MMN Editor

Blake Lively is breaking her silence after a New York City judge tossed out her sexual harassment claims against Justin Baldoni on Thursday.Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed Lively’s sexual harassment, defamation, conspiracy and Title VII claims against Baldoni. Two retaliation claims and a breach of contract claim still remain as the former co-stars prepare for trial.The “Gossip Girl” star shared her reaction to the judge’s decision in a lengthy post on her Instagram stories.”I’m grateful for the Court’s ruling, which allows the heart of my case to be presented to a jury next month, and for the ability to finally tell my story in full at trial, for my own sake, but also for those who don’t have the same opportunity to… many of whom I have known and loved deeply in my life, and the countless I’ll never know,” she wrote.JUSTIN BALDONI’S $400M LAWSUIT AGAINST BLAKE LIVELY ENDS AS FINANCIAL FIGHT STILL LOOMSShe went on to say that a lawsuit was “last thing I wanted in my life,” but that she decided to move forward with it due to “the pervasive RETALIATION” she experienced and continues to face for “privately and professionally asking for a safe working environment for myself and others.”In her lawsuit, Lively alleges Baldoni executed and participated in a “social manipulation” campaign in an effort to “destroy” her career and reputation. Lively added that she “hopes the court’s decision” will help show others, that no matter how “unfathomably painful” it may be, “you can speak up.””Don’t be distracted by the digital soap opera. The constant packaging of this lawsuit as a ‘celebrity drama’ is not only irresponsible, but it is by design: to keep you from seeing yourselves in my story,” she said. “The physical pain from digital violence is very real. It is abuse. And it’s everywhere. Not just in the news, but in your communities and schools.”BLAKE LIVELY’S PRIVATE VOICE MESSAGE TO JUSTIN BALDONI EMERGES AS LEGAL FIGHT ESCALATESThe “A Simple Favor” star warned her followers that “digital warfare” is not only a problem celebrities will have to face, saying “my claims won’t be the first or last time you’ll see,” something like this occur, adding that “often won’t be directed at celebrities,” but is something that “affects us all.”Having said that, she urged her followers to “pay attention to all the ways we can be manipulated online,” especially “if you have kids on phones,” saying they are the “most vulnerable” and need to be protected.”So much critical work has already been done to expose systems, tactics, and players who harm,” she said. “The work to create more safety is in part at trial, but it [will also] continue far after this trial is over. This is the work I’m most proud of.””I couldn’t begin to stand up if not for the countless who’ve gone before me — and the masses who are still around us all — creating laws, social change, sparking conversations, rallying, working privately and publicly, risking and sometimes losing everything for the safety of others in all spaces. Some whose names we know, most we don’t. Thank you. All of you.”BLAKE LIVELY ADMITS TO SUFFERING ‘LOWEST LOWS’ OF HER LIFE AS SHE BATTLES JUSTIN BALDONI LAWSUITLively ended her statement by ensuring her followers that she “will never stop doing my part in fighting to expose the systems and people who seek to harm, shame, silence, and retaliate against victims.””I know it’s a privilege to be able to stand up. I will not waste it. Your support keeps me going,” she concluded.Baldoni and Lively became embroiled in a legal back-and-forth after filming the Colleen Hoover-adapted film, “It Ends With Us.” Lively claimed she experienced sexual harassment on set and sued Baldoni in December 2024.Baldoni and Lively are still headed to trial, with the legal battle kicking off May 18.JUSTIN BALDONI’S ATTORNEY CALLS BLAKE LIVELY’S VICTORY CLAIMS ‘FALSE’ AFTER COURT DISMISSES LAWSUITFollowing the judge’s decision on Thursday, Sigrid McCawley, a member of Lively’s legal team, told Fox News Digital, that “this case has always been and will remain focused on the devastating retaliation” Lively faced.CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER”For Blake Lively, the greatest measure of justice is that the people and the playbook behind these coordinated digital attacks have been exposed and are already being held accountable by other women they’ve targeted. She looks forward to testifying at trial and continuing to shine a light on this vicious form of online retaliation so that it becomes easier to detect and fight,” she continued.”Sexual harassment isn’t going forward not because the defendants did nothing wrong but because the court determined Blake Lively was an independent contractor, not an employee,” McCawley concluded.LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSWayfarer Studios also shared a statement with Fox News Digital after the judge’s ruling.”We’re very pleased the Court dismissed all sexual harassment claims and every claim brought against the individual defendants: Justin Baldoni, Jamey Heath, Steve Sarowitz, Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel. These were very serious allegations, and we are grateful to the Court for its careful review of the facts, law and voluminous evidence that was provided,” a statement provided by Alexandra Shapiro and Jonathan Bach of Shapiro Arato Bach said.

