gshc2020.com

But Derby were told on Monday that Alalshikh no longer wanted to continue with the purchase of what BBC Radio Derby understands would have been a controlling stake.

"For the benefit of any doubt, the club is now off the market," a club statement said.

"It will continue to operate under the loyal, committed and unwavering support of Clowes Developments."

In a statement on social media, Alalshikh thanked those at Derby County for their involvement in the proposed deal, but suggested the time it took to be ratified meant he had to withdraw.

"We understood that the IFR process takes time and fully respect the importance of that," he posted on X.

"But unfortunately with the season already started, it would leave us with no time to prepare the team or the club for the season ahead.

"After careful consideration, we don't feel it is right to proceed at this time without the necessary preparation in place, but we will remain in conversation with the club and see what is possible in the future."

A deal for Alalshikh, the co-founder of boxing promotion company Zuffa, to take a controlling stake in the Championship club had been on the table with the football regulator since May.

An IFR spokesperson said: "The IFR has a statutory duty to thoroughly test all prospective owners of a club in the top five divisions of men's football.

"The assessment was completed in 55 days out of the 90 days allowed by law.

"The IFR had taken a 'minded-to decision' to approve the bid before the start of the 2026-27 season. This had been communicated to all parties last week.

"In every case, we must consider a broad but fixed list of matters, all set out in statute.

"This includes assessing all candidates against the IFR's test on financial soundness, sufficient financial resources, source of wealth, and honesty and integrity - including a check on any criminal proceedings or convictions, civil actions and other regulatory investigations."

The proposed deal had raised concerns among human rights campaigners, including Amnesty International, which said in June that the independent regulator faced a "defining test" over the investment.

Alalshikh, the chairman of Saudi Arabia's General Entertainment Authority - and someone who is close to the Kingdom's de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman - has been criticised by human rights groups for his role in alleged 'sportswashing'.

Saudi Arabia has been accused of using sports to improve its image in the wider world to distract from its human rights record, treatment of women, use of the death penalty and its anti-LGBT stance.

As well as being the owner of Egyptian club Pyramids between 2018 and 2019, Alalshikh recently owned Spanish side Almeria but sold the club to an investment group from Saudi Arabia last May. %!s()

Key Facts

Judge Roy K. Altman ruled Monday that Trump is allowed to submit an updated complaint in his lawsuit against the BBC, in which he alleges the broadcaster defamed him by misquoting his speech to supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, in a 2024 documentary.

While Trump initially alleged the documentary harmed both his personal reputation and his businesses, the updated complaint will be narrowed to only allege the documentary harmed his personal reputation.

The edit comes after the BBC subpoenaed the trust holding the president’s assets to turn over a vast amount of financial information in order to prove the documentary actually caused $10 billion in damages—as Trump initially claimed—including information about approximately 400 companies with ties to the president.

By narrowing his complaint, Trump and the trust can now argue the financial information isn’t relevant to the case—though Altman noted Monday that the issue of what can be subpoenaed will still have to be litigated in court.

Altman ruled Trump has “good cause” to amend the lawsuit, as the law requires, because Trump didn’t have some information needed to amend the lawsuit until more recently.

The BBC declined to comment to Forbes on the ruling.

What to Watch for

Trump is required to file his updated lawsuit today, Altman ruled.

What We Don’t Know

What information Trump’s trust could still have to turn over. Altman acknowledged in his ruling Monday that the updated complaint “might change the scope of discovery,” referring to what information the BBC is able to get from Trump. “Whether the amended complaint actually alters the Plaintiff’s discovery obligations is a question we’ll leave for Magistrate Judge Lett,” the judge added, however, referring to the magistrate judge who initially ruled Trump’s trust had to turn information over.

Surprising Fact

While the BBC fought Trump updating his complaint, Altman noted the amended lawsuit “will, in some respects, help the BBC,” as it will reduce the scope of potential damages Trump can ask the BBC for. Trump’s proposed narrowing of the lawsuit “represents a substantial diminution in the scope of the available damages,” Altman wrote, also noting it “removes several contested allegations … allowing the BBC’s re-filed motion to dismiss to focus more squarely on its most important arguments.”

Forbes Valuation

Forbes values Trump’s net worth at $6.4 billion as of Monday afternoon. The president’s 10-figure wealth is made up of assets that are all held by his revocable trust, which was created in order to distance Trump from his business empire without having to divest from it. The trust is maintained by Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., and only contains the president’s assets.

What Documents Could Trump’s Trust Still Have To Turn Over?

