WASHINGTON — The House adopted a Republican-only $95-billion budget proposal Wednesday, a long-shot effort to fund the Iran war and other White House priorities over objections from Democrats and a few GOP holdouts in a final push before the midterm elections.

House Republicans were divided over the plan, with conservatives wary because there are no offsetting budget cuts. But Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) plunged ahead, viewing the go-it-alone process as the best chance to usher President Trump’s priorities through the split Congress, despite skepticism in the Senate.

The vote tally was 216-214, with two Republicans and one independent joining Democrats in opposition.

“Just bullets and bombs to finish the job,” said Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), the chairman of the Budget Committee.

Democrats argued the money should be spent at home, particularly on efforts to lower costs for Americans.

“Republicans plan to spend tens of billions of dollars on Trump’s failed war in Iran,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Democratic caucus, said this week. “Think about what we could spend with these resources instead.”

Congress is at a standstill over the U.S. war against Iran — unable to stop Trump’s military strikes, but not having authorized the use of American military force — and politically torn over having to provide billions of taxpayer dollars to pay for it. Most Americans disapprove of Trump’s Iran strategy, according to a recent AP-NORC poll.

The budget battle comes as Trump attended the dignified transfer of four service members killed in the Middle East, bringing the military death toll to 18. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told senators at a fiery hearing this week that the Pentagon is running short of cash, despite a massive $150 billion one-time allotment in last year’s big budget bill.

Even as the House action advanced the resolution, Johnson’s strategy faces uncertainty in the Senate.

The package has $60 billion for the Pentagon and $13 billion for other national security needs, $12 billion for farmers struggling under Trump’s tariffs and $10 billion for voting law changes aligned with the SAVE America Act and proof-of-citizenship requirements that are Trump’s top priority.

Republicans are relying on the budget reconciliation process, which enables approval on a majority vote in Congress, bypassing the Senate’s ability to filibuster the measure to stall or kill it.

Once rare, the reconciliation process is now Johnson’s preferred strategy for pushing proposals through Congress. It’s the way Republicans approved Trump’s big tax breaks and spending cuts bill last summer and funded Homeland Security this year over Democrats’ refusal to fund Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

“No matter how you feel about current events, these funds are necessary to ensure our fighting forces remain ready, our troops are paid and our nation is safe,” said Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, the Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

But House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said, “Republicans have literally ripped food from the mouths of hungry children, seniors and veterans to sustain the Trump war machine.”

Among those opposed was Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, a former Republican turned independent who said he felt any war funding bill should be bipartisan. He also wanted to ensure Congress had a “much higher level of involvement” in bringing the war to an end, and he said this proposal did not set that process in motion.

Republicans Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Rep. Warren Davidson of Ohio also voted against.

This is the third time GOP leaders have relied on reconciliation, dubbing this version 3.0, and it’s a lengthy process. If the House approves the budget resolution, it next goes to the Senate for a round-the-clock session to consider politically tough amendments — something senators would rather avoid in an election year.

The budget resolution sets out instructions for the various committees to draft legislation, which Johnson hopes could be done this summer, with final voting on the package once lawmakers return after the August recess.

Senators pan House’s budget and have their own ideas

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has been noncommittal on the House package that also divides his own GOP majority, with some Republican senators preferring more money for the military and others demanding the costs be offset with cuts elsewhere.

“We’ll see,” Thune said this week.

Thune’s focus, at the moment, is avoiding another government shutdown. He wants the Senate to approve a stopgap funding measure, called a continuing resolution, to provide routine government funding before lawmakers leave for the summer break.

If senators are unable to reach agreement on government funding, Thune has said he may hold onto the House’s budget resolution and use it later in the fall as a way to push the resolution through the Senate over objections. He wants to prevent a federal shutdown when current funds expire on Sept. 30.

“It’s a possibility that, if necessary, we could pull that budget resolution passed by the House and use it to fund government,” Thune said. “I hope that’s not necessary.”

Thune has also clashed with Trump over the president’s push for the SAVE America Act, which would require proof of citizenship for voting. The measure, while popular among Trump’s most ardent supporters, does not have enough support among Senate Republicans for passage.

It’s already against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and experts warn the proposed new rules could make it more difficult for eligible Americans to cast ballots.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

Fox TV executives knew their telecast of Sunday’s 2026 FIFA World Cup Final would be big.

But bigger than every NFL game outside of the Super Bowl, the perennial ratings blockbuster, was not on their radar.

“I have to admit that I didn’t see it coming, that we and Telemundo would combine for almost 65 million viewers for the final,” Mike Mulvihill, executive vice president and head of strategy and analytics for Fox Sports. “That’s beyond what we could have hoped for.”

Spain’s World Cup victory over Argentina by a 1-0 score attracted the largest audience for any sports telecast outside of the Super Bowl since the 1994 Winter Olympics when Nancy Kerrigan and Tonya Harding competed in the women’s figure skating short program.

The 38.9 million viewers who tuned in on Fox was enough to make the final the most-watched soccer telecast in history. Telemundo’s coverage set the record for a Spanish language soccer telecast with 23.9 million viewers.

It capped a month of massive viewing for the quadrennial tournament. In the United States,128.4 million people watched some portion of the World Cup across Fox’s broadcast network, its cable outlet FS1 and streaming platform Tubi. The 104 matches averaged a record high 7.7 million viewers, a 116% increase over the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

Spanish language coverage on NBCUniversal’s Telemundo and the Peacock streaming platform combined to average 6.3 million viewers across the 104 matches, up 143% over the 2022 tournament.

Ad revenues for the tournament topped $1.2 billion, according to data from Guideline, which tracks media spending.

Having the tournament in the U.S. with games airing in daytime and prime time helped. Mulvihill noted the tournament came up at a fortunate time on the sports viewing calendar. The NBA Finals were over and Major League Baseball’s post-season and the NFL season are months away.

But even with that soft competition for sports fans’ attention, the World Cup demonstrated an ability to bring in viewers who don’t follow the sport. Fox data showed 53% of viewers who tuned into its coverage had not watched any soccer in the past year. The network’s research found that a majority of U.S. sports fans could name only two stars, Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi, and their home countries.

What brought the audience in? Mulvihill credits social media, which tends to be an angry place during big sporting events. The lead up to the World Cup was no different, but the doom and gloom went away once the action began.

“There was a lot of negativity around this tournament on social as there always is about everything related to the cost of tickets and related to challenges that foreign visitors might face coming to the U.S.,” Mulvihill noted. “As soon as the ball was kicked, and the matches were in progress, that just completely pivoted to overwhelming positivity.”

Patrick Rishe, director of the sports business program at Washington University in St. Louis, said the global reach of social media made the international stars accessible to U.S. fans and created a “fear of missing out” effect that likely drove them to watch.

“There is a communal aspect of soccer, in particular, where you can be in a room with people wearing 10 different colored jerseys, and they all just kind of get into the camaraderie of it, and the highs and lows of it, and the drama of it,” Rishe said. “So even if you don’t have rooting interests, it’s just fun to be a part of it.”

The appeal of communal viewing showed up in the Nielsen data. Out-of-home viewing accounted for 27% of the audience. For Sunday’s final, the figure was 35%

People were having viewing parties or gatherings at home as well. An average of 1.955 viewers per home watched the World Cup. The figure for last year’s regular season NFL games was 1.685 viewers.

The question going forward is whether the World Cup will spur more interest in soccer in the U.S. Major League Soccer has reportedly seen significant increases in ticket sales. The league, which has most of its matches on Apple TV, launched an ad campaign with the tagline, “Thanks World, We’ll Take It From Here.”

Versant acquired the rights to carry 300 Bundesliga matches. The company’s USA Network will carry at least 30 matches from the German domestic league, with the rest streaming on the company’s free Fandango platform. The league was previously available on ESPN’s streaming service, which required a subscription.

Telemundo acquired the Spanish-language TV rights to the Union of European Football Assns. men’s club competitions, including the Champions League.

Fox paid $485 million for the rights to the 2026 World Cup, while Telemundo shelled out $600 million for the Spanish-language telecasts.

But the real prize is the rights for the 2030 World Cup, which both TV networks and streamers are expected to vigorously pursue, even though the time zones will not be as hospitable to the U.S. (The host countries are Morocco, Portugal, and Spain.)

During a recent appearance at the CNBC Sport x Boardroom Game Plan Summit in New York, ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro made it clear where he stands.

“Of course we’re interested,” Pitaro said. “This has been a juggernaut. We’re not at all surprised by it.”

July 22 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s ruling Democratic Party leadership race has descended into an increasingly bitter dispute over allegations that members of a controversial religious group may be attempting to influence the party’s Aug. 17 national convention.

The dispute began after former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok, a candidate for party leader, raised the possibility that the Shincheonji Church of Jesus was intervening in the election.

Shincheonji is a South Korean religious movement whose alleged political activities have become the subject of a national investigation. The church has denied allegations that it directed members to join political parties or interfere in elections.

Kim’s claims have revived questions about why proposed legislation authorizing a special counsel investigation into Shincheonji was abandoned while rival candidate Jung Chung-rae was serving as Democratic Party leader.

The controversy has escalated beyond the original allegations. Jung has denied wrongdoing and threatened legal action, while his allies have demanded that Kim produce evidence, apologize or withdraw from the race.

Party members have warned that the dispute could deepen factional divisions and make it difficult to reunify the party after the convention.

The conflict is increasingly being viewed as a proxy battle between supporters of President Lee Jae Myung and those aligned with Jung.

