Author name: Admin

The Kansas City Streetcar extension project has come under intense scrutiny following a federal racial discrimination lawsuit filed by six Black and Hispanic workers. The workers allege they endured a culture of racial hostility and harassment — including slurs, threats, and intimidation — allegedly fostered by a foreman with ties to the Proud Boys, a far-right extremist group. The lawsuit, initially filed in Jackson County Circuit Court and later moved to U.S. District Court in Kansas City, claims a pattern of racial discrimination, harassment, and retaliation across the project’s job sites. The Plaintiffs and Defendants According to The Kansas City Star, the plaintiffs — Javier Buendia, Jonas Buendia, Oliver Curry, Carl Hunt, Joseph Martin, and Charles Watkins — accuse several contractors and unions of enabling or ignoring racist behavior. The defendants include: Herzog Contracting Corporation Stacey and Witbeck KC Streetcar Constructors (a joint venture of the two firms) International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 101 Heavy Construction Laborers Local No. 663 Additionally, three individuals — Bryce Shields, Josh Ayres, and Chris Greenwood — are named as defendants. Claims of Racist Abuse and Harassment The lawsuit alleges that the six men faced daily and weekly racial harassment, including slurs, threats, and violence. Lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote that the workers were “at the mercy of the terroristic whims of whomever chose to target them.” The plaintiffs claim that company management and union leaders failed to intervene or enforce anti-harassment policies. The suit seeks damages for emotional distress and workplace discrimination. A Foreman’s Proud Boys Connection According to the lawsuit, at least one foreman involved in the project was allegedly a member of the Proud Boys, a white nationalist group known for violent political extremism. It remains unclear which of the named defendants has that affiliation. The Proud Boys, labeled a terrorist organization in several countries, gained national attention after former President Donald Trump told them to “stand back and stand by” during a 2020 debate. Disturbing Incidents Reported by Workers The lawsuit outlines numerous racist incidents, including racial slurs, threats of lynching, and physical assaults: One foreman allegedly referred to Black workers as “monkeys” and said, “These monkeys I have on my crew ‘bout to drive me crazy.” Oliver Curry, one of the plaintiffs, reported that a white co-worker threatened to “find a tree to put it in,” a comment Curry interpreted as a lynching threat. Curry also claims that when a colleague called him the N-word repeatedly, the Proud Boys–affiliated foreman witnessed the incident but took no action. Another supervisor allegedly remarked that Black men “should end up in a noose.” In addition, the plaintiffs claim Black employees were falsely accused of theft, physically assaulted, and threatened with further violence by white co-workers. Violent Assault Allegations In one 2023 incident described in the suit, white workers allegedly attacked a Black man suspected of breaking into a worksite. The assailants allegedly tied him up, duct-taped his mouth, and beat him, with one shouting, “Back where I’m from, we lynch people like you.” Another allegedly offered to drag the man with his truck. These disturbing details, if true, paint a picture of a deeply hostile and unsafe work environment. Management’s Alleged Cover-Up Despite holding a meeting in November 2023 to discuss racism and harassment complaints, attorneys claim project management failed to discipline any accused employees. Instead, they allege that management covered up records of harassment. According to the lawsuit: “The change in policy and the expungement of employee records indicates an attempt to clear the record of any evidence of racial or sexual harassment.” Attorneys argue that this cover-up demonstrates company knowledge of the racial hostility and a refusal to act. Broader Context: Racism in Construction Workplaces This lawsuit sheds light on a longstanding issue in the construction industry — the prevalence of racial discrimination on job sites. Black and Hispanic workers have long reported being subjected to racist remarks, exclusion, and harassment in predominantly white labor environments. As the case progresses, the Kansas City Streetcar extension — once a symbol of local progress — is now facing questions about accountability, workplace culture, and oversight. Conclusion The allegations against the Kansas City Streetcar project and its contractors represent more than just a legal dispute — they highlight deep racial divisions that continue to plague American workplaces. For the plaintiffs, their case is not only about justice but also about changing a culture of racism and silence. Good luck to the plaintiffs — their fight is one that resonates far beyond Missouri.

