According to Daily Mail, Michelle Obama has kept her distance from Joe Biden’s re-election campaign due to personal frustrations involving the Biden family.
Obama has refrained from campaigning for Biden because of how the Biden family treated her friend Kathleen Buhle during her divorce from Hunter Biden, although both families deny any rift.
Michelle Obama has notably not participated in Joe Biden's re-election efforts in person or on social media. Her decision stems from frustrations over Kathleen Buhle's treatment during her contentious divorce from Hunter Biden.
Despite these reports, spokespeople from both the Biden and Obama camps firmly deny any animosity between the two families.
The friendship between Michelle Obama and Kathleen Buhle blossomed during the Obama administration. Michelle and Kathleen spent considerable time together, often working out and sharing cocktails at the White House. This bond was tested when Buhle’s marriage to Hunter Biden ended acrimoniously in 2017, with Buhle accusing Hunter of misusing family funds for drugs and prostitutes while battling his addiction to crack cocaine.
The details of this divorce recently resurfaced during Hunter Biden's federal gun trial in Delaware. Michelle’s frustration reportedly lies in her perception of how the Biden family treated Buhle during this tumultuous period.
The dynamic between the Obama and Biden families has reportedly shifted since their White House days. Former President Barack Obama himself has expressed candid opinions about the Biden family, reportedly describing their behavior as peculiar after a 2017 fundraiser for the Beau Biden Foundation.
While Michelle Obama was hesitant to campaign for Joe Biden in 2020, she ultimately did so due to political pressures. However, her reluctance appears more pronounced this election cycle. In contrast, Barack Obama has remained an active supporter of Biden, participating in multiple fundraising events.
The White House and representatives for Michelle Obama have been quick to dismiss rumors of a rift. Andrew Bates, a White House spokesman, emphasized the strong familial bond between the Bidens and the Obamas. He highlighted the close support the former President and First Lady have shown for Biden’s leadership and agenda.
Crystal Carson, a spokesperson for Michelle Obama, also denied any tension. She affirmed Michelle's ongoing support for the Biden-Harris campaign and reiterated her friendship with both Kathleen Buhle and the Biden family. Carson also noted that Dr. Jill Biden recently joined Michelle Obama’s family in celebrating the life of Mrs. Marian Robinson.
Despite the denials, Michelle Obama's absence from Biden's campaign has not gone unnoticed. Her powerful influence and popularity could be a significant asset, and her distance may raise questions among supporters and detractors alike.
As the campaign progresses, it remains to be seen if Michelle Obama will eventually join the re-election efforts, as she did in 2020. Her potential involvement could provide a notable boost to Biden’s campaign, which continues to navigate complex political and personal landscapes.
In conclusion, Michelle Obama's decision to refrain from campaigning for Joe Biden is rooted in her frustration over the treatment of her friend Kathleen Buhle during her divorce from Hunter Biden. This decision has been met with firm denials of any familial rift from both the White House and Obama's representatives. The evolving dynamics between the Obama and Biden families, along with Michelle’s influence, will continue to be of interest as the campaign unfolds.
Walgreens announced plans to close a significant number of its 8,700 US stores due to underperformance and lowered profit forecasts for fiscal year 2024.
According to Daily Mail, the pharmacy chain is targeting non-profitable locations, those in close proximity to each other, and those grappling with theft issues, according to CEO Tim Wentworth.
The Illinois-based company announced on Thursday, citing several challenges affecting its business. Walgreens also operates under the Duane Reade banner and has been facing a decline in sales, particularly in the US retail segment.
Following the announcement, Walgreens’s shares fell more than 15 percent in premarket trading. The company's stock value had already declined 40 percent for the year before the announcement.
Retail expert Neil Saunders criticized Walgreens for its high prices and lackluster deals, noting that these factors have contributed to the company's struggles. "The numbers from US retail – where sales plunged by 4 percent – are particularly disappointing, although not entirely surprising," Saunders said.
Walgreens has long been struggling to lose front-of-store customers, a trend exacerbated by the current cost-of-living crisis. Customers are increasingly seeking better deals elsewhere, finding Walgreens' prices uncompetitive compared to mass merchants.
While the exact number and locations of the store closures were not specified, the closures could affect a meaningful percentage of underperforming stores. CEO Tim Wentworth emphasized that the focus will be on locations that are not profitable, are situated close to each other, or are dealing with significant theft issues.
