thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--GMB Union Backs Lisa Nandy To Succeed Jeremy Corbyn As Labour Leader

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Lisa Nandy’s Labour leadership hopes have received a huge boost after the GMB union opted to back her for the top job.
It came after Jess Phillips dropped out of the contest to replace Jeremy Corbyn.
The GMB, one of the big five that are effectively needed to get candidates automatically on the final ballot paper, gave its highly-prized endorsement to the Nandy after a hustings in London.
Advertisement
The Wigan MP, who pipped Keir Starmer for the nomination, now won’t have to rely on getting 33 local Labour party nominations to stay in the race - a high bar when most appear to be endorsing Starmer or Rebecca Long-Bailey.
Starmer was popular among some union members, but Nandy emerged as the favoured choice of the 55 lay members of the union’s Central Executive Council after the hustings meeting at the TUC’s HQ.
Tim Roache, the GMB general secretary, said Nandy was a “breath of fresh air in the debate over Labour’s future”.
“The more members see of Lisa in this contest the more impressed they will be by her ambition, optimism and decisive leadership. GMB is proud to nominate her,” he said.
Advertisement
“Lisa won’t shy away from the tough challenges or bold decisions that lie ahead, because she knows that after fifteen years of losing elections, more of the same won’t cut it.
“A candidate entrenched in the union movement, Lisa gets the scale of the challenge.
“She will raise Labour’s game with a bold agenda that puts people first and grounds politics in their lives.”
Starmer is already through to the final ballot in the contest, having won the nomination of two other big unions, Unison and Usdaw, as well as the socialist environment association.
Lisa Nandy and Keir Starmer during the Labour leadership husting at the ACC Liverpool. PA Wire/PA Images
Long-Bailey is expected to get the backing of Unite and the CWU postal workers’ union to go with the Baker’s Union endorsement and would also go on the ballot of members that starts on February 21.
Advertisement
Emily Thornberry’s hopes now rely entirely on a sudden shift in support among constituency Labour parties (CLPs). To date, 12 have backed Starmer, four have backed Long-Bailey and two have backed Thornberry. No CLP has yet nominated Nandy.
Under new party rules introduced under Jeremy Corbyn, candidates need 5% of CLPs nominations or 5% of affiliates such as trade unions to get through to the final round of the contest.
Nandy had impressed many with her performances on TV, not least against the BBC’s Andrew Neil. But she has so far failed to get more than single figures in any leadership polling. The most recent YouGov poll suggests Starmer would be Long-Bailey by 63% to 37% in the final round.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Hillary Clinton Candidly Criticises Bernie Sanders In New Show

How Verizon Media and our partners bring you better ad experiences To give you a better overall experience , we @ @ @ @ @ that are more useful to you .
For example , when you search for a @ @ @ @ @ search information and location to show the most relevant cinemas near you .
We also @ @ @ @ @ you ads for similar films you may like in the future .
Like Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ show you ads that they think match your interests .
Learn more about how Verizon @ @ @ @ @ and how our partners collect and use data .
HuffPost is part of Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ partners need your consent to access your device and use your data ( including location @ @ @ @ @ , and provide and measure personalised ads .
Verizon Media will also provide you with @ @ @ @ @ .
Learn more .
Select 'OK ' to continue and allow Verizon Media and our @ @ @ @ @ , or select 'Manage options ' to view your choices .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Hillary Clinton gives an unvarnished view of Bernie Sanders, her 2016 Democratic presidential primary opponent, in a new documentary, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
“He was in Congress for years,” she says of Sanders in the Hulu documentary due to air in March, according to an interview with THR. “He had one senator support him. Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done. He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.”
Advertisement
The documentary is set to premiere this weekend at the Sundance Film Festival, before streaming on Hulu from March 6.
When THR asked Clinton whether her criticism still stands, Clinton said, “Yes, it does.”
A spokesperson for Sanders, now one of the 2020 Democratic presidential front-runners, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Clinton’s remarks.
In the interview, Clinton declined to say whether she would endorse and campaign for Sanders if he becomes the nominee. Instead, she went on to criticise “the culture around him,” including the sexist verbal attacks that his supporters, often referred to as “Bernie Bros,” have launched on social media in the past. Sanders condemned their comments at the time.
She also took aim at Sanders allegedly telling Elizabeth Warren during a 2018 meeting that he didn’t believe a woman could defeat President Donald Trump in 2020. Sanders has denied the exchange ever happened.
Advertisement
“Well, number one, I think [that sentiment] is untrue, which we should all say loudly. I mean, I did get more votes both in the primary, by about 4 million, and in the general election, by about 3 million,” Clinton said, calling the alleged comments “a very personal attack on [Warren].”
Clinton and Sanders campaigning together at the University of New Hampshire in Durham, New Hampshire, on Sept. 28, 2016. (Photo by Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images) Boston Globe via Getty Images
Directed by Oscar nominee Nanette Burstein, the four-hour documentary series, which Clinton described as telling a “larger story about women,” reportedly makes gender in politics a central focus. In the interview, Clinton told THR she believes media coverage of the 2020 race has been “reverting back to stereotypes, and many of those are highly genderised.”
She revealed that she has spoken to most of the other 2020 contenders, including two of the remaining women in the race: Warren and Amy Klobuchar.
“I always say [to the female candidates], ‘Look, you can run the best campaign, but you’re going to have to be even better than your best campaign to overcome some of the unfairness that will be directed at you as a woman,’ Clinton said.
Advertisement
Clinton — who struggled with how pointedly she should have attacked Trump in 2016, given the double standard often applied to women when they publicly express anger — said that bind still exists for the women in the 2020 race.
“It’s hard still. Very hard,” Clinton said, though she praised Warren’s retort to Sanders at the Democratic presidential debate earlier this month, when Warren said, “The only people on this stage who have won every one of their races are Amy and me.”
“I thought that was clever. Some people loved it, some hated it,” Clinton said.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Government Defeated In Lords Over Rights For Child Refugees Post-Brexit

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Boris Johnson has suffered a fourth defeat on his Brexit bill as peers insisted he must restore protections for lone child refugees in Europe.
An amendment proposed by Lord Dubs, who himself came to the UK as a child fleeing the Nazis on a kindertransport, was backed by 300 peers to 220, majority 80.
Advertisement
Following the vote, the peer called on MPs to “show what they’re made of” and back his amendment when the prime minister’s bill returns to the Commons on Wednesday.
I am enormously grateful to the Lords and of course to the public who have been so supportive of the moral argument for providing safe routes for children to be reunited with their families here. It's now the turn of the Commons to show what they're made of. https://t.co/bP1o65snYT — Alf Dubs (@AlfDubs) January 21, 2020
Ministers had already been defeated by peers on giving EU citizens physical proof of their right to be in the UK, and on the power of the government over the relationship between Brussels and local courts.
But the government has vowed to overturn the defeats in the Commons, which it should do easily with its 80-seat majority.
Advertisement
Make sense of politics. Sign up to the Waugh Zone and get the political day in a nutshell.
Lord Dubs is seeking to restore the right of unaccompanied child refugees, who are in Europe having fled war or persecution in their home country, to be reunited with family members in the UK after Brexit after the PM attempted to delete earlier protections in 2018 legislation.
Urging the government not to “close the door” on the children affected, Lord Dubs said some lived in “shocking” conditions in French camps at risk of sexual exploitation.
By providing them with a safe, legal route to the UK, peers would be “thwarting the traffickers” and avoiding the need for youngsters to take more dangerous options to get to their families.
Ministers have promised Lord Dubs to maintain the same rights for child refugees, just not through the withdrawal agreement bill.
But the Labour peer has said these pledges cannot be trusted.
It came after twelve councils made a last ditch plea for Johnson to restore the child refugee protections to the bill or risk them being exposed to abuse or exploitation.
Advertisement
The Bishop of Durham, the Rt Rev Paul Butler, said the law as it stood was “hard fought for, not easily won” and warned ministers against conveying a negative message.
The bishop said the issue acted as a “moral bellwether for the future of our country”, adding: “We want to be known as a country that is welcoming and passionate and committed to playing our full part in responding to the deep issues that arise from the reality of refugees around the world.”
Liberal Democrat Baroness Hamwee said: “There is a strong feeling that parliament should not reduce our commitment to these children or to safe and legal routes.”
Baroness Butler-Sloss, a former High Court judge and independent crossbencher, said: “What I am concerned about is urgency.
“It would be very easy for the government, intentionally or unintentionally, with everything else that goes along on Brexit, not to have a priority about these children. What we need to do is to retain the sense of urgency.”
Advertisement
The SNP’s immigration spokesperson Stuart McDonald said Johnson would be “callous and cruel” to overturn the Dubs amendment.
“The amendment brought forward by Alf Dubs is a vital provision that seeks to protect some of the world’s most vulnerable children,” he said.
“Any move by Boris Johnson to overturn the Dubs amendment - which seeks to allow unaccompanied child refugees to be reunited with their families in the UK - would be callous and cruel, and the prime minister would be guilty of abject moral failure.
“We know that Brexit will be damaging economically, but it will also mark a stain on the UK’s standing on the international stage if it was to leave the EU and turn its back on helping child refugees who have endured experiences that no child should.”
Oxfam’s head of humanitarian campaigns, Ruth Tanner, said: “Allowing children who have fled violence or persecution to be reunited with their families is a basic right that should be offered by the UK, whether or not we are part of the EU. Refugee children have been through enough and we owe them the chance to lead safe and dignified lives cared for by the people they love.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Coronavirus Spreads In China

Coronavirus Spreads In China

Beijing 'Cancels New Year Celebrations' In Bid To Contain Coronavirus
The coronavirus started in the Chinese city of Wuhan and has already seen hundreds taken ill, with 17 confirmed deaths. Heightened precautions are being taken in China and elsewhere by governments, as hundreds of millions of people are expected to travel both domestically and abroad for Lunar New Year celebrations.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Jess Phillips Quits Labour Leadership Contest And Admits She Cannot 'Unite' Party

