Category: Uncategorized

Robert Carradine, Revenge Of The Nerds and Lizzie McGuire star, dead at 71 as family reveals cause of deat

Actor Robert Carradine, who got his big break in Revenge Of The Nerds and later starred on the Disney Channel series Lizzie McGuire, has died at 71.

Carradine, who was part of the Carradine acting dynasty that includes his brother Keith and late half-brother David, died on Monday, his family revealed in a somber statement to Deadline.

They noted that Carradine had lived with and fought with bipolar disorder for two decades, but he ultimately took his own life.

‘It is with profound sadness that we must share that our beloved father, grandfather, uncle, and brother Robert Carradine has passed away,’ his family announced. 

The statement continued, ‘In a world that can feel so dark, Bobby was always a beacon of light to everyone around him.’

Carradine’s family said they were ‘bereft at the loss of this beautiful soul and want to acknowledge Bobby’s valiant struggle against his nearly two-decade battle with Bipolar Disorder.

‘We hope his journey can shine a light and encourage addressing the stigma that attaches to mental illness. 

‘At this time we ask for the privacy to grieve this unfathomable loss. With gratitude for your understanding and compassion,’ the statement concluded.

Sign up to our Editor’s Picks newsletter

By signing up, you will receive our newsletter as well as marketing emails with news, offers and updates from the Daily Mail. You can unsubscribe at any time. For more information, see our Privacy Policy.

+14

View gallery

Actor Robert Carradine, who got his big break in Revenge Of The Nerds and later starred on the Disney Channel series Lizzie McGuire, has died at 71. His family said in a statement to Deadline that he took his own life after battling bipolar disorder for two decades; pictured in 2023 in LA

+14

View gallery

Robert pictured with brother Keith this past October in LA at a SAG-AFTRA event 

Daily Mail reached out to representatives for Carradine’s brother, Keith, and his niece, actress Martha Plimpton.

Robert’s daughter Ever Carradine posted an emotional statement to Instagram in which she shared memories on their relationship, urging his fans to replicate his kindness in his memory.

‘My dad died today,’ said Ever, who Robert welcomed with Susan Snyder. ‘He was all heart, and in a world so full of conflict and division, I think we can all take a page out of his book today, open our hearts and feel and share the love.

‘I have a thousand stories and I’m being flooded with memories – so if you see me, please ask me about my dad, Bobby Carradine, who made me who I am.’

Ever ended the emotional statement in saying, ‘Rest easy, dad. I love you the most.’

Keith told Deadline in a statement on Monday that the family wanted people to understand that Robert had been valiant and courageous in his struggle with bipolar disorder over the past two decades. 

‘We want people to know it, and there is no shame in it,’ Keith said. ‘It is an illness that got the best of him, and I want to celebrate him for his struggle with it, and celebrate his beautiful soul. 

‘He was profoundly gifted, and we will miss him every day.’

He concluded, ‘We will take solace in how funny he could be, how wise and utterly accepting and tolerant he was. That’s who my baby brother was.’

+14

View gallery

Carradine pictured at a Hollywood Walk of Fame held on January 9, 2020

+14

View gallery

Robert pictured at an event commemorating Gilligan’s Island 55th anniversary in LA in 2019 

+14

View gallery

Carradine’s Lizzie McGuire costar Hilary Duff said on Instagram Monday, ‘This one hurts … I’m deeply sad to learn Bobby was suffering’

Carradine’s Lizzie McGuire costar Hilary Duff said on Instagram Monday, ‘This one hurts. It’s really hard to face this reality about an old friend. 

‘There was so much warmth in the McGuire family and I always felt so cared for by my on-screen parents. I’ll be forever grateful for that. I’m deeply sad to learn Bobby was suffering.’

Duff wrapped up in saying, ‘My heart aches for him, his family, and everyone who loved him.’

Robert was born March 24, 1954 in Los Angeles into the Carradine show business family.