HBO star Hannah Einbinder lashed out at Hollywood AI creators during a recent press conference discussing the final season of the show “Hacks.””The people who make this stuff are losers. They’re not artists. They’re not creative,” Einbinder said, according to Variety Magazine.”And they’ve wanted their whole lives to be special. And they’re not special. So, they’re trying to rob real creative people of our gifts. And you can’t. And even if you try, you will never be cool,” her takedown continued.FAR-LEFT PODCASTER GOES ON PROFANE ANTI-ICE, ANTI-TRUMP RANT AFTER WINNING GLAAD AWARD”You guys suck. No one likes you. Anyone who’s near you is because they crave power and access over any ethical standard. You are a loser. You will never be cool.” She added, “I want to put your head in the toilet and flush.” SOUTH PARK RESPONDS TO DHS AFTER DEPARTMENT USES SHOW TO RECRUIT ICE AGENTSEinbinder has a history of outspokenness, recently warning Americans that “none of us are safe” after the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer in Minneapolis in January.As reported by Deadline, Einbinder attacked the federal agency in a since-deleted Instagram post, asserting that carrying on “business as usual” after Good’s death would be a “collective death sentence” for the country.COLBERT WINS EMMY FOR ‘LATE SHOW’ AFTER CANCELLATION, SAYS HE LOVES HIS COUNTRY MORE THAN EVERShe also used to post to make broader commentary about issues she believed were negatively affecting the country and make a call to action to fight what she views as injustice.CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTUREEinbinder additionally denigrated ICE officers at last year’s Emmys Awards, concluding her speech for Best Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series by saying, “F— ICE and free Palestine!”Fox News’ Marc Tamasco and Lindsay Kornick contributed to this report.

On Friday it was reported that President Trump is considering further changes to his Cabinet after firing Pam Bondi as Attorney General.
President Trump has fired two high-level officials over the last month.
Trump fired Bondi as US Attorney General on Thursday and fired Kristi Noem as DHS Secretary.
The President reportedly fired Bondi over her handling of the Epstein files and dissatisfaction with her leadership.
Kristi Noem was fired after she spent $200 million on an ad contract and lied to Congress and claimed it was with Trump’s approval.
According to Politico and the Washington Post, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer may be on the chopping block.
President Trump may make further changes to his Cabinet ahead of the midterms, just in case the Republicans lose the Senate.
On Saturday, CBS News reported that Harmeet Dhillon, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, will be promoted.
And Stanley Woodward, currently the number 3 at the DOJ will be demoted.
CBS News reported:
President Donald Trump is likely to make leadership changes involving two more top roles at the Justice Department, sources told CBS News on Saturday.
The changes are most likely to affect Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, the No. 3 official at the Justice Department and Harmeet Dhillon, the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.
Senior officials have discussed promoting Dhillon to one of the top department roles, while demoting Woodward, the sources added. It was unclear if final decisions had been made yet.
The discussions of a possible promotion for Dhillon come shortly after Mr. Trump ousted Attorney General Pam Bondi earlier this week, after frustrations that she had not aggressively pursued criminal charges against his political enemies.
The Washington Post also reported about the next Cabinet shakeup.
“After ousting two of his highest-profile Cabinet members from their posts, President Donald Trump is considering making more changes to his administration’s top leadership, according to advisers — a decision that would accelerate the once-slow pace of his second-term staff departures,” WaPo reported.

