What the Mets absolutely must add this offseason, with or without Juan Soto

The Barstool Sports personality also said she was "not really allowed to listen to Noah Kahan" while dating the "Something in the Orange" crooner.

The Mets hope they are earning a reputation as a destination — a place players want to play.

"Jeopardy!" contestant Heather Ryan addressed an awkward situation she experienced on the game show over a "sexist" clue.

Quincy's publicist, Arnold Robinson, announced Quincy's death in a statement on behalf of Jones’ family members on Nov. 4.

Elon Musk supported California’s AI regulation bill, but also enthusiastically backed Donald Trump for president. In 2020, when Joe Biden won the White House, generative AI still looked like a pointless toy, not a world-changing new technology. The first major AI image generator, DALL-E, wouldn’t be released until January 2021 — and it certainly wouldn’t be putting any artists out of business, as it still had trouble generating basic images. The release of ChatGPT, which took AI mainstream overnight, was still more than two years away. The AI-based Google search results that are — like it or not — now unavoidable, would have seemed unimaginable.  In the world of AI, four years is a lifetime. That’s one of the things that makes AI policy and regulation so difficult. The gears of policy tend to grind slowly. And every four to eight years, they grind in reverse, when a new administration comes to power with different priorities.  That works tolerably for, say, our food and drug regulation, or other areas where change is slow and bipartisan consensus on policy more or less exists. But when regulating a technology that is basically too young to go to kindergarten, policymakers face a tough challenge. And that’s all the more case when we experience a sharp change in who those policymakers are, as the US will after Donald Trump’s victory in Tuesday’s presidential election.  This week, I reached out to people to ask: What will AI policy look like under a Trump administration? Their guesses were all over the place, but the overall picture is this: Unlike on so many other issues, Washington has not yet fully polarized on the question of AI.  Trump’s supporters include members of the accelerationist tech right, led by the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who are fiercely opposed to regulation of an exciting new industry. But right by Trump’s side is Elon Musk, who supported California’s SB 1047 to regulate AI, and has been worried for a long time that AI will bring about the end of the human race (a position that is easy to dismiss as classic Musk zaniness, but is actually quite mainstream).  Trump’s first administration was chaotic and featured the rise and fall of various chiefs of staff and top advisers. Very few of the people who were close to him at the start of his time in office were still there at the bitter end. Where AI policy goes in his second term may depend on who has his ear at crucial moments.  Where the new administration stands on AI In 2023, the Biden administration issued an executive order on AI, which, while generally modest, did mark an early government effort to take AI risk seriously. The Trump campaign platform says the executive order “hinders AI innovation and imposes radical left-wing ideas on the development of this technology,” and has promised to repeal it.  “There will likely be a day one repeal of the Biden executive order on AI,” Samuel Hammond, a senior economist at the Foundation for American Innovation, told me, though he added, “what replaces it is uncertain.” The AI Safety Institute created under Biden, Hammond pointed out, has “broad, bipartisan support” — though it will be Congress’s responsibility to properly authorize and fund it, something they can and should do this winter.  There are reportedly drafts in Trump’s orbit of a proposed replacement executive order that will create a “Manhattan Project” for military AI and build industry-led agencies for model evaluation and security.  Past that, though, it’s challenging to guess what will happen because the coalition that swept Trump into office is, in fact, sharply divided on AI.  “How Trump approaches AI policy will offer a window into the tensions on the right,” Hammond said. “You have folks like Marc Andreessen who want to slam down the gas pedal, and folks like Tucker Carlson who worry technology is already moving too fast. JD Vance is a pragmatist on these issues, seeing AI and crypto as an opportunity to break Big Tech’s monopoly. Elon Musk wants to accelerate technology in general while taking the existential risks from AI seriously. They are all united against ‘woke’ AI, but their positive agenda on how to handle AI’s real-world risks is less clear.” Trump himself hasn’t commented much on AI, but when he has — as he did in a Logan Paul interview earlier this year — he seemed familiar with both the “accelerate for defense against China” perspective and with expert fears of doom. “We have to be at the forefront,” he said. “It’s going to happen. And if it’s going to happen, we have to take the lead over China.”  As for whether AI will be developed that acts independently and seizes control, he said, “You know, there are those people that say it takes over the human race. It’s really powerful stuff, AI. So let’s see how it all works out.”  In a sense that is an incredibly absurd attitude to have about the literal possibility of the end of the human race — you don’t get to see how an existential threat “works out” — but in another sense, Trump is actually taking a fairly mainstream view here.  Many AI experts think that the possibility of AI taking over the human race is a realistic one and that it could happen in the next few decades, and also think that we don’t know enough yet about the nature of that risk to make effective policy around it. So implicitly, a lot of people do have the policy “it might kill us all, who knows? I guess we’ll see what happens,” and Trump, as he so often proves to be, is unusual mostly for just coming out and saying it.  We can’t afford polarization. Can we avoid it?  There’s been a lot of back and forth over AI, with Republicans calling equity and bias concerns “woke” nonsense, but as Hammond observed, there is also a fair bit of bipartisan consensus. No one in Congress wants to see the US fall behind militarily, or to strangle a promising new technology in its cradle. And no one wants extremely dangerous weapons developed with no oversight by random tech companies.  Meta’s chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, who is an outspoken Trump critic, is also an outspoken critic of AI safety worries. Musk supported California’s AI regulation bill — which was bipartisan, and vetoed by a Democratic governor — and of course Musk also enthusiastically backed Trump for the presidency. Right now, it’s hard to put concerns about extremely powerful AI on the political spectrum. But that is actually a good thing, and it would be catastrophic if that changes. With a fast-developing technology, Congress needs to be able to make policy flexibly and empower an agency to carry it out. Partisanship makes that next to impossible. More than any specific item on the agenda, the best sign about a Trump administration’s AI policy will be if it continues to be bipartisan and focused on the things that all Americans, Democratic or Republican, agree on, like that we don’t want to all die at the hands of superintelligent AI. And the worst sign would be if the complex policy questions that AI poses got rounded off to a general “regulation is bad” or “the military is good” view, which misses the specifics.  Hammond, for his part, was optimistic that the administration is taking AI appropriately seriously. “They’re thinking about the right object-level issues, such as the national security implications of AGI being a few years away,” he said. Whether that will get them to the right policies remains to be seen — but it would have been highly uncertain in a Harris administration, too.

