- entertainment The Wrap
Nicole Thea, the YouTube personality who was chronicling her pregnancy for fans, died along with her unborn baby on Saturday morning, her family announced on Thea’s Instagram page. She was 24.No cause of death has been announced. Thea had been expecting a child with her partner, a street dancer who went by the handle Global Boga (né Jeffery Frimpong). “To all Nicole’s friends and supporters it is with great sadness that I have to inform you that Nicole and her son she and Boga named Reign sadly passed away on Saturday morning,” the post reads. “Also Nicole pre-schedule a few YouTube videos and Boga has made the decision to allow them to be aired.”The message concluded, “As a family we ask that you give us privacy because our hearts are truly broken and we are struggling to cope with what has happened. Thank you her mum RIP My beautiful baby girl Nicnac and my grandson Reign, I will miss you for the rest of my life until we meet again in eternal heaven. Xxx”Also Read: Lil Marlo, '2 the Hard Way' Rapper, Dies at 30 in Atlanta ShootingA pre-taped video was posted on Sunday on YouTube, titled, “GOT IN A BATH FULL OF MILK! *BTS PREGNANCY SHOOT.” The footage is a behind-the-scenes look at a photo shoot that shows off her baby bump, along with her slipping into a milk bath.Back in March, Thea announced her pregnancy. “We can’t hide this any longer, secrets out.. GOD gave us the biggest blessing yet. I’m finally creating a beautiful little human inside of me,” she said in an Instagram post. “Can’t believe this bubba will be half of me and half of the loml. Honestly, @global_boga has been the best support EVER and GOD made no mistakes making him the father.”In late June, Boga shared that his son was expected to “arrive soon.” A few days later on June 30, he wrote, “I have good faith baby Boga will come on a Monday KOJO On What day were you born??”There had been no further updates on Thea or the baby since then.Read original story Nicole Thea, Pregnant YouTube Sensation, Dies at 24 At TheWrap
Lisa Marie is "beyond devastated" over the death of her son, whom she shared with ex-husband Danny Keough
- News The Daily Beast
If and when Donald Trump leaves office, whether now or the day after the election, it should be by resignation. We cannot and should not wait until Inauguration Day, January 20, 2021, for him to vacate the White House. His departure has become a matter of national emergency, national safety, and now national security.The polls show Trump losing by large margins to Joe Biden if the election were held today. His nearly catastrophic handling of the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in tens of thousands of unnecessary infections and deaths. And things are getting worse following the premature reopening of states, something Trump insisted upon. He wears no face coverings, despite the recommendations of his own task force. He holds mass rallies in violation of local health regulations and recommendations.The news that he may have failed to take note of intelligence reports that suggested that Vladimir Putin had offered bounties for the deaths of American soldiers in Afghanistan makes him a national security risk.If Trump does not resign before the election in November, there is little question he should resign the next day if he loses, especially if the election is not close, and turn the reins of power over to the president-elect. A landslide win by Biden will mean that the pandemic is not under control and probably that the economy remains in turmoil or perhaps ruins.The Time to Argue About Biden’s Economic Plans? After November 3.This makes Trump’s immediate removal from office all the more compelling because experts are warning that COVID-19 may build into another wave just as the regular flu season kicks into high gear starting in November. The health consequences could be catastrophic without a steady and clear national response. Trump’s resignation and turning power over to the new president-elect may be the only way to keep the situation from spiraling.How could this happen? Putting aside for the moment whether Trump would actually do this, there is-sort of-precedent for such behavior. While Richard Nixon is the only president to resign his office, there is another president who considered the possibility of immediate resignation and the transferral of power within days of the election to a new president-elect from the opposing party. That president also faced a world of high uncertainty and danger. He believed it was his duty to step down if he didn’t win, as soon as the election result was known.Woodrow Wilson, our 28th president, is not held in high regard these days. Princeton University, where he taught government and was president from 1902 to 1910, has decided to remove his name from university institutes and programs. “Wilson’s racism was significant and consequential even by the standards of his own time,” Christopher Eisgruber, current president of Princeton, said in a statement released last week. President Trump tweeted that the move was “incredibly stupid.”But it was not a crisis over racism that caused Woodrow Wilson to type out his resignation letter in 1916; it was a world war.By the fall of 1916, Wilson had kept the United States out of the European conflict for over two years. Despite his attempts to mediate an end to the war, the belligerent powers remained in a deadly stalemate. The battle for Verdun in France, horrific by any historical measure, started in the spring of 1916 and would continue, with unrelenting bombardments, until December. The Germans intended to “bleed the French white.” The human carnage was stultifying: nearly 800,000 men were killed in just 300 days of battle. The Battle of the Somme was worse. Having begun in July, it eventually resulted in a death toll of 1.3 million in just four months.Against this calamitous