Breaking news: After ousting two of his highest-profile Cabinet members, President Trump is considering making more changes to his administration’s top leadership, according to advisers, accelerating the once-slow pace of his second-term staff departures. https://t.co/FDYJE4ct0y
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) April 4, 2026

The post JUST IN: Trump Impending Leadership Changes May Affect Two More Top Roles appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

America’s war with the mullahs of Tehran is into its second month and it has already changed Donald Trump’s presidency in important ways. As the president considers how to navigate these new dynamics, it’s worth considering the experience of some previous presidents who entered office not expecting to be wartime presidents.Woodrow Wilson ended a four-cycle Republican winning streak by winning the three-way election of 1912. He did so because his two opponents, former president Teddy Roosevelt and incumbent president William Howard Taft, split the Republican vote. As president, Wilson embarked on an aggressive progressive domestic policy agenda. Things changed when World War One broke out in Europe midway through Wilson’s first term. Wilson then ran for reelection in 1916 promising to keep America out of the conflict, even using the slogan “He kept us out of war.” He did not keep that promise, though, as America entered the war in 1917, during the first year of his second term.Franklin Roosevelt was elected in 1932 to rescue the economy from the Great Depression. In his third term, he gained a new mission: fighting the Axis Powers and presiding over the largest military mobilization in American history. Roosevelt addressed this shift at a 1943 press conference where he explained the transition from “Dr. New Deal” to “Dr. Win-the-War.” FDR’s quip highlighted the way his administration had to reorder itself to face the new challenge.Lyndon Johnson came to office unexpectedly after the tragic assassination of John F. Kennedy. He took over in peacetime and began pursuing his dream of a Great Society — a sweeping domestic agenda to rival Roosevelt’s New Deal.WHY TRUMP, IRAN SEEM LIGHT-YEARS APART ON ANY POSSIBLE DEAL TO END THE WARAs he managed to pass his ambitious — and costly — domestic agenda, he soon found himself and his administration consumed by the conflict in Vietnam. The experience was so draining that by 1968, Johnson, who had spent his whole life pursuing the presidency, shocked the world by refusing to seek re-election.In 2000, George W. Bush explicitly campaigned on pursuing a humble foreign policy, rejecting the nation-building missions of the Bill Clinton era. His ambition was to be the “Education President.” Then, 19 militant jihadis from Al Qaeda struck America on September 11.  In response, Bush ordered the invasions of terror-supporting countries Afghanistan and then Iraq. As someone who served in that administration, the shift I saw was palpable. Bush had entered office with one kind of vision for his presidency, but history had a different idea entirely.War reshapes more than just the man sitting behind the Resolute Desk. It changes the teams around the president. We saw this with the resignation of Trump’s counterterrorism director, Joe Kent. As the Kent episode showed, advisors who were in alignment before the shooting starts are not necessarily in alignment once fighting begins.DESTROY THE REGIME’S POWER WITHOUT OCCUPYING IRAN: A SMARTER WAR PLANThis sort of thing has also happened in previous presidencies. In the early years of Wilson’s administration, Wilson was reliant on the advice of Texan political operative Colonel Edward House, who was so close to the president that he even lived in the White House. Things changed during the war, however, as internal critics in the State Department and the White House pushed back against House’s broad mandate managing the war.  Wilson and House also clashed over the Versailles Treaty, which led to a permanent end to their once close relationship.As for Johnson, he was famously intolerant of internal dissent, and he drove away or silenced advisors who questioned his Vietnam strategy. Johnson pushed aside his defense secretary Robert McNamara — initially the face of the Vietnam War—after Johnson noticed and didn’t appreciate McNamara’s increasing skepticism of Johnson’s Vietnam policy. Johnson wanted — and got — an echo chamber, to his administration and to our nation’s detriment.In the Bush administration, the Iraq war set off a bureaucratic civil war inside Bush’s national security team. This internal struggle led to the Valerie Plame affair, which brought about the indictment of Vice President Cheney’s top aide Scooter Libby after the exposure of the name of a covert CIA operative. Libby, however, had not leaked her name; his bureaucratic nemesis Dick Armitage