In a recent social media post, popular actresses Zhang Baizhi and Yang Zi were captured in a stunning photo together, showcasing two distinctly different yet equally captivating beauties and charms. The photo quickly went viral, sparking discussions and admiration from fans of both stars and beauty enthusiasts alike.The New York Giants on Friday released their starting quarterback and former high first-round pick Daniel Jones a couple of days after demoting him to the number 3 quarterback. The Giants were going to release him after the season as he had an over $20 million injury-protected guarantee. I think the Dolphins should try to sign him after he clears waivers. I’m not saying Daniel Jones is the answer at backup quarterback, but he seems like a fit in this offense. Jones got rid of the ball quickly in 2.5 seconds, not as quick as starter Tua Tagovalioa, but close enough. The Dolphins screwed their backup quarterback position this year, and they paid the price, but now is a chance for Mike McDaniel and Frank Smith to build back up another young quarterback, whose confidence must be shattered, just like he did with Tagovailoa a couple of years ago. Jones was caught in the middle of a regime change with the Giants in 2022 as they brought in a new general manager and head coach, so they inherited him. Jones played out the final year of his rookie contract and played the best season of his career. He led the Giants to the playoffs and won a road playoff game. Winning a playoff game is something Tagovailoa hasn’t done in his career. Jones’ career turned south in a hurry after the Giants gave him a new 4-year $160 million contract. The Giants sunk fast, and Jones didn’t play well, but the Giants didn’t help him out either. Their offensive line is a mess; they let their best playmaker, running back Saquan Barkley, leave this off-season, and outside of the top pick, Malik Nabers has no playmakers to throw the ball to. Now Jones has to play better, and he does not see the field well, and that’s probably because his confidence was shattered. He knew the righting was on the wall with the New York media always speculating about his job, and it didn’t help the Giants considered trading up for a quarterback in last year’s draft one year after giving Jones that contract. In the last few years, we have seen many high-draft pick quarterbacks get released by the teams that drafted them and resurrect their careers elsewhere. Sam Darnold was the number 3 pick in the 2018 NFL draft by the New York Jets, and this year is the starting quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings, who are 8-2 and on their way to the playoffs. The Vikings drafted a quarterback in the first round of this year’s draft, but Darnold will land on his feet elsewhere. Baker Mayfield was the number 1 pick by the Cleveland Browns in the 2018 draft, and after they dumped him a few years ago, he landed with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers a year and led them to the playoffs. He got a new contract and has the Bucs in the playoff hunt again. Geno Smith was a second-round pick of the Jets years ago, and after bouncing around the league, he landed on his feet with the Seattle Seahawks and got coached up to play well. He led them to the playoffs a couple of years ago and got a new deal and is doing well. These are just a few examples off the top of my head, but what it shows is that going to the right situation can help build a quarterback up and play well. Tagovailoa clashed with former Miami Dolphins coach Brian Flores, and the Dolphins changed coaches. McDaniel has gotten Tagovailoa to play the best football of his career . He rebuilt his confidence, which was shattered, and brought out a personality that no one had seen before to lead this team. This is a time for Jones to get a fresh start and rebuild his career, and McDaniel could be the guy to do that. I think the Dolphins should seriously consider signing him for the rest of the year and next year to see if McDaniel can build him back up like he did Tagovailoa as well as see what he can do on the field. Jones’s skill set just looks like a good fit for the Dolphins. An acorn fell out of the tree, and it’s time for the Dolphins to pick him up. What do they have to lose?NoneAndy Murray will coach Novak Djokovic through the Australian Open