Kim is generally associated with the party faction loyal to Lee. Jung, a former party leader, has developed his own base among rank-and-file members, and several senior party figures have publicly rallied behind him.

“The essence of this convention is to defeat an alliance of anti-Lee forces, divisive elements and Shincheonji,” Kim said Tuesday. “We must also examine, one by one, why the Shincheonji special counsel investigation did not proceed.”

Kim did not identify Jung by name. His remarks, however, were widely interpreted as criticism of Jung because proposed special counsel investigations into Shincheonji and the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification were abandoned during Jung’s tenure as party leader.

Rep. Lee Geon-tae, an ally of President Lee, reinforced Kim’s allegation in a social media post.

“It appears difficult to dismiss Shincheonji’s alleged intervention in the party convention as mere speculation,” Lee said. “We need to determine why the special counsel legislation was halted.”

Jung denied the allegations and said he would take legal action against the dissemination of false information.

Rep. Moon Jeong-bok, a Supreme Council member aligned with Jung, challenged Kim during a party leadership meeting Wednesday.

“What evidence supports the claim of a secret alliance with Shincheonji, and why is this allegation being used to place the party in danger?” Moon said. “He said he has evidence, so he must disclose it and accept responsibility.”

Reps. Choi Min-hee, Lee Sung-yoon and Han Min-soo, who are running for seats on the party’s Supreme Council and are considered Jung allies, issued a similar demand at a news conference.

They said Kim should apologize and withdraw his candidacy if he could not substantiate the allegation.

“He is portraying the Democratic Party as though it were violating the constitutional separation of religion and politics to gain an advantage in the election,” they said.

Some party officials said Kim’s accusation could backfire because Jung’s supporters may interpret it as an attempt to associate all of them with Shincheonji.

“It could be understood as linking every party member who supports Jung to Shincheonji,” a Democratic Party official said. “That could provoke voters and create even greater barriers between groups of supporters.”

Party members said the larger concern was that the fight could undermine unity long after the leadership election ends.

The repeated allegations, threats of lawsuits and demands for candidates to withdraw have pushed debate over party policies and future priorities into the background, they said.

“A certain level of conflict was expected before the convention, but the candidates are now crossing lines that should not be crossed,” another Democratic Party official said.

“The candidates and party leadership must prevent further division so these wounds do not remain after the primary is over.”

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260723010008191

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has met his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi at a gathering of southeast Asian foreign ministers, to discuss how to manage bilateral tensions ahead of a planned summit between US President Donald Trump and China’s Xi Jinping.

The meeting on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) gathering of foreign ministers in Manila on Wednesday came amid tensions over China’s conduct in the disputed South China Sea and the US war against Iran. ASEAN countries have expressed concerns about both issues at the meeting.

Relations between Washington and Beijing have also been complicated by Trump’s accusations that China meddled in US elections, allegations Beijing has dismissed as “pure fabrication”.

Rubio said the US and China have “great differences” that are likely to persist “for the foreseeable future”, but that he and Wang discussed the need to manage those disagreements to ensure Xi has a “very positive visit” to the US. Xi is expected to visit in September.

Wang said the US must “respect China’s core interests … effectively manage differences and disagreements, and address China’s legitimate concerns”, according to an official Chinese summary of their meeting. It described the talks as “pragmatic, positive and constructive”.

The two sides agreed to “make sound preparations for the next stage of high-level exchanges,” China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.

‘Commerce as geopolitical weapon’

Wednesday’s meeting came two days after a confrontation between Chinese and Philippine vessels in the South China Sea left a Philippine sailor injured, leading both countries to summon each other’s ambassador.

The incident this week took place on Monday at the disputed Second Thomas Shoal. The Philippines ⁠said Chinese coastguard struck one of ⁠the Philippine navy staff on the head with a wooden baton, while China said the Philippine personnel were the first to attack and accused Philippine vessels ⁠of ramming a Chinese patrol boat.

Rubio said the altercation benefited nobody, adding that Washington had ⁠reiterated in all its meetings that it was bound by a defence treaty to stand up for Manila.

“We intend to live up to our treaty obligations, and I think we’ve done so, and will continue to do so,” he said.

Rubio’s remarks echo an opinion piece he published in Philippine media on Tuesday about Beijing’s conduct in the South China Sea. Rubio warned of “dire new threats” if those waters were to “fall under the control of a power willing to use commerce as a geopolitical weapon”.

Beijing claims sovereignty over almost the entire South China Sea via a line on its maps that cuts into the exclusive economic zones of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam, and is at the centre of long-running disputes over a multitude of islands.

Disputes between the Philippines and China have increased in recent years as Manila takes a bolder stance while pursuing closer defence ties with the US, Australia and Japan.

The US has increased military financing for the Philippines to $100mn for the 2026 fiscal year and is providing an additional $9mn to expand a coastguard pier on the island of Palawan “to enhance Philippine maritime ⁠law enforcement presence and sustain operations in the South China Sea”, the State Department said in a fact sheet.

Discussing the US relationship with ASEAN member states, Rubio said the security and prosperity of the US and southeast Asia were closely interconnected.

“I believe very much that the future and the story of the 21st century will be written in this region and by how events unfold here,” he said.

Iran ‘not serious about talks’, says Rubio

Rubio also addressed the situation with Iran in a meeting with ASEAN foreign ministers, claiming that Tehran was responsible for the latest escalation.

“The problem we’re having right now is that they’re not serious about talks,” Rubio said. “If they’re serious, we’re serious. If they’re not, then we will do what’s necessary to protect our interests, and also the interests of our allies.”

The US has carried out strikes on Iran for eleven consecutive nights, including targeting roads, bridges and power plants in recent attacks, all but shattering an interim peace deal agreed by the two sides last month.

Rubio stressed that Iran could not be allowed to control the Strait of ‌Hormuz, as it could set a dangerous precedent for other parts of the world.

The top US diplomat also confirmed he would meet on Thursday with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov to discuss the Ukraine war, saying that Washington remained open to playing a constructive role in ending the conflict.

Pat McAfee knows just what the world needs in 2026.

More Pat McAfee.

The former Indianapolis Colts punter and kicker already is seemingly everywhere — as the host of his own show every weekday on ESPN, as an analyst on “College GameDay” and guest on a number of other shows on the network, as a commentator/participant with WWE until earlier this year, as host of multiple podcasts, etc.

McAfee has not, however, released an album full of songs written and sung entirely by the two-time Pro Bowl selection himself.

That situation will be rectified in a matter of weeks.

McAfee announced Wednesday that he would be dropping his debut record, “The Diary of a Polarizing Figure,” on Aug. 14, a musical collaboration with country singer-songwriter Ernest.

“For as long as I can remember my mere existence has made people hate my guts,” McAfee wrote in an X post announcing the project. “I’ve been writing songs about it for 20yrs & it’s time to let them aht.. A LOT of headlines & narratives.. if I was to die, I’d like my kids to know exactly who their dad is.”

Although McAfee definitely has his detractors, it’s interesting that he’s putting out an album focusing on the haters, considering his current popularity is such that he is reportedly in talks for a contract extension with ESPN that would pay him more than $60 million a year.

Some online commenters have criticized McAfee for the timing of his announcement, which comes a day after a number of his ESPN colleagues were laid off by Walt Disney Co. McAfee reposted one such complaint on X and commented simply, “The Diary of a Polarizing Figure, August 14th, 2026.”

He said Wednesday on “The Pat McAfee Show”: “A lot of things are being said about me at this exact moment. [People] are going to hear my responses through these songs because these types of situations have been happening to me throughout my entire life. … Literally since elementary school I’ve had people that just don’t like me because I’m too loud and everything like that.”

In December, McAfee released a country-rock single called “Dookie,” also a musical collaboration with Ernest. A news release at the time stated that the single marked “a new partnership between McAfee and DeVille Records / Big Loud Records.”

Ernest told Whiskey Riff early this year that he and McAfee had recorded eight or nine songs together.

“Any EA Sports game should have a Pat McAfee song on it,” Ernest said in describing the former West Virginia standout’s musical style. “It’s locker room hype s—.”

Many athletes have attempted musical careers, with varying degrees of critical and commercial success. It would seem far fewer sports broadcasters have tried the same crossover, with John Tesh probably being the best-known example after his stint covering athletic events for CBS and NBC in the mid-1980s.

If he wants advice from a peer, perhaps McAfee might seek it from Terry Bradshaw, the four-time Super Bowl champion and longtime NFL analyst who also has released a number of country/gospel albums and even had a top 10 country hit with a cover of “I’m So Lonesome I Could Cry” in the 1970s.

McAfee said on his show that he “wrote this entire thing over the last 20 years or so in the notes section” of his phone.

“A lot of very personal stuff in here,” he said. “Finding my singing voice has been fun. That has been a blast. Then [to] all the incredible people in Nashville who have assisted and kind of helped me piece all this together, I’m so grateful and thankful.”

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has agreed to work with Saudi Arabia to develop a civilian nuclear program, a watershed moment following a years-long effort to curb the proliferation of nuclear technology in the Middle East.

The announcement comes as President Trump has vowed to continue executing a war against Iran over its own nuclear ambitions. On Wednesday, the president warned he would target a bridge or power plant for every commercial vessel Iran fires upon in the Strait of Hormuz, after earlier this week threatening to strike a new facility Tehran is reportedly building to conceal its continued nuclear work.