was the leaker, and Armitage shamefully stayed silent about his role during the investigation. The episode showed the degree to which the higher stakes brought about by war can roil an administration, not to mention innocent lives.WHY TRUMP FACES AN AGONIZING DECISION ON OBLITERATING IRAN’S OIL SUPPLY IF HE CAN’T GET A DEALWar also takes a personal toll on presidents. Sometimes it leads to behavioral changes. In 2003, Bush gave up playing golf, one of his few outlets for escaping the pressures of the presidency. He said years later that he was unwilling to be seen on the links while American soldiers were dying in Iraq. As he explained in 2008, “I don’t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the commander-in-chief playing golf.” It was a quietly devastating admission about the weight a wartime president carries every day.In other cases, the toll of being president in wartime has been even heavier. Wilson suffered a stroke while in Europe and was incapacitated for much of the rest of the administration; his team kept the American people in the dark as his wife Edith secretly managed things in the White House. Roosevelt died during his fourth term at 63. Those who saw him in his final days found him to be pale and depleted beyond his years. A visibly thinned Johnson, who left office at 60, died less than four years after exiting the White House.While these examples may seem harrowing, there is one also instructive counterexample.George H.W. Bush entered the Gulf War with a limited objective, built a broad international coalition for expelling Saddam Hussein from Kuwait, achieved that objective, and got out. Bush’s national security team was extraordinarily disciplined and cohesive. The war did not appear to fundamentally damage Bush’s presidency or his person. Yet even Bush could not escape the political gravity of wartime leadership — he was perceived as so focused on foreign affairs that he lost touch with a domestic economy in recession, leading to what many believed was highly improbable when Bush had a 91% approval rating on the way: His defeat at the hands of Bill Clinton in 1992.  The lesson here is not that presidents should shrink from the use of force. President Trump has shown courage in taking on one of the most murderous and predatory regimes in the past half century. The decision to go to war is the most difficult decision a president must make. It costs lives and changes the world in unpredictable ways. And even before the end is reached, it changes the president, his staff, and his agenda, testing his character and taxing his body and soul in ways that cannot be fully anticipated.CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TEVI TROY

More than three decades after a Washington mother was found dead inside her home, investigators have made an arrest in a case that had long gone cold.In November 1992, Janice Randle was found dead on her bed inside her Graham, Washington home, with her young daughter nearby in a crib. At the time, her husband, James Randle, told authorities she may have died from a drug overdose, citing a past history of painkiller use.The couple had been separated and were going through a divorce. The case was initially treated as a death investigation and possible overdose. However, autopsy results later revealed there were no drugs in Randle’s system, prompting investigators to reclassify the case as a homicide.Despite that shift, only limited evidence was available, and detectives were unable to establish probable cause for an arrest. The case remained unsolved for decades.REALTOR’S COLD CASE MURDER FINALLY SOLVED AFTER 15 YEARS, POLICE SAYThe investigation was revived in recent years after family members came forward with new information, including accounts of alleged confessions made by James Randle. Those leads gave investigators a fresh perspective—and a new path forward.Authorities say the renewed investigation ultimately established probable cause to arrest the now 68-year-old suspect, who was living in a care facility in Everett, Washington. He was taken into custody on April 1.Investigators now believe Janice Randle died as the result of a violent struggle with her husband, with newly uncovered evidence contradicting the original account from 1992.YALE PROFESSOR’S FATHER CHARGED IN MOTHER’S DECADES-OLD MURDER, SAYS HE ‘USED ME AS BAIT’: REPORT”This case stands as a powerful example of how advancements in technology and investigative practices can bring justice—even decades later,” the Pierce County Sheriff’s Office said.”Most importantly, it is a testament to the unwavering commitment of the detectives and investigators who refused to let Janice’s story be forgotten,” officials added. “Their diligence, compassion, and determination have given Janice’s family the closure they have sought for so many years.”Court documents obtained by Fox 13 Seattle