After a thrilling conference championship Saturday and a drawn-out reveal show Sunday, the inaugural 12-team College Football Playoff field is set. The first true tournament in FBS history has plenty to love -- and elements to loathe. What Went Right: Unique opening-round matchups Whether the first round proves to be more competitive than the four-team Playoff's often lopsided semifinal matchups remains to be seen. Until then, there is at least intrigue in the historic rarity of the four pairings. One opening-round matchup -- ACC automatic qualifier Clemson at Texas -- is a first-time encounter between two programs that combine for seven claimed national championships. Of the other three, the most recent contest occurred in 1996 when Tennessee topped Ohio State in the Citrus Bowl. The Vols and Buckeyes meet as the No. 9 and No. 8 seeds at Ohio State's Horseshoe, with the winner advancing to face top overall seed Oregon. SMU, a perhaps surprising final at-large selection given the Mustangs' dearth of high-profile wins, meets Penn State for the third time ever and first since 1978. The Nittany Lions scored a 26-21 come-from-behind win in Happy Valley, where they will again host SMU. The Penn State victory ended a 30-year stalemate after the first and only meeting in the 1948 Cotton Bowl produced a 13-13 tie. Here's hoping the third part of a 76-year trilogy is as closely contested as the initial two. Meanwhile, the matchup with the most previous installments is the closest in proximity -- less than 200 miles separate in-state counterparts Indiana and Notre Dame -- and the most lopsided. The Fighting Irish and Hoosiers last played in 1991, with Notre Dame's 49-27 win marking its sixth straight victory by multiple scores. Indiana's last win in the series came in 1950, a 20-7 Hoosiers victory in Bloomington. What Went Right: Boise State's big opportunity Although not the first outsider to reach or win a Bowl Championship Series game, Boise State's 2007 Fiesta Bowl victory over Oklahoma was arguably the most pivotal moment in building support for outsiders to compete for the national championship. The Broncos spent two decades knocking on the door, beginning with their perfect 2004 regular season, extending through two Fiesta Bowl wins, and withstanding the heartbreak of late-season losses in 2010 and 2011. The celebration in response to Boise State being part of the bracket -- and not just in, but as the No. 3 seed with a bye into the quarterfinals -- marked a culmination of generations of effort for just this opportunity. What Went Right: ‘Football weather' comes to the postseason From the birth of the bowl system with the first-ever Rose Bowl Game, college football's postseason has resided primarily in warm-weather destinations. This makes sense for the original purpose of bowl games as showcases and celebrations of a team's regular-season performance, but less so for the goal of crowning a national champion. After decades of playing what often amounted to road games in the postseason, northern teams get their opportunity to host. Three of the four first-round contests are in such climates -- though Indiana won't be particularly disadvantaged by weather when playing Notre Dame in South Bend. With average December highs in Pennsylvania in the 30s, SMU will need its heaters on the sideline at Penn State's Beaver Stadium. The more intriguing trip, however, is Tennessee's to Ohio State. Longtime college football fans know the arguments about SEC teams playing in Big Ten country late in the year. Pitting two high-quality teams from the two leagues head-to-head in such conditions is a highlight of this new postseason system. And, given Tennessee and Ohio State have two of the nation's best defenses, expect a style of play befitting what is often described as football weather. What Went Wrong: More teams means more politicking When Mack Brown seemingly spent as much time on TV campaigning in 2004 as that year's presidential candidates, George W. Bush and John Kerry, his Texas Longhorns were among a small collection of teams vying for BCS bids. With the 12-team Playoff opening the top postseason opportunities to as many as 20 teams realistically, the political campaign ads that mercilessly ended in early November were replaced by the politicking of college football figures. Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard spent last week taking shots at SMU and other programs over strength of schedule -- a point neglecting that the Cyclones' losses came to unranked Texas Tech and sub-.500 Kansas. Arizona State's thorough dismantling of Iowa State in the Big 12 Championship Game solved that debate at the proverbial ballot box. However, brace yourself for an offseason of recount demands coming out of the SEC. Alabama's exclusion at 9-3, while 11-2 SMU landed the final at-large spot, is sure to play into the same controversy that South Carolina coach Shane Beamer leaned into last week. Beamer told The State (Columbia, S.C.) last week that his program may consider changing its nonconference scheduling in response to its seemingly inevitable Playoff snub. It's an odd position, given South Carolina's three losses all came in-conference, and the Gamecocks' nonleague slate included sub-.500 teams Old Dominion, Akron and FCS Wofford. But then again, how often are political campaign pitches rooted in logic? What Went Wrong: Quantity over quality? A more salient position in Beamer's case for South Carolina is that the Gamecocks scored quality wins during a season-ending, six-game streak. With its Rivalry