Former President Donald Trump and New York Attorney General Letitia James have been locked in a series of fierce legal showdowns for years. Their ongoing feud—rooted in investigations, lawsuits, and accusations of political retribution—reached a new level on October 9, 2025, when federal prosecutors indicted Letitia James on charges of fraud and false statements. Federal Indictment of Letitia James According to The New York Times, the indictment, filed in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleges that James misrepresented her intent to use a Norfolk, Virginia home as a secondary residence. Prosecutors claim she actually intended to rent it as an investment property, allegedly securing a $19,000 financial advantage through favorable mortgage terms. The indictment came just weeks after former FBI Director James Comey faced charges under similar circumstances, intensifying fears about Trump’s influence over the justice system and what critics call a pattern of political retribution. James, however, denied any wrongdoing, calling the charges “baseless” and politically motivated. “This is nothing more than the president’s weaponization of our justice system,” James said in a statement. “He’s forcing federal agencies to act as his personal enforcers because I held him accountable as New York’s Attorney General.” Trump vs. Letitia James: A Legal History The Trump–James rivalry has unfolded through several major lawsuits and court rulings. Here’s a look at their legal timeline. November 2019: The Trump Foundation Case In June 2018, Letitia James filed a lawsuit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation, alleging that Trump and his children misused charitable funds for personal and political gain. The lawsuit claimed that Trump diverted Foundation money to support his 2016 presidential campaign, including a $2.8 million fundraiser disguised as a charitable event. In 2019, the case ended in a settlement requiring Trump to admit to misusing funds and placing restrictions on future charity activities. His children—Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump—were ordered to complete nonprofit governance training, and the Foundation was officially dissolved. December 2021: Trump Sues Letitia James Before James could file her landmark civil fraud case, Donald Trump preemptively sued Letitia James, accusing her of political bias and violating due process. Trump’s lawsuit sought to block her investigation into his business practices. He claimed that James’s probe into the Trump Organization’s asset valuations was unconstitutional and politically motivated. Court documents highlighted James’s public criticism of Trump and her 2018 campaign statements about “having [her] eyes on Trump Tower.” The lawsuit was dismissed in May 2022 by a federal judge, allowing James’s investigation to proceed. September 2022: The Civil Fraud Lawsuit In 2022, James filed a civil fraud lawsuit against Donald Trump, three of his adult children, and top Trump Organization executives. The lawsuit alleged a decade-long scheme to inflate asset values in order to secure loans, reduce taxes, and mislead insurers—a scheme totaling $250 million in fraud. James sought to ban the Trumps from executive positions in New York-based companies and impose heavy financial penalties. The lawsuit became one of the most consequential legal challenges of Trump’s career. February 2024: The Landmark Judgment In 2024, Letitia James secured a major victory when a New York court ruled against Trump, ordering him, his companies, and his sons to pay over $450 million in penalties. The ruling also barred Trump from holding executive roles or seeking loans from New York banks for three years. This decision marked a significant legal and political blow to the former president. August 2025: The Appeals Court Reversal In August 2025, a New York appellate court overturned the civil fraud judgment, waiving the $450 million fine but upholding restrictions preventing Trump and his sons from leading companies in New York. The five-judge panel described the original penalty as “excessive” but agreed that some level of accountability was appropriate. April 2025: James Defends Her Record Earlier in April 2025, Letitia James highlighted her office’s ongoing efforts to challenge Trump administration policies she described as “dangerous and illegal.” She reported joining 15 lawsuits and submitting 22 amicus briefs alongside other Democratic attorneys general, addressing issues like citizenship rights, worker protections, and voting access. “We stopped some of their most unconstitutional policies dead in their tracks,” James said. “If this administration keeps bulldozing the Constitution, they’ll find all of us standing in the way.” Conclusion: An Ongoing Legal Feud The conflict between Donald Trump and Letitia James continues to shape national headlines. What began as a series of lawsuits has evolved into a full-blown political and legal war—testing the limits of American democracy, judicial independence, and political accountability.  