indicate the suspect allegedly admitted to two family members in the years after Janice’s death that he killed her and staged the scene to appear as a drug overdose. Investigators also noted Janice had visible bruising and signs of a struggle, though her death was initially ruled undetermined.FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON XThe records show the couple had been in a contentious divorce and custody battle at the time, and that the suspect had a prior domestic violence conviction and made threats in the weeks leading up to her death.Jail records show James Robert Randle was booked into the Pierce County Jail on April 1 on a first-degree murder charge, with bail set at $1 million.SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTERThe break in the case was driven in part by Randle’s daughters, one of whom was just 18 months old and in a crib next to her mother the night she died, who helped bring renewed attention to the investigation decades later.Janice’s oldest daughter, Katie Wakin, credited both her family and investigators for finally bringing the case back to light.SEND US A TIP HERE”The blessing of having a lot of my mom’s best friends fill in the gaps for us as kids because she was gone,” Wakin told Fox 13 Seattle. “I’ve had the pleasure of bonding with my siblings and we’re very, very close… we all do, because of this loss.”Wakin was 14 years old when her mother was killed and said she never expected to see an arrest.LISTEN TO THE NEW ‘CRIME & JUSTICE WITH DONNA ROTUNNO’ PODCAST”I don’t want to say I gave up hope, but I never thought I would see this in my lifetime,” she said. “I accepted that. I was at peace with that—until about a year ago.”That shift came when her younger half-sister, Kourtney Lewis, who was just 18 months old at the time of the killing, began digging into the case in 2025 while trying to learn more about her mother for her own children.LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? FIND MORE ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB”I never looked at some of the documents… just the basic documents when someone dies,” Lewis told Fox 13 Seattle. “When I looked at them, I knew. I knew exactly what was happening. And so, I said I need to figure this out.”Together, the sisters gathered information and pushed for answers—efforts that ultimately helped investigators reexamine evidence and zero in on the suspect.For Randle’s family, the arrest marks a long-awaited step toward closure after more than 30 years.Fox News Digital reached out to the Pierce County Sheriff’s Office for comment. 

UConn women’s basketball coach Geno Auriemma showed regret for his action at the end of Friday’s Final Four game against South Carolina where he and Dawn Staley got into a heated discussion.He began to speak to her aggressively, before the conversation devolved and quickly escalated into a visible shouting match. Auriemma said after the game he was upset that Staley had apparently not shaken his hand before the game (the two were seen shaking hands pregame, but Auriemma said he waited several minutes before seeing Staley).CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM”There’s no excuse for how I handled the end of the game vs. South Carolina,” Auriemma said in a statement posted to social media.”It’s unlike what I do and what our standard is here at Connecticut. I want to apologize to the staff and the team at South Carolina. It was uncalled for in how I reacted. The story should be how well South Carolina played, and I don’t want my actions to detract from that. I’ve had a great relationship with their staff, and I sincerely want to apologize to them.”Staley addressed the incident in an interview with ESPN immediately afterward.KNICKS BROADCASTER’S JOKE COMPARING BULLS’ ‘OBLITERATED’ DEFENSE TO IRAN LEAVES PARTNER STUNNED”I have no idea, but I’m going to let you know this: I’m of integrity. I’m of integrity,” Staley said. “So if I did something wrong to Geno, I had no idea what I did. I guess he thought I didn’t shake his hand at the beginning of the game. I didn’t know. I went down there pregame, shook everybody on his staff’s hand. I don’t know what we came with after the game, but hey, sometimes things get heated. We move on.”Meanwhile, Auriemma expressed displeasure with Staley and the referees during an in-game interview on ESPN.”Their coach rants and raves on the sideline and calls the referee some names you don’t want to hear. And now we get 6 to 0, and I got a kid with a ripped jersey, and they go, ‘I didn’t see it.’ Come on, man. It’s for a national championship,” he said to Holly Rowe.After the game, Auriemma declined to elaborate on the incident.”I said what I had to say and… nothing… nothing,” he said when asked what happened with Staley, refusing to tell reporters what he said. “Why would I say it? I said what I said, and obviously she didn’t like it. I just told the truth.”South Carolina ended UConn’s perfect season in what was a rematch from last year’s national championship that the Huskies won. The loss ended UConn’s 54-game winning streak dating back to last season.Fox News’ Jackson Thompson contributed to this report.Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Belle Burden is issuing a warning based on the “red flags” she experienced in her marriage.Burden, a Vanderbilt heiress whose new book, “Strangers: A Memoir of Marriage,” details her bitter divorce from hedge fund executive Henry Davis, ignored several issues in her marriage, and she’s detailing some big ones in a new interview.During an appearance on the “Financial Tea with Mrs. Dow Jones” podcast, the author described the way Davis handled the couple’s money. She explained that she gave up her career in corporate law to raise their three children and let him focus on his exploding career in finance — and in doing so, she let him control their bank accounts completely.”I think that there was something romantic, almost, about handing this over to him,” Burden admitted. “He was like the man in the gray flannel suit who had arrived. And he said to me, ‘I’m going to take care of you.’ So there was something that felt, like, wonderful about that.”NEW YORK HEIRESS BELLE BURDEN’S HUSBAND CONVINCED HER TO ALTER PRENUP BEFORE AFFAIR SHATTERED MARRIAGE: MEMOIRThe foundation of this idea, handing over control of finances to Davis, happened early on in their relationship.Burden had generational wealth from both sides of her family, and when she was younger, she signed a contract with her mother ensuring that she’d sign a prenup when she married. She had two trust funds, which were both protected in case of divorce, and she didn’t personally want a prenup, but the contract forced her hand.Davis suggested a specific amendment to the draft her lawyer had sent ahead of the wedding: instead of splitting everything equally if they were to divorce, he wanted them each to keep what they had in their own names and split anything in both of their names.NEW YORK HEIRESS BELLE BURDEN RECOUNTS THE VOICEMAIL THAT TORCHED HER HUSBAND’S DOUBLE LIFE: MEMOIRBurden wrote in her book that when she told her lawyer about the change, he “told me it was a bad idea; it was standard to share in what was earned during a marriage, both by [Davis] and by me … It was fair. I made the counterargument, repeating the words [Davis] had given to me to explain why we should make the change. Finally, [the lawyer] said, ‘Okay, Belle, if this is what you want.'”She admitted to feeling a “wave of anxiety,” but went through with the amended prenup because she trusted Davis.As she said on “Mrs. Dow Jones,” another factor was the couple’s “financial inequity.” She “wanted to make him feel good and feel important” — his family was “essentially broke” when he was growing up, and it wasn’t until after they were married that his career took off — and in doing that, she made herself smaller so he could “feel bigger.”Then, after they had their first child and she gave up her full-time work to be a mother, another factor came into play.”Over the course of our marriage, as I kind of handed [the financial control] off to him, you start to, or I started to believe I couldn’t understand it even though I’m a former corporate lawyer. I paid our bills, and I signed our tax returns, but I didn’t read them and I didn’t ask him what his bonuses were. And I just trusted and trusted and trusted. And I thought, ‘Oh, it’s just so complicated. Only he can understand it.'”In addition to not looking at the tax returns, Burden explained that a bookkeeper had kept track of every single charge she made on the couple’s credit cards.”It was like a subtle thing that feels protective, like he was very, like, had a strong hand on our spending … did not want us to spend too much, which felt like protection,” she said. “But the flip side of that is that it is controlling, it’s really controlling … it just was like these eyes on me. And I didn’t have the same eyes on him.”She didn’t find out until the divorce proceedings that over the course of their marriage, he’d amassed “at least eight figures of wealth.”LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSWhen Haley Sacks, the host of the podcast better known by her Mrs. Dow Jones moniker, asked if she would see it as a red flag in a future relationship if someone acted the way Davis did in the beginning, she was quick to agree.”I think it’s a real red flag,” she said. “I don’t think I will get married again. I feel like the idea of co-mingling assets again is really unappealing to me. I’m so happy being in control of my own. So if I was in another relationship, I think I would keep it very separate. But yes, I do see it as red flag. And I think, it doesn’t mean your husband is going to