It’s unclear. The initial subpoena called for the trust to hand over a wide variety of documents, including tax returns, showing the value of the overall trust, all the assets in it and the value of hundreds of businesses with Trump ties. Much of that could be considered information that’s specific to Trump’s businesses, however, and thus wouldn’t be applicable to the case once the defamation claims involving his businesses are removed. The initial subpoena did include assets that could be argued are more tied to his reputation, however, like licensing deals that rely on his political popularity. While it hasn’t made any formal court filings regarding what information it will request in response to the updated lawsuit, the BBC previously suggested in court the president’s business dealings are inextricably tied to his public reputation, making them still relevant to the case. Trump “ran for president of the United States on a platform of the art of the deal,” BBC attorney Chuck Tobin said in a July hearing, as quoted by Politico. “You cannot separate the man and his reputation from his operation of his businesses.”

Key Background

Altman’s ruling comes after the judge paved the way for it last week, issuing a ruling that kept the Trump trust from having to turn over documents until issues over the new complaint are resolved. Lett, a magistrate judge, previously ruled the financial documents had to be turned over to the BBC starting last week, but Altman agreed with the trust as it argued the documents should be hidden while the issue is litigated—since once they’re turned over, they can’t be taken back. Trump sued the BBC for defamation in December over its 2024 “Panorama” documentary, which quoted the president as telling supporters on Jan. 6, “We're going to walk down to the Capitol... and I'll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.” In actuality, Trump said, “We're going to walk down to the Capitol, and we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.” He then made the comment to “fight like hell” more than 50 minutes later. The BBC has apologized to the president for the editing job, saying it gave “the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action,” but has strongly denied it was defamatory.

Further Reading

Trump Can Keep Financial Info Hidden From BBC, Judge Rules—For Now (Forbes)

Trump Tries To Keep Financial Information Hidden From BBC In Emergency Filing (Forbes)

What Trump Suing The BBC Could Reveal About His Finances (Forbes) %!s()

Celtic's Emma Lawton has joined the Tractor Girls along with Hearts trio Georgia Hunter, Bayley Hutchinson and Georgia Timms and Hibernian pair Rosie Livingston and Eilidh Adams.

Hibs have also lost influential striker Kathleen McGovern to Newcastle United in the same division, while Mia McAulay has departed Rangers for WSL side Aston Villa.

McIntyre says these transfers are inevitable given the resources in England, but hopes Scottish clubs will start to receive larger fees for developing players.

"We don't want to lose talent, but when you're on the border of one of the best resourced leagues in the world, the fact they're coming to Scotland is a real positive in the sense it reflects well on the standard we have," McIntyre said, speaking at the new season launch.

"In an ideal world we want the best players to stay in Scotland, of course we do.

"Our priority is that the SWPL has a really high standard but we're not naive and if there's opportunities for players to go down south and play in a league that is so well resourced then we absolutely accept that.

"As long as the clubs get a financial reward for that then that's something that can become part of the economic model of women's football."

That aspect is something McIntyre thinks "will grow" but the majority of summer moves to England were under freedom of contract, with no compensation required.

"We're not yet, from a club perspective, really creating a lot through player trading," she explained. "That will come in time and will be a new revenue source."

McIntyre also stressed that the recent departures will provide openings for others to step up and gain valuable experience.

"Look at Hearts in the Champions League qualifiers with some really young players and doing fantastically well," she said. "Those opportunities, to some degree, come about because other players have left.

"So I think you have to see the positive and how we can use it to make Scotland a real hotbed of talent.

"Some of it may leave and that may benefit the national team, and when players leave it creates opportunity for young Scottish players to really get a chance."

The SWPL 2026-27 season kicks-off on Sunday 16 August. %!s()

“When I got my schedule for this year from all the wonderful film studios that I’ve worked with, I saw it and I kind of thought I was being punked,” Hathaway admitted to The Hollywood Reporter at The End of Oak Street premiere on Sunday. “But then they showed me that no, no, no, all these [release] dates were going to hold and I just said as long as audiences don’t get sick of my face — which I wouldn’t blame them, I would not blame them if they did— let’s go.”

She continued of her busy and wide-ranging slate, “I think it’s fun. Obviously I love making movies, take a look, but I also love that audiences want to go see original things and this movie is really original. It’s David Robert Mitchell in the director’s chair, directing a script that he wrote, and I’ve never seen anything like this so I was just really happy to be a part of it.”

The End of Oak Street sees Hathaway starring alongside Ewan McGregor, Maisy Stella and Christian Convery as a family trying to survive when their neighborhood mysteriously uproots and they find themselves surrounded by dinosaurs.

