California as part of her speaking tour in the United States,” the Institute detailed.
“Dr. Goodall’s discoveries as an ethologist revolutionized science,” the statement accurately noted.
“And,” the statement concluded, “she was a tireless advocate for the protection and restoration of our natural world.”
British primatologist Jane Goodall visits chimp rescue center on June 9, 2018. (Photo Credit: SUMY SADURNI/AFP via Getty Images)
She changed the world through research and advocacy
Dr. Jane Goodall, who appeared as a scientist and advocate throughout the world (not to mention fictionalized parodies in every genre of fiction), was most famous for her study of chimpanzees.
As a child, she received a toy chimpanzee in lieu of a teddy bear.
She has credited this with helping to foster a love for and curiosity regarding animals.
In the 1960s, she began studying wild chimpanzees in Tanzania’s Gombe Stream National Park.
Her discoveries about chimpanzees and their behavior and societies revolutionized how many understand non-human animals.
British researcher and primatologist Jane Goodall poses with the UNESCO 60th anniversary gold medal she received for her studies into the conservation of chimpanzees in Africa, 17 January 2006. (Photo Credit: FRANCOIS GUILLOT/AFP via Getty Images)
More broadly, Dr. Goodall’s decades of studying chimpanzees spun into broader conservation work.
In 2002, the United Nations names her a Messenger of Peace.
She has been an unyielding advocate in the face of worsening climate change.
Famous environmentalist and primatologist Jane Goodall speaks during a conference at the Metropolitan Theatre in Medellin, Colombia on August 22, 2024. (Photo Credit: JAIME SALDARRIAGA/AFP via Getty Images)
The world is a sorrier place without her
In her passing, Dr. Jane Goodall leaves behind her son, Hugo, along with three grandchildren.
She also has millions of fans and admirers throughout the world.
Some got their starts in activism, science, and animal conservation because of her inspiring example.
Keith has reportedly moved on with a new girlfriend, but it appears that the relationship did not begin until after he and Nicole separated.
So if there was no infidelity, why the abrupt filing? Well, one source claims to have the answer to that question.
Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban attend the 49th AFI Life Achievement Award Gala Tribute celebrating Nicole Kidman at Dolby Theatre on April 27, 2024 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images)
Insider says Nicole’s career came between her and Keith
According to a new report from Page Six, Nicole put acting on hold for several years so that she could focus on her two daughters by Keith.
But now that Sunday and Faith are in their teens, she’s back into career mode — and it seems Keith didn’t like that change.
“She’s been feeling amazing and very happy about having a career again,” the insider said, noting that the girls “love seeing their mom work” and are “very supportive” of her aspirations.
However, Urban has reportedly been “the opposite” of supportive.
Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman attend the 60th Academy of Country Music Awards at Omni Frisco Hotel at The Star on May 08, 2025 in Frisco, Texas. (Photo by Jason Kempin/Getty Images)
“Keith was used to her being supportive of his career,” the source explained.
“He’s not been as supportive as she hoped.”
A messy split ahead?
According to a new report from TMZ, Nicole already filed to legally end the marriage in sudden fashion, and she’s made some shocking demands in her Marital Dissolution Agreement.
Under the arrangement proposed by Nicole, the exes’ two daughters will spend 306 days of the year with her and just 59 days with Keith.
Keith Urban and Nicole Kidman attend The 2024 Met Gala Celebrating “Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion” at The Metropolitan Museum of Art on May 06, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for The Met Museum/Vogue)
Yes, Nicole has clearly given this a lot of thought, and she couldn’t be more precise in her demands.
She gave the vague “irreconcilable differences” reason for the divorce (a favorite among celebs who wish to retain a shred of privacy), and she’s stated that she intends to remain the “primary residential parent of the minor children.”
We may never find out exactly why these two called it quits, but it’s likely that there’s more than one explanation.
“Sometimes relationships just run their course,” said the Page Six source.