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Jess Phillips has dropped out of the Labour leadership contest after struggling to win support.
The MP for Birmingham Yardley, a longtime critic of Jeremy Corbyn, admitted on Tuesday afternoon she would not be able to “unite” the party behind her.
“The Labour Party will need to select a candidate who can unite all parts of our movement, the union movement, members and elected representatives,” she said.
Advertisement
“And I have to also be honest with myself, as I said I always would be throughout this campaign. At this time, that person is not me.”
HuffPost UK understands Phillips would now like to see Lisa Nandy win the race, but of the two frontrunners she would prefer Keir Starmer over Rebecca Long-Bailey.
Phillips added: “I truly believe that unless we talk to the country on their terms, not just on ours, that we won’t be able to make the gains we need to win an election - and do what everyone in the Labour movement wants to do, and that is make people’s lives better.
“In order to win the country, we are going to have to find a candidate, in this race, who can do all of that, and then take that message out to the country.”
Advertisement
Make sense of politics. Sign up to the Waugh Zone and get the political day in a nutshell.
Starmer has taken an early edge in the campaign and yesterday secured the backing of the support of the shop workers’ union USDAW, which had been tipped as one of Phillips’s few potential backers.
It means the shadow Brexit secretary is first of the candidates to make the ballot in the second round of the contest
But Long-Bailey is the favourite of the current leadership and also has the support of the grassroots leftwing Momentum campaign group.
Backbencher Nandy is also in the race along with shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry.
According to YouGov, Phillips’ decision to drop out of the race would see Starmer win the race on the first round of voting as he would secure over 50% of the vote.
With Jess Phillips looking like she may drop out of the Labour leadership race, we've recalculated our results to show what the first round would look like:
Starmer – 53%
Long-Bailey – 33%
Nandy – 10%
Thornberry – 4%
Original data from: https://t.co/Wi7JwQQ5NW — YouGov (@YouGov) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
The candidates are pitching to win the backing of the remaining big unions, which include Unite, GMB and the Communication Workers Union (CWU).
Unite’s close links to the left of the party are thought to make Long-Bailey the favourite for its tip.
Nandy is being touted as the front-runner for the support of the GMB, with its executives meeting in London today to decide which of the five candidates to rally behind.
However, even if GMB does decide in Nandy’s favour, the Wigan MP would still require another nomination from an affiliated group to get her through to the last round.
Candidates are required to have won the nomination of three Labour affiliates, including at least two unions.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Ozzy Osbourne Reveals Parkinson's Disease Diagnosis

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Ozzy Osbourne has been diagnosed with Parkinson’s, the rock singer has revealed.
In a joint interview with his wife Sharon Osbourne on Good Morning America on Tuesday, the 71-year-old said he’d been diagnosed with “a mild form” of the disease, which progressively affects the brain over a prolonged period.
Sharon said: “It’s not a death sentence by any stretch of the imagination but it does effect the nerves in your body. It’s like you’ll have a good day, then a good day and then a really bad day.”
Advertisement
During the interview, Ozzy revealed he’d had a “terribly challenging” year with regards to his health, after he was left in need of surgery following a fall at his home.
Ozzy Osbourne on Good Morning America ABC
“It’s been terribly challenging for us all,” he explained. “I did my last show New Year’s Eve at The Forum. Then I had a bad fall. I had to have surgery on my neck, which screwed all my nerves.”
Revealing how the condition affects him, Ozzy said: “I got a numbness down [my] arm [from] the surgery, my legs keep going cold.
Advertisement
“I don’t know if that’s the Parkinson’s or what, you know, but that’s... see, that’s the problem. Because they cut nerves when they did the surgery. I’d never heard of nerve pain, and it’s a weird feeling.”
Explaining why now was the right time to speak out about his diagnosis, the former Black Sabbath frontman explained: “I’m no good with secrets. I cannot walk around with it anymore… it’s like I’m running out of excuses, you know?”
Ozzy and Sharon during their Good Morning America interview ABC
Sharon went on to say that they are now seeking treatments abroad, claiming: “We’ve kind of reached a point here in [America] where we can’t go any further because we’ve got all the answers we can get here.
“So in April ― we’re going to a professional in Switzerland. And he deals with... getting your immune system at its peak.”
Advertisement
In February last year, Ozzy was forced to cancel shows on his world tour after developing pneumonia.
A month earlier, he’d cancelled shows in Europe after being taken to hospital with the flu and a severe upper-respiratory infection.
Ozzy and Sharin in 2018 Ian West - PA Images via Getty Images
Ozzy said at the time: “It just seems that since October everything I touch has turned to shit.
“First the staph infection in my thumb and now coming down with the flu and bronchitis.
“I want to apologise to all of my fans who have been so loyal over the years, my band, my crew and to Judas Priest for letting you all down.”
At the end of his Good Morning America interview, Ozzy revealed he hopes to eventually be well enough to tour again, saying: “I just can’t wait to get well enough to go on the road, that is what is killing me.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Hungover Paddy McGuinness Has This Morning Viewers In Hysterics With Chaotic Appearance

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Viewers were left in hysterics after the Top Gear presenter was left dealing with the after effects of a night out partying and no sleep live on air.
Advertisement
Paddy was joined on the daytime show by Top Gear co-star Chris Harris, hours after the world premiere of the new series in London’s Leicester Square.
Paddy McGuinness and Chris Harris on This Morning Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
During the show, Paddy gatecrashed a crisp tasting segment and admitted: “I won’t lie to you, I’ve not been to bed.”
When he was offered a sample of pale ale, he replied: “Not more of that stuff,” and joked that he had sprayed mace on himself.
Advertisement
Paddy interrupted a crisp tasting segment Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
When he was later joined by Chris on the sofa, he told Phil and Holly: “I knew I was flying too close to the sun when I was on stage and I said to the Director General of the BBC ‘Get the sambucas in, son’.
He joked: “He’s still there drinking, he’s still on it.”
Asked by Holly what he brings to the BBC motoring show, he replied: “Alcohol, lots of it.”
Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby teased Paddy over his hangover Ken McKay/ITV/Shutterstock
After Paddy then made a joke about his co-host only having one nipple, Chris said: “This is worse than I ever thought it would be.”
Phillip – who famously appeared on This Morning after a boozy night at the National Television Awards with co-host Holly – joked: “I find it quite shocking anyone could come on this sofa and be drunk. Who would do that?”
Advertisement
Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby made a drunken appearance on This Morning in 2016 ITV
Referencing next week’s NTAs, Holly replied: “This time next week it will be us,” before advising the pair: “Go home, get a wash, get to bed.”
Paddy’s behaviour certainly amused fans over on Twitter...
The whole interview with them both was absolutely hilarious @PaddyMcGuinness you’ve both really brightened up my morning #onenipple 😂😂 — kelly gannon (@kellywhitt1) January 21, 2020
Very funny watching the hangover guys of top gear 😂 — Tony Beck (@TonyBec96585730) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
Best interview ever — Katy Healey (@KatyHealey1987) January 21, 2020
#paddymcguinness is he still drunk from last night? 😆😆 so funny! #ThisMorning — loulou (@mrs_year2) January 21, 2020
Paddy McGuinness still pissed on This Morning makes great viewing 🥴😹 — Kirstie Abbott (@kirstieabbott12) January 21, 2020
Paddy and former cricketer Freddie Flintoff joined the presenting team on Top Gear alongside Chris last year, replacing Matt LeBlanc, with their second series as a trio debuting on Sunday.
Advertisement
This Morning airs weekdays at 10.30am on ITV.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Jennifer Lopez's Eternal Hustle