His parents were actors John Carradine and Sonia Sorel, and his brothers were Disney Imagineer Christopher Carradine; and actors Keith Carradine and the late David Carradine, who died in June of 2009 at 72. 

David was found dead a Bangkok hotel room on June 4, 2009, with investigators saying he died in an instance of asphyxiation. 

Medical examiner Dr. Michael Baden, who conducted a private autopsy on David, said that ‘he didn’t die of natural causes, and he didn’t die of suicidal causes from the nature of the ligatures around the body, so that leaves some kind of accidental death.’

Robert began working as a child actor, with his first appearance in motion pictures coming in 1972 in The Cowboys with John Wayne.

+14

View gallery

Robert’s daughter Ever Carradine posted an emotional statement to Instagram in which she shared memories on their relationship, urging his fans to replicate his kindness in his memory 

+14

View gallery

Ever ended the emotional statement in saying, ‘Rest easy, dad. I love you the most’

+14

View gallery

Ever shared a shot of she and Robert hitting the picket line during the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike 

Robert also appeared in the 1973’s Main Street from feted filmmaker Martin Scorsese; and in the famed 1978 movie Coming Home with Jane Fonda and Jon Voight.

One of his most prominent roles came as Lewis Skolnick in the 1984 comedy Revenge of the Nerds, which also starred Anthony Edwards, Curtis Armstrong and Timothy Busfield. 

He reprised the roles for sequels such as 1987’s Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise and two TV films: 1992’s Revenge of the Nerds III: The Next Generation and 1994’s Revenge of the Nerds IV: Nerds in Love. 

Carradine famously played the role of Sam McGuire on 65 episodes of the TV Series from 2001–2004, and in the 2003 motion picture based on the popular franchise with  Duff in the titular role.

Robert appeared alongside brothers David and Keith in 1980s The Long Riders, which also featured members of famed Hollywood acting families such as the Quaids, Guests and Keach family.

Robert Carradine’s tragic mental health woes appeared to surface in Colorado March of 2015 when his estranged wife, Edith Carradine said that he purposely tried to drive directly into a semi-truck.

Edith said in legal docs in their splot that Robert had ‘confessed to [her] and our two children that he deliberately drove into the truck to kill us both.’

Edith said Robert had been deeply depressed in the wake of his brother David’s death.

JUST IN; Gavin Newsom Calls for 25th Amendment to Remove Donald Trump amid escalating tension with Iran and Trump’s threat to end a whole civilizationhe is going to ruin us all

In a dramatic escalation of political tensions, California Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly called for the invocation of the 25th Amendment to remove President Trump from office.

Speaking amid growing national and international concern, Newsom argued that the current situation demands urgent constitutional action, stating that the president is “unable to effectively discharge the powers and duties of the office.” While he did not provide detailed evidence in his initial remarks, the call underscores mounting pressure from some political figures who believe the country is entering a period of instability.

The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, provides a mechanism for the vice president and a majority of the president’s Cabinet to declare the president unfit to serve. If invoked, power would be temporarily transferred to the vice president—currently JD Vance—who would assume the role of acting president. However, such a move would almost certainly trigger a fierce political and legal battle, particularly if the president contests the declaration.

So far, there has been no official indication from the White House or senior Cabinet members that they intend to pursue this course of action. Allies of President Donald Trump have dismissed the call as politically motivated, arguing that any attempt to invoke the amendment without broad bipartisan support would deepen divisions in an already polarized political climate.

Political analysts note that invoking the 25th Amendment is extremely rare and has never been used to permanently remove a sitting president against their will. Past uses have largely been temporary, such as during medical procedures.

Newsom’s remarks are likely to intensify debate in Washington, as lawmakers, constitutional experts, and the public weigh the gravity of such a step. Whether his call gains traction among federal officials remains uncertain, but it signals a significant moment in an already volatile political landscape.

As the situation unfolds, attention will turn to the vice president and Cabinet—whose collective decision would ultimately determine whether the constitutional process moves forward or remains a political flashpoint.