The Saudi deal stoked surprise and immediate concern across Washington, where lawmakers are expected to have a vote on the matter, as well as in Israel, itself a nuclear power that has long feared an atomic arms race could grip the region.

A Saudi nuclear program has long been tied to the standoff over Iran’s nuclear work, which successive U.S. administrations have said extends beyond civilian purposes. After Iran struck a nuclear deal with world powers in 2015, Saudi Arabia vowed to match whatever nuclear capabilities Tehran was allowed to keep.

In the decade since, U.S. officials had tried to keep Saudi Arabia from developing its own program, fearing it would fuel nuclear competition across the Middle East. But it became a consistent and central point of negotiation between the two allies.

Both the Trump and Biden administrations ultimately offered to support a limited, monitored program as part of a broader deal to normalize relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, hoping that a diplomatic breakthrough would mitigate the risks of an arms race.

But the agreement secured this week left skeptics in Washington and the region unclear what the United States had secured in return.

The deal comes after Trump told reporters this week that the goal of resuming war with Iran was to prevent them from ever obtaining nuclear weapons, a challenge that has vexed the international community since the outset of the century.

U.S. presidents have long sought to prevent Middle Eastern countries from acquiring technologies that could be used to build weapons of mass destruction. The 2003 invasion of Iraq over false claims about Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs prompted Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi to abandon his nuclear work. Over the next two decades, the United States and Israel also targeted Syria’s nuclear and chemical weapons programs under Bashar al-Assad.

But Iran’s slow march to nuclear weapons capability, enriching uranium near to weapons-grade with no clear civilian or scientific ends, has prompted other countries in the region to question whether they, too, might need similar capabilities to counterbalance a historic foe. Israel, which views the Islamic Republic and its nuclear program as existential threats, is widely believed to possess its own nuclear weapons.

Hours after the nuclear deal was reported by the Wall Street Journal, the White House was silent on the details and Trump administration officials were left scrambling when asked by lawmakers and reporters for answers.

While traveling in Manila, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters he was aware of the news reports, but deferred to the White House to provide more public information.

When pressed about the risks of such a deal, Rubio said he would not “opine directly on the agreement,” but said the United States “is not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation.”

The White House confirmed the deal Wednesday afternoon.

Back in Washington, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz told members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that he has not yet seen the agreement with Saudi Arabia.

The deal, which would last 30 years and involve American firms developing the program, is expected to be submitted for review to Congress. Lawmakers will consider the deal as they grow increasingly uneasy about the Trump administration’s handling of an expanding Iran war, which Trump and Israel launched, arguing for the need to wipe out Tehran’s capabilities to build nuclear weapons.

As the war enters its fifth month, Trump has continued to defend the military efforts and has dismissed the idea that war is unpopular among Americans as they feel the economic effects.

“Americans aren’t against the war,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday. “Americans don’t want high gasoline prices but they’re not against the war.”

Trump’s remarks were made as he traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to attend a dignified transfer of U.S. service members killed in the war. Asked what he would say to the families who lost their loved ones, Trump said he’d tell them they’re loved.

“All I’m going to say is, we love you. We love your child, and that’s what they are to them. They’re their children. There’s no games, no nothing,” Trump said. “That’s their child, and all you can do is throw out your heart.”

Earlier in the day, Trump said the United States will destroy a bridge or power plant in Iran each time it shoots at a ship in the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway for the global energy supply.

Trump’s threat to target bridges and power plants would mark yet another escalation that could affect civilians in the region.

Hasan Ghashghavi, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, denied Trump’s claim on Tuesday that Iran was requesting negotiations, saying in a statement on X that it was “in no way consistent with the facts.”

“It seems that Trump, in order to extricate himself from the quagmire he’s trapped in, should seek better paths,” he wrote. “Repetitive lies no longer even bring about short-term market relief.”

Times staff writer Nabih Bulos in Beirut contributed to this report.

Captain Phil Salt led from the front as he finished unbeaten on 47 to guide Welsh Fire to a six-wicket victory against Southern Brave in a low-scoring match in Southampton.

READ MORE: Captain Salt leads Fire to victory against Brave

Available to UK users only.

July 22 (Asia Today) — Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon was fined 10 million won ($6,600) Wednesday after a court found him guilty of having a political supporter pay for opinion polls he commissioned before the 2021 mayoral by-election.

Oh would lose his position as mayor if the sentence is upheld by the Supreme Court. He rejected the ruling and said he would appeal immediately.

The Seoul Central District Court also ordered Oh to forfeit 21 million won ($13,900).

Former Seoul Vice Mayor for Political Affairs Kang Chul-won, who was indicted with Oh, was fined 3 million won ($2,000). Businessman and political supporter Kim Han-jung was fined 5 million won ($3,300).

Prosecutors accused Oh of receiving the results of 10 private opinion polls from political broker Myung Tae-kyun before the April 7, 2021, Seoul mayoral by-election.

They alleged that Oh instructed Kang, then his chief of staff, to have Kim pay about 33 million won ($21,900) in polling costs.

The court found Oh guilty of arranging payment of 21 million won for five polls, including three that were not intended for publication and two that were released publicly.

The court said Oh complained when poll results were unfavorable and sought to delay their release to minimize their negative effect.

“The commissioning and payment of the polls were also connected to an effort to publish and report candidate-commissioned opinion polls prohibited under the Public Official Election Act,” the court said. “The nature of the offense is serious.”

The court said Oh had previously served as Seoul mayor and should have been familiar with the purpose and requirements of the Political Funds Act.

It also said he led the offense but repeatedly attempted to avoid responsibility during the trial by presenting arguments the court found difficult to accept.

Oh disputed the ruling after leaving the courthouse.

“The court found five opinion polls unlawful today, but I cannot accept that conclusion,” Oh told reporters. “The correct decision would have been to find me not guilty on every count.”

Oh said the conviction was based on Myung’s statements and circumstantial evidence rather than direct evidence.

His legal team said in a statement that it regretted the court’s decision to convict Oh without objective evidence.

“It is difficult to accept a conclusion reached by piecing together some of Myung’s exaggerated statements and various circumstances,” the statement said.

The defense said it would file an immediate appeal.

The case is governed by an expedited trial provision requiring a first-trial ruling within six months of indictment and appellate and Supreme Court rulings within three months of the preceding decision.

A final Supreme Court ruling is expected by January at the latest.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260722010008156

Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has spoken out publicly for the first time since he was arrested during protests in New Delhi, voicing support for student demonstrators who are demanding the resignation of the education minister.

Tony Thorpe, the guitarist for the English glam-rock combo the Rubettes, has died. He was 80.

“It is with great sadness that we officially announce the passing of Anthony John Thorpe. He was a father to Clay, a husband to Shirle, a friend to many, and a mentor to countless musicians young and old,” read a statement posted to his Facebook page. “His recently failing health did little to diminish his fierce intellect and sharp sense of humour. He will leave an unfillable hole in the lives of all who knew him, or his music.”

The Rubettes formed in 1973 after a session-musician team cut several doo-wop inspired tracks including the single “Sugar Baby Love.” The song hit number one on the UK charts in 1974 when the band, known for its uniform of white suits, performed on Top of the Pops. The single also charted in the U.S. top 40 and became their best-known song, along with European hits including “Tonight,” “Juke Box Jive,” “I Can Do It.”

The band sold millions of singles, primarily in Europe, over its career. Thorpe sang lead on several songs in the band’s catalog, including the country-influenced single “Baby I Know.” He left the group in 1979, and the Rubettes continued to perform and record in various incarnations.

The Rubettes classic-lineup singer, Alan Williams, posted on the band’s official Facebook page, saying Thorpe was “Mercifully now at peace.”

“Dear Tony, our paths having crossed but fleetingly during which time was conceived wondrous music and often hilariously memorable moments. Your brilliance with the axe and the pen cannot be denied and remains with us, never forgotten. Rest now Cowboy.”

Paramount Skydance has notched a needed win as it continues to pursue its $111-billion deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery.

On Wednesday, the European Commission gave its consent, allowing tech scion David Ellison’s industry-reshaping merger to move forward in the countries that make up the European Union.

Europe joins 64 other regulatory entities that have either approved the deal or chosen not to challenge it, Paramount said in a statement.

“These clearances recognize that the combination of Paramount and WBD will enhance consumer choice and enable a creative-first company to invest in more projects and bring stories to audiences worldwide,” Paramount said. “It will create a scaled media and entertainment company capable of competing with the tech companies that have come to dominate the industry.”

European regulators added just one condition: Paramount must end a partnership with Universal Pictures to share distribution of movies in Europe. Beyond that, regulators concluded that even with the proposed Paramount-Warner consolidation there were enough producers to avoid competitive harms.

“The Commission found that, at film production level, enough film studios remain as competitors,” the European Commission said in a statement. “These include other major US studios like Disney, NBC Universal … and Sony, along with smaller US studios such as Amazon MGM, A24 and Lionsgate, as well as European studios.”

But the merger would result in a “high concentration” of film distribution, the commission said, so Paramount would have 13 months to end its joint venture, United International Pictures, which distributes Paramount and Universal films to cinema owners in Europe.

Paramount must not “directly or indirectly … enter into any agreement or understanding with Universal to jointly co-distribute films” in the European countries for 10 years, the commission said.

Despite early concerns about potential dominance in the children’s television market, Paramount will not be required to divest Cartoon Network, a Warner asset, because of its ownership of Nickelodeon.

“The Commission found that streaming platforms offering children’s content will continue to act as a competitive constraint on the merged entity’s TV channels,” the agency said.