Source: They came for Fani Willis. They came for Marilyn Mosby. They came for Lisa Cook. And now, they’ve come for Letitia James. This is no coincidence. This is a calibrated campaign to strike fear into Black women who dared to occupy power, to question a powerful, corrupt, racist white man, and to hold the pillars of justice and policy. The audacity of Trump and his cronies to frame decent, professional Black women for mortgage fraud as if that’s the mortal sin of political life in a nation built on grift. But why mortgage fraud? Because it’s subtle. It’s technical. It’s the kind of charge that looks clean in a headline and filthy in a courtroom. It doesn’t require a smoking gun, just a signature, a checkbox, and an assumption of intent. Mortgage fraud lives in the gray zone between paperwork and persecution, which is precisely why it’s so useful for political revenge. It’s the perfect weapon for those like Donald Trump who’ve committed real fraud at scale. He and his henchmen can dress up their vengeance in the language of legality. They can say, “We’re just enforcing the law,” while they weaponize bureaucracy to criminalize Black women for daring to own property, power, or narrative space. It all starts in the shadows with whispers in bureaucracy, referrals from regulatory offices, letters stamped “investigation,” paper trails dissected for the faintest discrepancy. Trump’s people, including agencies now under his influence or scrutiny, peer into loan applications, home-residence declarations, and occupancy statements. They search for one misstep, one paperwork inconsistency, to brand a public servant a felon. Because they know that very few cases of mortgage fraud are simple. The lines are blurry. Life complicates residence. Personal decisions, family dynamics, and rental arrangements all create ambiguity. That lack of clarity is fertile ground for accusation. Under that uncertainty, they pounce on the Black women who tried him. Letitia James, the New York Attorney General, a relentless critic of Trump, is now the latest to be indicted by a federal grand jury for alleged bank fraud and false statements tied to a mortgage application. She’s accused of mislabeling one of her properties. James has denied wrongdoing and called the charges politically motivated. The timing is intentional. We are deep in the heart of a political season, and the motive is plain as day: weaken a formidable opponent who previously led a civil fraud case against him. Marilyn Mosby, once a rising star in legal ranks, endured the hammer of justice. Mosby’s mortgage fraud conviction was later overturned by an appeals court, but not before the damage had been done through years of corrosive reputational cost and the shadow of criminality hanging over her name. Mosby was targeted because she dared to do what few prosecutors had ever done: charge police officers for killing a Black man. Her decision to indict the officers involved in Freddie Gray’s death made her a marked woman. The backlash was instant and coordinated through police unions, conservative media, and political operatives who painted her as reckless, radical, and corrupt. When they couldn’t beat her in court, they went after her home. They went after her finances. They wanted to remind her, and every other Black woman in a position of authority, that there are consequences for holding white power accountable. Lisa Cook, a sitting Governor at the Federal Reserve Board, hears whispers that she, too, is under investigation. That somewhere, someone unearthed evidence of her declaring dual properties as primary residence. If true, this is a technical violation. If false or exaggerated, it is pure political sabotage. Trump, with characteristic bombast, calls for her resignation, even attempts to remove her “for cause” by hunting for legal language to justify a purge. And why her?  Because she is the first Black woman ever to sit on the Federal Reserve Board, an institution that, for over a century, was an ivory tower of white male economists shaping the nation’s wealth. Her scholarship exposed how racial violence and discrimination distort economic growth. Her very presence in that chair is a rebuke to the mythology of white meritocracy. By targeting her, they aren’t just questioning her paperwork; they’re questioning whether a Black woman has the right to define economic reality itself. This isn’t about mortgages. It’s about power, intellect, and the terror of seeing a Black woman at the center of America’s financial brain trust. What we’re witnessing in these cases is a web of semantics: “primary residence,” “investment property,” “vacation home,” “occupancy,” “intent.” It’s a world of forms, signatures, disclosures, not the boldface corruption that demands high proof. And that is its weapon: ambiguity. Four Black women in power, each accused or investigated under the same cynical script: dig into their private lives, their homes, their finances, their relationships. Find something—anything—that can be weaponized into a scandal. The charge doesn’t even have to stick. The goal is humiliation. The mission is containment. And the gall of it, my god the freakin’ gall of Donald Trump and his people to come after these women for “fraud.”  This is a real estate mogul who overvalued his assets by hundreds of millions of dollars and is now watching his allies prosecute Black women over line items on loan forms. The man who’s built an empire of theft and deceit dares to point his stubby finger at the very women who have spent their lives cleaning up the wreckage his kind left behind. It’s always the same choreography. First, the whisper of impropriety. Then the “exclusive” leak. Then the congressional hearing, the indictment, or the ethics probe. Trump’s orbit doesn’t need conviction; it just needs confusion because it thrives on spectacle, on smearing Black women’s competence and dignity through the slow grind of bureaucratic cruelty. White theft is enterprise, Black success is suspect. So now, Letitia James gets indicted on bank fraud and false statement charges, accused of mislabeling a Virginia property on loan paperwork. Marilyn Mosby is dragged through years of court battles

