Alex Trebeksays he's gotten super close with Ken Jennings, Brad Rutter and James Holzahauer over the years ... and having them back on "Jeopardy!" feels like a family reunion.
The beloved game show host joined us for "TMZ Live" and told us he's enjoying the hell outta hosting the greatest "Jeopardy!" contestants of all time. Alex says they've got an incredibly strong bond, forged during their long runs on the show.
If you've tuned in to the tournament of champions, you've probably noticed how much fun Alex has been having. It's been a trying 10 months for Trebek, who's battling stage 4 pancreatic cancer, but he tells us he's really enjoying this special competition.
Alex says he's still hanging in there in his fight against cancer ... he has his good days and bad, but it seems this reunion of sorts is really lifting his spirits. Really puts a smile on your face.
Trebek's been at the helm of the show since 1984, but says he's never moderated such a fierce competition ... and ya gotta hear why he's comparing this tourney to the Super Bowl!!!
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced they will step back as "senior" royals and work to become financially independent.
In a statement, Prince Harry and Meghan also said they plan to split their time between the UK and North America.
The BBC understands no other royal - including the Queen or Prince William - was consulted before the statement and Buckingham Palace is "disappointed".
Senior royals are understood to be "hurt" by the announcement.
In their unexpected statement on Wednesday, also posted on their Instagram page, the couple said they made the decision "after many months of reflection and internal discussions".
"We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen."
They said they plan to balance their time between the UK and North America while "continuing to honour our duty to the Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages".
"This geographic balance will enable us to raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity."
'Major rift'
BBC royal correspondent Jonny Dymond said the fact palace officials said they were "disappointed" is "pretty strong".
"I think it indicates a real strength of feeling in the palace tonight - maybe not so much about what has been done but about how it has been done - and the lack of consultation I think will sting.
"This is clearly a major rift between Harry and Meghan on one part, and the rest of the Royal Family on the other."
A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said discussions with the duke and duchess on their decision to step back were "at an early stage", adding: "We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through."
Over Christmas, the couple took a six-week break from royal duties to spend some time in Canada with their son, Archie, who was born in May.
After returning to the UK on Tuesday, Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, visited Canada's High Commission in London to thank the country for hosting them and said the warmth and hospitality they received was "unbelievable".
During the visit, Meghan said it was an "incredible time" to enjoy the "beauty of Canada".
"To see Archie go 'ah' when you walk by, and just see how stunning it is - so it meant a lot to us."
Former actress Meghan lived and worked in Toronto during her time starring in the popular US drama Suits, and she has several Canadian friends.
Close up, it was painfully clear that there were great chunks of the job they simply could not stand.
Both of them appeared to come alive with the crowds. But Harry hated the cameras and was visibly bored by the ceremonial.
And though Meghan was often the consummate professional, at times her impatience with the everyday slog of the role sometimes broke through.
She said she didn't want to become a voiceless figurehead; but when she raised her voice, she found criticism waiting for her.
They both made their feelings known in the 2019 interview with ITV's Tom Bradby.
But beyond the detail, what was so shocking was how unhappy they both seemed. The sun-drenched wedding of the year before seemed like a dream; here were two people visibly struggling with their lives and positions.
There are far more questions than answers; what will their new role be? Where will they live, and who will pay for it? What relationship will they have with the rest of the Royal Family?
And there's the institutional question. What does this mean for the Royal Family?
It comes just a few months after Prince Andrew stepped back from his duties. Some might see this as the slimmed-down monarchy that the 21st century needs.
But Harry and Meghan reached people that other royals didn't.
They were part of the reinvention and refreshing of the institution. This was not the way anyone would have planned its future.
Former Buckingham Palace press officer Dickie Arbiter suggested the decision showed Prince Harry's "heart ruling his head".
He told the BBC the "massive press onslaught" when their son Archie was born may have played a part in the decision.
And he compared the move to Edward VIII's abdication in 1936 in order to marry twice-divorced American Wallis Simpson.
"That is the only other precedent, but there's been nothing like this in modern times," Mr Arbiter said.
Asked how being a "part-time" member of the Royal Family might work, Mr Arbiter said he did not know.
"If they're going to be based in the UK, it means they are going to be doing a lot of flying [with] a big carbon footprint," he said, adding that this may "raise eyebrows".
He also questioned how the couple would become financially independent.
"I mean, Harry is not a poor man, but to settle yourself in two different continents, to raise a family, to continue to do your work - how's the work going to be funded?
"How is their security going to be funded?
"Because they're still going to have to have security - who's going to have to pay for this? Where's the security coming from? Is the Metropolitan Police going to be providing it and if so whether there's going to be any contribution in covering the security cost?"
Mr Arbiter also suggested questions would be raised over why £2.4m of taxpayer's money was spent on renovating the couple's home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, if they will now be living elsewhere for some of the year.