And it’s not the only sci-fi on the actress’ plate, as Hathaway is set to produce and star in a big-screen adaptation of Caro Claire Burke’s smash novel Yesteryear. The book is one of the biggest of 2026, having spent 17 weeks on the New York Times Best Sellers list, and follows a tradwife influencer who finds herself transported back to the 19th century.

Speaking for the first time about the project on the carpet, Hathaway noted, “That’s been a really fun discovery because I read a draft two years ago and I knew the intense feeling that I had for it, so it’s been really fun watching people discover it. I have friends writing me, they’re like ‘What, how?'”

She continued, “One of my friends wrote me and said ‘I can’t remember the last time that I immediately re-read a book.’ People are just loving it and I couldn’t be happier for Caro, what a triumph for her. And now we just have to do the movie justice.”

In the meantime, The End of Oak Street hits theaters on Friday. %!s()

Key Facts

Blanche will be formally sworn in as attorney general Monday after being confirmed in the Senate in a 50-49 vote, allowing Blanche to keep the job permanently after being acting AG following predecessor Pam Bondi’s ouster.

Blanche joined Trump’s Justice Department after serving as the president’s personal attorney during his years out of office, most notably representing Trump at his criminal trial in Manhattan.

Democrats have accused Blanche of favoring loyalty to Trump over the rule of law, with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., arguing at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing the attorney “continues to operate as the president’s personal lawyer.”

The new AG faces numerous issues at DOJ that deal heavily with Trump and could call for Blanche to either fall in line with Trump’s priorities or act in ways the president might not like.

Those issues include the DOJ’s handling of the Epstein files, ongoing litigation over Trump’s settlement with the IRS, prosecutions of Trump’s political enemies, litigation over Trump’s White House ballroom and election lawsuits ahead of the November midterms.

Blanche, for his part, has said he’ll follow the Constitution but has not said he’ll act independently of the president, saying during his Senate confirmation hearing the DOJ is “part of the executive” branch and he would be subject to dismissal by Trump if confirmed.

What Has Blanche Said About Trump?

When asked during his confirmation hearing about whether he was independent from Trump—based on the DOJ’s historic independence from the White House—Blanche responded by saying the DOJ “certainly operate[s] with integrity” and exists to “serve the American people and do the right thing.” The then-nominee then added, however, that if confirmed, “I will be a member of the Cabinet … and President Trump can fire me whenever he wants.” Blanche suggested he was unafraid to push back on Trump if needed, saying, “President Trump trusts me to give him counsel,” but “counsel does not mean I’m a yes man.” He raised eyebrows for an apparent slip during his testimony, when Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., asked if he was friends with Trump. Blanche first responded, “I am his lawyer” before quickly correcting himself to say he “was his lawyer.”

Big Number

$9.8 million. That’s how much Trump, through his Save America PAC, has paid Blanche’s law firm in legal fees, according to federal records. The PAC made payments from April 2023 through February 2025, when Blanche Law was paid $543,711 shortly after Trump’s inauguration. Trump’s Save America PAC has been used to pay the president’s lawyers for their work in his personal legal battles, and that $9.8 million would have gone to other attorneys and staff at Blanche’s firm in addition to him.

Epstein Files: Blanche Faces Thursday Hearing Over Redacted Documents

As deputy attorney general and acting attorney general, Blanche has long faced criticism for his handling of the Epstein files. Bondi has testified Blanche was responsible for how the documents were released to the public—a process that’s garnered widespread criticism, given issues with victim identities not being properly redacted—and Epstein’s victims have accused Blanche of not sufficiently listening to their concerns. Blanche is set to appear in court Thursday for a hearing over whether the DOJ must release some unredacted Epstein documents, as well as additional documents covering unsubstantiated allegations against Trump. The DOJ has so far fought the documents’ release, though it did turn over materials to be privately reviewed by the court. Judge Emmet G. Sullivan scheduled a hearing to discuss several issues with the arguments that the DOJ has made in court, with the judge noting Blanche didn’t provide proper documentation showing the redactions at issue hide victims’ names, hasn’t explained why the government can’t redact handwritten notes, and hasn’t yet followed the Epstein Files Transparency Act’s provision requiring the DOJ to submit a log justifying every single redaction. Blanche’s posture during the Thursday hearing could be telling, as the AG could continue to harshly fight the documents’ disclosure, or could be more amenable to turning some materials over, even when they deal directly with the president.

Trump’s IRS Deal: Will $1.8 Billion Fund Come Back?