"It could shutter a 'meaningful percent' of the stores of the quarter-or-so locations that are underperforming," Wentworth said. The company did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment about the store closures.
In addition to the US store closures, Walgreens has already closed 484 stores in the UK and 625 stores in the US as of February 2024. The company plans to simplify its healthcare portfolio, including changes to its ownership stake in VillageMD.
CEO Tim Wentworth, who joined Walgreens in October of the previous year, is navigating the company through declining in-store demand and weak sales of COVID-related products. As part of its strategic adjustments, Walgreens will no longer be the majority owner of VillageMD.
The company also adjusted its profit forecast for fiscal year 2024, now predicting $2.80 to $2.95 per share, down from the previous forecast of $3.20 to $3.35 per share made in March. Analysts had expected an annual profit of $3.20 per share.
For the third quarter, Walgreens reported adjusted earnings of 63 cents per share, falling short of the estimated 68 cents per share. This shortfall reflects the ongoing challenges the company faces in a competitive retail environment.
In summary, Walgreens is closing a notable portion of its 8,700 US stores due to underperformance and a challenging retail environment. The company’s stock has suffered, with shares dropping significantly, and its profit forecast has been lowered. CEO Tim Wentworth is steering the company through these turbulent times with a focus on profitability and strategic adjustments.
Former First Lady Melania Trump's attendance at Thursday night's presidential debate in Atlanta is uncertain, sparking speculation about her support for her husband's campaign.
Melania Trump, known for her rare public appearances, has not confirmed her attendance at the debate despite being scheduled to host a fundraiser for the Log Cabin Republicans on July 8th.
According to Daily Mail, the Trump campaign has been unable to confirm her presence. During a conference call with reporters, campaign adviser Jason Miller hinted that an announcement regarding her attendance might be made at the debate.
Former President Donald Trump arrived alone in Atlanta on Thursday afternoon. In contrast, First Lady Jill Biden will attend the debate and a rally with President Joe Biden on Friday in Atlanta.
Presidential historian Dr. Lindsay Chervinsky noted that it would be unusual for a candidate's spouse to miss a debate, as spouses have regularly attended since 1976. This adds to the speculation surrounding Melania's potential absence.
A report also suggests that Melania may not reside in Washington, D.C., full-time if Trump wins the second term. She might split her time between Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, and New York City, given that her son, Barron Trump, could attend New York University.
Melania would only travel to Washington, D.C., for ceremonial responsibilities. Her office has not responded to inquiries about these reports, maintaining a "curtain of privacy" around her, as mentioned by MaryAnne Borrell, a bipartisan professor of Government at Connecticut College.
Public sightings of Melania Trump are rare, particularly in the context of the campaign. She did not appear at a campaign rally for Trump in 2024 and did not attend Donald Trump's birthday party organized by his fan club on June 14th.
Melania Trump has been absent from the campaign trail this cycle, which is a stark contrast to her presence during the 2016 and 2020 election cycles when she attended all debates. Her limited public support for Trump's current campaign is noticeable.
She joined Trump for his 2024 presidential bid announcement in November but has otherwise made only limited appearances. These include attending one fundraiser and voting with Trump in Florida's primary.
When asked if she would campaign for Trump, Melania responded with "Stay tuned," leaving her intentions unclear. Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former friend and critic, commented that Melania has not supported Trump publicly in his current campaign.
Melania Trump will hold a fundraiser for the Log Cabin Republicans on July 8th at Trump Tower in New York City. The event charges $100,000 per attendee and is her second fundraiser for the group; the first was in April at Mar-a-Lago.
She was last seen in public in New York City the previous week. The couple was last seen publicly together in May at Barron Trump's high school graduation.
Melania Trump's absence from the debate breaks a longstanding tradition of candidate spouses attending these events, raising questions about her support for her husband's campaign. Her limited appearances contrast with the involvement of other first spouses in recent history. Speculation grows about whether she will make any significant public appearances or statements in support of Donald Trump’s bid for the presidency.
According to Newsweek, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed claims that Donald Trump’s team tried to hijack the hearing.
The hearing, which took place on Tuesday, was nearing its conclusion when Judge Cannon made her statement.
Former President Trump is facing 40 federal charges for allegedly mishandling sensitive materials seized from his Mar-a-Lago estate after his departure from the White House in January 2021 and for obstructing federal efforts to retrieve them. Trump has consistently pleaded not guilty to all charges, labeling the case a political witch hunt.