BBC royal correspondent Jonny Dymond said the couple have "considerable savings", including Harry's inheritance from Princess Diana's estate and the money Meghan earned as an actress.
But, asked about whether they might get jobs, he added: "There is a problem for members of the Royal Family - relatively senior ones, even if they say they're no longer senior - getting jobs, because they are seen to monetise their brand and you run into a whole host of questions about conflict of interest".
He added that we are now in "wait and see mode" as to whether this new model of being a royal can work - "or if this is really a staging post for them to leave the Royal Family".
The Prince of Wales pays for the public duties of Harry, Meghan, William and Kate and some of their private costs, out of his Duchy of Cornwall income, which was £21.6m last year.
Accounts from Clarence House show this funding - in the year Meghan officially joined the Royal Family - stood at just over £5m, up 1.8% on 2017-18.
Royal author Penny Junor said she "can't quite see how it's going to work", adding: "I don't think it's been properly thought through."
"I think it's extraordinary but also I think it's rather sad," she said. "They may not feel they are particularly loved but actually they are very much loved."
In an ITV documentary last year, Meghan admitted motherhood was a "struggle" due to intense interest from newspapers.
Prince Harry also responded to reports of a rift between him and his brother William, the Duke of Cambridge, by saying they were on "different paths".
In October, the duchess began legal action against the Mail on Sunday over a claim that it unlawfully published one of her private letters.
And the duke also began legal action against the owners of the Sun, the defunct News of the World, and the Daily Mirror, in relation to alleged phone-hacking.
Media playback is unsupported on your device
Prince Harry also released a statement, saying: "I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."
The duke and duchess moved out of Kensington Palace, where the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge live, in 2018 to set up their family home in Windsor.
Then last summer, they split from the charity they shared with Prince William and Kate to set up their own charitable projects.
The couple's announcement on Wednesday comes two months after the Duke of York withdrew from public life after a BBC interview about his ties to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who killed himself in August.
A Gen X classic gets an added dose of urgency in Freeform’s Party Of Five, one of the few TV reboots to offer meaningful updates while recapturing much of the magic of the original. Series creators Amy Lippman and Christopher Keyser return to their story of five siblings who must navigate adolescence and life in general (mostly) on their own after losing their parents. But, as Lippman has said in the lead up to the premiere, she and Keyser weren’t just looking to indulge in nostalgia; rather, they saw an opportunity to combine the age-old story of children (and teens) forced to grow up too fast with the reality of an immigration policy that has only grown more inhumane with time. What they have (re)created is a smart and moving family drama that really grows into its own.
Several key changes have been made to the framework: The Mexican-American Acosta family stands in for the Salingers, and the setting appears to have been moved from San Francisco to Los Angeles (at least, based on references to the proximity to U.S.-Mexico border). Lippman and Keyser, who co-wrote the first three episodes, also revise the tragedy that sets the series into motion—rather than lose their parents to a drunk driver, Emilio (Brandon Larracuente), Beto (Niko Guardado), Lucía (Emily Tosta), Valentina (Elle Paris Gelaspi), and Rafael (Lennox and Maverick Ashby) watch as Javier (Bruno Bichir) and Gloria Acosta (Fernanda Urrejola) are hauled off by ICE agents. This wrenching scene—set in the middle of family dinner, no less—comes just minutes into the pilot, and it’s not the only time we watch the Acosta family bid tearful goodbyes to each other. But it’s far from the last we see of Javier and Gloria; they’re still able (for now) to check in on their kids via Skype and phone calls.
Advertisement
However, that change doesn’t in any way diminish the trauma of being torn apart as a result of decisions made by people far removed from everyday life in this country; the family is beset by nightmares, resentment, money troubles, and, in the case of Emilio, fear of losing his DACA status. These complications generate consistent drama, but they also lend greater specificity and purpose to this retelling. Along with charming performances, purpose is what propels the pilot, which is otherwise a straightforward introduction. The new cast members are each given a chance to shine (albeit in regrettable circumstances), starting with Bichir and Urrejola, who bring passion and pathos to their roles. Larracuente provides a good, brooding anchor, while Guardado is the perfect combination of annoying younger sibling and nurturing older brother. Gelaspi is soulful but never an “old soul” cliché, but it’s Tosta who stands out in the early episodes. As the byzantine and counterintuitive nature of immigration policy and the path to citizenship reveals itself, Tosta gradually trades a more placid exterior for simmering resentment, without losing Luce’s multidimensionality. (The cachetón Rafa, played by infant twins, is kind of just there, because… he’s an infant.)
