Some Republican presidential candidates haven’t met polling and fundraising thresholds for the first 2024 debate, and now requirements for making it to the second debate will be even higher

Gaming is a fun way to have fun, relax, and learn to strategize. But we

SUNNYVALE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sep 12, 2023--

Tucker Carlson is back and proving precisely why he doesn’t belong on mainstream news. Fans will, of course, view that as a compliment, but it’s not intended as such. His new Twitter show, the first episode of which aired on Tuesday night (UK time), managed to pack a staggering amount of conspiracy and dangerous conjecture into 10 minutes and 27 seconds. Addressing his 7.9 million followers on the platform from the inside of some sort of log cabin, he launched into a jaw-dropping monologue, covering topics from the destruction of a massive dam in southern Ukraine to an alleged alien coverup by the US government. Sign up for our free Indy100 weekly newsletter The launch of ‘Tucker on Twitter’ comes just weeks after Fox News “parted ways” with its top-rated host. He has clearly kept hold of his loyal fanbase, with episode one of his new low-budget series racking up 44.9 million views in less than 10 hours. And yet, Carlson has made it clear that Twitter shouldn’t get too comfortable: proclaiming that he’ll ditch the platform in an instant if anyone dares call him out on his wild and problematic comments. “We’re told there are no gatekeepers here,” he said about Elon Musk’s social media stage. “If that turns out to be false, we’ll leave.” However, he added: “In the meantime, we are grateful to be here. We will be back with much more very soon.” If the first instalment is anything to go by, we should be concerned by this promise of “much more”. He began his tirade by accusing Ukraine of blowing up the Nova Kakhovka dam, and describing President Zelensky as looking like a “sweaty and rat-like a comedian-turned-oligarch”. He then claimed that the US government is essentially strong-arming its citizens into backing Ukraine against Russia, suggesting that the overriding message is: “Shut up and support Ukraine or else you are in trouble.” He went on to describe Americans as “the least informed people in the world” before accusing the media of “ignoring the stories that matter.” “What's happened to the hundreds of billions of US dollars we've sent to Ukraine? No clue,” he went on. “Who organised those BLM riots three years ago? No one's gotten to the bottom of that. “What exactly happened on 9/11? Well, it's still classified. How did Jeffrey Epstein make all that money? How did he die? How about JFK? And so, endlessly, on. “Not only are the media not interested in any of this, they are actively hostile to anybody who is in journalism. Curiosity is the gravest crime." He went on: “Yesterday, for example, a former Air Force officer who worked for years in military intelligence came forward as a whistleblower to reveal that the US government has physical evidence of crashed non-human made aircraft, as well as the bodies of the pilots who flew those aircraft. “The Pentagon has spent decades studying these otherworldly remains in order to build more technologically advanced weapons systems. OK? That's what the former Intel officer revealed, and it was clear he was telling the truth. “In other words, UFOs are actually real and apparently so is extraterrestrial life. Now, we know in a normal country this news would qualify as a bombshell, the story of the millennium, but in our country it doesn't.” He ended his diatribe by insisting that “most” people in the US live “manipulated by lies and silenced by taboos”. “It is unhealthy and it's dehumanising, and we're tired of it,” he stressed. So what is the antidote to all this state-sponsored “secrecy”? Why, to tune into ‘Tucker on Twitter’, of course. Plenty of people will, inevitably, and Musk himself has promoted the series’ release. Retweeting the episode, he wrote jovially: “Would be great to have shows from all parts of the political spectrum on this platform!” All we can say is, more sanity, please. Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

Jake Fraley hit a two-run homer, Spencer Steer added a solo shot, and the Cincinnati Reds beat the Los Angeles Dodgers 6-5

A United Arab Emirates investment firm bought a 30% stake in Egypt’s largest tobacco firm for $625 million,

Projected AP Top 25 college football rankings for Week 4 of the 2023 season after Tennessee was upset by Florida, while Alabama, Florida State, Georgia and Texas all struggled.

