DOJ taunts media after Trump scores win in battleground-state ballot fight

The Department of Justice took aim at reporters it viewed as biased on social media on Wednesday after a federal judge sided with the government in a dispute over 2020 ballots and election materials it seized in Fulton County, Georgia, in January.

"Wrong again, MacFarlane," a DOJ communications account wrote in an X post, targeting a MeidasTouch journalist who had speculated the department’s arguments would fail to persuade the judge.

Judge J.P. Boulee had found in a 68-page order that Fulton County did not prove its rights were violated when the FBI seized more than 600 boxes of election records. Boulee, a Trump appointee, denied county officials’ request that the boxes be returned, handing the Trump administration a win in its broader fight to investigate the 2020 election and prompting DOJ to taunt media skeptics online.

"Sorry for your loss, Anna," the DOJ social media account wrote in a separate post about a Lawfare editor.

FBI AGENTS SEARCH ELECTION HUB IN FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA

Boulee’s decision marked a win for the DOJ in its nationwide effort to investigate past elections in key battlegrounds that also include Arizona and Michigan, as Trump maintains that the 2020 election was tainted by widespread fraud and aggressively pushes for tighter election security measures ahead of the midterms.

The FBI had seized the boxes, which included 2020 ballots, from the Fulton County Election Hub and Operation Center after obtaining a court-approved search warrant. An underlying affidavit revealed the bureau was probing allegations of ballot irregularities and record-keeping failures in Georgia, a state Trump lost by a razor-thin margin to President Joe Biden that became ground zero for Trump's election fraud claims in the aftermath of 2020.

FBI SUBPOENAS 2020 ARIZONA VOTING DOCS AS FEDERAL PUSH INTO ELECTION ADMINISTRATION WIDENS

Democrats have widely criticized the investigation, including Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., who called it a continuation of a "sore loser's crusade" upon learning of the probe.

Fulton County Board of Commissioners chairman Robb Pitts, who is named in the litigation over the box seizure, previously called the investigation "yet another act of outrageous federal overreach designed to intimidate and to chill participation in elections.... I will always stand up for our elections workers and for the truth."

NAACP ASKS JUDGE TO LIMIT HOW FEDS USE GEORGIA VOTER DATA SEIZED BY FBI

Pitts and other Fulton County officials had argued the box seizures were unlawful and that the government showed "callous disregard" for the county's constitutional rights. But Boulee rejected those claims while still acknowledging that the underlying affidavit was flawed and contained "troubling" statements.

"While the Affidavit was certainly far from perfect, this is not a situation where an officer left out all the facts that might undermine probable cause or where an officer intentionally lied," Boulee wrote, adding that he "cannot say that the Affidavit was so deficient that its shortcomings rise to the 'high[] threshold' of callous disregard."

Boulee relied in his decision on the fact that the investigation was still in an early phase and emphasized that federal authorities had obtained a valid warrant supported by an affidavit. The affidavit outlined allegations related to missing ballot images, inconsistent recount totals and chain-of-custody problems, among other potential issues.

In response to Boulee's order, Pitts said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital that he agreed with the judge's assessment that the affidavit was "defective" and "problematic." 

"But I strongly disagree with the judge’s denial of Fulton County’s request for the FBI to return the election records it wrongly seized on January 28," Pitts said, adding that county officials would "continue, as always, to stand by our election workers and the voters of Fulton County. We intend to vigorously pursue all available legal options."

Fox News Digital reached out to Lawfare and MeidasTouch for comment.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/XJYG4W3

Justin Baldoni's team claps back at Blake Lively declaring 'resounding victory' in settlement

Blake Lively went on offense after settling her lawsuit with "It Ends With Us" co-star Justin Baldoni, asking a federal judge to award her potentially tens of millions of dollars.

In a new legal filing, obtained by Fox News Digital, Lively's legal team argued that Baldoni's dismissed $400 million defamation case was not only baseless but retaliatory. The 38-year-old actress accused Baldoni, Wayfarer Studios and others of filing the countersuit to punish her for speaking out about alleged sexual harassment and misconduct.

Lively demanded a sweeping financial judgment that includes attorneys’ fees, triple damages for alleged harm and punitive damages aimed at penalizing what her attorneys described as an abuse of the legal system. The move marked a dramatic escalation in an already bitter legal battle, shifting the focus to retribution as Lively attempts to hold her opponents financially accountable.