A grassroots campaign has launched to strip President Donald Trump’s name from federal buildings, monuments, and U.S. currency.

Organizers, backed by a coalition of activist groups, aim to eliminate what they call Trump’s personal branding from public institutions. The effort, which has quickly gathered thousands of online signatures, focuses on removing his name from government-owned properties and official currency.

Supporters contend that Trump’s divisive rhetoric and policies make his name inappropriate for symbols that are meant to represent the entire country. They argue that federal landmarks and assets should not serve as lasting tributes to any single individual, especially one viewed as polarizing.

Opponents dismiss the initiative as a purely political gesture designed to rewrite history and diminish a democratically elected president. Critics warn that allowing such targeted removals could create a dangerous precedent, where future administrations erase the legacies of their predecessors based solely on partisan disagreements.

The push reflects the deep cultural and political divisions in the U.S. today. For many Americans, the debate boils down to a simple question: Is this a necessary act of accountability, or an example of excessive political overreach?

TRUMP’S WORST NIGHTMARE JUST WENT PUBLIC:

THE “DESTROYER DUO” NEWSOM–KELLY EMERGES — AND WASHINGTON IS SHAKING

READ BEFORE IT’S DELETED. DROP YOUR TAKE IN THE COMMENTS. FOLLOW FOR MORE UNFILTERED POLITICAL BOMBSHELLS.

This isn’t a rumor anymore. It’s a political earthquake.

Governor Gavin Newsom, Trump’s loudest and most relentless critic, has reportedly joined forces with Mark Kelly — war hero, astronaut, and battle-tested moderate — to form what insiders are already calling the most dangerous Democratic alliance of 2028.

One brings raw fire, media dominance, and nonstop pressure.

The other brings credibility, calm authority, and crossover appeal.

Together?

They’re being branded the “Super Anti-Trump Weapon” — a combo designed to corner Trump, fracture the GOP, and rewrite the 2028 map.

Republican strategists are panicking.

Trump allies are scrambling.

The power balance just shifted — fast.

So what’s the real plan behind this alliance?

What moves are they preparing right now to neutralize Trump before the race even begins?

A new wave of political discussion erupted after reports surfaced about information related to ongoing legal and political developments involving former U.S. President Donald Trump. The revelations, which quickly spread across news outlets and social media platforms, have prompted intense debate among supporters, critics, and political analysts.

What Sparked the Headlines
The phrase “Trump’s worst nightmare” began trending online following reports that previously undisclosed details connected to legal proceedings and investigations had become public. Commentators say the developments could influence ongoing political narratives and legal discussions surrounding the former president.

While details are still emerging, analysts emphasize that public releases of information often play a significant role in shaping how political and legal stories evolve.

Political Reactions
Reaction from political figures and commentators has been swift. Supporters of Trump argue that the developments are part of a broader political battle, while critics believe the new information could have meaningful implications.

Political experts say situations like this often intensify partisan debate, particularly when they involve high-profile national figures.

Legal and Media Attention
The news has also drawn increased attention from legal analysts who are closely monitoring the broader investigations connected to the case. Experts note that document releases, witness testimony, and court filings can all become key moments that influence public perception and legal strategy.

Media coverage has expanded rapidly, with networks and political commentators offering various interpretations of the situation.

Impact on the Political Landscape
As the story continues to unfold, observers say it could shape political discussions in the coming months. Developments related to major legal or political cases often influence public opinion, campaign messaging, and national debates about accountability and governance.

For now, officials have indicated that the situation remains part of an ongoing legal process, and additional updates may emerge as proceedings move forward.

What Happens Next
Legal experts say the next steps will likely involve careful review of the newly public information, along with responses from attorneys and political representatives. As with many high-profile cases, the full impact may only become clear over time.

Regardless of political viewpoints, the developments highlight how closely the public and media continue to follow stories involving major national figures.

