Loni Anderson, the TV sex symbol known for sitcom WKRP in Cincinnati, and who later went through a widely publicized divorce with Burt Reynolds, has died. She was 79.
Anderson died at a hospital in Los Angeles from a "prolonged illness," her publicist said.
“We are heartbroken to announce the passing of our dear wife, mother and grandmother,” Anderson’s family said in a statement.
The actress became famous for playing receptionist Jennifer Marlowe on WKRP in Cincinnati, which aired on CBS from 1978 to 1982.
The shrewd and beautiful Marlowe played on the stereotype of the dim-witted "blonde bombshell." Anderson received three Golden Globe nominations and two Emmy nods for the role.
“I was against being like a blond window dressing person, so I made my feelings known,” she told Australian television in 2017. “And, as we know, Jennifer was the smartest person in the room.” She added, “She just turned into a great groundbreaking kind of character for women to be glamorous and smart.”
Tributes are pouring in for Anderson, with former WKRP in Cincinnati co-star Tim Reid calling her a "most talented, beautiful and defiant woman."
Anderson had more than 60 acting credits, also appearing in shows like Swat, Three’s Company, The Love Boat, Fantasy Island, The Bob Newhart Show, and more.
"Loni was a class act. Beautiful. Talented. Witty. ALWAYS a joy to be around," Steve Sauer, President/CEO Media Four and Anderson’s manager for 30 years, said in a statement. "She was the ultimate working mother. Family first…and maintained a great balance with her career. She and I had wonderful adventures together that I shall forever cherish. I will especially miss that infectious chuckle of hers. She will be forever missed."
Later in life, Anderson's life became tabloid fodder following an acrimonious split with Burt Reynolds. The couple started dating while filming the 1983 comedy film Stroker Ace.
The movie bombed, but the stars tied the knot in 1988. They adopted a son, Quinton, before divorcing in 1994. After years spent sniping at each other in the press, they eventually reconciled before Reynolds' death in 2018.
"We were friends first and friends last," Anderson told Closer Weekly in 2019. "It’s time to move on."
Anderson would marry four times throughout the course of her life. Her last husband, Bob Flick, was a founding member of the 1960s folk group the Brothers Four.
She is survived by her husband, her son Quinton, her daughter, Deidra Hoffman, her stepson, Adam Flick, two granddaughters, and two step-grandchildren.
As President Donald Trump works to unravel California Governor Gavin Newsom (D)'s electric vehicle mandate, consumer demand is softening for the expensive and sometimes unreliable vehicles.
Newsom's plan would see gasoline-powered cars banned in the state by 2035--a move that would effectively be a nationwide ban because automobile makers tailor their manufacturing to California's standards due to its large share of the overall marketplace.
Sales of EVs in California were already softening in 2024, but in the latest 3-month period ending in June, they were more than 16,000 lower than the same period the previous year--100,671 instead of 116,813 according to registration data.
At the end of 2024, EV sales were 25.1% of all sales in the Golden State, but April through June 0f 2025 they were 21.6%. That's not the direction Newsom and Democrat powers-that-be want things to go.
It doesn't help that more widespread use of EVs has exposed weaknesses such as the impact of extreme temperatures on battery life and charging time.
Furthermore, some of the perks EV users have enjoyed are going away in the coming months.
Special access to carpool lanes will end on September 30, and so will the tax credits ($7,500 for new and $4,000 for used EVs).
These perks were meant to attract drivers to EVs, and without them, some drivers may not be incentivized to pay higher prices and deal with "range anxiety" and the other drawbacks of EVs.
Consumers may remember the time in 2020 when EV owners were asked not to charge their cars in the afternoon or evening during a heat wave that strained the power grid.
Why buy a car that you won't be able to use when you really need to?
Think about it: if consumers know that in 10 more years they won't be able to get gasoline-powered cars anymore, wouldn't that drive demand for them up?
That's the exact opposite of what Newsom is going for, but it makes perfect sense.
Get your gas-powered car now or in the next several years before prices go up. EVs should get more affordable as time goes on, so it may be advantageous to wait as long as possible.
That is, if Trump doesn't manage to topple the mandate. My money's on him, for what it's worth.
Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb ruled Friday to temporarily block the Trump administration from rapidly deporting migrants who entered the country legally through humanitarian programs, pending a final ruling on a lawsuit filed by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and other civic groups.
Since taking office, President Donald Trump has been trying to get as many illegal immigrants back on their own soil as possible, which requires expedited deportations because of the millions his predecessor, Joe Biden, let in.
The case has shown a contrast between two vastly differing views on immigration.
