Clear your schedule, Pokémon fans, because an absolute truckload of it is coming to Twitch.

The social streaming service is set to run a Pokémon marathon featuring 16 movies and 19 TV seasons spanning a colossal 932 episodes.

It’ll be Twitch’s single longest programmatic viewing event to date, following marathons for the likes of Doctor Who, Saturday Night Live, and Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, to name a few.

But you won’t have to say farewell to the outside world for this one — the episodes and films will be streamed over a few different marathons kicking off at 10 a.m. PT on August 27 and rolling into 2019.

Of course, the marathon will kick off with the first season: Pokémon: Indigo League. Viewers can stream it from the TwitchPresents channel (where you can also find the dates and times for individual sessions) and it’ll be dubbed in French, German, Spanish, Italian, and Brazilian Portuguese.

Because you’ve always, always gotta catch ‘em all, the broadcast will be paired with an interactive Twitch Extensions overlay that lets you collect Pokémon badges while you’re watching. You’ll gain points from each badge and there’ll be a leaderboard, if you want to be the very best.

Twitch’s partnership with The Pokémon Company International makes sense. The streaming site saw thousands of Twitch viewers beat the multiplayer Pokémon Red in 2014, and the platform broadcast 24 hours of Pokémon to celebrate its 20th anniversary in 2016.

Plus, Twitch will broadcast four streams of the 2018 Pokémon World Championships live on Aug. 24, from Nashville, Tennessee.

“The Twitch community has a passion for Pokémon,” said Jane Weedon, Director of Business Development at Twitch in a statement. 

“[The event] marks our most ambitious block of animated programming to date in terms of duration and content.”

Here’s everything that will be played during the event, so you can plan:

TV seasons

● Pokémon: Indigo League

● Pokémon: Adventures on the Orange Islands

● Pokémon: The Johto Journeys

● Pokémon: Johto League Champions

● Pokémon: Master Quest

● Pokémon: Advanced

● Pokémon: Advanced Challenge

● Pokémon: Advanced Battle

● Pokémon: Battle Frontier

● Pokémon: Diamond and Pearl

● Pokémon: Diamond and Pearl Battle Dimensions

● Pokémon: Diamond and Pearl Galactic Battles

● Pokémon: Diamond and Pearl Sinnoh League Victors

● Pokémon: Black & White

● Pokémon: Black & White Rival Destinies

● Pokémon: Black & White Adventures in Unova and Beyond

● Pokémon the Series: XY

● Pokémon the Series: XY Kalos Quest

● Pokémon the Series: XYZ

Movies

● Pokémon: The First Movie

● Pokémon: The Movie 2000

● Pokémon 3: The Movie

● Pokémon: Lucario and the Mystery of Mew

● Pokémon Ranger and the Temple of the Sea

● Pokémon: The Rise of Darkrai

● Pokémon: Giratina and the Sky Warrior

● Pokémon: Arceus and the Jewel of Life

● Pokémon—Zoroark: Master of Illusions

● Pokémon the Movie: Black—Victini and Reshiram and Pokémon the Movie: White—Victini and Zekrom

● Pokémon The Movie: Kyurem vs. The Sword of Justice

● Pokémon The Movie: Genesect and the Legend Awakened

● Pokémon the Movie: Diancie and the Cocoon of Destruction

● Pokémon the Movie: Hoopa and the Clash of Ages

● Pokémon the Movie: Volcanion and the Mechanical Marvel

After Michael Cohen implicated President Donald Trump in open court in two campaign finance violations, Trump has been on the defensive.

The violations arose from an alleged scheme to silence two women who claimed affairs with the president. Cohen says he paid them off at the direction of Trump and pleaded guilty to eight counts on Tuesday. 

But Trump argues that campaign finance issues are common and what happened wasn’t a crime. On an interview that aired Thursday on FOX News, Trump pointed to his predecessor, former president Barack Obama, who he said was caught in a “massive” violation.

“Almost everybody that runs for office has campaign violations,” he argued. 

But there’s one key difference: the violation in Trump’s case was apparently purposeful. 

What happened with Obama?

In 2013, President Obama was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission after his 2008 campaign did not turn in reports for about 1,300 last-minute donations that totaled nearly $1.9 million. 