Week defeat of Clemson, South Carolina added a victory over a Playoff qualifier to complement victories over Texas A&M and Missouri. Alabama, meanwhile, boasts wins over No. 2 overall seed Georgia and that same South Carolina team in contention. SMU's resume might be the most likely to draw ire, given the Mustangs received the last at-large berth. However, SMU beat nine- and eight-win Duke and Louisville, with two losses by a combined six points. Indiana should be the more contentious at-large choice, with the Hoosiers beating only one team that finished above .500: 7-5 Michigan. Indiana's only other matchup with an above-.500 opponent was a 38-15 blowout at Ohio State. That's something Alabama and South Carolina have in common with Indiana, as all three teams lost in routs. Alabama dropped a 24-3 decision late in the season at Oklahoma that presumably doomed the Crimson Tide's chances, while South Carolina lost to Ole Miss 27-3. To that end, there are arguments to be made for and against every team that was on the bubble. No system will ever appease all parties. What Went Wrong: Seeding conundrum Much of the Playoff's very existence flies in the face of college football tradition. One facet of how the field was set that upholds tradition in its own small way is rewarding teams for winning their conferences by reserving the four first-round byes for league champions. When this format was implemented, however, the committee could not have envisioned that two of the top five conference champions would not be ranked in the top 10. Because three-loss Clemson survived a furious SMU comeback in the ACC championship game, and Arizona State caught fire after underwhelming losses to Texas Tech and Cincinnati to win a weak Big 12, the committee was in the unusual position of having to slot a non-power conference champion and double-digit-ranked team in a top-four spot. This first edition of the Playoff seems likely to be the last to use this format, even if this scenario seems like an outlier. --Kyle Kensing, Field Level MediaBY MELISSA GOLDIN Social media users are misrepresenting a report released Thursday by the Justice Department inspector general’s office, falsely claiming that it’s proof the FBI orchestrated the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021. Related Articles National News | Drones, planes or UFOs? Americans abuzz over mysterious New Jersey sightings National News | OpenAI whistleblower found dead in San Francisco apartment National News | Judge rejects an attempt by Trump campaign lawyer to invalidate guilty plea in Georgia election case National News | Texas’ abortion pill lawsuit against New York doctor marks new challenge to interstate telemedicine National News | US military flies American released from Syrian prison to Jordan, officials say The watchdog report examined a number of areas, including whether major intelligence failures preceded the riot and whether the FBI in some way provoked the violence. Claims spreading online focus on the report’s finding that 26 FBI informants were in Washington for election-related protests on Jan. 6, including three who had been tasked with traveling to the city to report on others who were potentially planning to attend the events. Although 17 of those informants either entered the Capitol or a restricted area around the building during the riot, none of the 26 total informants were authorized to do so by the bureau, according to the report. Nor were they authorized to otherwise break the law or encourage others to do so. Here’s a closer look at the facts. CLAIM: A December 2024 report released by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General is proof that the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was a setup by the FBI. THE FACTS: That’s false. The report found that no undercover FBI employees were at the riot on Jan. 6 and that none of the bureau’s informants were authorized to participate. Informants, also known as confidential human sources, work with the FBI to provide information, but are not on the bureau’s payroll. Undercover agents are employed by the FBI. According to the report, 26 informants were in Washington on Jan. 6 in connection with the day’s events. FBI field offices only informed the Washington Field Office or FBI headquarters of five informants that were to be in the field on Jan. 6. Of the total 26 informants, four entered the Capitol during the riot and an additional 13 entered a restricted area around the Capitol. But none were authorized to do so by the FBI, nor were they given permission to break other laws or encourage others to do the same. The remaining nine informants did not engage in any illegal activities. None of the 17 informants who entered the Capitol or surrounding restricted area have been prosecuted, the report says. A footnote states that after reviewing a draft of the report, the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington said that