"This settlement is a resounding victory for Blake Lively," representatives for Lively told Fox News Digital. "By agreeing to this settlement, and waiving their right to appeal, Justin Baldoni and every individual defendant now face personal liability for abusing the legal system to silence and intimidate Ms. Lively."

BLAKE LIVELY AND JUSTIN BALDONI REACH SETTLEMENT IN ‘IT ENDS WITH US’ RETALIATION LAWSUIT

"And by admitting that Ms. Lively’s concerns 'deserved to be heard,' the defendants have ended once and for all the fiction that Ms. Lively 'fabricated' claims of sexual harassment and retaliation," the statement continued. "From day one, Blake Lively’s mission was clear: expose and hold accountable those who weaponize smear campaigns and retaliatory lawsuits to intimidate and silence survivors. That mission continues."

A spokesperson for Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer parties pushed back sharply on Lively’s claims, framing the outcome of the broader case as a decisive win for their side and downplaying the significance of her latest filing.

"Let’s be clear, this is a win and total victory for the Wayfarer parties," Bryan Freedman told Fox News Digital. "The court had already dismissed 10 of Ms. Lively’s 13 claims, including every sexual harassment claim, every defamation claim, and all claims against the individual defendants. Ms. Lively voluntarily dismissed the rest. In our view, they settled because they knew they were going to lose in court. All that remains is a pending request for fees based on a very narrow issue that has been with the court since September 2025."

JUSTIN BALDONI'S $400M LAWSUIT AGAINST BLAKE LIVELY DISMISSED

Lively and Baldoni announced they had settled their nearly two-year legal battle in a joint statement shared Monday. The "It Ends With Us" stars were set to face off in court on May 18.

Baldoni and Lively first became embroiled in the legal back-and-forth after filming the Colleen Hoover-adapted film, "It Ends With Us." The "Gossip Girl" actress claimed she experienced sexual harassment on set and sued Baldoni in December 2024.

Lively detailed allegations of sexual harassment, retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence and more against Baldoni and film producer Jamey Heath in a complaint first filed with the California Civil Rights Department and later in federal court.

LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER

Meanwhile, Baldoni insisted that Lively had "falsely" accused him in an attempt to repair her reputation following the fallout from the movie's press tour in his own $400 million defamation lawsuit. The actor's claims were later thrown out by a judge in June 2025.

After battling in court for the past year and a half, a federal judge allowed Lively's retaliation claims to move forward in the high-profile Hollywood lawsuit highlighting what she claimed was a coordinated effort by powerful insiders to manipulate public opinion and destroy the actress' reputation.

However, Judge Lewis J. Liman tossed the majority of Lively's allegations against Baldoni, including the sexual harassment and defamation accusations. The judge's ruling dramatically narrowed the case to focus only on the actress' retaliation claims and a breach of contract claim weeks before the trial was set to begin.

Lively and Baldoni's notice of settlement, filed Thursday, signaled the two had reached a final resolution — ensuring that the same allegations cannot be brought back before the court again.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/KrpVSJb

'Left-wing extremists,' cartels move into crosshairs in Trump terror shift beyond ISIS

The Trump administration’s new counterterrorism strategy expands the scope of U.S. national security policy to include drug cartels and domestic extremist groups alongside traditional jihadist threats — a shift that could widen how counterterrorism tools are deployed at home and abroad.

A 16-page strategy released to reporters Wednesday identifies three primary sources of terrorist threats: "narcoterrorists and transnational gangs," "legacy Islamist terrorists," and "violent left-wing extremists, including anarchists and anti-fascists" — marking a break from post-9/11 frameworks that centered largely on groups like ISIS and al Qaeda.

The document lays out a three-part approach to combating those threats: identifying terrorist actors and plots before they occur, cutting off funding and recruitment pipelines, and ultimately dismantling established networks — a framework that signals a more expansive use of intelligence, financial and military tools across multiple threat categories.

The strategy broadens the definition of terrorism in ways that could extend national security powers beyond traditional jihadist groups — opening the door to expanded use of military, intelligence and law enforcement tools against cartels and actors inside the United States.