The European Commission joins regulators in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and South Africa that have found the deal would not crush competition in their respective markets. Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority is still investigating the merger’s impacts.

Paramount secured the approval of the U.S. Justice Department last month. The company was hoping to close its blockbuster acquisition of Warner Bros., which owns HBO, CNN and the Burbank studios behind such popular characters as Batman, Superman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo, by the end of September to avoid a larger payout to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders.

The European Commission’s approval came two days after Ellison’s firm was dealt a substantial setback.

A federal judge in Oakland on Monday issued a temporary restraining order preventing Paramount from finalizing the acquisition for at least 14 days as that antitrust case heats up. The decision came after 12 state attorneys general, led by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit last week alleging the merger would violate U.S. antitrust rules.

District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín scheduled an Aug. 3 hearing to determine whether a longer-term pause is warranted. The states are expected to seek a preliminary injunction, which would tie up Paramount’s merger for months.

Paramount, in its statement, noted the European Commission’s conclusions “directly refute key assumptions that underpin the state AGs’ complaint seeking to block the transaction,” including whether big-budget or blockbuster films should be considered a market.

Wednesday’s approval “marks another significant milestone in bringing Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery together,” Makan Delrahim, Paramount’s chief legal officer said in the statement. “We appreciate the Commission’s constructive engagement and thorough analysis throughout its review.”

Deal critic Alvaro Bedoya, a former Federal Trade Commission member who is now a senior adviser at the American Economic Liberties Project, offered a conflicting view.

“This is not remotely over. The United States is not Europe,” Bedoya said in a statement.

The Writers Guild of America joined the legal fray last week by filing its own antitrust complaint against Paramount, alleging the proposed union of two of Hollywood’s biggest studios would lead to fewer jobs and lower pay for writers. The WGA is also seeking an injunction.

The 37-page lawsuit filed by the state attorneys general alleges that Paramount’s proposed takeover — the largest Hollywood deal in decades — would violate the U.S. Clayton Antitrust Act, a century-old law to prevent mergers that weaken competition and raise costs for consumers.

In her order granting the states’ request for a temporary restraining order, Martínez-Olguín wrote: “The Transaction would also be difficult, if not impossible, to unwind if permitted to proceed given the anticipated consolidation of operations, sharing of business-sensitive information, and potential termination or reassignment of employees.”

Paramount faces a potential $7 billion payment to Warner Bros. should the company fail to close the transaction by next summer.

“He can play in more than one position and his versatility will be a great fit in the side,” said Swansea head coach Vitor Matos.

“Elijah joins us after performing well in all aspects of our recruitment process, and after a brilliant performance at the World Cup and we are very happy to have him with us.”

Just joins fellow New Zealand international Marko Stamenic at Swansea.

He will also be reunited with summer signing Stephen Welsh, who spent last season on loan at Motherwell from Celtic.

July 22 (UPI) — The Glasgow School of Art Mackintosh building, damaged twice by fire, would cost too much for the school to fully rebuild on its own, the school’s board of governors said Wednesday.

Rebuilding the school in line with artist and architect Charles Rennie Mackintosh’s original design would cost about $355 million, the school said in a press release Wednesday.

That amount is “equivalent to five times the GSA’s annual turnover [revenue], an amount that is not affordable and which would compromise the financial sustainability of the institution.”

The Art Nouveau building, completed in 1909, was damaged by fire twice. Much of the building was destroyed in 2014 after a student’s art project was ignited by an overhead projector. In June 2018, when the rebuilding was nearly complete, another fire destroyed it. There was no cause found for the second fire, which ignited a dispute between the school and its insurance company that ended in arbitration that wrapped up this spring.

Neil Baxter, architectural historian and former lecturer in architectural history at the school, said the building is “of the greatest world importance,” and said, “The Scottish government should step up, and if it can’t, the British government should step up,” The New York Times reported.

The school released an 80-page analysis Wednesday that highlights the potential for the Mackintosh Building “to become an anchor project in a creative and cultural production innovation district, attracting investment to the city, driving the growth of its creative economy, and supporting new businesses and employment opportunities.”

Ann Priest, chair of the Glasgow School of Art’s board of governors, said early discussions with Scottish and British government officials ahead of the announcement “have been supportive and incredibly positive.”

Priest said the board believes the building should be a “heritage-led economic regeneration project, building on the existing creative and cultural production assets within this part of the city, to strengthen Glasgow’s creative eco-system and its position as one of the UK’s leading creative economies.

“The Mack will always have a special place at the heart of The Glasgow School of Art’s history, and we have further plans within the next phase of work to create museum standard interpretations of the building that will exist alongside its retained architectural elements and help tell the story of this remarkable place and the people who have worked and studied there for years to come,” Priest said.

Gordon Gibb, a former director of professional studies at the school’s architecture department, said that the school needs another organization to “take over” the restoration.

“This is a building that influenced world architecture and changed Victorian traditionalism into modernism,” Gibb told The Times. “We have detailed records of every part of it,” he added, “so it should be brought back.”

UN rights chief condemns worsening repression in Nicaragua, urging the restoration of freedoms and the rule of law.

The United Nations human rights chief has condemned Nicaragua’s escalating crackdown on civil and political rights, days after President Daniel Ortega announced a plan to block elections and shut out the opposition.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said on Wednesday that the “latest developments further deepen the severe restrictions on fundamental freedoms, the dismantling of civic space, and the steady erosion of the rule of law” in the Central American country.

Ortega, a former leftist fighter who has ruled Nicaragua for almost two decades alongside his wife, Vice President Rosario Murillo, said on Sunday that “there won’t be elections” in the country, a move that would remove any prospect of a challenge to the couple’s rule.

General elections were due in November, but constitutional reforms passed 18 months ago extended the presidential term from 5 to 6 years, pushing the vote back to 2027.

Turk said power in Nicaragua was increasingly being concentrated “under the co-presidency”, with the ruling Sandinista party already holding full control over parliament, all municipalities and the regional councils on the North and South Caribbean Coast.

He called on the authorities to “reopen civic space, and restore the rule of law”, warning that “independent expression of thought or opinion is systematically suppressed”, urging that “people of all political viewpoints must be allowed to vote and run for office, in line with the State’s international human rights obligations”.

The statement also cited the government’s abrupt revocation of several lawyers’ credentials earlier this month, which it said had no legal justification, and noted that at least 46 people remain arbitrarily detained on political grounds.

Turk further raised concern over the treatment of religious groups, pointing to the unclear whereabouts of Bishop Abelardo Mata Guevara, 80, who was detained on June 29, and urged Managua to release all those held arbitrarily “with humanity and dignity”.

Since a deadly crackdown on protests in 2018 – in which more than 300 people were killed, according to UN figures – Ortega and Murillo have tightened their grip on Nicaraguan society.

A BON Jovi tribute singer has been forced to change his name from One Jovi after a legal threat from the rockers’ lawyers.

Andy Hearn, 53, trademarked the jokey moniker after other performers tried to copy it.

But he then got a cease-and-desist letter from the ’80s hitmakers, named after lead singer Jon Bon Jovi, saying the tag was too similar.

Engineering fitter Andy, of Rotherham, South Yorks, has been in the band for six years but was worried about the costs of tackling the Livin’ On A Prayer stars in court.

He said: “I was disappointed a multi-billion-pound company would be bothered about someone doing pubs and clubs for a few pennies.

“I said, ‘If you think I’m a threat, then thank you — it’s a compliment’.”

BRAD HEARTBREAK

Fresh blow for Brad Pitt as daughter, 18, takes legal action to cut ties

AIRPORT CHAOS

Abbey Clancy’s daughter ‘nearly ARRESTED’ after ‘gun’ joke with US security

Andy said they claimed a tribute band name had to be at least 20 per cent different.

He said the exchange took place around three years ago and was resolved after several emails.

Andy was allowed to keep rocking Bon Jovi classics with his band – and at solo shows – under the ‘One Jovi’ name.

But he now releases his own songs under the tweaked moniker ‘Mr One Jovi’.

Andy insists it has not soured his love for the band, whose music he first discovered as a teenager.

He said: “It didn’t affect the way I feel about them.

“I remember listening to them when I was 14 and just absolutely loving it.”

Andy is now stepping out of Jon Bon Jovi’s shadow and chasing chart success with original music of his own.

Bon Jovi have been contacted for comment.

A Portland teenager found a random old Lakers jacket in a Goodwill bin in January.

He paid $3.07 for it.

Seven months later, the item sold at auction for $89,600.

Turns out the old jacket wasn’t so random after all.

Verified by Sotheby’s auction house, it was a warmup jacket worn by NBA legend Wilt Chamberlain at least three times. That includes during the 1972 NBA Finals in which the Lakers defeated the New York Knicks in five games and Chamberlain was named the series MVP.

“This is Truly a once in a lifetime find,” Quinn Brown wrote on Instagram in January. “I am so grateful this jacket has landed in my hands.”

Brown, 19, has been reselling his thrift-store clothing finds online for the past three years. When he saw someone toss the short-sleeved Lakers jacket with “Chamberlain” on the back into a bin of clothes outside Goodwill, Brown grabbed it for his online shop.

Then he did some research. Brown found an online photo of Chamberlain wearing a jacket that looked very similar. He also discovered that the four-time league MVP’s jersey measurements closely matched those of the jacket.

This undated photo provided by Sotheby’s shows a warmup jacket worn by Wilt Chamberlain during the 1972 NBA Finals that was found in an Oregon thrift store.