The fine was one of the largest against a presidential campaign and topped the $208,000 in civil penalties paid by Rev. Al Sharpton after failing to accurately report receipts and spending during his 2004 presidential bid.

Republican Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential campaign was fined $100,000.

What’s going on with Trump?

In Trump’s case, Cohen told a judge that he paid off the two women “in coordination with, and at the direction of” the then-candidate. He said the secretive payments to hide damaging information about Trump were made for the sole purpose of “influencing the election.” 

It wasn’t just Cohen’s word, either. In court, federal prosecutors laid out their evidence, the timeline and the paper trail showing the payments and why they were made. 

Trump isn’t wrong in saying plenty of candidates have been fined for campaign finance violations. It’s relatively common to be fined by the Federal Election Commission for civil violations, as many of the violations aren’t done with malice. 

Even Trump’s campaign had issues. The FEC pointed out more than 1,000 errors in one 2016 filing, about a handful of which violated campaign finance laws, according to CNN. 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2LnPH4y

The saddest part of watching Urban Meyer’s Hall of Fame coaching career devolve into a 23-page report that depicts him as a serial liar, aspiring cover-up artist and reckless personnel manager who protected a risky employee is that human beings actually read what was on paper and concluded that he should remain as the coach at Ohio State. 

At least now it makes sense why it took 11 hours of deliberations Wednesday before the Board of Trustees settled on a three-game suspension for Meyer: A group of serious, successful people had to come to terms with a decision that was decidedly unserious in the name of King Football. 

What’s remarkable, however, about Ohio State’s decision to retain Meyer despite a rather overwhelming narrative in the investigative findings that would have brought down practically anyone else is the utter lack of self-confidence displayed by one of the top five college football programs of all time. 

In other words, the conclusion Wednesday was that Ohio State University needed Meyer more than Meyer needed Ohio State University, which isn’t just an embarrassment for one of the top public institutions in the country but a failure to understand their own history and a lack of faith in their brand. 

Ohio State has been good at football, more or less continuously, for a half-century. The Buckeyes were competing for national titles long before Meyer arrived and will do so long after he leaves. The institutional investment in winning football games is too deep, and the natural advantages of history and geography are too powerful, for Ohio State to ever be reliant on one person for its success. 

And yet Ohio State is apparently so afraid of what happens after Meyer that it was willing to all but ignore the findings of its $500,000 report, which offered a crystal clear roadmap to fire him, perhaps even with cause. 

Even if you strip away Courtney Smith’s domestic violence accusations – which Meyer was obviously skeptical of based on his responses to the investigators and his lack of compassion at the press conference Wednesday night – just think about what the report was able to corroborate.

More: Urban Meyer stays as Ohio State football coach, but he is diminished after investigation

More: Arrogance and pride helped lead to suspension of Ohio State football coach Urban Meyer

How many times over the years did Meyer sit in his office, asking himself what would happen if Zach Smith’s behavior ever became known outside the Woody Hayes Athletic Center? 

Surely Meyer had those thoughts in 2014 when he learned, according to the report, that his wide receivers coach had rung up a $600 bill at a strip club with one, or perhaps multiple, high school coaches while on a recruiting trip in Miami. But instead of firing an eminently replaceable employee, he changed his coaches’ manual, issued a warning and failed to report the misconduct to his athletic director.

Surely Meyer had those thoughts in 2015 and 2016 when Smith was late to practices and workouts and skipped scheduled recruiting visits that he falsely claimed he had made, leading athletics director Gene Smith to suggest firing him. 

Surely Meyer had those thoughts in 2016 when Smith was admitted to a drug treatment facility for “addiction to a stimulant prescription drug used to treat ADHD” and, again, didn’t inform his athletic director. 

But time after time, Meyer failed to take drastic action, never mind what should have been obvious warning signs about a domestic abuse history with multiple allegations and a sexual relationship with an Ohio State football secretary that Meyer may or may not have known about. Even if you accept the investigative report’s conclusion that Meyer didn’t know about that relationship and the other lewd sexual activities occurring at the OSU football facilities, what does it say about the culture of Ohio State football that the people who did know thought it was more important to protect Smith than to report it to Meyer and stop it? 