Jennifer Lopez's Eternal Hustle

On a crisp Saturday night in September, a private party celebrating the Hustlers premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival could be marked by two halves: Before Jennifer Lopez and After Jennifer Lopez. BJL spanned 11:30pm to approximately 1am. People were evenly dispersed throughout the bar, enjoying a routine soirée. A place card brandishing Lopez’s name sat on an unoccupied table. It was starting to seem like she might not show when murmurs rippled across the room. “She’s here!” AJL had begun.
As if lured by a magnetic cult leader — or a Hollywood megastar, same difference — partygoers drifted toward Lopez’s pulpit, dazed, wanting a glimpse. They could only get so close. Her area had since been roped off. Bodyguards stood at either end to stare down potential interlopers. Other cast members orbited around the venue, but Lopez was the centre of gravity.
Advertisement
In the ensuing weeks, the cosmos saw just how massive Jennifer Lopez’s pull could be. Riding a wave of effusive reviews, Hustlers became the highest-grossing live-action film in her 33-year acting tenure, testifying to her fortitude as a multihyphenate pop phenom. She was dubbed an immediate Oscar contender.
In the end, though, Hustlers also underscored how much Hollywood has slighted Lopez. That buzz wasn’t enough to land her the nomination, a fact that is surely rooted in how the Film Academy — and our culture at large — views women. Someone as famous as Lopez isn’t serious enough to join such lofty ranks, especially when she’s playing a thieving stripper.
Oscar omission aside, the success of “Hustlers” raises a valuable question: Why hasn’t Lopez gotten roles this dynamic all along?
Her finest acting comes when she’s exuding control, and when she can use that control to mask a character’s vulnerability. Think of the Out Of Sight scene when Lopez’s slick federal marshal has to shoot the criminal (George Clooney) she loves. Or the moment in Selena when she mocks the media’s scrutiny by bragging that her diet consists of pepperoni pizza and Doritos. Like Hustlers, those movies understand that Lopez’s charisma stems from her ability to win anyone over.
Advertisement
Jennifer Lopez and Constance Wu in "Hustlers." STX Films
Most movies don’t grasp this. They turn her into an underdog who comes out on top simply because, well, she’s Jennifer Lopez. Over the years, she’s struggled to find romance (The Wedding Planner and The Back-Up Plan), fled abusive lovers (Enough and The Boy Next Door), cleaned up after wealthy clients (Maid In Manhattan and Second Act) and ingratiated herself to contemptuous relatives (Angel Eyes and Monster-In-Law). Lopez is good in these movies. A primo self-marketer, she makes herself accessible to the audience in a way that transcends her rarefied glamour. Unfortunately, these movies aren’t always good to her.
I’ve wondered for years when Lopez would land another Out Of Sight. She can convincingly portray working-class strivers — many pop idols can’t — but I suspect that Lopez has hardly demonstrated her full range on-screen.
Broader career machinations — her celebrity, in other words — acted as an impediment; having collected $12 million for one of the biggest bombs in cinema history (2003’s Gigli) has its consequences. After seven nominations from the tacky Razzie Awards, the industry seemed to deem her unworthy of highbrow fare.
Wanting to know how Lopez is perceived in Hollywood and why Hustlers feels like a restitution of sorts, I called up a number of producers, directors and casting agents who have worked with her. What emerged was a classic tale: an “it girl” steadily reduced by gossip, setbacks and misconceptions. She lost that status and fought to regain it. Resilience was — is — her strength.
Advertisement
In five vignettes, this is the story of what predated that party in Toronto and how the artist forever known as J.Lo made invincibility her brand.
***
Talk to a few folks with a hand in Jennifer Lopez’s ascendancy, and you’ll hear the same thing: Everyone knew she’d be a star. That’s easy to say in retrospect, a convenient pat on the back for showbiz veterans who love to be in the know. But the anecdotes about a young Lopez brightening room after room sound similar enough to be believed.
At 16, she was Jenny Lopez, as Pam Golden, who cast Lopez’s first movie, My Little Girl (1987), recalled while leafing through old audition notes scribbled with descriptions such as “very pretty,” “talented” and “lots of potential”.
A few years after Girl, when Lopez was a dancer on the early-’90s variety series In Living Color, casting director Linda Phillips-Palo received a call from a former colleague who had just hired Lopez for a part in the heist thriller Money Train (1995) and insisted she consider the actress.
Advertisement
“We met Jennifer, and she was just fantastic,” Phillips-Palo said. “She had it written all over her face. This woman was not going to fail. ... I was around Tom Cruise and a lot of those people when they were getting their first jobs. You’d know that there was nothing else that guy could ever do but be a movie star. And it was like that with Jennifer.”
Jennifer Lopez and Ice Cube in "Anaconda." Columbia Pictures via Getty Images
Phillips-Palo quickly slotted Lopez opposite Robin Williams in Francis Ford Coppola’s fish-out-of-water dramedy Jack (1996). The film did lukewarm business, but along with the immigrant drama My Family (1995), for which Lopez received an Independent Spirit Award nomination, it established her screen presence as that of a compassionate everywoman.
Teddy Zee, then an executive at Columbia Pictures, saw the same quality that Phillips-Palo did when Lopez’s manager, Eric Gold, encouraged him to pay attention to Lopez while visiting the In Living Color set. Zee was so “committed” to Lopez’s potential that he let her pick between two hot scripts before she was even a household name. Fools Rush In — a traditional romantic comedy released amid the glory days of Julia Roberts and Meg Ryan — had already booked the Friends-anointed Matthew Perry as its leading man. Zee was convinced Lopez would favour Fools over her alternative, the creature feature Anaconda.
“I was shocked she chose Anaconda,” Zee said. “At the time, I thought it was a strange choice. But she was very strong in knowing what she wanted and why she wanted it. … I think she just saw it as an opportunity to market herself.”
Advertisement
Lopez shot Anaconda and Selena back to back, with Anaconda hitting theatres less than a month after the 1997 biopic about the late singer Selena Quintanilla-Pérez.
Lopez secured Selena — and her first $1 million salary — via what was said to be the largest casting search since Scarlett O’Hara. The filmmakers auditioned thousands of upstarts at a time when there were no age-appropriate Latina actresses with name value, according to producer Moctesuma Esparza.
When the movie debuted at No. 2 and drew rapturous reviews for Lopez, “it validated what our instincts were about her,” Zee said. Anaconda suddenly had a lot more weight, especially among underserved audiences of color.
Jennifer Lopez and George Clooney in Out Of Sight. Universal Pictures via Getty Images
With the one-two punch of Selena and Anaconda, and the Golden Globe nod that accompanied the former, Lopez went from hopeful to headliner. But it was Out Of Sight (1998) that certified her movie-star bona fides. Steven Soderbergh first tested Sandra Bullock for the role, but when Bullock and George Clooney’s chemistry didn’t click, Soderbergh told the studio he wouldn’t direct the movie if he couldn’t hire Lopez. The character needed to seem intrepid and sultry but not impervious; she had to fall in love with Clooney and precipitate his downfall.
Advertisement
Lopez “had everything going on,” Soderbergh said. That “everything” included the $5 million paycheck she negotiated against Clooney’s $10 million. (Her rationale: “Who’s going to break their ass to promote this movie while George is on ER?”)
“She was smart, she was sexy, she was funny, she was physical,” Soderbergh recalled. “Working with her as a director, if I were to give her a note, she had a dancer’s pride in being able to do your note exactly the way you described it immediately. … I certainly felt like we were catching her at the perfect time. She was clearly on a trajectory, and I felt, ‘We’re gonna get a lot of props for delivering her at a moment where she’s blowing up. Let’s be smart, let’s be early adopters.’”
With Out Of Sight, Lopez made the covers of Entertainment Weekly and Details. In the magazine Movieline, she lambasted Winona Ryder, Gwyneth Paltrow, Cameron Diaz, Madonna and Claire Danes for their acting skills. After a decade of surging fame, Lopez was everywhere. She signed a record deal with Sony and began a highly-publicised relationship with hip-hop mogul Sean “Puff Daddy” Combs, two moves that made her one of the globe’s most watched celebrities. But once an actor becomes a tabloid fixation, the calculus of her career shifts.
***
As the new millennium dawned, Lopez’s clout soared. Her name alone was enough to get the experimental psycho-thriller The Cell (2000) an instant green light, director Tarsem Singh said. When she joined the rom-com vogue by signing on to The Wedding Planner (2001), the movie’s $10 million budget shot to $30 million, partly to accommodate her $7 million paycheck, which was equal to that of co-star Matthew McConaughey, according to producer Jennifer Gibgot. Meanwhile, Lopez and Combs were central figures in the tabloid-magazine boom times. Following their 2001 split, Lopez was riding high: She was the first person to have a No. 1 movie (“The Wedding Planner”) and No. 1 album (J.Lo, her second) simultaneously.
Advertisement
Lopez fielded question after question from the press about her supposed diva demands — America’s way of telling a famous woman she’s made it. (“She’s not high-maintenance,” producer Kelliann Ladd contested when I spoke to her.) The single Jenny From The Block acted as a rebuttal, attempting to marry her down-home Bronx upbringing with her newfound wealth. But if you have to inform people you’re humble, they might not take your word for it.
Matthew McConaughey and Jennifer Lopez in "The Wedding Planner." Archive Photos via Getty Images
Come 2002, after the internet-defining Versace dress and a short-lived marriage to backup dancer Cris Judd, Lopez’s movie career tried to take the Julia Roberts route. Maid In Manhattan looked a lot like Pretty Woman, and Enough was a cousin of Sleeping With The Enemy. Both were modest box-office hits.
Then Gigli happened.
Lopez can blame Halle Berry, who was originally cast but dropped out to do “X-Men 2.” In theory, the appeal of Gigli is evident. It was a major-movie-star vehicle at a time when major movie stars were Hollywood’s meal tickets. Ben Affleck was still surfing his post-Good Will Hunting crest, and director Martin Brest had a track record for fruitful comedies (Beverly Hills Cop, Midnight Run). The film netted Lopez an A-list-worthy $12 million. By early-2000s standards, it became an event before the cameras even rolled, so much so that Lopez’s renown further eclipsed her esteem. Coupling up with Affleck during production created a media spectacle, and “Bennifer” became the nickname that inspired a thousand starry portmanteaus.
Heading into Gigli, Lopez had more than enough commercial fortune. But she needed to get critics back on her side. That’s where An Unfinished Life comes in. On paper, the midbudget drama had ample Oscar-bait hallmarks, including the backing of now-disgraced Miramax honcho Harvey Weinstein and a stripped-down role that seemed ideal for an actress asking to be taken seriously.
Advertisement
Jennifer Lopez and Ben Affleck in "Gigli." Alamy Stock Photo
Ladd, who was producing Life, couldn’t have anticipated what a calamity Gigli would be when she and prestigious auteur Robert Altman (Nashville) were debating whether to heed Weinstein, who urged them to cast Lopez. Altman instead courted Naomi Watts (opposite Paul Newman as a brusque Wyoming rancher who lends his battered daughter-in-law refuge). When Weinstein later replaced Altman with Swedish director Lasse Hallström (What’s Eating Gilbert Grape), in turn losing the initial actors, he again advocated for Lopez. By then, Gigli was in the can but wouldn’t hit theatres for another year. Hallström was “open to the idea” right away, but Newman’s replacement, Robert Redford, wasn’t quite as keen, Ladd said. Ever the dark horse, Lopez was willing to convince anyone who needed convincing.
“She was self-aware enough to say, ‘No, I can tone down the J.Lo look,’” Ladd recalled. “‘I can be the girl who grew up in Wyoming.’ And then she even did a makeup test, probably of her own volition: ‘Look, see, I can do it.’ She took it seriously.”
But Gigli opened two months after An Unfinished Life completed production, ensuring that no one else would take either seriously. Brest, the Gigli maestro, had clashed with Sony executives over the ending, meant to be more crime caper and less romantic comedy. Lopez and Affleck were called back for reshoots, and what resulted was a cheaply-written, inelegantly-designed disaster.
Jennifer Lopez in An Unfinished Life Alamy Stock Photo
Advertisement
Gigli is a Jennifer Lopez movie as much as it’s a movie about the idea of Jennifer Lopez. Arriving 15 minutes in, she whips around to introduce her glammed face in close-up — the kind of entrance only a dazzling dignitary can make. Lopez has the swagger to play a gangster type, but Gigli channels it through scenes as overcooked as the sensual vagina monologue that she spouts while doing yoga. Still, she runs circles around Affleck, always sure how long to pause before nailing a punchy line or when to arch her back to elicit a laugh. Together, they are so devoid of chemistry that one has to wonder what their actual relationship looked like behind closed doors.
Gigli tarnished Lopez’s movie image, underscoring how long it had been since she’d made something as exemplary as Out Of Sight. Grossing a mortifying $7.3 million on a $76 million budget, it was one of the biggest bombs in history. She and Affleck called off their wedding with four days’ notice and broke up four months later.
“I was eviscerated,” Lopez said in 2017. “I lost my sense of self, questioned if I belonged in this business, thought maybe I did suck at everything. And my relationship [with Affleck] self-destructed in front of the entire world. It was a two-year thing for me until I picked myself up again.”