(Sotheby’s via Associated Press)

After he posted a photo of the jacket online, Brown was contacted by Sotheby’s about consigning it for auction. He took the auction house up on the offer, and the jacket was whisked away in an armored vehicle.

Sotheby’s photomatched the jacket to three images: an undated photo from the 1972-73 season, a photo from a January 1973 game and a photo from a 1972 home game against the Knicks that was determined to be from either Game 1 or Game 2 of the NBA Finals.

Chamberlain had 12 points and 19 rebounds in Game 1, a 114-92 Lakers loss, and 23 points and 24 rebounds in Game 2, a 106-92 Lakers victory.

“I didn’t even think that finding something like this was possible,” Brown told the Associated Press. “I got very, very lucky.”

Sotheby’s estimated that the jacket could go for $150,000 to $250,000. While the final amount wasn’t quite that high, Brown told KIRO-FM (97.3) in Tacoma, Wash., that he’s “obviously happy” after making back 29,000-times his initial investment.

“$90,000 is pretty good,” he said. “I was hoping it would go higher. A little surprised, sitting there the last five minutes it didn’t really get any bids. So that was a little disappointing. But, still, a lot of money — especially since I only spent $3.”

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

July 22 (UPI) — The man who rushed a stage to attack author Salman Rushdie will face federal terrorism charges in a trial that began Wednesday in New York.

Hadi Matar, 28, was found guilty of murder in state court last year and was sentenced to 25 years in prison for the August 2022 attack that left Rushdie blind in one eye and without use of one hand.

The federal case will determine if the attack was an act of terrorism and if he was carrying out a fatwa against Rushdie, set by the former Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, or if it was for Hezbollah, the Iran-backed militia in Lebanon, or neither.

Khomeini, then the ayatollah of Iran, created the fatwa in 1989 because of Rushdie’s novel, The Satanic Verses, published in 1988. Hardline Muslims considered the book blasphemous because of the way it portrayed the Prophet Muhammad.

The attack on Rushdie happened at the Chautauquah Institution in Chautauquah, N.Y., as he was delivering a speech for more than 1,000 people on writers in political exile. Matar rushed the stage and stabbed Rushdie more than a dozen times.

Matar is a U.S. citizen of Lebanese origin who was raised in New Jersey and California. His friends and relatives said that after some professional and academic frustration, he became religious. His mother told The New York Times that she could not support him.

Rushdie, 79, wrote and published in 2024, Knife: Meditations After an Attempted Murder, a memoir about the attack and his recovery.

Matar had written in his notebook a list of pros and cons to attacking Rushdie. The Times reported that a page provided by prosecutors showed that he wrote one reason not to do it was: “Could make life worse. But I doubt that. It kind of sucks already.”

HumAngle Foundation gathered students, professors, and community journalists on Tuesday, June 21, at the University of Maiduguri in northeastern Nigeria to hold timely conversations around ways to strengthen community journalism in Nigeria.

The event, which also featured the launch of a guide to community journalism, is part of the Strengthening Community Journalism and Human Rights Advocacy in Northern Nigeria (SCOJA) project, implemented with support from the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Nigeria. Through a fellowship, the project has trained 90 journalists and human rights defenders in the past year. 

During the event, three SCOJA Fellowship alumni reflected on the journey so far and called on relevant organisations to commit to similar projects. The session had Yahuza Bawage, Faiza Jibrin, and Nathaniel Ishaya in attendance. 

“There aren’t many trainings that focus on the ethics of journalism in a very practical way,” Yahuza said. “One of the sessions we treated during the three-day workshop in Plateau State was Journalism Ethics and Standards, and that taught me a lot. I was able to learn about minimising harm.”

The same sentiment was echoed by the other fellows. They highlighted that interviewing vulnerable people is a delicate skill that not many journalism training programmes cover in depth, and that they were happy to have learned it during the fellowship.

“One skill I sharpened during the fellowship was my interview skills. I learned about building connections with the subjects first, and I practised it. It really works because instead of sticking strictly to my interview guide, I connected first, and the person became eager to share [their] experience with me. I also learned about not re-traumatising my sources through the questions I ask,” said Faiza. 

They also offered some advice and encouragement for fellow young journalists trying to find their feet.

“One thing I will tell student-journalists is that they should not allow fear to hold them back. They should try out new opportunities, and with mentorship, they can do so much,” Nathaniel added. 

During another session at the event, Hassana Danyerwa, a SCOJA Fellowship alumnus, talked about the elevation she experienced as a result of the fellowship.

“Although I am not a journalist and I joined the SCOJA Fellowship as an advocate, my experiences from the fellowship set me up for a global experience where I was the only Nigerian selected. The mentorship aspect of the fellowship helped me and opened a new professional pathway for me.”

She offered some words of advice on the conditions necessary for journalists to do their work.

“Sometimes, we do not know what we need until we are given it, but one thing community journalists need is mentorship. Also, trust and avoiding micromanagement so journalists can express themselves and explore different topics is important.”

During the six-month fellowship, the fellows produced several investigative reports and carried out advocacy activities on various issues, including human rights, gender-based violence, and climate change. In Kano, northwestern Nigeria, some of the fellows launched the Kano Climate Change Journalists’ Network as a direct result of their fellowship.

RIHANNA has nearly popped out of her pink see-through Savage x Fenty lingerie in brand new pictures.

The singer, 38, took to Instagram today to share a series of sexy snaps of herself rocking the bubblegum pink slip number.

She showed off her incredible figure and plenty of cleavage in the body-hugging outfit, just 10 months after giving birth to her daughter Rocki.

The mum-of-three took part in a beach-themed photoshoot for her own body-positivity and loungewear brand.

Shr rocked wavy blonde locks and plenty of pink blush to match her dress.

In one snap, Rihanna lay in an empty blue paddle pool as she delicately placed her hand on her chest.

In another, the songwriter thrust her bum in the air and through a blue and white pool float.

She captioned the post: “Luxe. Lace. Meet our new, softest stretch lace evaaaa.”

Her followers rushed to the comments section to compliment her as one penned: “Shine bright like a diamond.”

Another fan asked: “Is this the album cover?”

Somebody else gushed: “Body is tea,” while a fourth added: “Queen,” with several fire flame emojis.

Rihanna and partner A$AP Rocky welcomed their daughter Rocki in Los Angeles in September last year.

She shared a sweet Instagram post to confirm the news as she cradled the newborn who was wearing a pink outfit.

“Rocki Irish Mayers Sept 13 2025,” Rihanna announced in the caption.

Following months of speculation, Rihanna confirmed her pregnancy hours before the Met Gala in May as she walked down the streets of New York City with her bare baby bump on display.

She then arrived late to the red carpet of the prestigious fashion event in a tailored suit, her bump clearly visible.

The couple are also parents to sons RZA and Riot.

In October last year, A$AP dropped a big hint that he and Rihanna had secretly tied the knot.

After weeks of speculation, he kept fans guessing by adding: “I’m still not gonna confirm it.”

However, in another interview weeks later with Perfect magazine, he appeared to have had a change of heart, casually describing himself as the Umbrella hitmaker’s husband in a new interview. 

He said: “Being a father and a partner and a loving husband in my family is what makes me really, really happy.”

The two performers first got together back in 2019.

To understand political consultant Clinton Reilly–the hard-charging, number-crunching, message-honing, score-evening, candidate-firing, vitriol-spewing millionaire who is running Democrat Kathleen Brown’s campaign for governor–the autumn of 1993 is a good place to start.

One year before Election Day, Reilly was looking for work. Fresh from Los Angeles, where he had helped Richard Riordan beat the odds and become mayor, the San Francisco-based strategist had no major California clients. The problem was, in partisan races at least, he worked almost exclusively for Democrats, and the Democrats at the top of the ticket–Kathleen Brown and U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein–had already hired their campaign teams.

Shut out, Reilly then did what no other political player in California would dare to do–he met with Joe Shumate, a top adviser to Gov. Pete Wilson, and discussed if he could play a role in reelecting the state’s top Republican. Weeks later, he talked to Congressman Michael Huffington about managing his campaign for Feinstein’s seat. Reilly had consorted with the Republican enemy. In his business, that just isn’t done. “It’s like the Hatfields and McCoys,” says Wilson’s campaign manager, George Gorton. “You switch sides, and neither side trusts you.” Then, Reilly switched sides again. Last March, a few months after talking to Wilson’s forces, he stepped in to rescue Brown’s floundering campaign.

It was the kind of maneuver that has made Reilly one of California’s most feared and envied political consultants–and one of the most brilliant. If you don’t believe it, just ask him. To hear Reilly talk, he is to other consultants what L’Oreal is to Prell–the one candidates hire because they’re worth it. He’s the big gun, the closer, the one you call when money is no object. And Reilly lives up to his own hype just often enough to make it seem true.

In more than two decades, Reilly has run winning campaigns for some of California’s best-known politicians, including Feinstein, Barbara Boxer, Tony Coehlo, Bill Honig, Robert Matsui, Nancy Pelosi and David Roberti. He has helped elect the current mayors of San Francisco and Los Angeles. Even his sharpest critics say Reilly knows the California electorate–where it lives, how it thinks, why it votes–as well as any political operative in the state. Reilly knows how to reach people, and that’s what politicians pay him handsomely to do. The 47-year-old son of a Bay Area milkman wears Italian suits, drives a lipstick-red Jaguar and lives just down the street from Robin Williams in a three-story Seacliff home that looks out at the Golden Gate Bridge.