Ferrigno Jr. even shared his thoughts about Buddie.

Soccer Fans from Israel Attacked in Amsterdam, says Mayor. Prime Minister Calls Attacks "Anti-Semitic".

So far, the plan of having the two horses at the top of the rotation going deep into games in the playoffs hasn’t materialized.

"Detectives believe there are additional, unidentified victims of Matarico who have yet to come forward," the LAPD said.

Ja'Marr Chase wanted the ball just one more time.

They reconnected years later when their mothers set them up.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an emergency proclamation Thursday over the raging Mountain Fire that's now scorched more than 20,000 acres and forced thousands of evacuations north of Los Angeles. CBS News correspondent Jonathan Vigliotti has more.

The couple -- who moved together in February -- has been dating for the last five years.

In her new book, Cho Nam-Joo captures misogyny as a universal experience that affects every woman differently.

He was cute and had a nice profile depicting a clean-cut, slightly geeky guy. He was more computer tech than Miami drug dealer. Then I read a story about him.

Incumbent Democrat San Francisco Mayor London Breed has conceded the mayoral race in the California city to Daniel Lurie, who is leading ranked-choice voting.

There is only one deal that can be made, indirectly, with Iran: have Hamas release all of the hostages, and save Hezbollah as a weakened force. The post Pollak: Israel’s Secret Conditions for a Ceasefire Deal in Lebanon appeared first on Breitbart.

...plus the premiere of Prime Video's Citadel: Honey Bunny, and loads of new Hallmark films on Peacock!