Lippman and Keyser, who co-wrote the premiere with Michael Zebede, draw the necessary parallels between their ’90s ensemble—including Gen X teen icons Scott Wolf, Neve Campbell, and Matthew Fox—and the new class. Emilio (or Milo, as he’s known to promoters and fellow musicians) is the hot, prodigal son with a fantastic head of hair and an aversion to commitment, who nonetheless finds himself in charge of a family and a restaurant. Precocious tween Valentina is a math nerd instead of a virtuoso violinist, but she feels her parents’ absence more than her sister or brothers. Like Bailey, Beto is the sensitive teen athlete who is also the linchpin; he struggles more visibly than anyone else to juggle school and family obligations. Lucía is highly intelligent like her Salinger counterpart, and is also eager to shed the good, obedient girl image she no longer relates to—but she’s far angrier than Julia or even any of the other Acosta kids.
Photo: Gilles Mungasson (Freeform)
Advertisement
It’s often through Lucía that Party Of Five voices the rightful frustration that immigrant families and Latinx families feel at being pawns in a political game. To do that properly and poignantly, there’s Latinx (and Hispanic) talent behind the scenes as well, including Zebede, a writer and co-executive producer, writer/producer Mary Angélica Molina, producer/director Rodrigo Garcia, and director Eva Vives. Along with Lippman and Keyser, this creative team crafts a tale still too rarely seen—that of people of color for whom assimilation and aspiration may not be enough—along with others that aren’t quite as specific, but just as relatable: those of love triangles and other romantic foibles; of wondering where you belong; of rebelling against a stifling status quo.
There’s a greater focus on teen angst and rites of passage in Party Of Five than overt social commentary, which can feel more groundbreaking and political than its real-life allusions. For the next 10 Wednesday nights, viewers will gather with a family that may or may not resemble their own, but is still relatable. The Acostas are caught up in a quagmire, but their lives mattered before zero-tolerance policy was implemented, and their lives will continue to matter as debates are held and changes made (or not). And as the season unfolds, the combination of this particular premise with this particular family becomes even more complementary, almost poetic. Brown kids (and Black and Indigenous kids) in this country are often made to grow up fast; they’re also, all too often, growing up in a world that doesn’t care as much about them. Headlines and tweets may make the Party Of Five reboot seem timely, but it’s actually a story that predates its source material.
New York Times correspondent and CBS News contributor Jodi Kantor, who won a Pulitzer Prize for breaking the news about Weinstein, said the new sex crime charges announced Monday in Los Angeles are "an incredibly dramatic development."
"Weinstein is essentially now fighting charges on two fronts," Kantor told "CBS This Morning" on Tuesday. "The prosecutors are basically accusing him of hurting women day after day in L.A. And, remember that as jury selection starts in New York, the New York jury may know about what he's accused of doing in Los Angeles."
Kantor said the two cases could affect each other in unpredictable ways.
"First of all, there's a woman who's involved in both cases," Kantor said. "There are only two women at the basis of the New York charges, but the prosecutors can call other witnesses. One of those witnesses is also at the center of the L.A. allegations."
Showing a pattern with the other witnesses' testimony could be devastating for Weinstein's case, Kantor said.
"The nature of the Harvey Weinstein allegations is these women who are strangers to one another, who didn't know each other, they're telling very similar stories about the same man over and over again," Kantor said. "That's really powerful."
But, according to Kantor, Weinstein's defense team does have at least one thing on their side.
"The jury has to be unanimous to convict," Kantor said. "When is the last time that 12 people you know agreed on these really complicated matters about sex and power? So they may be able to create some doubt about exactly what happened and about consent in the jury's mind."
Prince William and Prince Harry have had a difficult year. After Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stepped out and established their own household, separate from that of Prince William and Kate Middleton, numerous reports claimed that the brothers were at odds and are now not nearly as close as they used to be.
This is compounded by the fact that they are rarely seen together when they used to be inseparable. Still, a new report reveals that Duchess Kate definitely wants the two to start patching things up, if only for the sake of the children.
How did the royal rift start?
Meghan Markle | DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS – WPA Pool/Getty Images
When Duchess Meghan joined the royal family in early 2018, rumors immediately started regarding the nature of her relationship with Duchess Kate. While many assumed that the two women didn’t get along, it seems as though the real story was the rift between Prince William and Prince Harry.
Royal sources claimed that the brothers were each on their own paths in life and that they had little in common anymore. A few months after Markle and Prince Harry got married, they announced that they would be separating households from Prince William and Duchess Kate, and re-established themselves in a quieter, more remote area of England.
After welcoming their son, Archie Harrison, in May 2019, they became even more reclusive. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex kept their son’s baptism a private affair and allowing only a few photos of the baby to be released.
How many kids do Prince William and Kate Middleton have?
Prince William and Duchess Kate are no strangers to balancing the press with the hard work of parenthood. They have three children in total: Prince George, born in July 2013, Princess Charlotte, born in May 2015, and their youngest child, Prince Louis, born in April 2018.