More powerful than many candidates he’s helped elect, more influential than most Democratic party officials, Reilly epitomizes the modern campaign consultant. His loyalty lies not with his party but with himself, and his egotism is legendary. So is his paranoia. He is “Nixonian,” says one colleague. “Queeg-like,” says another. State Sen. Quentin Kopp, a former client, refers to him fondly as “Satan.”

In what is essentially an anonymous profession, Reilly has a knack for attracting attention, and not all of it flattering. In 1988, he managed–and lost–what remains the most expensive political campaign in state history, the insurance industry’s $63.8 million effort to beat back reform. (Reilly’s firm netted at least $6 million). In 1989, after working for months on Feinstein’s gubernatorial campaign, he noisily fired the candidate, faxing a press release to the media that claimed she lacked the gumption to become governor. (They haven’t spoken since.)

Last year, Reilly went to the San Francisco Examiner for a talk with Publisher William R. Hearst and Executive Editor Phil Bronstein. Reilly left on a stretcher with a broken ankle that required nine screws and a metal plate to fix. Though subsequent litigation never established whether Bronstein or Reilly was the aggressor, it did reveal that Reilly injects testosterone, a tidbit that only enhanced his fearsome reputation. (According to Reilly, his doctor prescribes the injections to correct a hormone imbalance.)

“When the opponent knows you have (him) on your side, a chill goes up their spine,” says San Francisco Mayor Frank Jordan. “He’s certainly better to have inside the tent than outside.”

Now, Reilly faces his toughest test. Can he reinvigorate Kathleen Brown’s once promising campaign and propel her to victory? If he succeeds in electing the first woman governor of California, one thing is sure. Nothing will stand in the way of Clint Reilly. Except, perhaps, himself.

Reilly is holding court in the restored San Francisco warehouse that houses the Clinton Reilly Group. He sits in a conference room at one end of a long, sleek table. As always, he wears an expensive suit–today, it’s navy blue–a starched white shirt, a designer tie and patterned socks. The ovals of his wire-rimmed glasses are perched high on his pale, prominent nose. Unsmiling, he fiddles with an Evian bottle cap and crosses and uncrosses his legs.

Nine members of Kathleen Brown’s campaign staff sit around the table, and judging by the accumulation of empty coffee cups, they’ve been there for hours. The question at hand: how to energize the electorate–”to turn it on,” says Reilly, “so it votes.” The answer sounds simple: Demonize Pete Wilson. “Why is PW a bum?” asks the hand-scrawled heading atop a big sheet of paper. The answers are taped to the walls. “California in decline . . . . Never done what he’s said he’d do . . . . He’s a blank . . . . 12 years asleep at the wheel . . . . He’s a hypocrite.”

After half a day’s brainstorming, however, something is still missing. Reilly summons a female assistant who hurries off, returning a moment later with a folder stuffed with mailers from previous Reilly campaigns. He picks out a lustrous Riordan-for-mayor brochure. “The declining city,” he says, displaying a glossy four-color photograph of graffiti-scarred Los Angeles streets. “Everybody sees it. It’s not a core issue, it’s a symbolic issue. Then, you’ve got crime,” he says, pointing to another slick image: a gloved hand, aiming a revolver directly at the camera. What the Brown campaign lacks, Reilly says, are visual cues that show voters why California needs a change.

“That’s one of our problems. It’s the worst recession since the Great Depression. But how do you portray a middle-class Depression?” he asks, thinking aloud. “It’s not bread lines. It’s a whole new image for the ‘90s. And we need to capture that. We need to show people how four more years of Wilson will hurt them.” This is the Reilly trademark, distilling a race down to a few stark ideas. Political consultants like to boast of their ability to identify the themes that underlie a given election, but what sets Reilly apart is his capacity to condense those themes in evocative, elegantly produced television ads and mailers.

“The guy’s a genius,” Riordan says. “He’s weird. But he’s a genius.”

To bring home the threat of crime during the 1993 Los Angeles mayoral race, Reilly created a mailer about rape in Hollywood, the district that Riordan’s opponent, City Councilman Mike Woo, had represented for years. The text of the ad was mostly statistics. But its frightening series of photos caught the eye: a young woman, her face out of focus, with a spreading stain of red that looked alarmingly like blood. “Mike Woo,” said the punch line. “A Record on Crime That Could Kill You.”

Other consultants specialize–in mail, in television, in polling, in campaign management. Reilly prides himself on running a full-service firm, which he has deliberately modeled on a commercial advertising agency. He even went so far as to locate the Clinton Reilly Group in San Francisco’s ad district. It is, he says, a “real company” that makes a profit by meeting his clients’ every need, from speech writing to graphic design. Other consultants may ride the peaks and valleys of the campaign cycle by downsizing during the off-season. Reilly employs as many as 15 people regardless. Which, of course, costs money.

“He always talks about overhead,” says Dick Pabich, a Democratic political consultant. “We joke about his middle name: Clint ‘Overhead’ Reilly. You can’t have a 10-minute conversation without it coming up.” Not coincidentally, Reilly tends to work with deep-pocketed candidates. “His talent is he is able to convince his clients that they have to spend a lot of money,” says Ron Smith, a Republican political consultant. “I hope that comes off as a compliment.”

What do candidates get in return? His formidable ability to target key voters–a discipline known as “narrowcasting.” Using a computer-generated breakdown of the electorate, Reilly identifies groups of like-minded voters (white Democratic women who voted in five of the last six elections, for example). Then, he fills their mailboxes with custom-made Reilly brochures that dovetail with pointed Reilly television commercials. “(You don’t) talk vanilla to people who want chocolate or strawberry or rocky road,” he says.

Most important, Reilly’s clients get Reilly himself: a shrewd but unforgiving perfectionist, a relentless taskmaster who, during a campaign, rarely sleeps. “He is a nocturnal animal,” says Jack Davis, a San Francisco consultant. “He does his best work in the darkness.” There are many tales of his 3 a.m. telephone calls, and until about a year and one-half ago, he did not own a wrist watch. “He didn’t want to know what time it was,” says his younger brother, Kevin. “It was a way to extend his day and give it that little bit more that he could give it.”

When talking about the campaigns he has run, Reilly has a habit of referring to “the candidates I’ve elected,” speaking in a shorthand that strips the candidates themselves of any credit. The message is clear: Reilly is not merely an employee but a partner. Politicians aren’t the only ones with something to lose. Reilly’s reputation also is on the line.

“When it’s all over, you can’t give excuses for why you didn’t win,” says Reilly, sitting on an oversized couch in his cream-colored living room. Freshly cut roses sit in a vase, and the housekeeper has left a neat stack of logs in the fireplace, which Reilly has lit. “You basically have to live with the result for the rest of your career, for the rest of your life. So pretty soon, you start to say (to candidates), ‘Hey, look! If you don’t have the money, you’re not going to win, so get the money!’ You start saying to campaign workers, ‘Hey look, this isn’t a trial run here.’ ” He pauses. “They don’t like it sometimes. And they don’t like you.”

This take-no-prisoners behavior has taken its toll on Reilly. It has isolated him; few people call him a friend. “People either hate him and despise him or hate him and admire him,” says one former Reilly employee who puts himself in the latter group. “We used to refer to his mansion as Xanadu. The implication was that he was wandering around talking to the pictures.”

“ ‘Why do they walk away from me?’ ” Tony Coehlo, the former congressman from Merced, remembers Reilly lamenting. “ ‘I’ve helped them win and now they’re attacking me? Why?’ He gets hurt, really hurt, when people turn against him.”

Instead of dissuading clients, Reilly’s obsessiveness only adds to his allure. “You have to understand how much these people want to be elected. They’re people who want it so bad,” says one former Reilly employee. “They hire Clint because they know he has a monster in him, and that’s what they think they need to win.”

At Christmastime, 1969, Bess and Joe Reilly received a letter from the eldest of their 10 children. Clinton Thomas Reilly was 22 years old–the right age, he wrote, to tell his parents “thanks.” But the seven-page letter contained more than gratitude. It revealed the aspirations of a driven idealist who yearned to “drain myself in the service of others.”

“I am a restless man and cannot settle for least best,” Reilly wrote in careful script on lined notebook paper. “There is a strange will for perfection–not in detail but in vision–which threads my action during the day and often keeps me awake at night. . . .”

Reilly had recently left the seminary, ending nine years of study, and had decided to work in politics. “Where would I be now if your entire lives had been dedicated to the pursuit of money?” he asked his parents. “Would I be in a graduate school of business somewhere, waiting to become an executive trainee for a large corporation? What a dull–unexciting life that would be–and what a barren future that would hold.

“I am also aware that little can be done without money. Since I am primarily a doer, I plan to make enough of it to stay alive. My meager talents are worth plenty to someone! And I promise to make him pay!”

Reilly was born in Oakland in 1947, and he says he was drawn to politics even as a child. In the fifth grade, he was elected class president under the banner “Take a Hint, Vote for Clint”–a slogan crafted by his campaign manager and younger sister, Jill. Years older than their other siblings, Clint and Jill were inseparable, best friends, and when she was diagnosed with a brain tumor at the age of 11, “it was like a bullet that hit you and didn’t hit me. I had a feeling of a certain responsibility that came to me.”