Judge Cannon's remarks were a direct response to assistant prosecutor David Harbach's assertion that the defense was trying to commandeer the hearing. Harbach argued that the authorizations Trump had as president no longer applied after his presidency ended.
Harbach's argument came in response to Trump's lawyer, Emil Bove, who suggested that further investigation was necessary into the political motivations behind the FBI's raid on Mar-a-Lago in August 2022. Harbach accused Trump's legal team of introducing irrelevant allegations in an attempt to derail the proceedings.
Chief prosecutor Jack Smith, who attended the court session, has repeatedly claimed that the defense is attempting to delay the case until after the 2024 presidential election. Trump's lawyers argued that the FBI's search warrant was invalid and lacked sufficient detail.
Judge Cannon indicated that the search warrant seemed valid based on the case law presented. She noted that the warrant clearly outlined the search for documents with classification markings. The defense's motion aimed to discard evidence seized during the Mar-a-Lago raid.
Tuesday marked the final day in a series of hearings set by Judge Cannon to consider defense motions in the case. These hearings began on Friday with discussions about the constitutionality of Jack Smith's appointment as special counsel.
On Monday, the hearings focused on the legality of Smith's funding. The series of defense motions will continue to be reviewed by Judge Cannon until the end of July.
Former prosecutor Harry Litman criticized Judge Cannon in the Los Angeles Times, accusing her of delaying the Trump trial until after the election. Litman suggested that Trump would reward her if he were re-elected president.
Judge Aileen Cannon's dismissal of the prosecution's claims against Trump's legal team has sparked debate about the fairness and direction of the ongoing trial. The case continues to draw national attention, with Trump facing serious charges and the defense actively challenging the validity of evidence and procedures.
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the prosecution's claims that Donald Trump's legal team hijacked a hearing. Trump, facing 40 federal charges, has pleaded not guilty, calling the case a political witch hunt. The defense argues that the FBI's search warrant was invalid, while the prosecution claims that Trump's legal team is delaying the case.
Judge Cannon's decisions and conduct in the hearings will significantly impact the trial's outcome, drawing intense scrutiny as the legal battle continues into the election season.
First lady Jill Biden expressed her admiration for President Joe Biden's debate performance, sparking a contrast with widespread critical commentary.
According to Breitbart News, Jill Biden's praise stood in stark contrast to media analysts who largely agreed that President Biden did not perform well and should be replaced.
At the debate's conclusion, Jill Biden commended her husband, emphasizing his command over the facts and his ability to address every question. Her statements in front of a supportive crowd highlighted her unwavering support for the President.
"Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question. You knew all the facts," Jill Biden stated, her voice resonating with pride and encouragement. This public endorsement came amidst a wave of negative critiques from nearly every political commentator.
The media landscape portrayed a different narrative, particularly on major networks like CNN and MSNBC. Analysts were almost unanimous in their assessment that President Biden's performance was subpar.
These commentators suggested that the President's lackluster performance indicated a need for a replacement, a sentiment that gained traction in post-debate discussions.
Despite the critical reception, Jill Biden remained steadfast in her support. She asked the crowd a rhetorical question about former President Donald Trump: "And what did Trump do?" eliciting a unified response of "Lied!" from the audience.
This moment of solidarity with the crowd underscored her commitment to defending her husband's capabilities and countering the prevailing negative opinions. It was a stark reminder of the divide between public support and media analysis.
The critical commentary from media analysts focused on several perceived weaknesses in President Biden's debate performance. They cited instances where he appeared unprepared and struggled to articulate his points effectively.
While Jill Biden's praise was heartfelt, it could not overshadow the widespread agreement among political commentators that the President's debate showing was lacking. This sentiment was echoed across various media platforms, where calls for his replacement were not uncommon.
The contrast between Jill Biden's positive remarks and the critical media narrative highlights a significant divide in public perception versus media interpretation. It raises questions about the impact of such divergent views on the President's political standing.
Jill Biden's public support for her husband poignantly reminds us of the personal dynamics at play in politics. Her encouragement and confidence in his abilities starkly contrast to the critical assessments from media analysts.
First Lady Jill Biden praised her husband’s debate performance despite widespread criticism suggesting he did poorly and should be replaced. She applauded his knowledge and responses, contrasting them with Trump's alleged dishonesty. However, most commentators on CNN and MSNBC agreed that Biden lost the debate.