it “generally has not charged those individuals whose only crime on January 6, 2021 was to enter restricted grounds surrounding the Capitol, which has resulted in the Office declining to charge hundreds of individuals; and we have treated the CHSs consistent with this approach.” The assistant special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office’s counterterrorism division told the inspector general’s office that he “denied a request from an FBI office to have an undercover employee engage in investigative activity on January 6.” He, along with then-Washington Field Office Assistant Director in Charge Steven D’Antuono, said that FBI policy prohibits undercover employees at First Amendment-protected events without investigative authority. Many social media users drew false conclusions from the report’s findings. “JANUARY 6th WAS A SETUP!” reads one X post that had received more than 11,400 likes and shares as of Friday. “New inspector general report shows that 26 FBI/DOJ confidential sources were in the crowd on January 6th, and some of them went into the Capitol and restricted areas. Is it a coincidence that Wray put in his resignation notice yesterday? TREASON!” The mention of Wray’s resignation refers to FBI Director Christopher Wray’s announcement Wednesday that he plans to resign at the end of President Joe Biden’s term in January. Other users highlighted the fact that there were 26 FBI informants in Washington on Jan. 6, but omitted key information about the findings of the report. These claims echo a fringe conspiracy theory advanced by some Republicans in Congress that the FBI played a role in instigating the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when rioters determined to overturn Republican Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden stormed the Capitol in a violent clash with police. The report knocks that theory down. Wray called such theories “ludicrous” at a congressional hearing last year. Asked for comment on the false claims spreading online, Stephanie Logan, a spokesperson for the inspector general’s office, pointed The Associated Press to a press release about the report. In addition to its findings about the the FBI’s involvement on Jan. 6, the report said that the FBI, in an action its now-deputy director described as a “basic step that was missed,” failed to canvass informants across all 56 of its field offices for any relevant intelligence ahead of time. That was a step, the report concluded, “that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations in advance of January 6.” However, it did credit the bureau for preparing for the possibility of violence and for trying to identify known “domestic terrorism subjects” who planned to come to Washington that day. The FBI said in a letter responding to the report that it accepts the inspection general’s recommendation “regarding potential process improvements for future events.”Shariq Majeed is an Assistant Editor with Punjab bureau of The Times of India and is based in Ludhiana. He reports about Health, Environment and Climate related issues, Civil administration, Crime, Legal affairs, Politics, Agriculture, NRI affairs. Besides, he loves writing about communal harmony and families divided during partition. He has earlier covered Jammu and Kashmir. Read More How to make healthy Oats Palak Chilla for a kid's tiffin 10 best Fried Chicken dishes from around the world 10 ways to use turmeric in winters 10 animals not allowed as pets in India 10 types of Dosa and how they are made Animals and their favourite foods 9 nuts to eat daily for hair growth in winters How to make South Indian Podi Dosa at home From tigers to cheetahs: India’s big cats and where to find them Weekend Special: How to make Multigrain Thaalipeeth
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear arguments in a yearslong legal battle over a contentious proposed railroad that could send tens of millions more gallons of crude oil along the Colorado River, including near the critical water source’s headwaters in Colorado. Opponents of the 88-mile Uinta Basin Railway — led by Colorado’s Eagle County — successfully halted the Utah project when a federal appeals judge in 2023 agreed with their arguments that the potential environmental impacts of the rail line had not been sufficiently analyzed. But the coalition of private companies and seven Utah counties supporting the project petitioned the Supreme Court to review the appeals judge’s decision. In June, the nation’s highest court accepted their petition and said it would consider how far federal agencies must go in analyzing potential environmental impacts. If constructed, the rail line would connect Utah’s oil fields to the national rail network. It would greatly increase the amount of crude oil transported across Colorado and on to the refineries on the Gulf Coast. The project would allow oil producers to send up to 350,000 barrels of crude oil a day on