When you add it up, the bare minimum takeaway is that Meyer failed to properly manage an employee who wasn’t just problematic, but a massive human resources risk. Every day Smith showed up to work, he presented the potential to drag Meyer personally and the Ohio State football program into a legal, moral and human resources morass. And yet at every turn, there was little more than a stern warning not to do it again, pointing to Meyer’s reckless disregard for his role as the steward of not only Ohio State football, but the university’s reputation. 

In the end, after poring through the 23 salacious pages that were made public after his press conference Wednesday night, it’s going to be hard to take seriously anything Meyer says ever again. Even the investigative team wrote in the summary that they believe he lied to them about his role in cleaning up Smith’s 2009 arrest and whether he communicated with his wife about abuse concerns in 2015. 

Moreover, they concluded Meyer omitted relevant information he possessed about Smith on numerous occasions when it would have perhaps raised the alarm level around Ohio State and intimated that he might have wiped his phone of old text messages after Brett McMurphy’s Aug. 1 report that revealed communications between Shelley Meyer and Courtney Smith. 

Following that report’s publication, the report says Meyer and director of football operations Brian Voltolini “discussed at that time whether the media could get access to Coach Meyer’s phone, and specifically discussed how to adjust the settings on Meyer’s phone so that text messages older than one year would be deleted.”

And when Meyer handed over his phone for the investigators to examine the next day –  voila! – there were no messages older than a year. 

Regardless of what those communications contained, investigators believe Meyer suffered from “consciousness of guilt,” thinking immediately about deleting texts after the damaging story went public.

In the end, though, without reason for any NCAA or legal action against Meyer directly,  this was always going to be about what Ohio State wanted, not what made sense based on the factual findings in a 23-page report.

Make no mistake, the ultimate outcome for Meyer and what is in the report are directly in conflict.  And the only way to look at what investigators found and conclude that Meyer should be retained is to see Ohio State as a weak institution that has acquiesced its history, its standards and its pride for the sake of a football coach it deems irreplaceable.

Might as well just go all the way and rename the place. From now on, it’s Urban Meyer State.

 

Europa League: Celtic lead Suduva inside three minutes – Live – BBC Sport

<!–

<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–
<!–

<!–

<!–

<!–

A scandal about German police officers obstructing a TV crew at a far-right rally has escalated after it emerged that the protester at the centre of the dispute was an off-duty police staff, raising further concerns about entrenched right-wing sympathies among the police and attacks on press freedom.

Authorities in Saxony confirmed on Wednesday that the police employee had attended a march by anti-Islam and anti-migrant group PEGIDA in the state capital, Dresden, on August 18 and had reported journalists covering the rally to police who detained them for 45 minutes.

Video footage showed a well-built man in sunglasses and a hat in the colours of the German flag confronting the crew working for public broadcaster ZDF, waving his hands at the camera, telling them not to film and reporting them to the police.

The ZDF reporter, Arndt Ginzel, accused police of effectively acting as the “executive” arm of PEGIDA.

The incident took place at a rally against a visit to Dresden by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. 

But Merkel’s conservatives also faced accusations of ignoring the rise of far-right groups in Saxony, after state premier Michael Kretschmer, a senior member of the chancellor’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), appeared to defend the police action, writing on Twitter: “The only people who come across seriously in this video are policemen.”

A deputy leader of the Social Democrats (SPD), who share power with the CDU in the federal German government, accused Merkel’s party of complacency about the growth of the far-right.

“The CDU in Saxony has for decades denied or trivialised right-wing radical movements and violence,” Ralf Stegner told Handelsblatt daily.

It has “allowed right-wing thinking in Saxony not only to go unchallenged but also to be acceptable”, he said.

Press freedom 

German Justice Minister Katarina Barley, also from the SPD, said the events were “very worrying” and had to be quickly and comprehensively cleared up.

“Press freedom is an important part of our society and our constitution,” she said. 

Kretschmer has since said he is a convinced defender of a free press and Die Welt newspaper quoted him on Thursday as saying, “I am intent on assessing the situation calmly and in a factual manner.”

Cornelia Hass, chief executive of the DJV union representing journalists, urged Germany’s federal and state security officials to review the way police are trained in their dealings with reporters.

“Safeguarding press freedom needs to be a major element in the training of security forces,” she said.

Journalists covering demonstrations by PEGIDA are regularly spat at, verbally abused and threatened by protesters with little police intervention.