President Donald Trump just keeps on running into legal roadblocks in his bid to turn the U.S. military and other federal agencies on U.S. citizens in Democrat-run cities. This week alone, federal judges have blocked his attempt to send the National Guard into Portland and placed restrictions on ICE’s ability to make arrests in Chicago without a warrant. On Thursday, yet another federal judge blocked the president from sending the Guard into Chicago, another city where officials and citizens have explicitly expressed they do not need or want them there. According to Politico, U.S. District Judge April Perry issued a restraining order barring the National Guard from carrying out the directives of the Trump administration, which deployed Guard troops to Chicago earlier this week. Why did Judge Perry issue this restraining order? Well, for the same reason Trump was blocked from weaponizing the military against Portland: everyone with half a brain knows Trump is flat-out lying about these cities being “war zones” and ICE facilities being “under siege.” From Politico: She described the narrative of violence as exaggerated and pointed to the use of tear gas and military-style tactics against “mostly peaceful demonstrators” — a group she noted was never more than a few hundred strong. It’s a legal blow for Trump, who’s leaned hard into law-and-order messaging, especially in cities that limit cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. Chicago and nearby Broadview — home to a major ICE facility — have been front and center in the administration’s push. Again, Trump’s so-called “land order messaging” is really just him spreading propaganda about rises in violent crime in cities where violent crime is actually down, as it is across the nation. Perry also noted that National Guard troops are “not trained in de-escalation” or any other aspect of law enforcement that would equip them to handle civil protests appropriately. Of course, Trump, who is never one to let reality get in the way of a false narrative that, in his mind, justifies him dabbling in fascism, has already responded to the ruling by having his administration file a notice of appeal in the Seventh Circuit. Unfortunately, it is in the appellate court that the Trump administration has seen success in reversing the rulings of federal judges who aren’t afraid to stand up against the regime. In fact, according to Axios, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has signaled it is likely to rule in Trump’s favor on his deployment of the guard in Portland, not because it’s necessary, but because the judges simply believe the president has the right to do it. “What I’m struggling with is, the president gets to direct his resources as he deems fit, and it just seems a little counterintuitive to me that the city of Portland can come in and say ‘No. You need to do it differently,” Judge Ryan Nelson, a Trump appointee, said during oral arguments Thursday. Axios reported that the panel “had tough questions for an attorney for the state, noting the law requires the court give deference to the president when he says troops are needed to protect federal law enforcement and buildings.” So, basically, all a president has to do is claim sending in the military is necessary — lack of evidence be damned — and state sovereignty just goes completely out the window. Still, Chicago and Illinois leaders are counting Perry’s ruling as a win. Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson both released statements praising the decision. “Donald Trump is not a king — and his administration is not above the law,”  Pritzker tweeted Thursday. “Today, the court confirmed what we all know: there is no credible evidence of a rebellion in the state of Illinois. And no place for the National Guard in the streets of American cities like Chicago.” Johnson was even more blunt, saying in a statement, “The Trump administration is unreliable. They lie, misrepresent, and put people in danger.” Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, who filed the legal challenge against the Trump administration, called the ruling a “victory for the rule of law,” and praised the court for recognizing the administration’s lack of “credibility.” Hopefully, this ruling holds up, but as we have seen, the U.S. “justice” system just doesn’t appear to be equipped to rein in a power-mad ideologue of a commander in chief, who does not care about justice or truth. SEE ALSO: National Guard Arrives In Chicago As Trump Threatens Insurrection Act ‘The Guard Is Not Needed’: Chicago Mayor Pushes Back On Trump’s National Guard Threat Trump Ramps Up Threats To Send Troops To Chicago After Violent Labor Day Weekend Trump Threatens Jail For Chicago Mayor & Illinois Governor