On the heels of Gigli, the Miramax team handling publicity for the single-father comedy Jersey Girl (2004) — also starring Affleck — began “quietly highlighting” that Lopez’s character dies in the movie’s first 15 minutes, as if to assure audiences they wouldn’t endure much of her. As is often the case with celebrity scandals, the woman’s reputation suffered more than the man’s.
***
Advertisement
No one I spoke to captured Lopez’s vicissitude better than Leon Ichaso, who directed her in El Cantante, the 2007 biopic about Puerto Rican salsa star Héctor Lavoe.
According to Ichaso, Marc Anthony brought El Cantante to him in 2003 as a potential collaboration with Lopez, who was looking to tap into her own Puerto Rican roots. (She would play Nilda Georgina “Puchi” Román, Lavoe’s wife). Ichaso went to Lopez’s Los Angeles home to pitch his vision. What he got in return was a snapshot of her celebrity. “The first meeting was really weird,” Ichaso said.
He showed up with a VHS copy of the 1972 documentary Our Latin Thing cued up to a scene chronicling a rowdy Manhattan block party. Ichaso started waxing about his vision when a “testy” Lopez interrupted him.
“Leon, you’re too interested in history,” she said, according to Ichaso. “This movie is not about history.” Convinced she’d change her tune after seeing the scene, he asked to play the VHS. Only one problem: No one knew how to work the VCR. Not Ichaso, not Lopez, not her manager, Benny Medina, whom she would fire that year and later rehire. Lopez had to march upstairs and wake Affleck, who traipsed down in sweatpants to solve the problem with his signature groggy enthusiasm. After watching the scene, “Jennifer turned to me and said, ‘That’s my movie,’” Ichaso recounted.
Slowly but surely, El Cantante got off the ground with a small budget that afforded Lopez a fraction of the sums she’d earned for The Wedding Planner and Gigli. By the time Ichaso went to meet with her again a few months later, she’d broken up with Affleck and begun dating her future co-star.
Advertisement
Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony in El Cantante Alamy Stock Photo
“Jennifer was sitting on Marc’s lap, which is funny because Marc doesn’t have such strong legs,” Ichaso said. “They were a couple, and they were sharing French fries. They both seemed so, so relaxed.”
Anthony and Lopez’s new relationship fueled the production. Both had entourages that, according to Ichaso, constituted “24/7 frenzy”. They thrived on chaos; Ichaso compared their relationship, which ended in 2011, to Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. “Marc is the love of her life, with his cigarettes and craziness and drinking and whatever,” he said, acknowledging that Lopez seems content with current fiancé Alex Rodriguez. “She loves him. She would say to me, ‘I couldn’t sleep with him last night because of his cigarettes. I locked the bedroom.’ They were like kids. They were just, at that time, so happy.”
That energy complemented the tone of the film, and like everyone who has worked with her, Ichaso praised Lopez’s commitment. She even smoked cigarettes for a brief period to prepare, despite being the “healthiest person in the world,” he said.
Reviews for El Cantante were tepid, but the film at least succeeded in not positioning Lopez as an underdog. It was the first movie she produced, and it shows: Puchi has tenacity, agency, brass. The theatrical rollout, on the other hand, didn’t. The distributors marketed El Cantante with an urban vibe accenting the characters’ druggy proclivities, and Ichaso felt the PR exploited Latin clichés that didn’t represent the film. Plus, by the time it opened in August 2007, almost a full year after premiering at the Toronto Film Festival, the world still hadn’t forgiven Lopez for Gigli.
Advertisement
“It was at a time where people didn’t like Jennifer very much after she broke up with Ben,” Ichaso said. “They just didn’t take her seriously, and maybe that’s what bothered her the most. At the time, there weren’t many Jennifer Lopez films that were memorable, so this one just got destroyed.”
***
Once a celebrity union stokes the tabloid fire, the couple involved is targeted for life. Lopez got it especially bad because she dated so many high-profile men. Eventually, photographers were invading movie sets to capture mundane footage to sell to People and Us Weekly.
The Monster-In-Law (2005) producers knew to anticipate such hysteria, but they didn’t know how intense it would get. To combat paparazzi who stalked the production through Los Angeles, the crew had to erect makeshift walls and station assistants with umbrellas blocking the action, according to producer Chris Bender. Nevertheless, photographers scaled roofs and camped out in the Malibu cliffs to snap long-lens shots. Bender, who had collaborated with the likes of Ashton Kutcher and Rachel McAdams, had never experienced anything as manic as the Lopez surveillance.
There’s an upside, though. “At the time, that was considered a plus because your movie was getting publicity in advance of the eventual release,” he said. “That was sort of the pre-Instagram way of taking advantage of celebrity to create awareness for your movie.”
Advertisement
Jane Fonda and Jennifer Lopez in Monster-In-Law Alamy Stock Photo
Around the same time, the Hollywood trades were littered with the corpses of failed J.Lo projects. Any actor’s career is a combination of talent, timing, wise decision-making and sheer luck, and Lopez’s missed opportunities tell us a lot about the career she hoped to design.
She was considered for Kate Beckinsale’s role in Serendipity, according to producer Simon Fields. She developed a modern take on the opera Carmen, an adaptation of the Latina friendship novel Dirty Girls Club and a movie about a psychiatrist who treats superheroes. None of those manifested; one even resulted in a lawsuit. Lopez turned down Unfaithful, which netted Diane Lane an Oscar nod. She lost at least two gigs to Angelina Jolie: First, Paramount thought of her for 2003’s Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, and secondly, she reportedly exited a prestigious Frida Kahlo biopic to pursue the lead in 2004’s Taking Lives” (“That role will be the most challenging thing I’m sure I’ll ever do,” Lopez had said of Kahlo.) She was also supposed to make a big-band musical with Nicole Kidman and a live-action Carmen Sandiego.
She joined the 2005 rom-com “Hitch,” after which producers used her name to bait Will Smith for the lead, according to Zee, who said Columbia executives sought an actress of colour because they were apprehensive about marketing a courtship between a Black man and a white woman. (Lopez eventually dropped out due to scheduling issues, and Eva Mendes took her spot).
Advertisement
Jennifer Lopez and Alex O'Loughlin in The Back-up Plan CBS Photo Archive via Getty Images
After Monster-In-Law, An Unfinished Life and the 2007 album “Brave,” which was her first album that didn’t debut in the Top 10, Lopez hit a nadir with critics and audiences alike. She took a few years off, giving birth to twins in 2008. By the time she returned with the formulaic romantic comedies The Back-Up Plan (2010) and What To Expect When You’re Expecting (2012), the comic-book craze had engulfed Hollywood. The types of adult movies she’d made in the prior two decades — particularly rom-coms — were passé. If no one took her seriously then, certainly no one would do so now.
“The truth of the matter, really, is she has not been considered for a bunch of years a major actress,” one Oscar-nominated producer said. “She’s been considered a major success and a major celebrity, and she has loads of goodwill because she’s one of the nicest human beings on Earth. It has probably made it a tad harder on the acting front because of her celebrity status. She might have gotten other roles had she not become such a pop celeb icon.”
***
Lopez clearly sensed that The Back-Up Plan wouldn’t be enough to restore her early-2000s glory. Wanting double the buzz, she timed her next album, Love?, to coincide with the movie’s release. But Lopez parted with her record label in what may or may not have been an amicable split after the intended lead single, Louboutins, bombed. With a new wave of pop stars taking over (Rihanna, Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift, Beyoncé) and a drastically-changing Hollywood business model, Lopez had to rehabilitate her brand.
Advertisement
First, Lopez agreed to judge American Idol alongside Randy Jackson and fellow newcomer Steven Tyler. She negotiated a reported $12 million for her first season and $20 million for her second, fees that upped the ante for all superstars appearing on reality-competition shows.
Idol ratings were dwindling, and while her presence did little to restore its earlier cachet, it did place her in living rooms across Middle America at a crucial time. She put her name on perfumes, hair-care products, home goods and a Kohl’s clothing line. With the much-needed success of the 2011 dance banger On The Floor and her post-Back-Up Plan movie choices, Lopez leaned into her Jenny From The Block persona, opting for digestible, populist vehicles that wouldn’t strain credulity.
Ryan Guzman and Jennifer Lopez in The Boy Next Door Universal Pictures
In the screwball thriller Parker (2013), Lopez brought comedic relief and demonstrated the texture of her charisma. (“This may be Lopez’s most appealing screen performance since she traded barbs with George Clooney in Steven Soderbergh’s Out of Sight,” The Hollywood Reporter raved.) She delivered a committed, delightful performance in the schlocky The Boy Next Door”(2015), which targeted Latinx audiences by hiring Step Up breakout Ryan Guzman, a process she was deeply involved with, according to casting director Nancy Nayor. For the crime twister Lila & Eve (2015), co-starring Viola Davis, she secured a part that once had director Charles Stone III eyeing Charlize Theron, Cate Blanchett, Julianne Moore and Robin Wright.
No single project illustrates the return to her Jenny From the Block ethos better than Shades Of Blue. When creator Adi Hasak was first developing the TV series in 2013, Lopez’s longtime producing partner Elaine Goldsmith-Thomas suggested her for the top role, an FBI informant with a troubled past. Hasak was sure Lopez would say no. But movie vets seeking nonfranchise material had begun drifting to television.
Advertisement
A week later, Lopez told him she wanted to produce and star in the series, likening it to NYPD Blue and Homicide: Life On The Street. In a way, she anticipated the rise of the late-2010s female antihero. Furthermore, she wanted to pitch it to a broadcast outfit, which would have been expected to enlist Julianna Margulies or another TV-centric actor, rather than a premium network.
ABC passed, but superproducer Ryan Seacrest, whom Lopez had befriended via American Idol, helped establish Shades Of Blue at NBC.
“It wasn’t HBO, it wasn’t Showtime,” Hasak emphasized. “There were other places that were, I would say, as worthy or worthier of Jennifer Lopez. She was fearless. She decided with our team that this was the place to go.”
Ray Liotta and Jennifer Lopez on "Shades of Blue." NBC via Getty Images
Fifteen minutes after their pitch meeting with NBC honcho Robert Greenblatt, Blue was given a 13-episode green light, Hasak said, with Oscar winner Barry Levinson (Rain Man) helming the pilot.
Advertisement
“I’m still hoping to work with her on a musical someday, too,” Greenblatt said by email, presumably referencing the scrapped Bye Bye Birdie production that Lopez was attached to. “She’s one of the most professional people I’ve ever worked with and I also think she’s vastly underrated as an actor.”
Lopez capitalized on Blue to, again, reach a wide audience that didn’t necessarily subscribe to the narrative that Lopez isn’t a viable actor.
“She’s a fucking real person,” Hasak said. “That bullshit of premier cable versus basic cable? She doesn’t function in that universe. … She has the wherewithal of not doing the usual Hollywood bullshit and saying, ‘I have to climb the highest mountain.’”
Mere weeks after the first season wrapped, Lopez launched a lavish three-year Las Vegas residency. Across 2016, 2017 and 2018, she produced and judged the competition series World Of Dance, resumed her status as one of the highest-paid celebrities, got engaged to Alex Rodriguez and starred in Second Act. In a roundabout way, that Working Girl-lite comedy, released in December 2018, was a perfect setup for Hustlers. Her character had to fight to demonstrate her business savvy, whereas Lopez had already done that. She was ready for the next challenge.
Lili Reinhart, Jennifer Lopez, Keke Palmer and Constance Wu in Hustlers STX Films
Advertisement
A zippy drama about New York strippers who fleece their male clientele after falling on hard times, Hustlers harnesses Lopez’s power without sacrificing her vulnerability. She makes an entrance even splashier than the one from Gigli, pole-dancing to Fiona Apple’s Criminal.
As Ramona, whom director Lorene Scafaria said would have cited J.Lo as her style inspiration, she commands the film. Like Lopez, Ramona constantly sells her personality in exchange for admiration. Also like Lopez, Ramona is resourceful and bewitching, which makes the performance a clever extension of the actor inhabiting it. It also exemplifies the world-weariness that undergirds her screen presence. The role that is so well-suited it acts as a sort of destiny fulfilled.
The J.Lo brand is peaking in a way it hasn’t since roughly 2002, which includes co-headlining the Super Bowl halftime show with Shakira and shepherding a film about Colombian drug lord Griselda Blanco. At a time when the entertainment establishment is reassessing how it treats women, Lopez’s resurgence is a success story. Even without the Oscar nomination, the fact that her comeback coalesced at age 50 proves that Lopez’s work ethic has made her invincible. Maybe the future Jennifer Lopezes of the world won’t have to fight so hard not to be underestimated.
Since Hustlers, Lopez has gotten “scads” of offers for reputable movies, according to Goldsmith-Thomas.
“I said to Jennifer the other day, ‘Oh, my God, one year ago we would have begged to be in this conversation and now we’re passing on this movie,’” she said. “We’re incredibly aware that this is a club that we’ve wanted to be a part of. We take nothing for granted.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Piers Morgan Insists He Wasn't 'Mocking Chinese People' On Good Morning Britain Following Backlash