backdrop, Wilson was convinced that if he lost, he needed to transfer power immediately to his challenger, Republican Charles Evans Hughes. Until the passage of the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, a president-elect would have to wait four months before being inaugurated, on March 4. (The lame-duck amendment in 1933 moved the date up to January 20).Wilson had reason to be concerned that he may not be re-elected, though he had spared America any involvement in the war so far. In 1912, Wilson was elected only because Theodore Roosevelt split the Republican Party and ran against the Republican incumbent, William Howard Taft, on the Bull Moose ticket. With the Republicans “reunited” in 1916 behind former New York governor and Supreme Court associate justice Charles Evans Hughes, the odds of Wilson winning seemed long.Recognizing this, Wilson sat down at his portable Hammond typewriter days before the election to peck out his conditional resignation. He recognized, he wrote, that if Hughes prevailed, “I would be without such moral backing of the nation as would be necessary to steady and control our relationship with other governments.” The situation would be “fraught with the gravest dangers.”He concluded that, in that event, he needed to appoint Hughes as his secretary of state, secure his vice president’s agreement to resign, and then resign himself. Under the rules of succession then in effect, Hughes would immediately become president. “I would have no right to risk the peace of the nation,” Wilson wrote, “by remaining in office after I had lost my authority.”Trump would need to recognize this same responsibility if he is rejected at the polls in November. With the pandemic still afoot and the economy a mess, there would be no time to waste at this critical juncture. But since the line of succession is different today, how could President-Elect Biden become President Biden before Jan. 20?Here’s how. Under the 25th Amendment, ratified and passed in 1967, a president can appoint a vice president in the event of a vacancy in the office, with the consent of the House and the Senate by simple majorities in each chamber. In this case, Trump would ask Pence to resign, appoint Biden as his VP, and then resign himself, allowing Biden to succeed to the presidency.A final hurdle would be the Republican-controlled Senate, which has been Trump’s lapdog under Mitch McConnell. But clearly if Trump actually did his duty and resigned, it seems improbable that the Senate would stand in the way.Of course, it is impossible to conceive of Donald Trump resigning, even with a widening crisis unfolding all around him. Then again, Richard Nixon was no quitter, as he acknowledged when he resigned. So who knows? Trump likes to sulk and feel sorry for himself-so he could say “to heck with you” if he is humiliated at the polls.In the end, Wilson did not need to resign because he squeaked out a victory in 1916. The election was so close that Hughes went to bed election night being congratulated on his victory, and it took days for the result to finally become clear.Ironically, Wilson typed his provisional resignation letter in his erstwhile summer home in New Jersey, known as Shadow Lawn. That home burned down later, but a new Shadow Lawn was erected, located on the campus of Monmouth University. Two weeks ago, Monmouth announced that it would remove Wilson’s name from the mansion built to replace the one that was destroyed.James Robenalt is the author of The Harding Affair, Love and Espionage During the Great War and January 1973, Watergate, Roe v Wade, Vietnam and the Month That Changed America Forever. He occasionally lectures with John Dean, Nixon’s White House Counsel, on legal ethics.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
- News CBC
"The photo has the look of a very troubling dream," Dan Conlin says as he studies an old black-and-white image.Conlin is a transportation historian who's spent a lifetime studying images of ships, trains and aircraft. He's also a former curator of Halifax's Maritime Museum of the Atlantic, which houses a large collection of materials from the 1917 Halifax Explosion.The image he's studying surfaced recently on Reddit with a user from Halifax, England, wondering if it was a "new" image of the 1917 disaster."You have these tranquil little wavelets in the foreground and some stately, anchored vessels - including a sailing ship," Conlin said. "But in the background there are these awful, nightmarish clouds, including a horrible column that is rising into the sky. It looks like a surreal nightmare."When Conlin first looked at it, the crisp details of the foreground and the blurry background raised his skeptical eyebrows. "There was quite a tradition in the World War I era of faking photos by doing composite photos, where you layer one image on top of another," he said.One well-known photo of the explosion taken from McNabs Island was later suspected to have been doctored by a company. They seem to have added clouds for dramatic effect - and to sell more postcards.But Conlin thinks in the nightmarish photo, it's more likely that the clouds are moving from the force of the explosion, while the ships were untroubled by any winds. The disaster killed nearly 2,000 people and badly hurt thousands more. It levelled the Richmond district in the north end."It's carnage and destruction out of Dante at the base of that cloud. People are dying and fires are starting and this awful event has hit Halifax in the distance," he said."That angry cloud gives you an idea of the violence and tragedy that is unfolding even as the shutter clicks. It's really rare and that photo, as far as I can tell, has never been published."Searching for 'RGS'CBC News tracked down the source of the social media image to the Community Archives of Belleville and Hastings County in Ontario, where archivist Amanda