walk out the way mine did, but if you ask the questions and ask to be included and asked to understand where the assets are and whose name is on them and they don’t want to tell you, that is a real red flag. And you should really talk to a professional to try and understand what’s going on financially in your marriage.”In March 2020, when Burden, Davis and two of their three children were quarantining in their Martha’s Vineyard home at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Burden got a phone call from a man saying that his wife was having an affair with her husband. Davis was apologetic at first, but the next morning, he told her he wanted a divorce.NEW YORK HEIRESS BELLE BURDEN SAYS EX-HUSBAND REFUSED TO GIVE THEIR 12-YEAR-OLD A BEDROOM AFTER DIVORCE”I try to hold both things in my head, that we really loved each other and had a very happy marriage for a long period of time,” she said, “but that he was pretty much programmed from long before the time he met me to really protect himself financially. And I think that was at play in the prenup. I think that was at play at every stage in our marriage. And I think that when he earned money, like when he got a bonus, there was no part of him that was ever going to put it into joint name.””You were using your trust to pay for the children’s school, for the houses,” Sacks pointed out. “And he was building like a vintage Rolex collection.”Burden wrote briefly about the Rolex collection in her book, claiming that under his watchful eye, she put purchases like birthday presents for the children and clothes for herself on her personal credit card that he didn’t monitor, and her family paid school tuition and made college funds for the kids while he spent money on things like “a dozen rare Rolex watches, several motorcycles, rare coins, custom suits from Zegna, a small vintage boat that had been used in ‘Live and Let Die,’ and expensive red wine, hundreds of bottles.”The book is also where she wrote about using her trusts to purchase the family’s two homes — homes she went through extra effort to make sure were in Davis’ name as well.In 2001, they bought a four-bedroom apartment in Manhattan, something that was “much bigger” than she thought they needed, but that Davis loved. She emptied one of her two trusts to purchase it and listed Davis as a joint owner, “even though he had not contributed to the purchase.” She said she was happy to do it.A few years later, she used her second trust to purchase a summer home in Martha’s Vineyard. Davis had gone to look at it alone, and he’d loved it, so she wired him the funds from the trust, emptying it completely, and, as with the apartment, she made sure Davis was listed as a joint owner of the property.Burden told Sacks that she’d had to write a former letter to the trustees of her trusts to release the funds so she could make the purchases — another option would have been to simply buy the homes with the trusts so they would have stayed protected, but she felt like it was important for Davis’ name to be on the deeds as well.”I felt like I was doing something so important for our marriage, for our family, that I was curing something for him,” she said.It wouldn’t be until after Davis filed for divorce and requested the prenup be enforced that she realized the situation she was in.In their initial conversations after she learned of the affair, she wrote in “Strangers” that he’d told her she could keep the apartment, the house and custody of their three children. While he continually refused any custody throughout the divorce proceedings and after, the enforcement of the prenup meant that while she wouldn’t be able to touch anything he’d earned in his very successful career, he would be entitled to half of the two homes.Burden called Davis to talk to him about this after receiving a summons from court. She wrote that during the call, she asked, “Why are you doing this to me?”, to which he answered, “I’m not doing anything to you.””I said, ‘You left us. You’ve never told me why,'” she recalled. “His voice was calm, cold. ‘I didn’t leave you. I changed residences.'”She wrote that she felt herself “losing control” at that response, and started sobbing and telling him that he had left her and their children. In response, “He said, in a singsong voice, like a taunting child, ‘Boo-hoo. Poor Belle. Always the victim.'”Later, the made the decision to file a counterclaim that would fight the prenup — for years, she said she and Davis agreed they should amend the prenup “since it was no longer fair” to her, given her decision to give up her career while his took off. They never went through the process, and when push came to shove, she couldn’t afford to buy Davis out of the two homes, meaning she’d be forced to sell both.CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTERSix months later, a judge dismissed the