Trump and conservatives want the border to be respected and laws to be followed. Having millions of illegal immigrants and temporary migrants in the country is causing chaos and costing taxpayers billions of dollars every year.
They ask how illegal immigrants can have rights to be in the country, and if they don't, they favor getting them out ASAP.
On the other hand, Democrats believe migrants should have the same rights as citizens even though they broke the law to come into the U.S.
However, even migrants who entered through these humanitarian programs would have entered the country illegally by crossing the border if the programs didn't exist.
Trump ended the humanitarian migration program for those coming from some Latin American countries--namely Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela--and the Supreme Court upheld his right to do so. The end of CHNV parole means that migrants who entered under that program are now illegal immigrants, and the Trump administration has every right to deport them.
The Trump DOJ was apparently summoning migrants to court and dismissing charges against them, with ICE agents outside the courtroom waiting to detain them for deportation.
Cobb's rationale for the order was snotty and partisan--no surprise coming from a Biden appointee.
"This case's underlying question, then, asks whether parolees who escaped oppression will have the chance to plead their case within a system of rules. Or, alternatively, will they be summarily removed from a country that -- as they are swept up at checkpoints and outside courtrooms, often by plainclothes officers -- may look to them more and more like the countries from which they tried to escape," Cobb wrote.
What about a system of rules that doesn't just legalize mass illegal migration rather than try to stop it?
Trump wants to see the mass chaos of immigration under Biden brought back under control so that we are not overrun by potentially billions of migrants who want to leave their countries of origin for what they see as the Promised Land--the U.S.
Democrats prefer the chaos because it gives them more leverage to expand social programs and eventually, gain enough new voters to ensure they remain in power forever.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) said Sunday night that if Democrats in the state House don't show up to work by 3 p.m. on Monday, he will ask a court to remove them so he can appoint replacements under Texas Attorney General Opinion No. KP-0382.
The Democrats fled to Illinois last week to "break quorum" and prevent the House from voting on a redistricting plan that they think disenfranchises minority voters.
By their absence, they are denying the chamber a quorum, which means votes cannot take place.
“Real Texans do not run from a fight. But that’s exactly what most of the Texas House Democrats just did,” Abbott wrote. “Rather than doing their job and voting on urgent legislation affecting the lives of all Texans, they have fled Texas to deprive the House of the quorum necessary to meet and conduct business.”
The Democrats justified their actions by accusing Republicans of trying to "steal the voices" of minority voters.
Democrat Caucus Chair Gene Wu (D-Houston) said the governor is “using an intentionally racist map to steal the voices of millions of Black and Latino Texans, all to execute a corrupt political deal.” The chairman said House Democrats will “not be complicit in the silencing of hard-working communities who have spent decades fighting for the power that (President Donald Trump) wants to steal.”
But Abbott responded, "The Attorney General considered 'whether Texas law allows for a determination that a legislator has vacated office' if they intentionally break quorum. The Attorney General concluded that 'whether a specific legislator abandoned his or her office such that a vacancy occurred will be a fact question for a court.'"
Abbott added:
These absences are not merely unintended and unavoidable interruptions in public service, like a sudden illness or a family emergency. Instead, these absences were premeditated for an illegitimate purpose— what one representative called “breaking quorum.” Another previously signaled that Democrats “would have to go by an extreme measure” of a quorum break “to stop these bills from happening.” In other words, Democrats hatched a deliberate plan not to show up for work, for the specific purpose of abdicating the duties of their office and thwarting the chamber’s business.
That amounts to an abandonment or forfeiture of an elected state office.
Abbott's words were far more restrained than Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's.
“Democrats in the Texas House who try and run away like cowards should be found, arrested, and brought back to the Capitol immediately,” Paxton wrote in a post on X. “We should use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law.”
Democrats in the Texas House who try and run away like cowards should be found, arrested, and brought back to the Capitol immediately.
We should use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law.
— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) August 3, 2025
Meanwhile, Democrats accused Republicans of bringing up relief for recent flood victims in the same special session in which the redistricting vote would be held.
“For two weeks, while families in the Hill Country mourned the loss of over 130 Texans in catastrophic floods, Democrats fought to make their relief the legislature’s top priority,” the Texas House Democrats said in a statement on Sunday. “Instead, Governor Abbott and Republican leadership used the tragedy as political cover.”
Sadly, it seems that the only way to try to get Democrats to actually do their jobs as legislators was to hold that aid "hostage" to voting on an issue that Republicans have full power to do.
Let's remember that these Republicans were elected in sufficient numbers to do a job, and now Democrats want to prevent them from doing part of that job just because they don't agree. That's not democracy, and Abbott cannot let it stand.