Reilly’s mother, a recent convert to Catholicism, was raising her children in the Church. As Jill fought her illness, her faith became more intense. “She wanted to be a nun,” her mother says, and soon after Jill’s death, Clint announced his desire to enter the seminary. The Reilly family moved to a new home in the working-class city of San Leandro, and when Clint was 14, he went to live at St. Joseph’s Seminary in Mountain View. Pursuing the priesthood, he earned his college degree in philosophy and under the supervision of his favorite professor, the Rev. Eugene J. Boyle, he got his first taste of social activism.

In 1968, while in college, Reilly led a group of seminarians in producing a local version of the Kerner Commission report, the analysis of racial tensions that was written in the wake of the 1967 summer riots. The resulting 577-page “Little Kerner Report” concluded that white San Franciscans were “sleeping through a revolution.” (Mayor Joseph Alioto scoffed, calling the report “the product of 21-year-old students who have been secluded in their seminary and not in contact with the objective facts.”) A year later, Reilly left the seminary just three and one-half years shy of taking his vows. After a brief stint working for Planned Parenthood, he threw himself into politics.

“I think initially, intuitively, I wanted to get involved in politics because that was a place where you could improve people’s lives and make the biggest impact on the direction of the world,” says Reilly. “It was a pure motivation.”

In 1974, Reilly urged Father Boyle, well known as a liberal activist, to run for the state Assembly against another Democrat, John Francis Foran. “Loyal to the People,” was the slogan Reilly devised for Boyle, and the underdog candidate was gaining ground by the day. Then, at the last minute, Foran sent out a campaign mailer that showed a photograph of what was purported to be Boyle’s residence: a building that looked like a cross between the White House and “The Beverly Hillbillies” mansion. “Why doesn’t Father Boyle practice what he preaches?” the mailer asked. In truth, the building was the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley. Nobody lived there. Still, the hit piece succeeded. Boyle lost by a few hundred votes, and Reilly’s days as a political ingenue were over.

“That was a real turning point for Clint,” says John Thiella, a State Board of Equalization staffer who worked with Reilly on several campaigns during the ‘70s and ‘80s. “(Afterward), he understood that it wasn’t just the right ideology and goodness that led to success. You had to do some harsh things to win.”

Reilly puts it differently: “I learned the power of money.”

He certainly wasn’t making any. For most of the ‘70s, Reilly estimates that his campaign work earned him only a few thousand dollars a year. To make a living, he opened a high-class junk shop that sold traffic lights, milk cans, apple crates, Mao buttons–anything that would bring in cash. Reilly’s break came in 1979 when he ran San Francisco Supervisor Quentin Kopp’s campaign for mayor, forcing heavily favored incumbent Dianne Feinstein into a runoff. Kopp lost, but Reilly was on the map.

By his own admission, Reilly was drinking heavily during this period. “He was a Remy Martin kind of guy,” says his friend Jack Davis. In the middle of the Kopp campaign, Reilly was arrested for drunk driving and resisting arrest, according to police records. Then, while he was running the 1980 reelection campaign of then-Van Nuys Congressman Jim Corman, a Democrat, something happened between him and a girlfriend that would haunt him for years.

“Did you ever hit (your girlfriend)? Did you ever grab (her) in anger? Did you cause injury to (her)?”–lawyers for the San Francisco Examiner would pepper Reilly with these questions 13 years later, in response to the lawsuit he filed after his ankle injury. During legal proceedings, Reilly’s lawyer advised him not to answer. Still, by the time the newspaper settled–paying Reilly somewhere between $400,000 and $900,000–the alleged incident with his former girlfriend had become part of the Reilly lore. As the San Jose Mercury News put it: “Is . . . Clint Reilly a testosterone-crazed, woman-beating bully . . . ?”

“I just don’t feel it’s fair to ask me to answer that question,” he says, grimacing as he paces his office at Kathleen Brown’s headquarters. “I have acknowledged that I had a drinking problem, and that I also had problems coping with the pressures of the work. I stopped drinking in 1981 and sought counseling and even continue today to see the counselor that I saw back then. A number of things I did were destructive. And I felt it was real important for me to sort of look at myself and my behavior and make significant changes.”

Reilly insists that he had gotten ahold of himself by the time he opened his firm in 1982. With more than 30 campaigns behind him, it was time to make money. “I began to say to myself, ‘Well, gee, somebody who gets a job for $125,000 as a result of what I do and who may have that job for life. Because of his own good efforts but also what I did for him, he’s earned a ton of money, he’s gotten a lot of personal psychic rewards, he’s gotten to be a famous person. Now why in the heck should I do this for 2,000 bucks a month?”

He started demanding more money and getting it–at least six figures a campaign. Still, some candidates flinched. In 1982, after Reilly orchestrated a decisive primary victory for Barbara Boxer in her first congressional race, Boxer fired him for exceeding her campaign budget and leaving her in debt. “It’s very expensive to have a manager like Clint,” she said at the time. It could also be maddening. In the midst of the campaign, Reilly demanded that Boxer mortgage her house to raise more cash. When she refused, he went to her husband, who told Reilly to get out of his office. (Boxer refused to comment on the incident, saying it was “personal.”)

But Reilly was getting to be known as a winner. In the early years, he had lost business because he was not part of the San Francisco political machines of then-Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy or Assembly Speaker Willie Brown. By the mid-’80s, though, Reilly’s nonalignment had become an asset. Plenty of candidates sought his services, and he was free to work for whomever he wished. Soon, his behavior made some wonder if there was anything he wouldn’t do.

There was the way he conducted the 1988 insurance initiative campaign, spending what many people think was an obscene amount of money–and making a fair bit himself. (Afterward, he says, “I basically didn’t have to work a day in my life for the rest of my life.”) There was the way he publicly ditched Feinstein in 1989. (“That was bad judgment, a humbling experience for an arrogant man. But I’ll tell you what it did. It got Dianne off her ass.”) And there was the way, in 1990, he sought to work on behalf of a pro-development ballot measure in San Francisco. When the developers hired a rival consultant, Reilly turned around and spent $150,000 of his own money to defeat it. (“I think the message was adequately communicated.”)

Reilly had come to understand that money was more than merely a way “to stay alive,” as he’d written his parents in 1969. Money was the enduring currency of power. Money bought freedom–to be generous, perhaps, or to even old scores. And money commanded one of the things Reilly most craved: respect. No longer the idealistic 22-year-old, compelled to serve others, Reilly wanted to be appreciated, and experience had shown him that people appreciated what they paid for. He had learned this lesson, but he resented those who had taught him.

“In many ways, I see him as a high-priced call girl,” says Calvin Welch, a community activist in San Francisco whom many describe as Reilly’s Father-confessor. “On the one hand he greatly luxuriates in charging people top dollar and spending an incredible amount of money and having that reputation, which means he will only go after certain kinds of candidates. On the other hand, he despises those people for thinking they can buy Clint Reilly.”

Kathleen Brown sat down with Clint Reilly for the first time last March. Attorney Bill Wardlaw, a Brown adviser who had worked closely with Reilly on the Riordan campaign, hosted the afternoon session in his West Los Angeles office. Immediately, Brown says, she was struck by Reilly’s sophisticated analysis of California politics. Although the meeting had been arranged less than 24 hours before, Reilly had sketched out a formula for victory–”He diagnosed my campaign better than anyone had in a year and a half,” she says.

As darkness fell, Brown saw something else. “After about 2 1/2 hours, the lights went out–the building had closed down,” Brown remembers. “He kept right on going–(talking about) the Inland Empire margin of victory. We continued our conversation in semi-darkness. It was unusual.” Impressed by his intensity, Brown offered Reilly the job of campaign chairman. “He is a warrior. A commando. There’s nothing that comes across the transom that unnerves him or distracts him from the focus of this campaign.”

Reilly’s arrival unnerved some of Brown’s campaign staff, however. Within days of Brown’s decision, campaign manager Teresa Vilmain, policy director Roy Behr and media consultant Jim Margolis all resigned–opting to “make the tough decision now,” Margolis said in a statement, “rather than face difficulties later.” Reilly got what he wanted: complete control.

Reilly appeared to be just what Brown needed. Known for little more than her lineage, she lacked the very thing Reilly’s candidates are known for–a sharply defined image. But along with his expertise, Reilly brought his reputation as a walking cluster bomb. One woman fund-raiser who had worked for Brown for three years quit the campaign without even meeting him because of what she had heard. Other staffers had heard the stories, too. There were so many, they were impossible to avoid.

Among the things people claim to have seen Reilly do over the years: comment on the size of a woman’s breasts in front of a roomful of male colleagues; inform a male employee that he wanted “to vomit” at the sight of him; reduce men and women staffers to tears; throw paper clips; punch a wall repeatedly next to an employee’s head; pound a chair up and down; break a glass ashtray by slamming it on a table; knock the telephone receiver out of a woman’s hand while she was talking; chase an employee down a street.

“That’s one that does have a kernel of truth to it,” Reilly says of the last example. According to two sources, in the midst of a 1986 supervisorial race, Reilly became so upset at mistakes made by a staffer named Laurie R. Glenn that he pursued her, shouting, out of his office and into the streets of San Francisco in the middle of the night. Reilly says that he can’t recall precisely what occurred. “I wasn’t chasing her down the street,” he says. “I think, actually, she was chasing me.” (Glenn declined to comment.)

Reilly hates the subject of his temper, even though he often brings it up himself. When asked to explain it, he is by turns irate, contemptuous and remorseful. He concedes that he can be out of control sometimes and unnecessarily hurtful, though “much, much less than legend would have it.” That kind of anger “there’s no excuse for,” he says. “I feel badly about it.” During a campaign, though, Reilly says he uses anger strategically. Candidates “are not hiring me because they want me to get along with everybody. They’re hiring me because they want to win. The campaign is a war, you know?” And rage is a tactical weapon.