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Piers Morgan has doubled down on his defence of a segment on Tuesday’s Good Morning Britain, after he was accused of “mocking Chinese people”.
During the latest instalment of the ITV breakfast show, Piers and Susanna discussed Peter Phillips – the eldest grandchild of the Queen and Prince Philip – who recently appeared in a Chinese advert for milk.
Advertisement
After the ad was played on the show, Susanna was left exasperated when Piers began making noises, in what was apparently an imitation of the Chinese brand’s name.
“I don’t know the Chinese for ‘I only drink…’, what’s it called?” he protested.
Piers then requested the ad be played again, after which he declared: “Ching chang cho jo”, again trying to repeat what was said in the advert.
Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid ITV
His co-host then told him: “You can’t say [that]... taking the mickey out of foreign languages is rather 1970s.”
Advertisement
Growing louder, Piers hit back: “Surely you can take the mickey out of it! He’s using ‘ching chang chong’ milk from the Chinese state – that’s what they said in the advert!
“I can’t repeat what they’re saying in the advert… I’m trying to mimic the wording of that advertisement.
“By the way, it’s not me flogging the Chinese state milk. Are people going to be more annoyed about me trying to mimic the Chinese State milk ad than they are about a member of the Royal family trying to flog Chinese State milk””
“Yes, Piers, do you not realise the kind of woke times we’re living in?” Susanna responded.
“Oh god…” Piers then offered, after which the topic of conversation was changed.
After seeing Piers’ impression of the Chinese ad, many viewers took issue with it on social media, accusing the host of racism…
Terrible show of racism - mocking Chinese language live on television - time to go #PiersMorgan @piersmorgan @GMB 😡 — Maître McG (@dugaldmcgarry) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
Oh @piersmorgan you're digging yourself a hole man. Why are you mocking the Chinese language on live tv?? Tut tut #GMB — Ryan Adolpho🐝 (@ryan180680) January 21, 2020
@GMB why are you allowing @piersmorgan to be racist and mock the Chinese language. A disgrace!!! @Ofcom need to investigate this and heavily fine both him, the show and the network for condoning this crass, racist and inflammatory action by their 'presenter' #removepiers — Ross Suttie🏴🏳🌈 (@rsuttie) January 21, 2020
Piers Morgan mocking Chinese dialect on Good Morning Britain. How very modern and mature of him. Get. In. The. Bin. @piersmorgan @GMB — Ben Marshall (@benmarshall1993) January 21, 2020
Racist @piersmorgan taking the piss out of the Chinese language now live on national TV. Release an apology live on air before the programme finishes @itv @GMB — M@BOTCOM (@_MATTdotCOM_) January 21, 2020
Great example to set to your sons, and the rest of Britain - "this OK to do guys, this is how chinese people talk". No, no we don't thank you very much — VS (@ryonakata) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
So Piers Morgan who spent the whole show yesterday defending that he’s not a racist follows on the next morning mimicking a Chinese accent 🤔
But I’m sure the @itvstudios will turn a blind eye since it’s “entertaining” 💁🏻♀ — Lisa Mckenna (@LisaM_x) January 21, 2020
Just turnt on the TV for the news, no.. its @piersmorgan mocking the Chinese language on live TV. Are you ok with this @ITV @GMB !?? Seriously this man needs stopping. he's poisoning large sections of the country every morning. — Hankins (@HeinzJunkins) January 21, 2020
Piers Morgan doing a racist Chinese voice on GMB shows that it’s still somehow acceptable to be anti-Chinese in this country. Yet nothing is ever said or done about it. — Joe (@jbakerroberts) January 21, 2020
Time warp back to when @ITV and @GMB thought it was okay to do a Chinese impression... Ching Chang Chong Ching Chang.... unbelievable #GMB #bitracistmate pic.twitter.com/Z8QRUvP62e — AdamD 🦛 (@MongrelAdam) January 21, 2020
@piersmorgan What you did @GMB is racist and derogatory, and exactly the same #racialabuse I and some British Chinese people have received 'mocking' us and our heritage. Please apologise. To not do so would endorse similar racist behaviour #SayNoToRacism https://t.co/BpR38bgEc6 — Cllr. Alex Yip (@alexyip258) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
@ITV please, do us all a favour and remove that rude, ignorant imbicile @piersmorgan from our screens. As if bullying Harry and Meghan wasn't enough, he's now mocking the Chinese. Seriously? 🤷🏻♀🤬 — Sarah🦄 (@BeesBabe1975) January 21, 2020
How does he still have that Job!? https://t.co/lZOTu4kC7p — R Victor Williams (@RVictorWilliams) January 21, 2020
One such critic was footballer John Barnes, to whom Piers sent a number of tweets, insisting he was not mocking Chinese people, but mocking “a member of the British royal family appearing in an advert for Chinese state milk”.
Just saw @piersmorgan on GMB mocking Chinese people on the way they speak, what are the odds he faces no criticism for it... there’s an example for Laurence Fox of white privilege — John Barnes (@officialbarnesy) January 21, 2020
I was mocking a member of the British royal family appearing in an advert for Chinese state milk, not Chinese people. https://t.co/IO5TEXUYmf — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
Speaking as an Irishman (who wasn't offended), were you as upset when Ian Wright mimicked Roy Keane's Irish accent?
If not, and I can't find any tweets from you about it, then pipe down with your hypocritical virtue-signalling. https://t.co/0bozMmwFed — Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) January 21, 2020
HuffPost UK has contacted representatives for Good Morning Britain for comment.
Last week, Piers was put in his place by Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu, after he hit back at the suggestion the media’s treatment of Meghan Markle has been rooted in racism.
After she accused him of having a “vendetta” against the Duchess Of Sussex, Dr Shola said: “What’s so offensive about this Piers, especially with you. You are a man, privileged to have power and influence and you are using your platform so irresponsibly to spout out this personal vendetta with nasty and vile comments knowing fully well that your words are containing bigotry, misogyny, sexism and racism.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Here’s What We Know About Coronavirus