The use of technology in football has been on the increase over the past few years but none seems to create as much heated debate and questioning as that of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR). By and large, it is felt that minor and visible calls are improved across the course of the season with on-pitch referees getting extra help. However, there have been several high-profile incidents of late that have led to clubs, or personnel within them, complaining about the eventual decision or decision-making process, with the most recent coming in the Champions League. Manchester United boss Erik ten Hag felt aggrieved that a number of calls went against them in their 4-3 defeat to FC Copenhagen, including a decision to send off Marcus Rashford for serious foul play. Here’s everything on VAR you need to know, including the latest causes for complaint against it. What has gone wrong? Most recently, Man United complained about Rashford’s red card, given out for stepping across and onto the foot and shin of an opponent in a Champions League encounter. Ten Hag insisted his side had seen three “very debatable” penalties go against them in four games and called his forward’s sending off “very harsh”. In domestic football, Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta complained over “unacceptable” errors from on-pitch and VAR officials as his team lost to Newcastle, while Wolves boss Gary O’Neil labelled a penalty decision given against his team and upheld by VAR as “scandalous” - also against Newcastle. Ange Postecoglou suggested recently that clubs have to shoulder part of the blame for long stoppages for VAR, saying: “Some of it is self inflicted because if we come out every week complaining about decisions that is what will happen, every decision gets forensically checked and we will be sitting around for a long time in every game trying to figure out what is going on.” However, it must be noted that the vast majority of these are subjective opinions and where Arteta sees fault, another manager, supporter or, indeed, official may see justification in decision. One incident which was not subjective, but instead a quite clear mistake, came with Luis Diaz’s goal for Liverpool against Tottenham being ruled out for offside and then allowed to stay disallowed, despite the VAR officials running their processes and showing the forward was onside. The “significant human error” came as a result of the official, Darren England, appearing to forget that offside rather than a goal had been awarded in the first place. To another extreme, Millie Bright criticised the fact there was no VAR in the first edition of the Women’s Nations League, after a clearly offside goal was allowed to stand against England which would have been simple to rule out. Further clear VAR errors which PGMOL have had to apologise for include no penalty being awarded to Wolves against Man United after Andre Onana clattered Sasa Kalajdzic, a Brentford goal against Arsenal not being checked properly with no offside lines drawn and a West Ham late equaliser being ruled out for a foul, where none was apparent. What has gone right? In truth, a lot. It’s overlooked when three or four calls are spot-on, when one causes serious complaint or at least is a subjective call which a majority seem to disagree with. As an example, in the incident-packed Tottenham vs Chelsea fixture, several goals were correctly ruled out for offside through use - or checking - of VAR and the penalty awarded which saw Cristian Romero sent off was also a result of VAR intervention. Generally speaking, these calls that are widely accepted as correct do not get highlighted, partially because the technology exists for that very reason: it’s expected to help officials make the right calls with a second look. That doesn’t mean they don’t occur, though. The Premier League reported that 82 per cent of decisions were correct in the season before VAR was introduced, rising to 94 per cent being correct in 2019/20. What is the process for VAR checks? From the Premier League website: VAR will be used only for “clear and obvious errors” or “serious missed incidents” in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity. When any of those match situations occur or potentially occur, VAR is constantly rewatching and monitoring match footage from the hub at Stockley Park. If there is a decision to be made, the VAR or Assistant VAR (AVAR) will relay to the referee that play should be halted while checks are made, before recommending either an overturn, a pitchside check of the monitor for the ref or a continuation of play with the on-pitch original decision. The video officials have until the ball goes dead to inform the referee that a check is underway if play is already ongoing. The referee can then either check the monitor or accept the VAR recommendation. Upon reviewing the pitchside monitor, they may then stick with their own initial assessment or overturn the original, before communicating their new decision to the crowd. What have PGMOL said? The refereeing chief of Professional Game Match Officials Limited, Howard Webb, took over the role last year to improve the standard of officiating in the English game and to help oversee a smoother use of technology. PGMOL confirmed to the League Managers’ Association “they are actively looking at how best to incorporate VARs into match-day refereeing teams, to ensure the dynamic between on-field referee and VAR is conducive to producing positive outcomes.” After the Diaz incident, the organisation “acknowledge[d] a significant human error occurred” and brought in additional processes to ensure no repeat happened. They also released the audio of that incident, an “unusual step” according to Webb, “to show everybody what was very quickly pretty apparent to us, a human error and loss of concentration.” Webb has suggested the pool of VAR-specific officials will be increased but Lee Mason presents a cautionary tale. The former referee was appointed a full-time VAR for 2022/23, but departed the role last season after the aforementioned error over Brentford’s goal against Arsenal. Mason, who had already been stood down from the officiating list that campaign previously for wrongly disallowing a Newcastle goal, was labelled a “serial offender” by ex-PGMOL boss Keith Hackett - however, at the start of the current campaign, Mason was re-hired as a referees’ coach for the lower leagues. It is not thought he has ongoing work with VAR but that has not been confirmed by PGMOL, nor why his credentials are suited to guiding less-experienced officials despite having been removed from his post already. Read More What is VAR, how does it work and what are the biggest problems? Mikel Arteta: ‘I’m completely with referees’ Mauricio Pochettino learned lessons from famous battle to mature as manager Unai Emery acknowledges good fortune opened the door for Villa’s victory ‘Great result’ cheers David Moyes as West Ham have another good European night Liverpool angered by VAR as Jarell Quansah goal ruled out in Europa League defeat

Indian cricket superstar M.S. Dhoni said he will look to return for the next IPL season after he led Chennai Super Kings to a record-equalling fifth title over Gujarat Titans in what...

Rookies Brice Turang and Sal Frelick hit three-run homers in consecutive innings and the Milwaukee Brewers continued Mitch Keller’s second-half skid in a 14-1 blowout of the Pittsburgh Pirates on Thursday

For years, Mint was the personal finance app to beat. It gives you a deep

The Collection Challenge in Pokémon GO involves collecting event-specific Pokémon and will yield players a massive amount of Stardust and XP upon completion. Here are the Pokémon necessary to complete this challenge.