Tsunami created a DIY blueprint for the ’90s indie rock scene. Decades later, a new box from Numero Group celebrates the band’s legacy.

President-elect Donald Trump has named Susie Wiles to be the chief of staff in his upcoming administration. Wiles, who will be the first woman to ever serve as White House chief of staff, was previously Trump's campaign manager. CBS News campaign reporter Olivia Rinaldi has more.

Is there a way to refinish the floors that can prevent pet damage?

The traditional shingled-style home, at 38 Darby Lane in East Hampton, comes with seven bedrooms and 5½ bathrooms sitting on 1.95 acres.

Al Michaels had enough with the officiating in the Ravens-Bengals Thursday night thriller.

The 47-year-old "Dawson's Creek" alum revealed his diagnosis via Instagram earlier this week, writing, "I'm in a good place and feeling strong."

Police have released images of two suspects wanted for attacking two Jewish students near DePaul University in Chicago on Wednesday afternoon in what law enforcement is describing as a “battery/hate crime."

The outlook is grim for the world’s second largest economy, with growth slowing and the prospect of a new trade war following Donald Trump’s electoral victory.

Hope unleashed her "initial post-election thoughts" in a TikTok video.

Without a win this weekend, every game becomes a must-win for the Jets.

Former Chicago Sky forward Isabelle Harrison was in "complete shock" following former President Donald Trump winning a re-election bid over Vice President Kamala Harris.

Whether to re-sign Teoscar Hernández and Walker Buehler are just two big decisions the Dodgers have this offseason.

Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday congratulated Donald Trump on his election victory in his first public comment on the U.S. vote, and he praised the president-elect’s courage during the July assassination attempt.

The "BFFs" podcast co-host claimed she turned down an alleged $12 million dollar offer from the country singer to stay silent about their split.

Read the latest from Fox News Opinion & watch videos from Sean Hannity, Raymond Arroyo & more.

"Great food, expensive alcohol, dancers, acrobats, models. Sometimes we had live animals, sometimes different performers. It all added up, but he didn't care," the source told The Post.

Officials said a 13-year-old middle school student showed up to Roosevelt Elementary with a backpack and a black duffel bag.

Five domestic llamas were spotted strolling on train tracks in Provo, Utah, after the woolen creatures escaped from their owner, according to the Utah Transit Authority.

Former President Donald Trump will be the 47th president of the United States. Here's what that could mean.

Common Sense Media also reviews “Olivia Rodrigo: Guts World Tour,” “ Heretic” and “Anora.”

NASCAR remains dedicated to racing again in Southern California, but it's unclear when a planned, reconfigured race track in Fontana will be ready.