Rise of the far right

Merkel’s decision in 2015 to let in about one million refugees and migrants, many fleeing wars in the Middle East, has fuelled support for far-right groups such as PEGIDA and the Alternative for Germany (AfD), now the main opposition party in parliament.

Saxony, the cradle of the PEGIDA movement, is a stronghold for far-right sentiment. In last year’s federal election, the AfD was the strongest party in the state, pushing Merkel’s CDU into second place.

Kretschmer, who has criticised Merkel’s migration policy, faces a tough challenge in next year’s state election to hold Saxony for the CDU.

Neo-Nazis have a strong tradition in Saxony, especially in Dresden, where they gather every year on February 13 to mark the Allied firebombing of the city in World War II which killed 25,000 people and destroyed its baroque architecture.

Asked by broadcaster NDR about the off-duty police employee taking part in a PEGIDA rally, a Saxony police spokesman did not deny there might be supporters of the group in police ranks.

“The police is a cross-section of society. We have all political views,” he said.

SOURCE: Al Jazeera and news agencies

Image: Luke leonard, Mashable

Size matters … for science, anyway.

While there have been numerous prior studies (both scholarly and unscientific) on penis size, the British Journal of Urology International (BJUI) published one of the girthiest analyses to date. Pulling data from 17 previous academic papers that included a total of 15,521 men worldwide, researchers in the UK came up with a meta-analysis of what they believe to be the average penis size and girth of a penis when erect and when flaccid.

Sorry, guys, but your eggplant emoji isn’t exactly accurate. According to the new research in BJUI, the average flaccid penis is 3.61 inches in length and 5.16 inches in length when erect. Girth is 3.66 inches when flaccid and 4.59 inches when erect.

Numbers aren’t the only results to come out of the new study. It also questions some of the common penis size stereotypes, like whether your race or foot size are determining factors for penis size.

The researchers did not find enough evidence from the 17 previous studies to come up with a conclusion about the difference in size by race. Two studies incorporated foot size into account, and found penile length to be “significantly weakly correlated,” while the other did not find a correlation at all between the two.

The stronger statistically significant correlations were between flaccid stretched or erect length and height, which was found in four studies, although the correlations were not extremely strong.

Of course, there are a few limitations that could affect penile dimensions, including temperature, level of arousal and sperm count.

But we’re much more interested in what 3.61 and 5.16 inches actually looks like, so we’ve compared the two averages with everyday household objects.

Let’s get establish a penis size baseline …

Blue lego is the size of an average flaccid penis.

Red lego is the size of an average erect penis.

Image: luke leonard, mashable

Now let’s get comparing to 17 household items …

1. A crayon 

Image: luke leonard, mashable

2. A pair of batteries

Image: luke leonard, mashable

3. A Nerf Dart

Image: luke leonard, mashable

4. A “fun” size Snickers bar

Image: luke leonard, mashable

5. A small cactus

Image: luke leonard, mashable

6. A ticket

Image: luke leonard, mashable

7. A pair of wine corks

Image: luke leonard, marshable

8. A shot glass

Image: luke leonard, mashable

9. A Diet Coke can

Image: luke leonard, mashable

10. Three batteries 

Image: luke leonard, mashable

11. Hand lotion 

Image: luke leonard, mashable

12. Three small Snickers bars, just the tip bitten off one

Image: luke leonard, mashable

13. (Almost) two sticks of gum

Image: luke leonard, mashable

14. Two toothpicks

Image: luke leonard, Mashable

15. Three wine corks

Image: luke leonard, mashable

16. A small TV remote

Image: luke leonard, mashable

17. And, of course, a banana

Image: luke leonard, mashable

This article was originally published in 2015. 

Crazy Rich Asians

type

Movie

release date

08/15/18

performer

Constance Wu, Henry Golding, Michelle Yeoh

director

Jon M. Chu

mpaa

PG-13

Since day one, Crazy Rich Asians has bore the burden of being the first Hollywood film in a long time — 25 years, to be exact — to feature an all-Asian principal cast with Asian-Americans in lead roles. It’s rare to see a production like it, rarer still to see it top the box office.

The returns mark a historic win for everyone involved, and though it’s proof that a movie about contemporary Asian characters played by (actual, non-whitewashed) Asian actors could dominate the box office, it remains to be seen whether the movement has made an impact on the industry, and more importantly, will last.