Here’s What We Know About Coronavirus

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Heightened precautions are being taken in China and elsewhere at the moment, as governments are trying to control the outbreak of coronavirus, that threatens to grow.
Anxieties around the virus intensified after Chinese government expert Zhong Nanshan revealed that it can be spread between humans. Authorities had previously said there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission.
Advertisement
Chinese authorities have now advised people to stop travel into and out of Wuhan, the city at the centre of a new virus outbreak that has killed nine.
So far, at least 17 people have died, CNN has reported, and hundreds have been infected. So, should we be worried?
What is coronavirus and where has it spread?
The virus, known also as 2019-nCoV, is thought to be a new strain of coronavirus that has not previously been identified. The new type of coronavirus appears to have originated in the central city of Wuhan, which has reported 198 cases. Initial symptoms of the novel coronavirus include fever, cough, tightness of the chest and shortness of breath.
Others who have been diagnosed in Beijing, Shanghai and southern Guangdong province had also visited Wuhan. Internationally, four cases of coronavirus have been confirmed among Chinese travellers in South Korea, Japan and Thailand.
Advertisement
There has been concern that the outbreak is similar to Sars (severe acute respiratory syndrome), a different coronavirus that spread from China to more than a dozen countries in 2002-2003.
When Sars first infected people in southern China, the Chinese government initially tried to conceal the severity of the epidemic, which ended up killing nearly 800 people. The cover-up was exposed by a high-ranking physician.
Gabriel Leung, dean of medicine at the University of Hong Kong, said Chinese authorities have responded much more quickly this time.
Where did the virus come from?
The first cases identified late last month were among people connected to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan. The first patients were suspected to have contracted the virus from animals, but human-to-human transmission was confirmed late on Monday.
Mr Zhong, a government expert who helped expose the scale of Sars, told Chinese state broadcaster CCTV that two people in Guangdong province caught the virus from family members.
Advertisement
Fifteen medical workers have also tested positive for the virus, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission announced. Previously, the commission said no-one who came into close contact with patients, including health professionals, were infected.
Professor Leung, who was heavily involved in the response to Sars, said modelling shows that cases will multiply over the coming weeks but the outbreak will gradually lose momentum as precautionary measures take effect.
What measures are other countries taking?
Numerous nations have adopted screening measures for travellers arriving from China, especially those from Wuhan.
Australia’s chief medical officer Brendan Murphy said his country will be increasing airport screening. Australia receives a significant number of travellers from China, including three direct flights a week from Wuhan into Sydney, and these flights will be met by border security and biosecurity staff for assessments.
Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong and other places with extensive travel links to China are also enacting stricter screening measures. At least three US airports have started screening incoming airline passengers from central China. Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe said: “We need to step up our caution levels as the number of patients is continuing to rise in China. Please take every possible precaution.”
Advertisement
Health authorities in the UK are not screening arrivals on the flights from Wuhan to Heathrow.
Reuters
Is it safe to travel there?
The World Health Organization said earlier in the week: “Based on currently available information, WHO does not recommend any restriction of travel or trade.”
However, advice changed on 22 January. National Health Commission vice-minister Li Bin said in one of the first public briefings since the beginning of the outbreak: “Basically, do not go to Wuhan. And those in Wuhan please do not leave the city.”
Authorities also reportedly said that the country was now at the “most critical stage” of prevention and control.
It emerged that Britain would start enhanced monitoring of all passengers who arrived on direct flights from the Chinese city of Wuhan to tackle the threat of the virus.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Sperm Can Be Donated 48 Hours After Someone's Died. Here's Why That's Important

filo via Getty Images
Men in the UK should be allowed to voluntarily donate their sperm after death, scientists have argued – in the same way organs are donated after someone has died.
The UK has a shortage of donor sperm, but demand is high and increasing, with the number of single women and women in same-sex relationships seeking fertility treatment on the rise.
Advertisement
Meanwhile male fertility problems – often caused by poor sperm quality or quantity – remain the most common reason for couples to seek fertility treatment. The researchers believe the introduction of donation after death could help fill the healthy sperm gap.
“If it is morally acceptable that individuals can donate their tissues to relieve the suffering of others in ‘life-enhancing transplants’ for diseases, we see no reason this cannot be extended to other forms of suffering like infertility, which may or may not also be considered a disease,” they wrote in the Journal of Medical Ethics.
After death, sperm can be collected either through electrical stimulation of the prostate gland or surgery, and then frozen until required.
Previous research suggests sperm harvested from dead men can result in viable pregnancies and healthy children, even when retrieved 48 hours after death.
Advertisement
Any concerns about the possible transmission of ‘unhealthy’ genes can be addressed by carrying out health checks on the donor and the sperm, the authors said. They added that sperm donation after death would also help to increase the diversity of supply.
Families could, of course, veto a donation – just as they can do for organs. But they may derive comfort from knowing their loved one is ‘living on’, the authors argued, adding that expectations about the status of any resulting child would need to be clearly addressed.
“The important point is that considerations of the family, including a romantic partner surviving the deceased man, do not justify a blanket ban on the use of sperm collected after death, especially if the donor has specified a desire to donate,” they said.
As funding for fertility treatment in the UK remains contentious – with many clinical commissioning groups cutting NHS IVF in their area – it’s unclear who would pay for the harvesting of sperm after death, the researchers note.
However, they concluded: “It is both feasible and morally permissible for men to volunteer their sperm to be donated to strangers after death in order to ensure sufficient quantities of sperm with desired qualities.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-21--Anosmia: This Is What Life Is Like When You Have No Sense Of Smell

Softulka via Getty Images
“I would love to be able to smell my mum’s perfume or my partner’s cooking,” says Jesselyn Verity. She’d also dearly like to know “what all the fuss is about” when it comes to walking past a branch of Lush.
The 27-year-old, who works at a West End theatre in London, doesn’t have a sense of smell, also known as anosmia – and it has huge repercussions across her life. “I find it so baffling that other people can just smell things in the air without having to make a conscious effort to sniff something,” she says.
Advertisement
Verity isn’t alone in her struggles – a study saw researchers from the University of East Anglia speak to more than 70 people aged 31-80 about living without smell and discovered just how many aspects of life it can disrupt.
Common themes that arose included everyday concerns about personal hygiene, a loss of sexual intimacy and the break-down of personal relationships.
It can also be dangerous, as Professor Carl Philpott, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, explains: “One really big problem was around hazard perception – not being able to smell food that had gone off, or not being able to smell gas or smoke. This had resulted in serious near misses for some.”
Verity knows this first hand. “I can’t smell smoke, burning or gas,” she says. “At uni, one of my housemates left the gas on and I had no idea.” Nowadays, she cooks on an electric stove.
Advertisement
Jesselyn Verity Jesselyn Verity
Smell disorders are thought to affect around 5% of the population – that’s around one in 20 people. Some people lose their sense of smell altogether, others might experience a change in the way they perceive odours. Some perceive smells that aren’t there at all.
Anosmia can be caused by many things, from infections and injury to neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s. It can even be a side effect of certain types of medication.
How does it affect people’s lives?
Imagine not being able to properly taste the food you eat. This was a major issue flagged by the new study, which was published in the journal Clinical Otolaryngology.
Some participants no longer enjoyed eating, and lost appetite and weight as a result. Others ate more food with low nutritional value that was high in fat, salt and sugar – and gained weight. Some lost interest in preparing food altogether or were too embarrassed to serve dishes to family and friends, which had a knock-on impact on their social lives.
Advertisement
“Smells link us to people, places and emotional experiences... people who have lost their sense of smell miss out on all those memories.”
Inability to link smells to happy memories was also a problem. Prof Philpott paints a picture of what that actually means: “Bonfire night, Christmas smells, perfumes and people – all gone. Smells link us to people, places and emotional experiences. And people who have lost their sense of smell miss out on all those memories that smell can evoke.”
Another source of anxiety among those interviewed was personal hygiene for participants who couldn’t smell themselves, something Verity worries about.
Researchers also spoke to parents of young children, who couldn’t tell when their child’s nappy needed changing, and experienced feelings of failure as a result. “One mother found it difficult bonding with her new baby because she couldn’t smell him,” says Prof Philpott.
Many participants described a negative impact on relationships, too – ranging from not enjoying eating together to an impact on sexual relationships. All of these problems led to a range of negative emotions including anger, anxiety, frustration, depression, isolation, loss of confidence, regret and sadness. The problems are compounded by a lack of understanding about the disorder among clinicians, the study suggested. “I have depression and BPD [borderline personality disorder] but I have no idea how strongly that’s tied to the anosmia,” says Verity, who studied at UEA. “It’s hard to say how much I miss out on as I have no idea what it’s like to be normal.
“I try not to think about it too much otherwise I just get angry and sad.”
Prof Philpott and his fellow researchers hope their study’s findings will motivate clinicians to take smell problems more seriously, with better help and support offered to patients. Verity is pleased to hear about this focus, especially as she finds a lot of people don’t take her condition seriously or fully understand the impact. “The most common question I get asked is, ‘so does that mean I can fart in front of you?’,” she says.
The 27-year-old has undergone blind smell tests, a CT scan and surgery to have part of her septum removed. She’s tried experimental steroid sprays, acupuncture and craniosacral therapy (light manipulations of the skull and sacrum) – it hasn’t been cheap, or easy.
“My response from hospitals has just been: ‘Oh you’re anosmic, and that’s now your life.’ Although actually, most haven’t even heard of anosmia and it’s usually easier to just say I don’t have a sense of smell,” she says, an experience which can be “quite demoralising” if she has to explain or justify the impact.
“It’s been an absolute nightmare my entire life to try and get other doctors to take it seriously,” she adds. “I don’t think enough is being done about it.
“I am worried about the future. If I ever have kids how am I going to know if they need changing? Will I miss being able to smell them? When my parents pass on, am I going to forget them quicker if I can’t remember their smell?”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--How Love Island's Shaughna Earned Her Title As The Villa's Queen Of The One-Liners

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Every year on Love Island, there is one contestant who has a particular way with words.
And we’re pleased to announce the villa’s latest Queen Of The One-Liners is Shaughna Phillips.
In case you’ve missed her ascent to the throne, allow us to explain why we’re all bowing down to the sharp-witted democratic services officer...
Advertisement
When she delivered this withering response when Callum recoupled with Molly after Casa Amor
ITV
When she said this after one of the twins recoupled with Callum
ITV
When she spoke the truth about being sucked in by fuckboys
ITV
When her dental regime wreaked havoc with her relationship
ITV
Advertisement
When the South African heat proved to be too much for her
ITV
When she had no time for Mike pretending to be an expert on relationships
ITV
When she was completely distracted during the twins’ entrance
Shaughna really is the voice of the nation #LoveIsland pic.twitter.com/LgFBYyS78a — Love Island (@LoveIsland) January 13, 2020
When she tried to explain why Nas hasn’t found a partner in the villa yet
ITV
When she decided to eat her feelings after Rebecca got with Callum
ITV
Advertisement
When she decided to give Callum a taste of his own medicine
Hi I'd like my revenge served cold please. Thanks x #LoveIsland pic.twitter.com/QArLkNiPqs — Love Island (@LoveIsland) January 16, 2020
When she reminded herself she needs a man, not a boy
ITV
When she almost threw herself in the pool
ITV
When she drafted up a speech for Callum to give to Rebecca to reject her advances
When she was not here for Callum getting to know the twins
ITV
Advertisement
And she prayed his date with Eve didn’t last too long
Yawning just thinking about it to be honest #LoveIsland pic.twitter.com/iqETGZPjMh — Love Island (@LoveIsland) January 14, 2020
When she stepped up her game with Rebecca
ITV
When she had this reaction to the boys’ departure for Casa Amor
ITV
Love Island airs from Sunday to Friday at 9pm on ITV2.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--John Boyega Bought His Parents A House, And Their Reaction Is Guaranteed To Have You In Tears