nine more trains — each stretching as long as two miles — on the tracks along Colorado’s Interstate 70, which follows the Colorado River for hundreds of miles. A dozen local governments in Colorado , across political divides, and the state’s attorney general filed briefs in the case urging the Supreme Court not to change the decision issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. They also argue in favor of maintaining the federal environmental law in question, the National Environmental Policy Act. “The project raises the risk of leaks, spills, or rail car accidents immediately adjacent to the headwaters of the Colorado River, the most critical water source for the state’s residential communities, and agricultural and outdoor recreation sectors,” Attorney General Phil Weiser‘s brief states . “The project’s risks to Colorado’s residents and natural resources have generated deep concern and strong opposition from across the state.” The justices will hear from both sides Tuesday morning, but a decision is likely weeks or months away. Justice Neil Gorsuch last week recused himself from the case after ethics watchdogs noted his ties to Colorado billionaire Philip Anschutz , whose companies could profit if the railway is built, according to reporting from The New York Times. Construction on the project could not begin even if the Supreme Court sides with the railway project because the court is analyzing only one of the reasons the lower court halted the railway. If the Supreme Court agrees with railway proponents’ arguments, the lower court will have to reassess its analysis and issue a new opinion. But conservationists fear the court could use the case to weaken one of the nation’s foundational environmental protection laws. The decision could lead to “a radical restriction of the way the government evaluates the environmental impact of decisions,” said Sam Sankar , the senior vice president of programs for the environmental legal group Earthjustice. At the heart of the litigation is whether the U.S. Surface Transportation Board — a federal agency that regulates railways — violated the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to analyze potential environmental impacts of the project outside of the immediate area of the proposed line. The federal appeals judge last year found that the board had violated the law and should have scrutinized potential threats to the Colorado River as well as increased wildfire risk caused by more train traffic. Lawyers for the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition, which is spearheading the rail project, argued that such a thorough analysis was not needed. The Surface Transportation Board should consider the immediate environmental impacts of a project, such as whether construction will displace bighorn sheep habitat or alter a mountain stream, the attorneys argued in their brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. But the board should not be required to analyze “imponderables such as whether the new rail might contribute to an accident hundreds or thousands of miles downline,” they wrote. “If a new rail line in Utah will displace habitat for bighorn sheep or alter the topography in ways that threaten a pristine mountain stream, the Surface Transportation Board must consider those issues,” the brief states. But the chance of a faraway crash or that “the new rail might ... somehow affect ‘environmental justice (in) communities (on) the Gulf Coast’ are not issues the Surface Transportation Board must run to ground.” The Colorado communities opposed to the new railway include Glenwood Springs, Grand County, Grand Junction, Avon, Basalt, Routt County and the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, which represents 31 counties and municipalities in the northwest region of the state. They reject arguments that impacts on their communities shouldn’t be considered. Glenwood Springs city councilman Jonathan Godes said any spill of crude oil into the Colorado River would be catastrophic for his town and every community downstream. “Our entire recreation economy is built around the river,” he said. “It would destroy our economy and our drinking water.” ©2024 MediaNews Group, Inc. Visit at denverpost.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.British American Tobacco snaps seven straight sessions of gains
CLARKSVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Tate McCubbin had 20 points and Austin Peay cruised to a 93-46 victory over Brescia on Sunday. McCubbin also contributed eight rebounds for the Governors (5-8). Anton Brookshire scored 15 points while going 5 of 13 (5 for 12 from 3-point range). Isaac Haney went 5 of 9 from the field (4 for 8 from 3-point range) to finish with 14 points. The win broke a six-game slide for the Governors. Damian Garcia led the way for the Bearcats with 17 points. ___ The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar . The Associated Press