“We human beings on many levels are motivated by our desire to look good in front of our colleagues, and (by) the fear of shame,” he says, explaining why he has humiliated staffers in the presence of others. “I want it to be a public experience (so) that you know that everyone in the whole organization is going to know that you f- – -ed up.”

Reilly isn’t entirely wrong. He may have trouble getting along with people, but in the most fundamental sense, he understands them. He has pondered their motivations for years–as a seminarian, as a philosophy student, as a campaigner, as a boss. He has made a fortune by identifying and appealing to voters’ hopes and fears. He is a professional manipulator. That, say several former colleagues, is what makes him so cruel.

“The man possesses a superhuman ability to zero in on your emotional or psychological vulnerability. Clint’s weapon is words, and I’ve never seen anybody who can hit you so on the mark,” says one former employee who echoed the descriptions of dozens of others. Reilly often seems “loopy” and “out there,” this person says, but when he cuts into you, he does so with surgical precision. “That Jesuit training was really something he paid attention to. That priestly kind of power over you is there. It’s not just about a boss telling you you didn’t get enough widgets done. It’s about a priest making a fundamental comment about (your) character.”

As Reilly excoriates others, Calvin Welch says, he also flays himself. “He is a guy at war with himself. There’s the seminarian. There’s the hard-boiled campaigner. And then there’s what you could call the friend. Sometimes they don’t fit together. He is basically troubled by doubts as to whether or not he made the right decisions in his life.”

In 1991, those doubts made Reilly quit campaigning. He was exhausted, he said, and disillusioned. “In my experience, most politicians are not up to the task,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in announcing his retirement. But few people thought he would stay out of the game for long. Politics had made him a man about town in San Francisco–a staple of Herb Caen’s column, he escorted beautiful women to expensive restaurants and hosted extravagant parties at his home. As many had predicted, he was back at work within months, joining Frank Jordan’s long-shot campaign for mayor. He had decided to reconcile himself, he now says, to “certain realities of the business that will never change: the wear and tear, the continuous, the seven days a week, 16 hours a day, day after day after day.”

There are obvious payoffs–his museum quality art collection, his private beach, his up-close view of the Golden Gate Bridge. But they come at a price. Reilly says he doesn’t have to justify his temper, his wealth, his work. Still, he never stops doing so. “Look, you know . . . I am who I am and I am what I am and I’m proud of what I am,” he says. “I enjoy what I do. It’s exciting. It’s exhilarating. It’s fun. But it’s also very difficult. It’s tiring. It’s emotionally draining. It’s sometimes frustrating. It’s full of tension. . . . Sometimes, one doesn’t have total serenity about everything that you do. But, in general, I, you know . . . I am not at peace. I’m at a relative state of happiness, with a lot of tension in there as well.”

The San Francisco fund-raiser was going marvelously. The ballroom of the St. Francis Hotel was packed with nearly 1,000 Kathleen Brown supporters who had paid at least $500 a plate. “Here Comes the Sun,” blared from the loudspeaker as Brown and Vice President Al Gore entered the room and began working their way through a crowd that included several other Reilly clients. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi was seated at the head table. State Sen. Milton Marks and former Supt. of Schools Bill Honig were a few tables away. Reilly’s girlfriend–a Riordan staffer named Janet Koewler–also was there, sitting at his side. But Reilly’s gaze rarely settled on anyone but Brown and her special guest.

Reilly is running the race of his life. If Brown ousts Gov. Pete Wilson, she will instantly become the most prominent woman in American politics, and Reilly could be catapulted into the national fray as well. “Clint wants to elect a President,” says one observer. Already, there is speculation that if Brown wins, Reilly’s old friend Tony Coehlo, now at the Democratic National Committee, may try to land him a job on President Clinton’s reelection campaign.

But that’s a big if. Reilly has yet to arrest Brown’s slide. Although he has brought discipline to the Brown campaign, her lead–which had hit a high of 23 points in May, 1993–is now a distant memory. The Los Angeles Times poll in mid-September had Brown behind by nine points among likely voters. With the election five weeks away, Kathleen Brown is still struggling with the problem that has vexed her from the start: explaining to voters why she is an alternative to Pete Wilson, why she should be California’s next leader.

Reilly insists that the 1994 election is about effectiveness. He says he’s convinced that if the campaign can connect Wilson to the decline of California, voters will turn to Brown. Thus, most of the 30 different television ads he has created for Brown do little more than attack Wilson. But you can’t beat something with nothing, and for all of Reilly’s efforts, Brown’s political identity remains almost as unfocused today as when she hired him.

Still, Brown remains optimistic, saying Reilly, whom she’s paid more than $690,000 in commissions and fees so far, is worth the price. “All the polls last year were not realistic assessments of what the race was going to be about. I knew that,” she said in late August. Because of Reilly, “we are right where I needed to be–in a neck-and-neck race with an incumbent governor who will be defeated in November.”

Not everyone is so sure. “(Reilly) is the best opener I’ve ever seen. He can handicap a race, he can analyze the electorate, figure out what votes are needed where. He’s almost worth his fee for that alone,” says longtime confidant, Calvin Welch. “He never gets crazy at the beginning because he has it all figured out. But when things don’t unfold the way they’re supposed to–the candidate wears the wrong dress, some bozo doesn’t get the third mailer out to the left-handed Lithuanians — But his great weakness is his end game. That’s when he loses it. .”

Clint Reilly hasn’t lost it so far. He hasn’t thrown anything, hasn’t reduced a staffer to tears. But he continues to flog himself. He hasn’t taken a day off since he joined the Brown campaign (he has been known to chide staffers who have). He sees his girlfriend infrequently. On their one-year anniversary in June, she gave him a frame to hold a picture of the two of them. Today, it sits empty–there’s been no time to pose for a photo.

“This is the most important race for governor anywhere in the country,” Vice President Gore told the audience at Brown’s fund-raiser. Reilly’s girlfriend gave his hand a squeeze. “This is a bus,” Gore continued, “we cannot and will not allow to stall.” Reilly probably couldn’t have said it any better himself.

THE CLIENTS

“He is a warrior. A commando. Nothing unnerves him.”

STATE TREASURER KATHLEEN BROWN

(1994 gubernatorial race)

“The guy’s a genius. He’s weird. But he’s a genius.”

LOS ANGELES MAYOR RICHARD RIORDAN

(1993 mayoral race)

“When opponents know you have (him), a chill goes up their spine.”

SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR FRANK JORDAN

(1991 mayoral race)

“It’s very expensive to have a manager like Clint.”

SENATOR BARBARA BOXER

(1982 congressional race)

“He gets hurt, really hurt, when people turn against him.”

FORMER CONGRESSMAN TONY COELHO

(1982, ‘84, ’86 congressional races)

She and Reilly have not spoken in five years.

SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN

(1983 mayoral race)

Major League Soccer says it is investigating allegations of tampering by Inter Miami after the club signed Brazil midfielder Casemiro.

On Wednesday, Miami announced they had signed the 34-year-old – who left Manchester United at the end of last season – on a deal that runs to the end of the 2027 MLS campaign, with an option to extend until June 2029.

But moments later, the MLS released a statement saying it was “reviewing a tampering allegation” against the club.

“The league is gathering all relevant information and will refrain from further comment until the review is complete,” it added.

“While Inter Miami CF and the LA Galaxy have reached a settlement for the discovery priority [first rights] to sign Casemiro, the terms will be released upon conclusion of the tampering investigation.”

The investigation concerns Casemiro’s discovery rights, an MLS regulation that gives a specific club first refusal over a player should they want to join.

A club may have up to five players on their discovery list at any time and can add or remove players.

Los Angeles Galaxy held the discovery rights for Casemiro but in announcing the player’s signing, Inter Miami said they had acquired the rights from the Galaxy.

Casemiro announced in January that he would depart Old Trafford at the end of the 2026-27 season following a mutual decision not to renew his contract.

He won five Champions League titles with Real Madrid before moving to United in 2022, who played for Brazil as they reached the last 16 at this summer’s World Cup.

“What motivates me the most, and I think this is true for every player, is winning and continuing to grow,” he said.

Casemiro made 160 appearances for United, scoring 26 goals and providing 14 assists as he won one EFL Cup and one FA Cup.

In the wake of Casemiro’s departure, United have prioritised midfield reinforcements in this window, buying Andrey Santos for £50m from Chelsea, and Youri Tielemans from Aston Villa for £35m.

Before the announcement of the investigation, Inter Miami co-owner Sir David Beckham said of Casemiro: “He is a winner who has achieved so much in the game and after such an incredible career with Real Madrid and Manchester United I’m delighted that he’s decided to make Miami his next home.”

At Miami, Casemiro is set to join former Real and Manchester United team-mate Sergio Reguilon as well as Argentina’s World Cup finalists Lionel Messi and Rodrigo de Paul.

It is not the first time Inter Miami have been probed over transfer dealings.

In 2021 they were fined $2m after breaking MLS rules with the signing of France midfielder Blaise Matuidi from Juventus the previous year.

The MLS said Matuidi had been paid more than was allowed, effectively giving the team four “designated players” last season rather than the permitted three. Designated players’ wages do not count towards the MLS salary cap.

Known as the ‘Beckham rule’, it was introduced when the ex-England captain joined Los Angeles Galaxy in 2007.