Democrats are reeling after President Joe Biden's troubling debate performance against Donald Trump on Thursday night.
According to Daily Mail, the Democratic Party is grappling with serious concerns about Biden's age and capacity to continue his re-election bid after his struggle during the debate.
Biden, 81, stumbled throughout the 90-minute debate, leading to growing calls for him to be replaced on the ticket. Immediately after taking the stage, Biden's voice was hoarse, and he frequently cleared his throat. He appeared disoriented, often looking blankly into the camera or down at his notes.
The President repeatedly lost his train of thought and stumbled over his words. David Axelrod, a former senior advisor to President Barack Obama, expressed shock at Biden's early struggles. Axelrod said, "There would be 'discussions' in the party after the debate about whether Biden should continue his run for re-election."
Throughout the debate, Biden struggled to finish his sentences or talk points. CNN moderators Jake Tapper and Dana Bash had to frequently remind him to use the rest of his time. Biden's former White House communications director, Kate Bedingfield, also criticized his performance, describing it as "really disappointing."
An activist and CNN commentator, Van Jones, described the debate as "painful." He suggested that some party members might push for Biden to consider stepping aside, given his performance.
Various Democratic strategists and commentators voiced their concerns either anonymously or on social media. MSNBC contributors Max Burns and Jimmy Van Bramer expressed their shock and concern. Burns asserted, "I don’t know if high-level conversations are happening right now about Biden’s concerning performance, but it would be political malpractice to pretend tonight advanced the Biden campaign."
Nicole Wallace of MSNBC noted that the conversation about replacing Biden was "live and active at the highest levels of the Democratic party." Joy Reid shared that the universal reaction was approaching panic, with concerns about Biden appearing feeble and weak.
Kenneth Vogel cited a prominent Democrat who simply texted, "Gavin please...," referring to California Governor Gavin Newsom as a potential replacement. Kasie Hunt quoted a Democrat saying, "If I was Gavin (Newsom) or Gretchen (Whitmer), I’d be making calls tonight," and another stating, "we are f***d."
Despite these concerns, Biden's spokesman, Andrew Bates, dismissed the criticism and praised Biden for making a "strong argument for his vision" during the debate. Bates reacted by saying, "We have plenty of experience offering backbone transplants."
Jimmy Van Bramer wrote, "Texts from family and friends, all Democrats who despise Trump, are extremely concerning. You cannot just spin this and ignore the fact that this is not going well for our side."
The debate has intensified the already present anxieties about Biden's age and his ability to serve another four years. Axelrod noted that Biden's performance confirmed fears about his age and ability to serve effectively. Calls for Biden to be replaced have grown louder, with influential voices within the party weighing in on the debate's fallout. The conversation about a potential replacement is gaining momentum as the party considers its options.
As the Democratic Party grapples with the aftermath of this debate, the focus remains on addressing the concerns about Biden's capabilities and whether a change in candidacy is necessary. Thursday night's debate has left the party in a state of uncertainty, questioning the future of their leadership and their chances in the upcoming election.
The Supreme Court dismissed a significant case on social media censorship, sparking a heated dissent from conservative justices.
According to Breitbart News, the ruling determined that plaintiffs lacked standing, as they could not prove direct harm from social media companies' actions or government pressure.
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court decided on a contentious case involving allegations of censorship by social media platforms. The case revolved around claims that federal officials had pressured these platforms to suppress certain posts during the 2020 election and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The majority opinion, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, concluded that the plaintiffs failed to establish standing. According to Barrett, the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the actions of social media companies or government officials directly caused their alleged injuries.
Barrett highlighted that social media platforms like Facebook frequently moderated content deemed false or misleading during the election and pandemic. She noted that federal officials communicated extensively with these platforms about their content moderation efforts.
“During the 2020 election season and the COVID–19 pandemic, social-media platforms frequently removed, demoted, or fact-checked posts containing allegedly false or misleading information,” Barrett stated.
The plaintiffs argued that the government coerced social media platforms to restrict their speech, violating the First Amendment. They sued numerous Executive Branch officials and agencies, alleging this pressure led to unconstitutional censorship.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked the standing necessary to pursue the case without concrete injuries directly traceable to the defendant's conduct. Barrett explained, “At this stage, neither the individual nor the state plaintiffs have established standing to seek an injunction against any defendant.”