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Star Wars actor John Boyega has shared a video of the touching moment he revealed to his parents that he’d bought them a house.
The moment in question actually happened a couple of years ago, but John has only shared the moment publicly now, in a video he posted on Instagram.
Advertisement
In the clip, John first tells his parents that they’re in a swanky location for an interview about his success, only for him to reveal to them that it’s actually their new home.
“On behalf of myself, I’d like to say thank you for everything that you’ve done,” he says. “I decided to do a secret project for a few months, and I’m here to tell you that there was no interview, that was a lie, this is your house that I am presenting to you.”
At first, his mum and dad are completely speechless, and it’s only after the star explains it a few more times that the message begins to sink in.
Advertisement
John explains: “It’s your prayers that got this. Because the skill and the ability that I have received has been from your prayers... Honestly from the bottom of my heart, thank you so, so much for everything you have done.”
It’s then that the video reaches its true emotional peak, and John gives his dad a hug as he starts to cry at the touching gift.
John Boyega with his parents Instagram/John Boyega
John can currently be seen in action as Finn for the final time in Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker.
The final instalment in the recent trilogy has received mixed reviews from fans and critics.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--The Royals Are Getting Their Own Animated TV Series – Inspired By Prince George Memes

Samir Hussein via Getty Images
Prince George is going to star in his own TV series... kind of.
Gary Janetti, the guy who wrote and produced Family Guy, runs an Instagram account of Prince George memes – and it’s now getting an animated show.
The comedy, called The Prince, will be written and produced by Janetti for HBO Max, a US streaming service.
Advertisement
It’s said that the producer will voice the gloriously self-assured and snobby Prince George in the show, with Orlando Bloom as Prince Harry, Condola Rashad as his nemesis Meghan Markle, Lucy Punch as Kate Middleton, as well as Tom Hollander as Prince Philip and Prince Charles, according to Deadline.
The series is described by HBO Max itself as a “biting, satirical look at the life of Prince George of Cambridge, the youngest heir to the British throne, as he navigates the trials and tribulations of being a royal child.”
In each episode, six-year-old George will show what life is like as a young prince – from navigating the 775 rooms of Buckingham Palace, to primary school away from the royal.
Advertisement
Janetti said he’s “thrilled” to be working at HBO Max for the series, “bringing them yet a series about a family ruthlessly fighting for the throne.”
The producer first started posting the memes of George in September 2017, on his first day of school. “He was just so expressive and really cracked me up,” Janetti told Vanity Fair after the post went viral. “I posted one with a caption, without giving it much thought. I did a few more and slowly developed a character for him.
“Then, when Meghan Markle got engaged to Harry and she was everywhere in the news, I had formed enough of a character for George that I knew, ‘Oh, he is not going to like this.’ He is not going to like somebody else getting all the attention.”
In the past two and half years, Janetti’s account has gained nearly one million followers, where he posts photos of George reacting cattily to royal news, bitching about his mum and sister, cosying up to his Gan-Gan (the Queen), fan-boying over male Olympic skaters, and eagerly anticipating the day he becomes king.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Jess Phillips Endorses Lisa Nandy In Labour Leadership Contest

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Labour leadership candidate Lisa Nandy has won the support of Jess Phillips, who dropped out of the race yesterday after admitting she could not win enough support.
Phillips said Nandy was “deeply impressive” and will be getting her first preference vote in the contest.
Advertisement
Keir Starmer, the current frontrunner in the battle to succeed Jeremy Corbyn, will get Phillip’s second preference vote.
For a candidate to win on the first round they have to win over 50% of the votes of party members.
If no candidate reaches that threshold then second preference votes are reallocated until a winner emerges.
Phillips, who is seen to be on the right of the party and was a longtime critic of Corbyn, quit the contest after admitting she could not “unite” the party behind her.
She told Sky News today: “I think Lisa has been deeply impressive throughout the race.
“And I have found that not just on a personal level but I think the public view and the stuff that she has been doing have really made her stand out.
Advertisement
“So for me I would be happy if the Labour Party were led by Lisa Nandy or Keir Starmer.”
A spokesperson for Phillips confirmed the Birmingham Yardley MP would vote for Nandy in first place and Starmer in second.
“Jess will be backing the candidates who she thinks can bring the party together and win back the trust of the electorate,” the spokesperson said.
“She will be voting for Lisa and Keir. As she has said before, Lisa will be her first preference choice.”
Nandy’s campaign received a crucial boost this week after she secured the backing of the GMB union.
But according to the latest YouGov poll of party members she is still trailing Starmer and Rebecca Long-Bailey.
Long-Bailey, the favourite of the current party leadership, is expected to win the endorsement of the Unite union.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Court Backs Legal Action Against Woman After Stepchildren Saw Her Topless At Home

Tilli Buchanan, left, reads a document in court as she sits with Randy Richards, right, her lawyer AP
A court has backed criminal action against a woman accused of being topless in front of her step-children – in her own home.
Tilli Buchanan was charged under Utah’s law on lewdness involving a child after she took off her shirt while redecorating her home with her husband in Salt Lake City in late 2017 or early 2018.
Advertisement
Buchanan’s husband also removed his shirt to keep it clean, but was not charged because the lewdness law treats men and women differently for baring their chests.
When her husband’s three children, aged between nine and 13, walked in, she “explained she considers herself a feminist and wanted to make a point that everybody should be fine with walking around their house or elsewhere with skin showing,” her lawyers said in court documents.
The charges against her were filed after the children’s mother reported the incident to child welfare officials working on a separate investigation involving the kids.
Police said Buchanan removed her shirt and bra in front of the children while “under the influence of alcohol.”
Advertisement
In court this week, Jude Kara Pettit supported supported prosecutors who argued that lewdness is commonly understood to include women’s breasts in American society, the Salt Lake Tribune reported.
It wasn’t immediately clear whether Buchanan would appeal the ruling. If she does not, her misdemeanour charges would move toward trial. If convicted, she could face jail time and be forced to register as a sex offender for 10 years.
Buchanan and the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah had pointed to a court ruling that overturned a topless ban in Colorado.
A global movement advocating for the rights of women to go topless, called the Free the Nipple campaign, has seen mixed success fighting similar ordinances in other parts of the country.
The 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a ruling that blocked a ban in Fort Collins, Colorado, on women going topless in public.
Advertisement
But the US Supreme Court this month left in place the conviction of three members of the Free the Nipple campaign who were arrested for going topless on a New Hampshire beach in 2016.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Lisa Nandy Asks Piers Morgan 'How On Earth' He Would Know If Meghan Markle Suffered Racism

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Labour leadership candidate Lisa Nandy has asked Piers Morgan “how on Earth” he would know if the press had been racist towards Meghan Markle given he has never had to deal with “ingrained prejudice”.
Interviewing Nandy on Good Morning Britain on Wednesday morning, Morgan dismissed the suggestion the Duchess of Sussex had been a victim of racism from the British media.
Advertisement
“Meghan Markle has exactly the same level of treatment as someone like Kate Middleton, good and bad in equal measure,” he said.
“If you are a member of a royal family, you get acres of press coverage. I would say 70% of the Meghan coverage has been positive, 30% has been negative, and she doesn’t like the negative stuff.”
The GMB presenter added: “It’s got nothing to do with her skin colour. Nothing to do with her gender.
“They have done stuff the British public – and the media reflect British public opinion most of the time – just thought was wrong.”
Advertisement
But Nandy rejected the claim. “If you don’t mind me saying, how on Earth would you know? As somebody who has never had to deal with ingrained prejudice, you’re not in a position to understand people who have,” she told Morgan.
Nandy took a big step on Tuesday towards making it on to the final ballot paper in the Labour leadership race after she won the backing of the GMB union.
Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer is the frontrunner in the contest, having already secured his place on the final ballot paper.
Rebecca Long-Bailey is expected to pick up the support of the major Unite union to be Starmer’s main rival.
Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, appears to face an uphill battle to make it through to the next stage of the contest.
Advertisement
Jess Phillips, the outspoken backbencher, yesterday dropped out of the contest after admitting she could not win enough support.
The Duchess of Sussex was joined by Prince Harry in Canada on Monday after hashing out the new arrangement for the two of them with other senior members of the royal family.
And the pair have issued a legal warning to the media after various outlets published paparazzi shots of duchess walking her dogs with their baby, Archie.
The images of the duchess emerged on Monday morning and showed her walking her two pets with her son in a baby sling in a park in Vancouver.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Amazon Founder Jeff Bezos Has Accused Saudi's Crown Prince Of Personally Hacking His Phone

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Saudi Arabia’s embassy has denied that the kingdom’s crown prince personally hacked into the phone of Amazon CEO and billionaire Jeff Bezos two years ago.
“Recent media reports that suggest the Kingdom is behind a hacking of Mr. Jeff Bezos’ phone are absurd,” the embassy tweeted. “We call for an investigation on these claims so that we can have all the facts out.”
Advertisement
Recent media reports that suggest the Kingdom is behind a hacking of Mr. Jeff Bezos' phone are absurd. We call for an investigation on these claims so that we can have all the facts out. — Saudi Embassy (@SaudiEmbassyUSA) January 22, 2020
The denial came just hours after The Guardian and The Financial Times published reports that Bezos’ cell phone was hacked on May 1, 2018, after it received a WhatsApp message that appeared to have been sent from the personal account of Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Bezos’ phone began covertly sharing large amounts of data after receiving an encrypted video file from a number used by the crown prince, according to a report detailing the results of a digital forensic analysis obtained by both publications. The analysis reportedly found it “highly probable” that the malicious file triggered an infiltration of Bezos’ phone, though it’s unclear what data was taken.
The file was reportedly sent weeks after Bezos and the crown prince exchanged phone numbers at a dinner in Los Angeles during the crown prince’s trip to the United States, according to the Financial Times. Crown Prince Mohammed met several top US executives during his trip, reportedly in hopes of drawing economic investors to Saudi Arabia.
Advertisement
But the relationship between the crown prince and the Washington Post owner grew tense after the gruesome murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist who frequently wrote in the Post to criticise the kingdom’s leadership. Khashoggi was killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018 by Saudi agents who worked directly for the crown prince, drawing international condemnation.
Saudi Arabia has repeatedly claimed that Khashoggi’s murder had nothing to do with the crown prince, and in December sentenced five people to death and three to jail after what human rights experts considered a sham trial. US intelligence officials have said they believe the crown prince personally ordered or at least approved of Khashoggi’s killing.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Piers Morgan's 'Chinese' Impression On Good Morning Britain Sparks Ofcom Complaints