In a revealing interview with Newsmax, former President Donald Trump articulated his mixed feelings about pardoning musician Sean "Diddy" Combs, emphasizing the complexity added by Combs' past critical comments towards him.
Despite a recent conviction on lesser charges of prostitution, Trump finds previous hostile remarks from Combs complicating the pardoning decision, the Guardian reported.
During his chat with Rob Finnerty on Friday, Trump deliberated openly about the potential of pardoning Combs, who could face up to 20 years in prison.
A federal court found Combs guilty in July on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. While he was acquitted on the more serious accusations of sex-trafficking and racketeering conspiracy, the lesser counts still carry severe penalties.
Combs, now awaiting sentencing scheduled for October 3, is currently detained at the only federal lockup in New York City.
His legal team has requested his release on a $50 million bond during the waiting period, asserting his entitlement to better conditions before final sentencing.
Trump revisited Combs' unfavorable comments from the past as a crucial factor in his pardon deliberation. Previously, Combs had made harsh remarks about Trump's presidency, including a 2017 comment to the Daily Beast where he expressed indifference towards Trump, and a 2020 statement to Charlamagne tha God advocating the banishment of "White men like Trump."
"It's hard, you know? We're human beings. And we don't like to have things cloud our judgment," Trump stated, acknowledging how past interactions have soured, complicating his feelings towards issuing a pardon.
The transformation from acquaintances to adversaries has clearly left a mark on Trump, hinting at personal hurt influencing his decision-making process.
Trump's presidency featured several controversial pardons, particularly for political allies, which some critics argue undermined the integrity of the judicial system.
Moreover, his administration faced scrutiny over the decision not to release additional documents from the Jeffrey Epstein case, highlighting the complex dynamics at play within the justice system. Ghislaine Maxwell, linked to Epstein, was also mentioned by Trump as a potential pardon candidate, further stirring the controversial nature of such decisions.
These elements provide context to the political and personal intricacies involved in Trump's consideration of pardoning Combs.
As the sentencing date approaches for Combs, the outcome of this high-profile case could influence future interactions between political figures and the criminal justice system.
Whether Trump decides to pardon Combs or not, it will reflect on the former president’s legacy and potentially set precedents for how personal and political biases are navigated in legal decisions.
The ongoing situation, laden with legal and personal drama, continues to garner significant media and public attention, emphasizing the importance of transparency and fairness in the exercise of presidential pardon powers.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is President Donald Trump's lead man at Health and Human Services (HHS), is keeping big promises, and that was evidenced in a major way this week alone.
According to Breitbart, RFK announced this week that after a two-decade-long battle, mercury in vaccines has been fully banned. He blasted federal agencies for allowing "a known neurotoxin to be injected into pregnant women and children for decades."
Kennedy, in a detailed video statement explaining the move, announced the successful ban of thimerosal, a preservative containing mercury that's still found in common vaccines and is not safe for pregnant women and children.
Despite overwhelming evidence of the dangers of the mercury-based preservative, the CDC allowed it to be used in multi-dose vaccines, often administered to pregnant women and children.
Rightfully so, Kennedy took a victory lap in his X post announcing the banning of the preservative.
After more than 20 years of delay, I’m proud to finally deliver on a long-overdue promise: protecting our most vulnerable from unnecessary mercury exposure. pic.twitter.com/rYF5BN8JYj
— Secretary Kennedy (@SecKennedy) August 2, 2025
"After more than 20 years of delay, I’m proud to finally deliver on a long-overdue promise: protecting our most vulnerable from unnecessary mercury exposure," he wrote.
Breitbart noted:
Thimerosal, a compound whose main ingredient is ethylmercury, had been used for decades as a preservative in multi-dose vaccine vials. According to Kennedy, the CDC shockingly continued to permit its use in flu shots given to pregnant women and children, despite overwhelming evidence of its neurotoxicity.
"The amount of ethylmercury in the flu shot that CDC just banned under my order is 25,000 times the EPA’s safety level for drinking water," he said in the video.
He cited a number of peer-reviewed studies and presented compelling evidence of the dangers of the preservative.
Kennedy held nothing back in his criticism of federal agencies allowing it to be used in vaccines -- especially for those most vulnerable to disastrous side effects.
"Why were we injecting this toxin into babies and pregnant women?" Kennedy asked. "Federal and state laws classify expired thimerosal vaccines as hazardous waste. Yet they were good enough to put into your bloodstream?"
"I’ve spent 20 years trying to get mercury out of vaccines," Kennedy said. "I spent four years trying to get mercury out of fish, and nobody called me anti-fish."