For now, the team behind Crazy Rich Asians are optimistic. On Monday, EW spoke with the producers for this week’s issue, before news broke that a sequel is now in development, about what the big box-office debut means for the future of Asian- and Asian-American led films from an industry standpoint. The conversations below are condensed from two separate calls: one with John Penotti of Ivanhoe Pictures, which helped finance Crazy Rich Asians, and one with Nina Jacobson and Brad Simpson of Color Force, which first acquired the rights to Kevin Kwan’s novel in 2013, on which the film is based.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: What was your reaction to that final tally of $35.3 million? How did you feel?
JOHN PENOTTI: I know it sounds trite, but I refreshed my page three times. I had to make sure I was looking at the right thing… I tried to lower my own personal expectations, because I just didn’t want to be disappointed.

NINA JACOBSON: Ecstatic. Overjoyed. Thrilled. Obsessed.

BRAD SIMPSON: It’s been an extraordinary experience. We obviously wish we were prescient and could say when we optioned this book, we somehow knew this would happen. The word we keep using is “joy”… Nina and I, as white producers, understood on an intellectual level but never fully understood the power of representation [until now]. We’ve been blown away, sitting with Asian-Americans in audiences, saying they experienced seeing themselves on screen for the first time.

JACOBSON:  “Joy” was the word that Kevin wrote down for himself as the mantra as he wrote the book, and it carried over to the experience. It always felt like this had the potential to be a big hit commercial movie — we never saw it as a specialty movie, we never thought it wasn’t a big mainstream movie. The depth of feeling and passion it would inspire because of the timing and the significance of the growing frustration over whitewashing, the desire for audiences to be seen and heard, that was something that has been really humbling to see. It’s been humbling to see what it means for people to be seen, to be heard, to see themselves on screen not as the sidekick, not as the ancillary character, but as everything in this movie.

What were the keys to making this successful opening happen?
JACOBSON: Certainly the Asian-American community, the degree to which they have come together to give us the wind beneath our wings, to creating all of this excitement around the release of the movie, and to make enough noise that other ears perked up, is so compelling.

PENOTTI: I think we had a good sense early on that Jon had directed a really heartfelt, compelling film. We saw it even in the earliest of rough cuts, but there was absolutely no doubt that the marketing and publicity challenge of this was going to make or break this, because we knew that the film was always the strongest attribute. My concern always revolved around, could we come up with the words to convince people that they need to look broadly at it? … Warner Bros. made it an event film. They found a way to broaden the talking points around what people are now embracing, the idea of representation and Asians as protagonists.

On that note, have you already noticed more people being encouraged to pitch Asian-led stories, more projects finally being greenlit? Is this a win for representation?
JACOBSON: I certainly hope so and believe there will be a ripple effect.

SIMPSON: I hope the ripple effect is not necessarily copy-cattying, but more opening up the conversation about what types of movies and TV shows a general audience will go see… We’ve all seen a lot of stories about, to be frank, the trials of white people, and I think that people want something different, want cultural specificity. There are a lot of stories that haven’t been told, so why don’t we tell those stories instead of trying to tell the same stories over and over and over again? I think in some ways our film was burdened, and it’s just one story, one very particular story and one particular journey. I hope it opens up to a multiplicity of stories that can be told as a result.

PENOTTI: It’s easy to throw the words “watershed moment” around this, but I think it’s exactly that. I’ll tell you that starting not just this weekend but the last four months as anticipation for the film grew, we’ve been pitched some of the most terrific Asian-focused, global films [at Ivanhoe], and it’s just incredibly heartening. We have hired another executive at my company who’s going to focus a hundred percent on [representation]. We’re making sure there’s not another 25-year delay. We just won’t let it happen.

In your opinion, there’s been a definite push for inclusion, then?
PENOTTI: Yeah. Let me be clear: It’s not even chatter. You’ll start seeing announcements, even beyond our company but for sure from us in the coming weeks on films that are absolutely now a reality because this film has demonstrated that there is a voracious appetite for diverse stories. Crazy Rich Asians is just one story. There are countless more.

SIMPSON: I think there has been a movement over the last couple of years, if you look at Hidden Figures, Get Out, and The Big Sick, where you’re seeing that audiences have been ready for this for a long time.