For the past several months, the Trump administration has been pressuring red-state governors to engage in a rare, mid-decade redistricting process to protect the GOP’s narrow House majority. While Texas and Missouri have successfully implemented new congressional maps, Indiana’s redistricting effort appears to be stalling out, and Utah may have redistricted itself into a “dummymander.” According to Politico, Vice President JD Vance is visiting Indiana to try and whip the state legislature into beginning a redistricting effort. The trip comes after Indiana’s Republican Gov. Mike Braun told the White House he was concerned that the redistricting push didn’t have support in the state Senate. White House deputy chief of staff James Blair, Political Director Matt Brasseaux, and Republican National Committee chief of staff Michael Ambrosini will be joining Vance in Indiana on Thursday. Anonymous Republican insiders who spoke with Politico said that Indiana GOP Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray is behind the stalled redistricting effort. They said Bray “has been doing nothing to help the effort along or encourage his members, but has been really sort of hiding behind them, and maybe even subtly or not so subtly pouring cold water on the idea so that he can say he doesn’t have the votes.” Indiana’s congressional map is already fairly gerrymandered, with Republicans holding seven of the state’s nine seats in the House. A new map would give Republicans total control of the state’s House seats. Despite frequently telling people not to politicize the issue when it comes to school shootings, Republicans have wasted no time politicizing the death of Charlie Kirk to push through a new electoral map of all things. “They killed Charlie Kirk – the least that we can do is go through a legal process and redistrict Indiana into a nine-to-zero map,” Sen. Jim Banks, the Republican of Indiana, told POLITICO last month. Utah has successfully seen through its redistricting process, though there are concerns that its attempt at a gerrymandered map may blow up in its face. Utah already implemented a new map in 2021 that carved the traditionally blue Salt Lake City into four separate districts, with Republicans currently holding those four districts. A lawsuit was filed against that map, with a judge ordering the state legislature to redraw the map. The new map drafted by Utah’s Republican state legislature has split Salt Lake City into two districts. From the New York Times: By doing it this way, rather than grouping most of Salt Lake City into one Democratic stronghold and creating three safely Republican seats, Republicans have an opportunity to maintain control of all four House seats next year. But they have also risked creating a so-called dummymander – a gerrymandered map that backfires against the party it’s intended to favor. Republicans drew two light-red districts – one more competitive than the other – that could both potentially flip toward Democrats in a year that strongly favors them. Along with two safe Republican seats, the new map, which must still be signed by Gov. Spencer Cox and approved by a judge, creates one district that Trump won by about seven percentage points last year, and another district that Trump won by about 2 points. President Donald Trump’s pressure campaign on Republican-led states to begin rare, mid-decade redistricting efforts to protect the GOP’s narrow House majority has seen Texas and Missouri successfully implement new congressional maps that potentially give them a combined total of seven more seats ahead of the 2026 midterms. It’s worth noting that lawsuits have been filed against the Texas map by voting rights groups alleging that the map is racially gerrymandered. California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the “Election Rigging Response Act” in August to combat the Texas redistricting effort. A special election will be held in California on Nov. 4, where voters will determine whether control of the state’s congressional maps remains with an independent redistricting committee or goes to the state legislature through 2030. Should voters choose to give the state legislature control, Gov. Newsom intends to implement a map that would neutralize Texas’ gains. If the lawsuits in Texas succeed, and California’s voters approve a new map, the map could drastically change for Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterms. SEE ALSO: President Trump Eyes Florida And Indiana In Redistricting Push California Gov. Gavin Newsom Signs Bill Launching Redistricting Effort Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe Sets Special Session For Redistricting Texas Democrats Will Return To State After Special Session Ends Calif. Gov. Gavin Newsom Counters Texas Redistricting Effort With One Of His Own Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana Critics Call Texas Governor’s New Congressional Map Gerrymandering US Senator John Cornyn, FBI Team Up To Hunt Texas Democrats Texas State Dems Break Quorum To Prevent Redistricting Vote Gov. Greg Abbott Orders Arrest Of Texas Democrats Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Sues To Remove Democratic Rep In Redistricting Fight Racial Gerrymandering Lawsuit Filed Over Texas Voting Map