TRUMP REWRITES NATIONAL SECURITY PLAYBOOK AS MASS MIGRATION OVERTAKES TERRORISM AS TOP US THREAT

At the same time, the strategy takes aim at the intelligence community, arguing it has been "mired in old ways of looking at threats" and, at times, "weaponized" for political purposes — language that underscores the administration’s push to reshape how counterterrorism priorities are defined and executed.

The strategy expands the counterterrorism mission to include domestic extremist violence, particularly from what officials describe as left-wing ideological movements — a shift that places greater emphasis on identifying and disrupting networks operating inside the United States.

White House counterterrorism chief Sebastian Gorka said the administration is focused on politically motivated violence domestically and would use "all the tools constitutionally available" to identify and disrupt extremist actors.

TRUMP ADMIN TO HOLD GLOBAL SUMMIT ON COUNTERING ANTIFA, SOURCES CONFIRM

He pointed to recent high-profile attacks, including the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, as examples of what he described as a broader rise in extremist violence.

"If you look at the Tyler Robinson, as you mentioned, the murder of the assassin, of Charlie Kirk. If you look at Robert Westman, the murderer of the little children of the Annunciation Catholic School last year, we see an ideology that, ostensibly, began by preaching tolerance, being used by specific actors to wage violence against the most innocent, little children at Catholic schools at churches. This is a threat we will take very seriously."

"Whether you are right wing inspired or left being inspired, the point at which you advocate for violence or use violence yourself, for political purposes, means you are actually undertaking terrorism," Gorka went on.

The strategy calls for mapping and disrupting "violent left-wing extremists" using available law enforcement authorities, a move that could expand how federal agencies apply counterterrorism tools in domestic cases.

The strategy also elevates drug cartels to a central national security threat, embedding them alongside jihadist groups as a core counterterrorism priority — a shift that blurs the line between traditional criminal organizations and designated terrorist actors.

Gorka framed cartel violence as a direct and ongoing threat to the United States, arguing the scale of deaths tied to drug trafficking now rivals wartime losses.

"More Americans were murdered by illicit drugs smuggled across the border by cartels in one year than in 70 years of combat fatalities of U.S. service men and women," he said. "They declared war on us. We are responding."

The strategy builds on actions already underway, including the designation of major cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and a military campaign targeting suspected smuggling operations — steps that expand the range of tools available to confront cartel networks.

Recent operations have targeted suspected drug boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific as part of what officials describe as an ongoing effort to combat "narcoterrorism," signaling a more sustained operational posture.

"If we know where you are, if you killed Americans, if you're plotting to kill Americans, within 72 hours, we can kill you, we can arrest you or we can kill you," Gorka said.

Beyond domestic and cartel-related threats, the strategy places Iran at the center of the global terrorism landscape, describing the regime as the most significant state-backed threat facing the United States — reinforcing a continued focus on Tehran’s role in supporting proxy networks.

"The greatest threat to the United States emanating from the Middle East comes specifically from Iran," the document states, citing both Tehran’s military capabilities and its backing of groups such as Hezbollah.

Gorka echoed that assessment, arguing many global threats ultimately trace back to Iran. 

"Nine out of ten times, you scratch the surface of that threat, and three nanometers later, you find Iran," he said.

The strategy calls for continued military, intelligence and covert operations against Iran and its network of proxies, signaling those efforts will persist "until the regime in Tehran is no longer a threat to the United States."

The document also emphasizes more aggressive use of military, financial and intelligence tools, alongside increased pressure on allies to take on greater responsibility in combating shared threats, pointing to a wider, more integrated counterterrorism posture going forward.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/sG6q3yp

DOJ sues Denver over ban on ‘assault weapons’

The Justice Department announced Tuesday that it has filed a lawsuit against the city of Denver, Colorado, "alleging that the City unconstitutionally bans certain constitutionally protected semi-automatic rifles."

"These laws unconstitutionally infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in common use for lawful purposes," according to the Justice Department.

"The Constitution is not a suggestion and the Second Amendment is not a second-class right," Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement. "Denver's ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles directly violates the right to bear arms. This Department of Justice will vigorously defend the liberties of law-abiding citizens nationwide."

The 12-page complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado names the City and County of Denver, Colorado, and the Denver Police Department as defendants. It said Denver has an ordinance that makes it "a crime to carry, store, keep, manufacture, sell, or otherwise possess a so-called ‘assault weapon,’" but that the ordinance contains "politically charged rhetoric."