Waking up to the election results on Wednesday, many Americans who opposed Donald Trump may have felt inclined to resent their neighbors. How could more than 70 million of them vote for a convicted felon who had hobnobbed with a fascist, showed little respect for the country’s institutions or alliances, and couldn’t even promise not to rule as a dictator? Some foreign observers on social media seemed to react similarly, seeing in Trump the worst traits of American caricatures: egomania, narcissism, chauvinism, carelessness.But these prejudices were unfair on November 4, and they are still unfair on November 8. Yes, Trump is a true native son of this country, and some of its worst tendencies have allowed him to flourish. And yes, those who care about the future of the United States have every right to be worried about the trends he has unleashed or exploited—authoritarianism, misogyny, conspiracism.And yet: This country has always been a big, beautiful land of contradictions. As an Iranian Canadian socialist who moved here from Europe in 2017, I hear my share of anti-American chatter from left-leaning Middle Easterners, Canadians, and Europeans. Many seize on simple stories about America as a land of hyper-capitalism, violence, racism, and imperialism—and such stories are not in short supply. The United States remains the world’s only developed country not to have public health care. It is by far the world’s biggest military power. And expressions of racial animus can be loud, deadly, and persistent.[Jennifer Senior: Focus on the things that matter]But to reduce America to these clichés is to miss much that is extraordinary. This same country of megalomaniac capitalism is home to public libraries and research universities that are the envy of many European social democracies—institutions tended by millions of Americans deeply committed to their survival. Those who imagine America as a country of racists perhaps haven’t actually visited its small towns, where mosques, Hindu temples, and gurdwaras prosper next to churches and synagogues. In this supposedly immigrant-hating country, Trump banned entry to the residents of seven Muslim countries in 2017—only for thousands of Americans to show up at airports in protest. Thousands more Americans staff immigrant-rights groups. For a narcissistic country, the United States has a lot of excellent public museums that acknowledge historical injustice and encourage self-reflection.This country got its start as a naively daring social experiment already riven with contradictions. A group of European slave owners on ethnically cleansed land pledged to establish a nation whose self-evident truth was the equality of all. And yet, what they founded was a breathtakingly dynamic republic whose tree of creativity has never ceased leafing. The hopes vested in the United States have been sometimes vindicated, sometimes dashed. Chattel slavery endured here long after it was eradicated in Britain. But in 1860, Americans did elect a president who brought about its abolition at the end of a bloody civil war. The postwar promise of Reconstruction gave way to Dixiecrat rule and Jim Crow, but the American civil-rights movement of the 1960s was to become the most inspiring example of civil disobedience of its era, encapsulated in the call of Martin Luther King Jr. for the United States to “live up to the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truth to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”American actions abroad have also been contested and contradictory. In the Philippines, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, Washington played the role of imperial power. The same Washington helped establish the League of Nations in an effort to end all war—before the U.S. Senate refused to join it, undermining its efficacy. The United States first vowed to stay out of World War II, then joined the Allies to help defeat fascism on the beaches of Normandy and the plains of Manchuria. After the war, the United States helped establish democracies in Japan and West Germany—during the same era in which it took part in organizing an antidemocratic coup in Iran.[Listen: Are we living in a different America?]The essence of America has always been the battle over its essence. No one election has ever determined its complete or permanent nature, and that is as true now as it was in 1860 and 1876. If today’s America is the America of Donald Trump, it is also the America of those who would stand up to him.Don’t give up on this beautiful country. Its best traditions are now in danger, and no special genius of constitutional design will automatically keep them intact. In the hands of a president who may wish to model himself on Vladimir Putin, democratic institutions will be tested like never before. Americans will have to fight to safeguard them at every level of government. Daunting as this task may be, I have faith that Americans will rise to it. Trump may be the Founders’ nightmare, but their dreams can still outlive him.

After Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, Barack Obama dutifully carried out the peaceful transfer of power. But a large faction of Americans declined to treat Trump as a president with democratic legitimacy. In their telling, he lost the popular vote, urged foreign actors to interfere in the election, broke laws, and transgressed against the unwritten rules of liberal societies. So they fancied themselves members of the “resistance,” or waged lawfare, or urged the invocation of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment. Immediately after Trump’s inauguration, liberal groups started to push for his impeachment and removal from office.Now Trump is returning to the White House. But history isn’t quite repeating itself. This time, Trump’s case for democratic legitimacy is far stronger. He won the Electoral College decisively, and he appears likely to win the popular vote. No one believes that a foreign nation was responsible for his victory. Although he still has legal problems stemming from his past actions, no one alleges illegality in this campaign. For all of those reasons and more, a 2016-style resistance to Trump is now untenable. He will begin his term as a normal president.A small faction of Trump detractors may continue to say that he is illegitimate, because they believe that he should have been convicted during his impeachment, or because they see his attempts to overturn his election loss in 2020 as disqualifying, or because they believe he is a fascist.[Read: What can women do now?]But that approach will be less popular than ever, even among Trump opponents, because an opposition that purports to defend democracy cannot deny legitimacy to such a clear democratic winner; because the original resistance oversold enough of its allegations to diminish its ability to make new ones without proof; because some in the resistance are exhausted from years of obsessive, at times hysterical, focus on Trump; and because unaligned Americans who don’t even like Trump are tired of being browbeaten for not hating him enough.Maybe voters made a terrible mistake in 2024. But that’s a risk of democracy, so we must live with it. I have strong doubts about Trump’s character, his respect for the Constitution, and his judgment. I worry that his administration will engage in reckless spending and cruelty toward immigrants. Having opposed government overreach and civil-liberties abuses during every presidency I’ve covered, I anticipate having a lot of libertarian objections to Trump in coming years.Yet a part of me is glad that, if Trump had to win, the results are clear enough to make Resistance 2.0 untenable, because that approach failed to stop Trump the first time around. It deranged many Americans who credulously believed all of the resistance’s claims, and it foreclosed a posture toward Trump that strikes me as more likely to yield good civic results: normal political opposition.The American system makes effecting radical or reckless change hard.As a Never Trump voter who thought January 6 was disqualifying but who respects the results of this election, I urge this from fellow Trump skeptics: Stop indulging the fantasy that outrage, social stigma, language policing, a special counsel, the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, or impeachment will disappear him. And stop talking as if normal political opposition is capitulation. Everyone should normalize Trump. If he does something good, praise him. Trump is remarkably susceptible to flattery. Don’t hesitate to criticize him when he does something bad, but avoid overstatements. They are self-discrediting. And know that new House elections are just two years away. Focus on offering a better alternative to voters, not ousting the person they chose.Meanwhile, oppose Trump’s bad ideas by drawing on the normal tools Americans use to constrain all presidents. Our constitutional and civic checks on executive power are formidable, frustrating every administration. So be the John Boehner to his Obama. Even if ill intent exists in Trump’s inscrutable mind, his coalition does not wish to end democracy. Some will turn on the president when he merely has trouble fulfilling basic promises.And in America, power remains dispersed––the left never succeeded in shortsighted efforts to end the filibuster, or to destroy federalism and states’ rights, or to strip the private sector of independence from the state, or to allow the executive branch to define and police alleged misinformation.Until 2028, normal checks can constrain Trump. Then he will term out. Yes, he will almost certainly do some troubling things in the meantime: impose tariffs that will harm Americans with rising prices or carry out excessive deportations that needlessly harm families and communities. But he has a mandate for some lawful parts of his agenda, including parts that I personally hate.[Thomas Chatterton Williams: What the left keeps getting wrong]Amid the give-and-take of democratic politics, I hope that Trump will normalize himself too. Through what he says and does, he could reassure voters who regard him as a fascist with dictatorial aspirations, rather than deploying rhetoric—let alone taking actions—that elicit reasonable concern or fear. He may even try reassurance, if only because it would be in his own self-interest.A Trump who reassures the nation that he will adhere to the law, the Constitution, and basic human decency—and then does so—will inspire a lot less opposition than a Trump who indulges the excesses of his first term and reminds Americans why they rejected his bid in 2020.“We’re going to help our country heal,” Trump promised on Election Night. He has all the power he needs to make good on that promise, which will require restraining his worst impulses. If he succeeds, he will earn a historical legacy far better than the one he has today. I doubt that he has it in him. Typically, his word is not his bond. But I hope that he proves me wrong.

"LeBron focuses a lot on recovery, which is crucial if you want to perform at your full power and live a long time," Dave Asprey, an entrepreneur and author known as "the father of biohacking," told The Post.

Will McDonald IV was a man on a mission over the offseason, and the mission is greatness. McDonald hired a chef and one trainer for strength and one for agility and his breakout season has him third in the NFL in sacks (eight) behind Trey Hendrickson (11) and Dexter Lawrence (nine). It allows Will McDonald...

Before you get too excited about the holiday deals flooding your in-box, do the math. More often than not, a retailer’s discounts come with expensive caveats.