The Court emphasized its lack of jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the case due to the plaintiff's inability to establish standing. Barrett and the majority noted the impracticality of reviewing extensive communications between federal officials and social media companies without specific legal injuries.
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, issued a powerful dissent. “Victims of the campaign perceived by the lower courts brought this action to ensure that the Government did not continue to coerce social media platforms to suppress speech,” Alito wrote. He argued that the plaintiffs simply wanted to express their views on critical public matters.
Alito emphasized the importance of protecting dissenting speech, particularly on issues like the COVID-19 pandemic. “Our country’s response to the COVID–19 pandemic was and remains a matter of enormous medical, social, political, geopolitical, and economic importance,” he stated.
Justice Alito warned that the Court's inaction might set a dangerous precedent for future government control over public discourse. He concluded by urging recognition of constitutional violations and criticizing federal pressure on social media.
In summary, the Supreme Court's decision to dismiss the case on standing grounds leaves significant questions about the extent of government influence on social media censorship. The strong dissent from conservative justices highlights the ongoing debate over free speech and government coercion in the digital age.
The upcoming debate between former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden will feature muted microphones and no live audience, modifications requested by Biden's campaign.
According to Breitbart News, the changes have sparked suspicions of bias due to the moderators' known criticism of Trump.
CNN recently demonstrated the muting system for the debate, explaining that one candidate's microphone will be silenced while the other is speaking. Each microphone has two green lights to signal when it is active. This system aims to make interruptions difficult to comprehend.
Biden's campaign requested the muting system to prevent interruptions from Trump. They also insisted on a debate without a live audience, as Biden prefers to avoid in-person reactions. The Biden campaign communicated these demands to the Commission on Presidential Debates.
The rationale for the no-audience policy is to benefit American voters watching from home rather than entertain an in-person audience. The New York Times confirmed that the request for no audience came directly from the Biden campaign. They believe that debates should prioritize the viewers at home, not an in-person crowd.
The moderators for the debate, Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, have previously expressed criticisms of Trump, raising concerns about potential bias. Jake Tapper has made several negative remarks about Trump, including allegations of dishonesty and derogatory comments about his presidency. Similarly, Dana Bash has accused Trump of race-baiting, sexism, and being anti-science.
In a recent segment, CNN's Kasie Hunt cut off the microphone of Trump campaign national secretary Karoline Leavitt. This incident further fueled suspicions of bias against Trump.
The debate is scheduled to begin at 9 p.m. Eastern. After a coin toss, Biden will appear on the right side of the screen, and Trump will have the final closing remarks.
Critics argue that the choice of moderators could influence the debate's fairness. Jake Tapper's past statements, such as "For tens of millions of our fellow Americans, their long national nightmare is over," and his retweet of a post calling something "100% insane," highlight his critical stance toward Trump.
Likewise, Dana Bash's comments, including calling Trump's actions "outright lies" and labeling him as "sexist" and "anti-science," underscore her critical viewpoint. These concerns about bias have been a significant point of contention leading up to the debate.
The Biden campaign's request for muted microphones and no live audience aims to ensure a more orderly debate. By preventing interruptions and avoiding the influence of an in-person audience, they hope to create a more controlled environment for the candidates to present their positions.
The debate's modifications have stirred controversy, with critics questioning whether these changes could unfairly benefit Biden. Supporters argue that the measures are necessary to maintain decorum and focus on the issues at hand.
In conclusion, the upcoming debate between Trump and Biden will feature significant modifications, including muted microphones and the absence of a live audience, both of which Biden's campaign requested. These changes and concerns over moderator bias have created a charged atmosphere leading up to the event. As viewers tune in, the focus will be on how these adjustments influence the candidates' performances and the overall tone of the debate.
According to Breitbart News, former First Lady Michelle Obama has distanced herself from President Joe Biden's re-election campaign due to the mistreatment of her friend Kathleen Buhle, Hunter Biden's ex-wife.
Michelle Obama's decision to remain on the sidelines is partly due to her disapproval of the Biden family's treatment of Buhle. Her disdain for partisan politics also plays a role. Although she was initially hesitant to campaign for Joe Biden in 2020, her reluctance has only grown.
The discord between the Obamas and Bidens predates Hunter Biden's divorce from Buhle. Former President Barack Obama privately referred to the Biden family dynamics as “weird sh*t” at a 2017 fundraiser. During this period, Hunter Biden was newly divorced and dating Hallie Biden, his late brother Beau’s widow.