Texas-based fast-food chain Trump Burger, known for serving up MAGA politics with its supersized patties, has quietly closed its doors amid ongoing immigration troubles facing its Lebanese-born owner, Roland Mehrez Beainy. When the restaurant first rose to viral fame, it positioned itself as “a patriotic haven for burger lovers” across the Lone Star State, plastered with red, white, and blue décor and dedicated to the 45th president. Now, those same storefronts stand empty, dark, and locked, a dramatic fall from the brand’s once-viral status as the self-proclaimed “home of the Trump Burger.” The Independent reports that Beainy was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) earlier this year for overstaying his visa, which was originally issued in 2019 and set to expire in February 2024. Previously reported by BOSSIP, the arrest sent shockwaves across conservative social media, as the restaurant’s owner had publicly aligned his brand with Trump’s “America First” rhetoric, only to now find himself on the receiving end of the same immigration system that the former president once promised to tighten. From Red Hats To Red Tape: Legal Troubles Mount In the Independent, local outlet KHOU confirmed through an ICE spokesperson that Beainy “does not have any immigration benefits that prevented his arrest or removal from the United States.” The agency identified him as a “28-year-old illegal alien from Lebanon” who entered the U.S. as a non-immigrant visitor in 2019 and “failed to depart by 12 February 2024, as required under the terms of his admission.” Beainy was taken into custody on May 16, 2025, and later granted bond by an immigration judge on June 13 while awaiting further proceedings. But even with his release, the restaurants appear to be stalled — and possibly shuttered for good. The Independent states that Houston Business Journal reportedly visited Trump Burger’s Chimney Rock Road location twice during peak hours this week and found the neon sign switched off, a “closed” notice taped to the door, and a deserted parking lot. On Google, the listing now reads “temporarily closed.” The Journal described the franchise’s current state as one “hanging in the balance,” citing the legal web surrounding Beainy’s ongoing case as a major factor in the shutdown. ICE’s Message: No Exceptions, No Matter Your Politics While Beainy’s supporters online have tried to frame the arrest as politically motivated, ICE officials have made it clear that his political leanings played no part in their decision. In a statement shared with KHOU and cited by The Independent, the agency said: “Under the current administration, ICE is committed to restoring integrity to our nation’s immigration system by holding all individuals accountable who illegally enter the country or overstay the terms of their admission. This is true regardless of what restaurant you own or political beliefs you might have.” That last line cuts sharply, especially for a restaurant that wore its loyalty to Trump like a brand badge. At its height, Beainy’s bold branding drew both crowds and controversy, with lines of supporters taking selfies beside murals of Trump and slogans like “Make America Grill Again.” But that marketing magic has since faded into irony. Now, the very business that prided itself on American pride finds itself facing an identity crisis, and a possible permanent closure, as its owner fights deportation from the country he once marketed as “great again.” What’s Next For Trump Burger? At press time, the Independent reports that emails to the restaurant bounced back undelivered, and no formal statement has been released by the Trump Burger team. ICE confirmed Beainy remains in immigration proceedings, with his future and the future of his MAGA-branded empire uncertain. For now, the patriotic promise of Trump Burger has cooled off faster than a cold fry left under a heat lamp. The post MAGA Meaty Mystery: Houston Restaurant Trump Burger Closes after Boss Deported appeared first on Bossip.

Megan Thee Stallion is standing ten toes down in her defamation lawsuit against blogger Milagro Gramz, and she just won a major sanction in their case. The two will face off in a Houston court via trial, but in the meantime, Meg’s team won a sanction against Milagro after claiming she “deleted thousands of text messages” despite being told not to. Meg was granted an “adverse inference jury instruction” as well as “monetary” sanctions against Milagro—whose full name is Milagro Elizabeth Cooper—for what the court is calling “spoliation of evidence.” According to the legal documents, Cooper was instructed not to delete any correspondence about Meg, but she did so anyway. Meg’s team said “not so fast” once Milagro was unable to turn over the evidence and requested that the judge make it permissible in court to let the jury know that she attempted to hide things that could have harmed her defense. She is also now responsible for giving Meg back her coins for having to bring the issue up to the court though they have not agreed on what the compensation will be just yet, according to Hot 97. Either way, Milagro is digging herself quite the hole ahead of the trial. She was already ordered to pay $5,000 towards Meg’s lawyer fees back in July for tampering with evidence, and she’s also accused of circulating a deep fake pornographic image of the “Cobra” artist, which is now considered a federal crime. The entire case stems from Milagro’s commitment to allegedly disseminating falsified information in support of Tory Lanez. Meg claims that the blogger participated in fueling a smear campaign against her alongside the imprisoned singer’s father, Sonstar Peterson, that contributed to immeasurable harassment in the years after her shooting. Allegedly, the fake porn video was the final straw on the stallion’s back that led her to march Milagro into court. The post Megan Thee Stallion Wins New Sanction Against Milagro Gramz In Defamation Case, Claims Blogger Deleted Text Message Evidence appeared first on Bossip.