Hill answered the phone.She said the photo, which measures seven centimetres by 10 centimetres, entered their collection in 2012 as part of a donation of a personal album of photos taken between 1917 and 1919."It looks like it's been through the wars. The image is a bit battered and the image is kind of difficult to see," she said.When Hill saw the coverage of the 100th anniversary of the explosion in 2017, she dug up the album and looked again at the smoke-cloud photo."On the back are written the words, 'Halifax 30 seconds after the explosion. RGS,'" she said.Hill studied the album and realized some of the photos showed a sailor named Reginald Stevens. She did some more research and learned that his middle name was Garnet. She'd found the RGS who took the photo. "I have to admire his presence of mind," she said.That was good evidence she was looking at an original photo, not a mass-printed image, and thus it might be new. She scanned it and posted it to their website.But she couldn't find service records showing RGS had been in Halifax on Dec. 6, 1917, and in place to have taken the photo. "It would be interesting to look those up and see which ship he was on. That would place him in Halifax at the time of the explosion."CBC sent the photo to Joel Zemel, who's written two books about the Halifax Explosion. He's studied hundreds of photos relating to the explosion and estimates fewer than 20 show the actual blast cloud. He's posted many of the known ones to his website."I haven't seen this one," he said.He noted the clouds obscure the distance and it gives few clues as to where it was taken. The strange three-masted sailboat to the right seems out of place in the steam age, but could have been moored and hulked - that is, used as a floating warehouse.The high angle limits where the photographer could be around the harbour. "One of the only vantage points that could take a photograph that high would be off HMCS Niobe, which was a depot ship in the harbour at the time."The Niobe was anchored near what was then the Canadian naval college and today is CFB Stadacona. The explosion happened about 1.2 kilometres away, near today's Irving Shipyard.Zemel scoured his personal archives and drew a frustrating blank. He returned to the search the next day and double-checked the Canadian Navy List of personnel. Reginald G. Stevens was a mate in the Royal Canadian Volunteer Reserve."I had missed the key entry in my previous search. According to the Canadian Navy List, December 1917, Mate Stevens was indeed borne to HMCS Niobe," he said."Here we have a sailor who was in the right position at the right time to have taken this photograph. That gives it some credibility."But Zemel said the time frame doesn't match eyewitness accounts from the Niobe."The water is very calm. That seems kind of strange, because within 30 seconds of the explosion, there would have been the tidal wave which came up on the Niobe."One eyewitness from the Niobe reported that the blast had blown his jacket off and tossed the 11,000-tonne ship into the air, before she crashed back down. As soon as the boat stopped bouncing, they sprang into action to help those caught in the inferno.Zemel concludes it's plausible that Stevens took the image from the Niobe, but not thirty seconds after the explosion. Perhaps it was a few minutes later, and when he finally printed the photo and wrote on it, he estimated it had only been thirty seconds.Mysterious sailing shipZemel has tried extensively to identify the sailing ship in the photo. If he could name it, that could be the critical confirmation that the photo is what it claims to be. It would also confirm from where Stevens took the photo.He scoured insurance records and lists of ships damaged by the explosion, but nothing matches it.Zemel said the unidentified ship is driving him nuts. "I think the photograph is authentic. It's just this boat is an enigma."Dan Conlin adds that while we have good lists of ships damaged by the explosion, we don't have lists of ships in the harbour that were not damaged by the explosion. So the mystery sailboat could have emerged unscathed and sailed on, dropping off the historical horizon.Amanda Hill, the archivist, praised Stevens's presence of mind to take the photo and wondered why he would have had a camera handy 103 years ago.Conlin says in that regard, 1917 was a lot like 2020. People had been taking photos since the 1830s, but it was a cumbersome, expensive process. Only professional photographers took photos.But Kodak had started selling its iconic Brownie cameras to the masses just before the war."People had the same urge that we have nowadays to snap photos of friends and relatives. They were using this new technology to take pictures of family and neighbours and houses and their first car and buddies in the military," Conlin said."Sailors love to show families what they've seen when they go back home."Conlin noted that the Niobe was an anchored ship at the time and served as a floating barracks. "There were all kinds of people who were assigned to Niobe, but would work in other parts of the dockyard or the harbour," he said.That means even if we can show the RGS who took the photo was the Reginald Garnet Stevens stationed to the Niobe, and that the Niobe was in the harbour at the time of the explosion, and that the angle of the photo matches the angle from the Niobe, the exact location of the photo escapes us.Stevens could have taken it from the Bedford Basin looking south to the Narrows, or near Georges Island, looking north to the disaster.Identifying that sailing ship, or finding a diary entry from Stevens saying he took the photo on the day of the disaster, would likely be enough to confirm it 100 per cent."The explosion happened over a hundred years ago, but it still has surprises for us," Conlin said. "This picture is a real reminder of that."MORE TOP STORIES