counterclaim and enforced the prenup, then set a trial date to resolve the issue of child support and their joint property. Davis, Burden wrote, hadn’t brought up her counterclaim in the months after she initially filed it, but after it was dismissed, he was “inflamed by it.””He said he would give me only the minimum child support required by law,” she claimed. “He said I would have to face the consequences of the prenup, of my failed counterclaim.”She grappled with the idea of her children losing the homes they’d known all their lives and with losing what her family had left to her, as well as her own financial security.”There was no reason for it, given [Davis’] resources, given his desire to shed, given his refusal to make a home for the kids,” she wrote. “It felt like he was playing a game, or running a deal, one he was going to win at all costs, by a wide margin, regardless of the impact on me and our children.”In the end, an hour before their trial was to begin in October 2021, Burden and Davis reached a settlement on their own. He negotiated the terms, and she said that she “had to be calm, deferential, grateful,” and that if she got her lawyer involved or “pushed him,” he would withdraw the offer altogether.He gave up his interest in the two properties they owned and agreed to child support and to pay the children’s medical expenses and school tuition. Meanwhile, he’d keep all the money he’d earned throughout their marriage.”I don’t know what finally made him decide to settle,” Burden admitted. “I have several guesses, but I will never know for sure. Maybe he always planned to resolve it before trial, to give me the house and the apartment. But only after he brought me to my knees.”She told Sacks, “I had given up the fantasy of having any settlement from him, because he was not going to give me any of his money … I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about what I didn’t get or what was lost financially. I really just focus on what I have now.”

Yefry Archaga. Credit: Greene County Jail.
The weak border policies from previous Democrat regimes continue to have deadly consequences for innocent American citizens.
As the Springfield Daily Citizen reported, 18-year-old Yefry Archaga was taken into custody on Tuesday in Webb City, Missouri, and charged with first-degree murder after killing a 15-year-old teenager named Miles Young last month.
Archaga is Honduras. He is listed in jail records with an active immigration detainer (Hold for ICE). He is reportedly originally from Honduras.
Archaga also reportedly has ties to gangs in the area.
Another suspect, 18-year-old Praize King, was previously arrested and charged with first-degree murder as well.
According to Ozarks First, a juvenile suspect arrived at a Springfield residence on March 12 with Archaga, two juvenile witnesses, and another underage suspect to discuss how to lure Young into a trap. The juvenile suspect believed Young was responsible for the victim’s death in a homicide case last year.
Then, the group put their plan into motion that day.
Ozarks First reported:
The juvenile allegedly met up with Archaga, two juvenile witnesses, and an adult suspect before meeting with Young, driving around Springfield. The young suspect in the statement reportedly discussed “setting up” Young, later arriving at an apartment to retrieve a second vehicle.
Archaga sat in the second vehicle as the suspect drove him and the two witnesses, as the juvenile suspect drove the other vehicle, described as a black Mercedes, which was planned to pick up Young.
When the juvenile suspect arrived at the residence, Young was with another juvenile witness, while speaking on the phone with another juvenile witness. The two witnesses reportedly told Young not to go with the juvenile suspect, thinking it was a “set up,” due to the suspect not liking Young.
The witnesses reported to law enforcement that the juvenile suspect blamed Young for the death of a victim in a 2025 homicide case.
The juvenile suspect then drove Young toward West Maplewood Street and then stopped while the adult suspect blocked the road.
Young fled the vehicle in panic and was chased by Archaga, who was wearing a ski mask and carrying a Glock-style pistol. Young was then shot multiple times and fell to the ground.
Young reportedly begged for his life, saying, “I just don’t wanna die.” Archaga then fired the fatal shot.
Greene County deputies and Emergency Medical Services rushed to the scene and tried to save Young’s life before taking him to Cox South Hospital. The boy was later pronounced dead from a single gunshot wound to the chest.
Archaga is currently in the Greene County Jail and is being held without bond.
The post HORROR: Gang-Affiliated Illegal Alien Lures 15-Year-Old Missouri Boy into Trap and Guns Him Down as He Begs for His Life appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.