It'll be fascinating and refreshing to see what else Sec. Kennedy and the Trump administration do for America on the health front.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has been one of the most outspoken MAGA advocates for the Republican Party for years now, and she's easily one of the most popular, by both social media follower count and her ability to generate headlines.
However, in a recent interview with the Daily Mail, Greene expressed her growing frustrations with the GOP, saying she feels like the old guard is back on the rise -- the "neocon" side of the party that is the MAGA agenda's only real opponent.
She implied to the outlet that she's considering a departure from the GOP if it continues down the course she believes it's on.
She insisted that her loyalty to President Donald Trump remains strong, but she's now taking notice of the warning signs that the party could be headed down a familiar and dangerous -- election-wise -- path.
In a 45-minute phone call with the outlet, MTG made several shocking statements about her thoughts on the party and where it stands today with Trump in the White House.
"I think the Republican Party has turned its back on America First and the workers and just regular Americans," she said.
The Daily Mail noted:
MTG senses that the GOP is reverting to its 'neocon' past, and its leaders, the 'good ole boys,' are a formidable opponent for the true MAGA agenda.
'I'm not afraid of Mike Johnson at all,' she said candidly.
She then dropped a bomb about her current relationship with the Republican Party, and where she might end up if she continues to sour on it.
"I don't know if the Republican Party is leaving me, or if I'm kind of not relating to Republican Party as much anymore," she revealed. "I don't know which one it is."
Her frustrations included her questioning of the seeming wind-down of the DOGE movement and stopping or severely cutting back on foreign aid.
"Like what happened all those issues? You know that I don't know what the hell happened with the Republican Party. I really don't," she said.
Greene made it clear that she wants nothing to do with where the party is going at the moment.
"But I'll tell you one thing, the course that it's on, I don't want to have anything to do with it, and I, I just don't care anymore."
Only time will tell if Greene stays on board with the GOP, but it sounds like some major changes will have to happen.
President Donald Trump and members of his administration have faced fierce backlash from MAGA circles regarding their handling of the Jeffrey Epstein situation and determining that it's more or less a nothingburger.
While President Trump spent weeks downplaying the situation, according to the New York Post, he's now ready "to release everything" related to the disgraced, deceased, convicted child sex-trafficking monster.
The president's insistance on released everything the government still has on Epstein comes in the wake of an interesting interview involving Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and Epstein's convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.
Rumors have circulated regarding a potential deal for Maxwell, possibly involving a pardon or commutation, although more information is not available.
In an interview with Rob Finnerty of Newsmax, President Trump explained what he believes took place in the sit-down, multi-day interview between Blanche and Maxwell.
"I think [Blanche] probably wanted to know, you know, just to get a feeling of it, because we’d like to release everything, but we don’t want people to get hurt that shouldn’t be hurt," Trump said.
"I want to release everything," the president declared. "I just don’t want people to get hurt."
The president noted that he hadn't spoken to Blanche about Maxwell but insisted that his administration is trying to ensure that people don't "get hurt."
“Todd went in and I think he just wants to make sure that innocent people aren’t hurt," Trump told Finnerty.
Trump was also asked about the rumors regarding a potential pardon for Maxwell, to which he said he hadn't been asked about, though he added that he has the "power" to do so.
"I’m allowed to do it, but nobody’s asked me to do it," Trump said. "I know nothing about it. I don’t know anything about the case, but I know I have the right to do it."
Trump was also asked about rumors that he is possibly considering a pardon for convicted rapper Sean "Diddy" Combs.
"Well, he was essentially, I guess, sort of half innocent," Trump said.
He also recounted his prior relationship with Diddy.
“Probably – eh, you know, I was very friendly with him. I got along with him great, and seemed like a nice guy. I didn’t know him well, but when I ran for office he was very hostile,” Trump said.
“It’s hard, you know, like, we’re human beings, and we don’t like to have things cloud our judgment, right? But when you knew someone and you were fine, and then you run for office, and he made some terrible statements – so, I don’t know, it’s more difficult,” the president continued.
A Michigan lawmaker considered by many to be a rising star in the Democratic Party has found herself in hot water with her most progressive colleagues.
Sen. Elissa Slotkin drew fire from the left last week when she skipped a vote on a potential block on arms sales to Israel in favor of a star turn on Stephen Colbert’s late-night comedy show, as the Daily Mail reports.
It was on Wednesday that Slotkin ventured to the Ed Sullivan Theater in Manhattan to tape her segment on Colbert’s show, taking to social media to plug her pending appearance.