Michelle Obama has taken issue with how the Biden family treated Buhle, blaming her for exposing Hunter Biden's behavior. This situation only intensified the existing friction.
The relationship between the families changed significantly in 2015. President Obama discouraged Joe Biden from running for president, a move Biden believed was due to Obama's preference for Hillary Clinton.
Hunter Biden resented the Obama White House after he was pressured to quit his lobbyist job to avoid negative optics. In his memoir, he detailed his financial and career challenges, describing his situation as "riding the escalator without an exit." He felt isolated and unsupported.
Hunter Biden also expressed frustration at some Obama staffers, feeling they undermined and mocked his father. This added to the tension between the two political families.
Despite these strains, discussions have occurred regarding Michelle Obama’s potential involvement in Biden’s 2024 campaign. Top White House aide Anita Dunn and Michelle Obama's aide Melissa Winter have explored ways for her to participate.
Michelle Obama's spokesperson, Crystal Carson, has publicly stated that she supports Biden's re-election and maintains friendships with Kathleen Buhle and the Bidens. However, her reluctance to campaign reflects deeper issues.
The White House, through spokesperson Andrew Bates, has downplayed the tensions. Bates emphasized that the Biden and Obama families are very close, dismissing claims of discord as unfounded.
Nevertheless, the underlying issues between the families have affected Michelle Obama's political engagement. Her decision to distance herself from the campaign is emblematic of the broader, unresolved tensions.
As the 2024 election approaches, whether Michelle Obama will ultimately lend her support remains to be seen. The discussions involving her potential involvement indicate a willingness to bridge the gap, but the personal and political complexities make the situation delicate.
Former First Lady Michelle Obama's distance from President Biden's re-election campaign highlights significant family and political tensions. These issues trace back to longstanding personal and professional disputes between the Obamas and Bidens. The treatment of Kathleen Buhle, Hunter Biden's ex-wife, is a major factor, alongside Michelle Obama's disdain for partisan politics.
On Tuesday's "America's Got Talent" episode, a young musician stunned everyone.
Maya Neelakantan, a 10-year-old from India, amazed the judges with her electric guitar rendition of "Last Resort" by Papa Roach.
According to Fox News, Maya's performance began with a slower, traditional song before she transitioned into the heavy metal classic. The judges and audience gave her a standing ovation, recognizing the unexpected talent from someone so young.
Sofia Vergara, visibly impressed, questioned Maya's age, saying, "Are you sure you're 10 years old? Your energy, your confidence. A perfect audition. Amazing." The other judges echoed this sentiment, and they were equally surprised by Maya's skill and stage presence.
Howie Mandel, curious about Maya's influences, asked, "Who inspired you?" Maya responded by naming Alex Jones from Tool and Gary Holt, the guitarist from Exodus and Slayer, as her inspirations. This revelation added another layer of intrigue to her performance.
Heidi Klum praised Maya, stating, "Everyone in this room loved what you just did. You should be very proud of yourself." The young guitarist's performance clearly resonated with the judges and audience alike.
In a surprising twist earlier this month, Simon Cowell pressed the Golden Buzzer twice in one episode. This unusual occurrence led to a sudden rule change in the show.
The first Golden Buzzer was pressed for Liv Warfield, a singer from Chicago. Later, a drone light show by Sky Elements prompted Cowell to press the Golden Buzzer again, creating confusion among the production team, judges, and audience.
Producer intervention was required when Cowell pressed the Golden Buzzer the second time. The ensuing confusion led to an on-the-spot rule change, allowing each judge two opportunities to press the Golden Buzzer per season.
Simon Cowell's reaction to Maya's performance was particularly notable. "You know what I love about this audition? You just weren't expecting this. You were so shy, and you're 10! And then you turned into, like, this rock goddess," he said, capturing the surprise and admiration felt by all.
Howie Mandel, recognizing the potential impact of Maya's performance, remarked, "Well, I think you just picked yourself up a viral moment." This statement highlighted the likely widespread attention Maya's performance would garner.
Maya Neelakantan's performance on "America's Got Talent" showcased her remarkable ability to switch from a traditional song to a heavy metal classic, impressing both the judges and the audience.
The season has been notable, partly due to Simon Cowell using the Golden Buzzer twice, leading to a rule change that now allows each judge two uses per season. Judges Sofia Vergara, Howie Mandel, Heidi Klum, and Simon Cowell all praised Maya, seeing great potential in her future.