JACOBSON: The people who are lagging are not audiences. It’s been decision makers who have been a little slow to hear what audiences are telling them, that they want more diversity, that they want to be given more choices in the marketplace.

Just to make it clear now, once and for all, are there Asian movie stars?
JACOBSON: Absolutely, unequivocally, and we’ve been lucky enough to have a movie full of them.

SIMPSON: The amazing thing about this movie is, all of these actors wanted to be in this movie, but the only reason we were able to get them wasn’t just their enthusiasm for this movie but because they’re underemployed. I feel like we were able to get a group of actors in this movie that, if the marketplace were more fair, wouldn’t have been available, because they would have been working on 17 different movies that they starred in all at once. There’s a wealth of talent out there that’s not being used.

PENOTTI: I’ve been involved in a lot of films, but I’ve never seen the core of a movie — our director, our cast, our producing team — [like this], in contact every day since the wrap. I’m talking every day, we have been in group contact, sharing moments and anecdotes, and it’s gotten many times very personal, very emotional. This cast, this director, are voicing the issues, concerns, and hopes of a gigantic population.

Within about 24 hours, Michael Cohen has raised more than $130,000 to help in his legal fight.

More than 2,000 people donated to the “Michael Cohen Truth Fund” to help the president’s former lawyer and fixer. The effort was started by Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis.

“Michael decided to put his family and his country first. Now Michael needs your financial help – to pay his legal fees,” Davis wrote on the page. 

He added the fund was a “transparent trust account, with all donations going to help Michael Cohen and his family as he goes forward on his journey to tell the truth about Donald Trump.”

It wasn’t long ago that Cohen pledged his complete loyalty to Trump, even saying publicly he’d take a bullet for his boss. That relationship crumbled over the last few months, especially after a federal raid of his office, hotel and home in April.

Still, Cohen has gone from being a villain in the public eye to having thousands willingly open their wallets to help him. He’s worth millions and has been taped in the past threatening reporters, once telling a Daily Beast journalist to tread “very f—— lightly because what I’m going to do to you is going to be f—— disgusting. Do you understand me?”

Cohen ended up pleading guilty on Tuesday to eight federal charges, including campaign finance violations. While appearing in court, Cohen implicated the president by saying he acted on behalf and at the direction of “the candidate,” plainly meaning Trump.

The donations to him vary from small amounts such as $5 or $10 to $100 or $500. One anonymous donor gave Cohen $15,000 on Wednesday. 

Stormy Daniels, the porn star who alleges to have had an affair with the president and has been at odds with Cohen, is also crowdfunding to raise money for legal services. Her fight is against both Trump and Cohen, who helped negotiate the hush agreement she is attempting to be freed from. 

Her fund has raised more than $585,000 over the months. 

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2BDWnvB

Ben Affleck is once again turning to rehab for treatment, according to reports.

People magazine and Entertainment Tonight report Affleck’s estranged wife, actress Jennifer Garner, drove the “Justice League” actor to a rehab facility Wednesday. 

This week, Affleck was spotted spending time with Playboy model Shauna Sexton, raising questions whether he and “Saturday Night Live” producer Lindsay Shookus had called it quits after dating for about a year.

Affleck, 46, has been open about his struggles with alcohol in the past. In March 2017, he shared on his Facebook page that he’d “completed treatment for alcohol addiction,” explaining it was “something I’ve dealt with in the past and will continue to confront.”

“I want to live life to the fullest and be the best father I can be,” Affleck wrote before acknowledging Garner. “I’m lucky to have the love of my family and friends, including my co-parent, Jen, who has supported me and cared for our kids as I’ve done the work I set out to do. This was the first of many steps being taken towards a positive recovery.”

Affleck also entered rehab in 2001 for alcohol, a couple months after the debut of his film “Pearl Harbor.”

Affleck and Garner announced their plans to divorce in 2015 after 10 years of marriage. They have three children together: Violet, 12, Seraphina, 9, and Samuel, 6.

USA TODAY has reached out to Affleck’s reps for comment.

Contributing: Andrea Mandell

Affleck: ‘I have completed treatment for alcohol addiction’

 

Read or Share this story: https://usat.ly/2LmUfIB