To the apparent surprise of many in her party, Slotkin posted a photo from backstage at the legendary venue, writing, “Tune in tonight!!”
Her presence in New York caused Slotkin to miss multiple votes on the Senate floor, however, including the aforementioned resolution that would have halted over $675 million in arms sales to Israel, a proposal that, while ultimately defeated, drew growing support from Democrats in the chamber.
The resolutions pertaining to Israel were introduced by far-left Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–VT), and they garnered support from many in the progressive wing of Slotkin’s party.
As a result of what some viewed as her dereliction of the duty to be present and to vote on them, Slotkin’s absence spurred notable criticism from several of her more radical colleagues.
In the wake of the uproar, Slotkin attempted to assuage concerns raised by her fellow lawmakers and her constituents alike, taking to X to explain her thinking.
She began, “I owe it to my state to make clear where I stand: Had I made it back for the vote yesterday, I would have voted yes to block offensive weapons to Israel based on my concerns over lack of food and medicine getting to civilians in Gaza.”
The senator added that while she is a “strong supporter of the Jewish State of Israel,” she is also attuned to the “calls from Michiganders who have friends and family trying to survive in Gaza.”
Slotkin went on to criticize the method utilized by Sanders to express frustration with decisions made by Israeli leaders, saying, “In general, I think these Disapproval votes are a bad way to do foreign policy.”
She continued, “The Executive Branch, whether run by Democrats or now Republicans, has the responsibility to set U.S. foreign policy, and to lead negotiations with both allies and adversaries.”
Slotkin’s long-winded treatise did little to sway her critics, with AIPAC Tracker, a group that chronicles political contributions from pro-Israeli groups to elected officials, writing, “The essay is not necessary, Senator. The people simply want you to stand against genocide. Your obfuscation is telling.”
Though Slotkin says she would have voted in favor of the arms sale block had she been in D.C., she does have a history of critiquing the far-left wing of her party on high-profile topics, saying just recently, “I can’t just be an activist…,” adding that she has to be “more than just an AOC…because we live in a purple state, and I’m a pragmatist.” That seems a fair observation, but one which may continue to foster friction with the progressive arm of the Democratic Party.
The last several weeks have been replete with revelations about the efforts of prior administrations to undermine Donald Trump, both while a candidate and as president.
Now, several veterans of Trump’s first term in the White House have stepped forward to claim that they were informed by Google that they had been under investigation by the Biden FBI, a disclosure the company was previously prevented by court order from making, as Fox News reports.
Details of the scrutiny faced by members of Trump’s first administration emerged on Friday in a post on X from Dan Scavino, who now serves as White House deputy chief of staff.
Scavino explained that he had been “proudly and patriotically serving in the first Trump White House” but, upon departing in January 2021, was targeted by what he called “Biden lawfare.”
The high-level Trump aide noted that five weeks before returning to the White House for the president’s second term, he received a troubling email from tech giant Google.
That message said, “Google received and responded to legal process issued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation compelling the release of information related to your Google account.”
It continued, “A court order previously prohibited Google from notifying you of the legal process… .”
Scavino made the situation public last week, in an effort to underscore what he said was a “small taste of the INSANITY that many of us went through – right here in the United States of America. LAWFARE at its finest. A Complete and Total Disgrace!!!!”
Soon after Scavino recounted the story on X, current FBI Director Kash Patel posted in response, writing, “I got one of those too… .”
Another former -- and current -- Trump official, Jeff Clark, chimed in as well, saying that he also received the notification from Google, noting, “Indeed, a whole [former special counsel] Jack Smith team was assigned to go through my emails after there was a privilege review.”
Clark lamented the expansive scope of the probe, adding, “But that group of lawyers ignored my religious pastor privilege, and other privileges and basically shipped all they could to Jack Smith.
Echoing the financial and personal ramifications of Democrat lawfare of which so many Trump allies -- such as Carter Page -- in recent years have complained, Clark added, “But it still cost me tens of thousands to try to protect my communications” and blasted “thugs with law degrees” who ignored the fact that “medical records and other private communications had nothing to do with the 2020 election. They were no one’s business.”
With so many now calling for accountability for perpetrators of the Russia collusion hoax and the related lawfare to which Scavino and others have brought renewed attention, the pressure is on the Justice Department to produce results, and it remains to be seen whether any indictments are on the horizon.
For now, however, some of those victimized during the Biden years can perhaps take a small degree of solace in the recent announcement that the Office of Special Counsel, an independent federal agency, has launched a probe of Jack Smith for potential violations of the Hatch Act, a statute designed to limit political activities of federal employees.