LINDSAY GRAHAM URGES US, ISRAEL TO ARM IRANIAN CIVILIANS IN ‘SECOND AMENDMENT SOLUTION’ TO TOPPLE REGIME

"The term ‘assault weapon' is not a technical term used in the firearms industry. Rather, as Justice Thomas has aptly noted, ’assault weapon' is a rhetorically charged political term developed by anti-gun publicists," the complaint reads. "In reality, the firearms the City calls ‘assault weapons’ include ordinary semiautomatic rifles possessed by millions of law-abiding Americans. Indeed, Americans own literally tens of millions of AR-15 style rifles, the paradigmatic ‘assault weapon’ covered by the Ordinance. As the Supreme Court has recently recognized, the AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America."

"When the City banned AR-15 style rifles with standard capacity magazines, it banned an arm in common use for  lawful purposes by law-abiding citizens," the complaint added. "Therefore, the Ordinance violates the Second Amendment, and the United States brings this action to vindicate the rights of Denver citizens whose rights have been — and are continuing to be — violated by Defendants."

The complaint calls for declaratory and injunctive relief. The Denver Police Department told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that it would defer to the Denver mayor's office for comment. The mayor's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

SPANBERGER SIGNS GUN BILLS, MAKES A PROPOSED GUN BAN EVEN HARSHER

The office of Denver Mayor Mike Johnston released a statement Monday saying he was joined "by public safety and civic leaders in rejecting a demand from the U.S. Department of Justice to repeal the city's longstanding ban on assault weapons."

"The demand, which suggested a lawsuit would be filed if Denver does not comply, came last week in a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice," the Democrat's office said. 

"Our first job is to keep Denverites safe, and we will not be intimidated out of doing it," Johnston said in a statement. "Denver's law has stood for 37 years because it works, it saves lives, and it reflects the values of our community. No demand or lawsuit from Washington is going to change that."

Johnston's office said "Denver’s law was passed in 1989 and restricts the possession and sale of guns with magazines carrying more than 15 rounds," and that "Denver retains clear legal authority to regulate firearms within its borders to protect public safety, and the ordinance is consistent with both Colorado law and the U.S. Constitution."

However, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division said Tuesday that, "I have directed the Civil Rights Division, through our new Second Amendment Section, to defend law-abiding Americans from restrictions such as those we are challenging in these cases."

"Law-abiding Americans, regardless of what city or state they reside in, should not have to live under threat of criminal sanction just for exercising their Second Amendment right to possess arms which are owned by tens of millions of their fellow citizens," Dhillon continued.

"In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark decision District of Columbia v. Heller, held that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to possess weapons that are in common use for lawful purposes," the Justice Department said.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/RaDr89t

Skip Bayless to reunite with Stephen A. Smith on ESPN as First Take's ratings slip

For the first time in nearly a decade, Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith will debate each other on ESPN’s "First Take" this Friday.

On Monday, the network announced Bayless will join Smith for a "one-time reunion" in Los Angeles. Bayless last appeared on the show in June 2016, before leaving ESPN for FS1.

The dynamics this time are different. "First Take" used to be Bayless’ show. He personally asked Smith to join him as a full-time debate partner in 2012. At the time, Smith had just returned to ESPN as a radio host and did not have a television platform. Today, Smith is one of the biggest names in sports media, while Bayless no longer has a television show after leaving FS1 in 2024. He is now a contributor to Gilbert Arenas’ YouTube platform.

SPORTS MEDIA RACE-BAITERS ARE ALREADY TAKING NIKOLA JOKIC CRITICISM TOO FAR

Notice the wording ESPN used to promote Bayless’ appearance, calling it a "one-time reunion." That phrasing appears to shut down speculation that Bayless could return to "First Take" as a full-time host or a weekly contributor, like Chris "Mad Dog" Russo.

Still, Smith previously said he had moved on and had no interest in reuniting with Bayless. Plans and visions change.

As OutKick reported last month, most of ESPN’s shows are up double digits year over year. It is no coincidence that this surge coincided with the network toning down political and racial dialogue. However, "First Take" is the outlier.