While rumors persist that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge could be planning for a fourth child, they have not yet announced anything.
Since the birth of Archie Harrison this past May, he has only been spotted on one or two playdates with Duchess Kate and Prince William’s children. Although some sources have insisted that Markle turned to Middleton for parenting advice after the birth of her son, sadly, the royal cousins do not seem to spend a great deal of time together.
Do Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want more children?
Whether or not Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan eventually have another baby remains to be seen. On one hand, Prince Harry spoke out in 2019, stating that they want “no more than two” children due to the potential for negative effects on the environment.
Still, the two are known to love kids and it is very possible that they want to give Archie Harrison a sibling. Some sources have speculated that they will probably announce a pregnancy in 2021, in order to allow for a bit of a gap in between children.
This would likely be a healthier thing to do. Although since Duchess Meghan is past 35, and is considered to be of advanced maternal age, the possibility of complications become greater the longer they wait.
Kate Middleton is hoping the brothers reconnect
No matter how many children the royal couples end up welcoming, it seems as though Duchess Kate might have finally had enough of the rift. In a recent report, sources close to the royal family claim that Middleton has one major hope for 2020: that the royal cousins get to spend more time together.
The source noted that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan chose to spend the holiday season separately from the royal family, heading to Canada for a retreat from the spotlight. It is certainly possible that Prince Harry and Markle decide to change up their mindset in the new year and spend a great deal more time around Middleton, Prince William, and their kids.
Still, they have proven to be a bit unpredictable in the past, so only time will tell.
The Duke and Duchess recently returned from Canada, where they spent the Christmas holidays with the Duchess' mother, Doria Ragland.
They were met at Canada House by Janice Charette, the high commissioner for Canada in the United Kingdom.
"The Duke and Duchess have a strong connection to Canada. It's a country The Duke of Sussex has visited many times over the years and it was also home to The Duchess for seven years before she became a member of The Royal Family," the royals said on their Instagram page, Sussex Royal.
The Duke and Duchess posted a video of their tour, which included seeing exhibits and meeting the staff.
Judge Burke denied the motion, arguing that the new charges are "next to meaningless" as far as Weinstein's criminal case in New York is concerned.
On Tuesday morning, Judge James M. Burke denied a request from Harvey Weinstein’s legal team to delay his criminal trial in New York County “with a cooling off period” after the former movie mogul was indicted on new charges in Los Angeles County on Monday.
Attorney Arthur Aidala argued that it would be impossible to select a "fair and impartial" panel of jurors after the widespread coverage of Weinstein’s new indictment.
"It is the talk of the town, at this very moment," Aidala said, holding up copies of national newspapers that printed front-page coverage of the charges. "Don’t we need a cooling-off period? Don’t we at least need a period of time so there are other things in the news?" (Weinstein's legal team also suggested that the New York District Attorney's office was in cahoots with L.A. and that these new charges were timed to help the prosecution.)
But the judge immediately denied the motion to adjourn, arguing that the new charges are "next to meaningless" as far as Weinstein's criminal case in New York is concerned.
"The jury knows and will be instructed that being arrested or charged or indicted for a felony is in and of itself meaningless," he said. "If you want to explore the L.A. charges on your voir dire, you may of course do so."
The judge also said he would consider a request to present the jury — once selected — with instructions related to the case.
In light of the new charges, lead prosecutor Joan Illuzzi-Orbon asked the judge to revoke Weinstein's bail agreement and have him remanded, a motion that was also rejected.
Manhattan Assistant District Attorney argued that Weinstein now faces a more perilous situation and could try to flee. "It would ensure that the defendant is here in court and answering to the charges of bar," Illuzzi-Orbon told the judge. "We know that the defendant is a man of great means. He travels back and forth across the country privately. He has enormous amounts of real estate. So, judge, there is a grave risk that this defendant at some point will realize that the evidence against him is imposing and overwhelming and look to not only what this means for him, but the fact that across the country the same thing will happen to him."
Tuesday's court session, the second of the trial, began with the judge lambasting Weinstein's team after their client was caught using his cellphone after the judge had warned them — particularly Aidala — about the consequences of another such infraction.
"Put it away, now," a court officer had yelled at Weinstein shortly before the judge entered the courtroom.
"There is an issue, it’s an ongoing issue, it’s been an issue every single court date," the judge told Weinstein's team, as Weinstein himself repeatedly shook his head. "Mr. Weinstein, I could not implore you more to not answer the following question: Is this really the way you want to end up in jail for the rest of your life, by texting in violation of an order? Is it?"
But the judge decided against revoking Weinstein's bail, giving his team another stern warning instead.
As for the timeline of the case, the court will begin seating jury panels of 120 people Tuesday morning, with open court voir dire processions scheduled to start next Thursday, Jan. 16.
Exclusive