The main issue that briefly threatened Blanche’s confirmation was his signing and subsequent defense of Trump’s settlement of a lawsuit against the IRS, which included a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund” to compensate political allies and an agreement that broadly shielded the president and his affiliates from legal action from the government. Blanche has said the $1.8 billion fund is “dead” after even GOP lawmakers slammed it, and issued an order saying the fund was not moving forward in response to concerns from Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., ahead of his committee confirmation vote. He also issued a written statement narrowing the scope of the immunity deal to specify it only shields Trump, his eldest sons and the Trump Organization from legal action by the IRS and Treasury Department based on actions they’ve already taken and tax returns that have already been filed. Blanche’s orders aren’t legally binding under the terms of the settlement, though—as it can only be modified with the written agreement of all the parties, which didn’t happen—and Democrats have expressed fears Blanche could simply issue a new order and bring back the anti-weaponization fund after being sworn in. It remains to be seen how Blanche will handle the issue as AG, and whether payouts to political allies, including Jan. 6 rioters, could still take place—whether by reviving this fund or creating a new one.

DOJ Goes After Trump’s Enemies

The DOJ has launched numerous investigations into Trump’s political enemies and brought indictments against several, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, former FBI Director James Comey and former Trump adviser John Bolton. Trump fired Bondi after publicly suggesting he was unhappy with her for not going far enough to punish his critics, however, and it’s likely he’ll now be exerting pressure on Blanche to prosecute people who cross him. The DOJ is currently prosecuting Comey—after initial charges against him and James were dismissed—and reportedly is carrying out investigations against such Trump critics as Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., former CIA director John Brennan, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. Blanche will face tough decisions over whether to press forward with charging notable enemies of the president, with previous sets of charges often facing criticism from legal experts for being based on flimsy legal arguments.

Could Blanche Help Trump-Friendly Businesses?

The DOJ also has a role to play when it comes to potentially going after—or helping—businesses that have ties to the president, his family or his political allies. The president and his family are linked to numerous businesses that could potentially be granted reprieves from the federal government, though so far that has not been an issue. There have, however, already been several instances of Trump-friendly companies having cases against them dropped during the president’s second term. SpaceX, led by onetime Trump adviser Elon Musk, got out of a discrimination lawsuit that the DOJ dropped in February 2025, while criminal probes against Boeing and Abbott Laboratories ended after those companies made hefty donations to Trump’s inaugural fund. (The government has never alleged the moves to drop those cases were at all connected to the donations and Musk’s involvement with Trump.) As attorney general, Blanche could face pressure from the president to go easier on companies that are linked to him or have helped him out financially.

Trump’s D.C. Priorities: White House Ballroom And Reflecting Pool

As attorney general, Blanche will have to navigate Trump’s intense focus on construction projects in Washington and the litigation that has ensued, including Trump’s allegations of vandalism at the Reflecting Pool and an ongoing dispute over the construction of a new White House ballroom. His swearing-in comes right after Trump publicly fumed over U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro dropping federal charges against David Hearn for allegedly vandalizing the Reflecting Pool, telling reporters she “made a mistake” and “folded like an umbrella.” The former Olympian was initially indicted for allegedly damaging the water feature, but Pirro unexpectedly reversed her decision, saying it was clear that the issues with the Reflecting Pool were instead the result of a “botched installation.” A federal appeals court also ruled last week to halt construction on the ballroom—though it won’t be stopped immediately, as the court paused its ruling to give the Trump administration time to appeal it. Blanche could now oversee a showdown at the Supreme Court over Trump’s pet project, after the president said the ruling blocking it was a “National Security threat to our Nation.” He will also see continued litigation over Trump’s attempted takeover of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, where a tarp still covers the venue’s sign after Trump’s name was ordered to be removed from it.

DOJ’s Role In November Midterms

Blanche’s DOJ could play a key role in the November midterm elections, as the agency is tasked with defending Trump’s sweeping executive orders on voting. Trump has long claimed there’s widespread fraud in elections—which evidence does not support—and his administration has taken numerous steps as a result, including attempting to restrict mail-in voting, seeking states’ voter rolls and directing the U.S. Postal Service not to mail some absentee ballots if the voter isn’t on a state-approved list. Many of those directives are now tied up in court, where Blanche’s DOJ will have to defend them ahead of the midterms. The DOJ could also be tasked with litigation after the election, should Trump want to challenge any alleged issues that arise.

Further Reading

Trump Confirms He Didn’t Sign Order Killing $1.8 Billion Fund—Signaling It Might Be Revived (Forbes)

Senate Confirms Todd Blanche As Attorney General (Forbes)

Blanche Confirmed As Attorney General—Here Are The Concessions That Got Him The Job (Forbes)

Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Todd Blanche As AG After Initial Delay (Forbes) %!s()