"Get Up" airs directly before "First Take" and is up 18%. "The Pat McAfee Show," which follows "First Take," is up 16%. And yet, "First Take" is up just 5%, which falls below the standard Big Data + Panel bump.

In an industry where showing growth is paramount, ESPN management and Smith are certainly aware of "First Take’s" trends.

They hope Bayless can provide a much-needed bump, but we aren't so sure he will.

Bayless is no longer the needle mover he was when he left ESPN 10 years ago. Near the end of his run at FS1, "Undisputed" averaged just 30,000 viewers. He also recently stopped recording "The Skip Bayless Show" podcast, which drew only a few thousand views per episode on YouTube.

Further, Bayless cannot be the answer if Smith is the problem.

Since signing a record $100 million contract last year, Smith has appeared increasingly uninterested in the content. His rants are often predictable, repetitive and riddled with errors. Over the past year, he has repeatedly misidentified players or discussed players and coaches who are no longer active.

Perhaps Smith’s political commentary has become a distraction for him. If so, he should no longer host a daily two-hour sports debate show on ESPN.

Skip Bayless will not change that. If anything, known for his obsessive preparation, Bayless will further highlight Smith’s lack of command of current sports topics and make him look worse.

In other moves to boost viewership for "First Take," ESPN says rapper Cam’ron on May 5 and comedian Kid Mero on May 7 will also debate Smith next week.

For now, Bayless is excited for his return.

"CAN’T WAIT FOR FRIDAY," he posted on X. "MORE SOON."

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/8hpmefN

Supreme Court temporarily blocks appeals court ruling on abortion pill, restores wider access to drug

The Supreme Court on Monday temporarily blocked a federal appeals court ruling that would have sharply restricted access to the abortion pill, restoring, for now, the ability of patients to obtain the drug through telehealth, mail and pharmacies.

The order signed by Justice Samuel Alito temporarily allows women seeking abortions to obtain the pill without an in-person visit to a doctor, a temporary legal victory for abortion activists.

A federal appeals court had imposed new restrictions on the abortion pill last week.

"It is good to see SCOTUS issue this stay to immediately restore access by mail to mifepristone," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said, responding to the ruling on X. "But this fight is just beginning."

FEDERAL APPEALS COURT BLOCKS MAILING OF ABORTION PILLS IN RULING WITH NATIONWIDE EFFECT

"We will stop at nothing to prevent the Republicans from putting a national abortion ban into effect," he added.

The majority of abortions in the United States are obtained through medications, usually a combination of mifepristone and a second drug, misoprostol. The availability of those drugs has blunted the impact of abortion bans that many Republican-led states have sought to enforce since a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade.

Louisiana sued to restrict access to mifepristone, asserting that its availability undermined the ban there.

NEW YORK GOV. HOCHUL SIGNS LAW PROTECTING ABORTION PILL PRESCRIBERS AFTER DOCTOR INDICTED IN LOUISIANA

The administrative stay remains in effect until at least May 11 at 5 p.m., giving the state time to respond to requests for a longer pause, and for the high court to take up the case on the merits.

"This ruling is not final — keep watching," Center for Reproductive Rights President and CEO Nancy Northup wrote in a statement. "Getting abortion pills through telehealth has been a lifeline for women since Roe v. Wade was overturned. There is no reason people shouldn’t be able to get mifepristone at a pharmacy or through the mail.

"Louisiana's attempt to restrict access is political and not based in science or medicine. Americans deserve access to this critical drug that has been FDA approved for 25 years."

EXPERTS SOUND THE ALARM OVER 'SHOCKING' STUDY SHOWING SIGNIFICANT RISKS TO WOMEN WHO TAKE ABORTION PILLS

Manufacturers of mifepristone filed emergency appeals asking the Supreme Court to step in.

Kristan Hawkins, president of the anti-abortion group Students for Life, decried Monday’s decision.

"Pill pushers receive every benefit of the doubt, including today, as Justice Alito allows pill traffickers and big pharma to operate temporarily while arguments are sent to the Court," she said in a statement.

UNIVERSITY OF OREGON TO OFFER ABORTION PILLS ON CAMPUS THIS FALL AFTER STUDENT PRESSURE CAMPAIGN

After Friday’s ruling from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, some groups that prescribe abortion pills by telehealth had planned to switch to misoprostol-only regimens.