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Ofcom has confirmed that they’ve received almost 300 complaints in the space of one day, following Piers Morgan’s impression of a Chinese milk brand during Tuesday’s show.
The presenter faced accusations of racism from many GMB viewers after he made noises live on air, in what was apparently an imitation of a Chinese advert featuring the Queen’s grandson, Peter Phillips.
Advertisement
He then requested the ad be played again, after which he declared: “Ching chang cho jo”, again trying to repeat what was said in the advert.
Many viewers were unimpressed with Piers for his comments, with an Ofcom spokesperson now telling HuffPost UK that the TV watchdog has received 297 complaints in 24 hours.
Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid during Tuesday's Good Morning Britain ITV
As is standard Ofcom procedure, these complaints will all be assessed before it decides whether to take the matter further and launch an investigation.
Advertisement
During the episode, Piers’ co-host Susanna Reid told him that “taking the mickey out of foreign languages is rather 1970s”, to which he loudly hit back: “Surely you can take the mickey out of it! He’s using ‘ching chang chong’ milk from the Chinese state – that’s what they said in the advert!
“I can’t repeat what they’re saying in the advert… I’m trying to mimic the wording of that advertisement.”
On Twitter, Piers later insisted that he hadn’t been “mocking Chinese people”, but rather making fun of “a member of the British royal family appearing in an advert for Chinese state milk”.
HuffPost UK has contacted ITV for comment.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Donald Trump's Impeachment Defence Is That Democrats Are Bad

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump began on Tuesday, his lawyers offered a bombastic and truth-challenged defence of the president that insisted the real bad actors in all of this are the Democrats.
During a debate over a resolution laying out the trial procedures, the initial argument from White House counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump’s private lawyer Jay Sekulow boiled down to a series of complaints about the process during the House impeachment inquiry ― most of which were false or misleading.
Advertisement
House Democrats presenting the case for impeachment explained how Trump abused his power by withholding military assistance from Ukraine, an ally effectively at war with Russia, while demanding a sham investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump’s highest-polling political rival in the 2020 election.
Cipollone said House Intelligence chairman Adam Schiff, who now serves as the House impeachment manager, “made false allegations about a telephone call,” but he didn’t specify what was false.
On his now-famous July 2019 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump asked Zelensky to look into Biden and his son Hunter. He later said publicly that he wanted Ukraine to start “a major investigation into the Bidens” ― which is essentially the heart of the Democrats’ abuse of power case.
For the rest of the afternoon, Trump’s team complained about process. Sekulow claimed that Trump “was denied the right to cross-examine witnesses,” access evidence or have counsel present during impeachment proceedings before the House Judiciary Committee.
Advertisement
These alleged refusals amount to “a trifecta that violates the Constitution of the United States,” Sekulow added.
But that isn’t really what happened. The Judiciary Committee invited the president to participate in its hearings and the White House said no. There is also no constitutional provision requiring the House to allow the president to cross-examine witnesses, access evidence or have counsel present during impeachment hearings.
The resolution being debated ― which was written by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ― would not guarantee any witness testimony in the Senate trial. Despite their public fury over the lack of witnesses in the House inquiry, Trump’s team supports the resolution, saying that if Democrats think their case was good enough to impeach the president, they shouldn’t need more witnesses at trial.
The resolution calls for 24 hours of arguments from each side, starting on Wednesday and spread out over three days each, followed by a period of questioning by senators. Only then will the Senate vote on whether to subpoena witness testimony, which a handful of Republicans have said they would support doing. Democrats would need only four Republicans to join them to get witnesses.
Both Sekulow and Cipollone claimed the impeachment of Trump threatened the constitutional order by attacking executive privilege.
Advertisement
“There’s a reason we keep executive privilege, and we assert it when necessary,” Sekulow said. “And that is to protect ― to protect the Constitution and the separation of powers.”
Cipollone attacked the “notion that invoking your constitutional rights to protect the executive branch” could be an impeachable act of obstruction.
In fact, Trump has not once asserted executive privilege throughout the entire impeachment inquiry. He has directed his aides and Cabinet officials to not comply with congressional subpoenas. He has refused to hand over documents from the State Department and the Office of Management and Budget. But in none of these instances did he officially assert executive privilege.
“They never claimed executive privilege!” Schiff said in a rebuttal to Trump’s lawyers. “In order to claim privilege, you have to specify which document, which line, which conversation.”
Trump’s lawyers also complained that the House never went to court to enforce its subpoenas for testimony from the administration officials whom Trump prevented from testifying.
Advertisement
“The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for complete judicial review,” Sekulow said, adding, “We’re acting as if the courts are an improper venue to determine constitutional issues of this magnitude. That is why we have courts.”
But the Trump administration is making the exact opposite argument in court to prevent former White House counsel Don McGahn from testifying before a congressional committee. Trump’s Justice Department lawyers argue that Congress has no constitutional right to enforce a subpoena and the federal judiciary has no constitutional ability to rule on a congressional subpoena.
Perhaps the most glaring falsehood asserted came from Cipollone when he alleged that Schiff did not allow Republican members of the House investigating committees to enter the sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF, originally used for witness depositions. All members of the three investigating committees ― the House Intelligence Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Oversight and Reform Committee ― were allowed equal access, regardless of party, to the witness depositions held in the SCIF.
In response to these false allegations, Schiff in his rebuttal declined to say that Trump’s lawyers were purposefully lying in the president’s defence. He carefully said that Cipollone was simply “mistaken” or “just plain wrong.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-01-22--Lady Gaga's Stupid Love Leaks Online Ahead Of Music Comeback And Fans Are Already Obsessed

LOADING ERROR LOADING
To say that Lady Gaga’s musical comeback has been hotly anticipated is an understatement for many Little Monsters, but excitement reached fever pitch after her reported new single leaked on Tuesday night.
It had previously been claimed the superstar was preparing to release new single Stupid Love next month, but a full high-quality version of the track has somehow made its way online earlier than intended.
Advertisement
The song is thought to be the lead single from her forthcoming sixth album – nicknamed LG6 among fans – and sees Gaga return to her pop roots after going country on her last solo release, Joanne.
Lady Gaga Michael Buckner/Variety/Shutterstock
And while we will have to wait to hear the finished, final version, it seems like fans are already in stupid love with the track...
Advertisement
I’m so ready for a summer of Gaga! #stupidlove — Courtney Act (@courtneyact) January 22, 2020
If a demo of #StupidLove broke the internet, imagine the announcement with the official release🔥#LadyGaga is back to save again pop music pic.twitter.com/6QgsOO3FvY — #LG6 (@MatteMonsteh) January 22, 2020
FREAK OUT, FREAK OUT, FREAK OUT!
LOOK AT ME NOWWWWWWw,
CUS ALL I EVER WANTED WAS LOOOOVVVVEEE #STUPIDLOVE pic.twitter.com/XCfmxpKGWY — Jonathan (@_jfairley) January 21, 2020
Can’t stop listening to stupid love, send help pic.twitter.com/i13hUlcRnI — chriX (@wheresmywigg) January 22, 2020
Advertisement
Lady Gaga returning with Stupid Love to save pop music pic.twitter.com/BRmnokKnMh — Sam Stryker (@sbstryker) January 21, 2020
A decent song by a decent popstar. That’s what it’s all about. — Peter Robinson (@Popjustice) January 21, 2020
Advertisement
Promised myself I wouldn't listen to the Gaga leak...
WHAT.A.BOP...#StupidLove pic.twitter.com/4z8kihQlQh — Gary McAllister (@Gary_McAllister) January 21, 2020
everyone coming back to stan after months of silence and makeup #StupidLove #LG6 pic.twitter.com/mAKnZ2DsJB — ßr∞klyn (@bklynightadieu) January 21, 2020
LADY GAGA CAME BACK TO POP MUSIC AND IT’S BLOODY GOOD — Regan Okey (@reganokey) January 21, 2020
Gaga suffered a similar leak back in 2013 while she was readying herself to debut Applause.
It led to her declaring a “pop emergency” and releasing the track early, but so far there’s no word from Gaga or her camp on whether she will do the same with Stupid Love.
POP MUSIC EMERGENCY #0DAYSTillAPPLAUSE MY NEW SINGLE COMES OUT TODAY. 911 SPREAD THIS MESSAGE — Lady Gaga (@ladygaga) August 12, 2013
Advertisement
Other details about her new album have also started to surface in the press, with reports Gaga has given writing credits to members of N-Dubz on two tracks.
According to The Sun, a song called Feels So Good lists Dappy, Fazer and Tulisa as writers alongside US rapper Ty Dolla $ign, songwriter Toby Gad and herself.
This has sparked speculation she may have sampled one of their songs.
Tulisa is reportedly also credited on Chances, suggesting the pair have written together.
Fazer, Tulisa and Dappy of N-Dubz EMPICS Entertainment
Of course, this would not be Tulisa’s first big writing credit.
In 2018, she famously won a five-year legal battle against will.i.am and Britney Spears over their hit single, Scream And Shout.
Tulisa maintained that she helped write the track, which reached the number one spot in the UK singles chart in 2013, but was left out of the writing credits, meaning she hadn’t made any money from it.
Advertisement
As a result of the legal battle, she was named one of the song’s co-writers, alongside will.i.am, Jef Martens and Jean Baptiste, and was awarded 10% of the worldwide publishing rights and income made from it.