President-elect Donald Trump speaks during an election night event at the Palm Beach Convention Center on November 6, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Florida. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images A Vox reader writes: “Trump can’t run for a third term, right? (Yes, we know what the Constitution says … but he really, truly can’t run for a third term, right??)” President-elect Donald Trump has won his second — and final — term in office.  While Trump has joked about pursuing a third term and has a penchant for promoting authoritarian ideas, he’s barred from running again by the 22nd Amendment of the US Constitution. To run for a third term, he’d have to repeal that amendment, and that would be difficult. Undoing a constitutional amendment requires an overwhelming level of support from Congress and state legislatures, support he would be unable to obtain.  When asked if there were legal loopholes or other ways for a president to get around the 22nd Amendment, Stanford University Law Professor Michael McConnell, a specialist in constitutional law, had a definitive answer.  “No. There are none. This will be his last run for president,” McConnell told Vox.  What the 22nd Amendment says The 22nd Amendment firmly limits presidents to two successful runs and applies equally to those elected to consecutive terms and those, like Trump, who are elected to nonconsecutive terms. It states the following:  “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.” The amendment was ratified in 1951 and came after years of both parties calling for term limits for the presidency.  While President George Washington set a precedent for only holding two terms in office, President Franklin D. Roosevelt later became the first and only commander-in-chief to serve additional terms. Roosevelt was ultimately elected to four terms in office, though he passed away during his last term in 1945.  Following Roosevelt’s tenure, there were growing calls to establish term limits for future presidents, leading to Congress’s approval of the 22nd Amendment and states’ subsequent ratification.  Why it’s so hard to roll back the 22nd Amendment The thresholds for approving a constitutional amendment and for repealing it are exceedingly high.  There are two ways to go about rolling back an amendment. The first would require two-thirds of both the House – 290 members – and the Senate – 67 members – to agree to do so. Once they did so, three-fourths of all states – 38 – would then also have to agree.  These thresholds would be impossible for Trump to meet given Democratic opposition, and there would likely be some Republican outcry as well. While Republicans are poised to retake Senate control, they’ll fall far short of the two-thirds majority required for such a vote. If the GOP attains control of the House, they’d similarly fall far short of the two-thirds majority needed there. Additionally, at least 17 states have voted for Vice President Kamala Harris, signaling that they’d be unlikely to support any such amendment. That’s more than the one-fourth of states Trump could afford to lose should he somehow succeed in getting the amendment overturned by Congress. A second means of repealing an Amendment would require holding a Constitutional Convention, which two-thirds of states – 34 – would have to support. Any amendments proposed at such a Convention would still need ratification from three-fourths of states – 38.  This option would face the same opposition from Democrat-leaning states as the first one.  Since the amendment was first approved, there have been numerous proposals in Congress raised to repeal it, though they have all languished due to lack of support.  The amendment is crystal clear Experts say there aren’t really any realistic options for Trump to try to bypass the 22nd Amendment.  Theoretically, the 22nd Amendment doesn’t prevent a former president who has already served two terms from becoming vice president in a subsequent term. As vice president, that person could then potentially ascend to the presidency if the president on the ticket stepped down.  “It could theoretically happen, but it isn’t going to happen,” says McConnell, who added that it’s a “silly thing to worry about.” Efforts to challenge the amendment in court are also moot.  The Supreme Court does not have the basis to overturn the 22nd Amendment, according to legal experts.  Per UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, any challenge to a constitutional amendment would likely rest on arguments that the procedure used to approve the amendment was faulty in some way.  That’s “impossible” in this case, says Winkler, given how this amendment has been settled for more than seven decades.  Winkler notes the Supreme Court could try to interpret the 22nd Amendment to say that it only applies to presidents who have served consecutive terms, but even that would be a stretch based on its text. Any effort to declare the amendment unconstitutional by the Court would run into the problem of the amendment being part of the Constitution, notes McConnell. “By definition, the Constitution cannot be unconstitutional,” he says.  Overall, as Georgetown law professor Abbe Smith explained when asked if Trump could vie for a third term, it’s pretty simple: “Short answer: There is no way.”  As such, Trump’s recent run is set to be his final one. 

San Francisco 49ers long snapper Taybor Pepper spoke out about the Democratic National Convention on Thursday after Vice President Kamala Harris was projected to lose the election.

The 350-pound crook must forfeit $35 million “in ill-gotten proceeds from his crimes.”