Dr. Angel Foster, founder of The Massachusetts Abortion Access Project, said her organization was preparing to send misoprostol only on Monday afternoon but was able to switch back.

"Regardless of what happens with this regulatory issue, we and other groups will continue to provide high-quality abortion care to patients in all 50 states," she said.

The appeals court decision would have required the Food and Drug Administration to reimpose tighter limits on mifepristone access while litigation continues.

Fox News' Bill Mears, Shannon Bream and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/9RXlx4J

Minnesota T-Wolves at San Antonio Spurs best bet for Game 1 of the 2026 Western Conference Semifinals

The second round of the 2026 NBA PLAYOFFS starts Monday with two games that weirdly overlap. Thank God for YouTube TV's controllable multi-view feature.

Nonetheless, I'm here to handicap Game 1 of the Minnesota Timberwolves at San Antonio Spurs in the Western Conference Semifinals.

76ERS VS KNICKS SECOND-ROUND SERIES PREDICTED TO GO AT LEAST SIX GAMES IN MUST-WATCH NBA MATCHUP

Minnesota was 2-1 straight up and against the spread vs. San Antonio during the regular season, and the total was 2-1 to the Over.

But, due to load management and tanking, you have to take the regular season with a grain of salt when betting on the playoffs. With that in mind, I'm fading the regular-season results in the Timberwolves-Spurs series opener.

Let me explain why this series could turn into a rock-fight. First of all, San Antonio ranked third in defensive efficiency during the regular season and Minnesota ranked eighth. Again, the regular season isn't the end-all, be-all, but this matches the eye test.

Furthermore, the average pace for the three Timberwolves-Spurs games was 96.0 possessions per 48 minutes. For context, 99.4 was the average pace during the NBA regular season. The average pace for the 2026 NBA Playoffs is 95.5. So, if those averages hold up, we’re looking at a roughly 92.1 Pace for this series. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE

These teams will have to hit mad 3-pointers and/or get to the foul line often for the Over to cash. Well, the T-Wolves allowed the fewest made 3-pointers per game during the regular season and the Spurs led the NBA in defensive FT/FGA rate.

Minnesota All-Star SG Anthony Edwards was upgraded to "questionable" for Game 1. Personally, I think that’s more likely to be a "smokescreen" and we don’t see Ant-Man until this series heads to Minneapolis for Game 3.

Plus, T-Wolves SG Donte DiVincenzo is out for the season and breakout combo guard Ayo Dosunmu missed their close-out win vs. the Denver Nuggets in Game 6 of the first round and is "questionable" for Monday. DiVincenzo and Dosunmu are great shooters and their absence hurts Minnesota’s floor spacing. 

Yet, the Timberwolves went from +14.5 underdogs on the opener down to +12.5 after the Edwards injury news, so maybe he does play Monday. Regardless, even if Edwards does, San Antonio is the second-toughest defense to play in your first game back from injury, besides the Oklahoma City Thunder.

The Spurs have long, athletic wings to throw at Edwards, with the greatest defensive basketball player ever, Victor Wembanyama, backing them up. Also, without Ant-Man, the Timberwolves will probably run their offense mostly through PF Julius Randle in Game 1, and I don’t see that going well for him.

I say that as a New York Knicks fan who absolutely loves Julius. Because he was their best player, Knicks fans held their postseason shortcomings from 2021-24 against him. When, in reality, you’re never a title contender if Randle is your best player. That’s not his fault. That goes on the NYK’s organization.  

However, he tends to play too much iso-ball and take guys off the dribble. Because Timberwolves C Rudy Gobert can’t shoot, Wembanyama doesn’t have to leave the paint. Hence, Randle will have to make hard, contested jumpers or score against Wemby inside the paint. Good luck, dude.

Lastly, the Spurs are double-digit favorites, so the market expects a lopsided game, and "blowouts are where Overs go to die".

Teams play with less urgency in blowouts and there is no reason to foul down 10+ points in the final minutes. The Under cashed in four of the five games in the San Antonio vs. Portland Trail Blazers series, and the Spurs were double-digit favorites in three of those Unders. 

Prediction: Spurs 113, Timberwolves 98

_____________________________

Follow me on X @Geoffery-Clark, and check out my OutKick Bets Podcast for more betting content and random rants.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/SytXQ4h