DDG is committed to keeping everyone in his and Halle Bailey’s business, and his latest album release is giving fans insight into how he feels about their custody battle. On the track “17 more years”, DDG opens up about where the former lovers currently stand as they work to come to an amicable arrangement for their 1-year-old son, Halo. “I don’t wanna fight no more, tired of the court dates,” he raps on the track. “Lawyers getting over on us, watching money go to waste. We should all get together on his birthday, light the cake. If we talk, it’ll get better. Go ahead and drop the case. Used to text your phone, now we speaking through the mail. You don’t even know, I got love for you still. Said you want me gone, is that really how you feel? Might as well get along, we got 17 more years” Well, ok. The track comes after Bailey filed and won a restraining order against DDG claiming physical and emotional abuse at the hands of the popular vlogger/streamer. DDG hit back at Bailey, using her postpartum depression against her, and claimed that Halo was unsafe with his mother who he alleged had communicated having suicidal ideation on more than one occasion. “I have been very vocal about my anxiety, depression, and previous thoughts of suicide,” Bailey wrote in a declaration to the court at the time. “Without waiving the psychotherapist-patient privilege and physician-patient privilege, I have reached out to my doctor and received treatment to address these issues. I have been and remain 100% available and capable as a parent to our son, Halo.” In August, a judge declared that both DDG and Halle were no longer allowed to post their son on social media following a summer in which the Little Mermaid actress claimed that the streamer regularly used their son to incite online violence against her. “Whenever he wishes to cause upset, he starts badmouthing me to his several millions of fans,” Bailey wrote in her declaration at the time. “He claims I am withholding our son and that I am with other men. As a result, I then receive threats and hate on social media. He seems to try to set up drama for his fans. He goes ‘live’ ranting about me and alleges that I am keeping Halo from him. This is false. I have requested a set schedule, which he refuses.” Nonetheless, DDG seems to feel that there’s room for healthy reconciliation or at least he hopes there is. As for Bailey, the six-time Grammy nominee is gearing up to release her debut album, love? or something like it, on Oct. 24. She hasn’t said much about it, but we can only assume that she’ll be opening up in her own way about everything that happened in their relationship. Her track “braveface” seemed to be speak to the pain she learned how to hide during a contentious relationship, while “back and forth”—the track she released ahead of Valentine’s Day—was a flirtatious bop about leaving the passion for the bedroom. Looks like Halle will be giving the girlies a bit of everything on her debut. We’re here for it! The post DDG Releases New Album, Asks Halle Bailey To ‘Drop The Case’ On Lead Single appeared first on Bossip.

The girls are STILL fighting! Cardi B called BIA a “p***y” for copping pleas about beefing during her pregnancy now, but allegedly spreading cheating accusations to Offset’s friend when Bardi was “five months pregnant with Blossom last year.” BIA pulled a J. Cole and waved the white flag as Cardi B’s never-ending feud with Nicki Minaj and rappers who backed up Barbie exploded again last week. While the embattled rap divas traded insults about each other’s parenting skills, the Boston rapper realized she’s not on that type of time. While promoting the Oct. 10 release of Bianca on Hot97, BIA denied dedicating her debut album to coming for Cardi. She threw shade at Cardi’s (and Pardi’s) pen, but told Nessa she didn’t want to compete with Cardi unless they’re getting in the booth together. If you say so, sis! “Why would I? I don’t care about anybody that much to get up and dedicate my life to like, ‘Oh, let me get at her.’ Like, no way, bro, that’s crazy,” the “Whole Lotta Money” mami said. “It’s like a little beneath me because that was a year ago for me,” BIA added about continuing the feud after another diss by Cardi.”So now this album was coming out on Oct. 10 either way, whether she dissed me or not.” On “Pretty & Petty,” Cardi didn’t hold back on “diarrhea BIA” about everything from her body to her relevance. Still, BIA said she charged it to the game rather than taking it personally. “I was like, ‘Well, I’m glad she felt like she’d get that off.’ I knew it was coming because this is rap. I’m competitive so, like, I diss you, you diss me … It’s part of the game,” she explained. BIA didn’t let up on the copycat claims about Really Her and Cardi B’s “Enough,” but she welcomed a creative challenge rather than continuing to beef with an expecting mother. “I can go get on your a** again, but it’s like, girl, enjoy your pregnancy. My mother didn’t raise me to be dragging a pregnant lady. That’s out,” she continued. BIA may have conveniently moved on, but Cardi pulled up to call her out for copping pleas. Check out Cardi B putting BIA on blast for messing with her marriage to Offset after the flip! The post Cardi B Calls BIA A ‘P***y’ For Conveniently Copping Preggo Pleas, Claims BIA Sabotaged Offset Marriage During Pregnancy With Blossom appeared first on Bossip.