VIRAL CLAIMS: Image linked to Jeffrey Epstein sparks debate involving Melania Trump

A photo reportedly circulating from recently discussed Epstein-related materials is drawing attention online, after claims surfaced suggesting it shows Melania Trump submitting what some have called an “Epstein visa” application.

The image has spread quickly across social media, leading many to question its context and how it fits into the broader timeline of Epstein’s connections. However, others argue the claims may be exaggerated, pointing out that documents can easily be misunderstood without full context.

Some observers also note that modeling visas, sponsorship paperwork, and immigration forms were common during the 1990s for international models working in the U.S., urging caution before drawing conclusions based on a single image.

As Epstein-related materials continue to resurface, the discussion is adding to ongoing speculation, with many calling for verified information and careful analysis before forming judgments.

 Sources and context are being discussed in the comments below 

BREAKING: Epstein victim just released tapes of Donald Trump that will force him to resign from the presidency…

See it Here Because the claim you quoted (“Epstein victim released tapes of Donald Trump that will force him to resign”) is **unverified and potentially false**,

I can’t write it as a statement of fact. What I *can* do is write a **brief, realistic news-style article** that clearly frames this as a **breaking claim circulating online**, notes the lack of verification, and reports reactions. That’s how credible outlets handle situations like this. *BREAKING: Unverified Audio Claim Sparks Political Firestorm Social media erupted late Tuesday after posts began circulating claiming that an Epstein victim had released audio recordings allegedly involving former President Donald Trump.

The posts, which rapidly gained traction across multiple platforms, suggested the recordings could have serious political consequences. As of this writing, no major news organization has verified the authenticity of the alleged tapes, and no recordings have been publicly confirmed by law enforcement or the courts. Representatives for Trump have denied the claims, calling them “false and defamatory,” while urging the public to wait for verified facts.

Experts warn that unsubstantiated allegations often spread quickly during election cycles, fueled by viral headlines and emotionally charged language. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” said one media analyst, noting that misinformation can influence public opinion long before facts are established. At present, there is no official investigation or legal action connected to the alleged recordings. Journalists and authorities continue to urge caution as the situation develops.

TRUMP’S WORST NIGHTMARE JUST WENT PUBLIC:

THE “DESTROYER DUO” NEWSOM–KELLY EMERGES — AND WASHINGTON IS SHAKING

READ BEFORE IT’S DELETED. DROP YOUR TAKE IN THE COMMENTS. FOLLOW FOR MORE UNFILTERED POLITICAL BOMBSHELLS.

This isn’t a rumor anymore. It’s a political earthquake.

Governor Gavin Newsom, Trump’s loudest and most relentless critic, has reportedly joined forces with Mark Kelly — war hero, astronaut, and battle-tested moderate — to form what insiders are already calling the most dangerous Democratic alliance of 2028.

One brings raw fire, media dominance, and nonstop pressure.

The other brings credibility, calm authority, and crossover appeal.

Together?

They’re being branded the “Super Anti-Trump Weapon” — a combo designed to corner Trump, fracture the GOP, and rewrite the 2028 map.

Republican strategists are panicking.

Trump allies are scrambling.

The power balance just shifted — fast.

So what’s the real plan behind this alliance?

What moves are they preparing right now to neutralize Trump before the race even begins?

A new wave of political discussion erupted after reports surfaced about information related to ongoing legal and political developments involving former U.S. President Donald Trump. The revelations, which quickly spread across news outlets and social media platforms, have prompted intense debate among supporters, critics, and political analysts.

What Sparked the Headlines

The phrase “Trump’s worst nightmare” began trending online following reports that previously undisclosed details connected to legal proceedings and investigations had become public. Commentators say the developments could influence ongoing political narratives and legal discussions surrounding the former president.

While details are still emerging, analysts emphasize that public releases of information often play a significant role in shaping how political and legal stories evolve.

Political Reactions

Reaction from political figures and commentators has been swift. Supporters of Trump argue that the developments are part of a broader political battle, while critics believe the new information could have meaningful implications.

Political experts say situations like this often intensify partisan debate, particularly when they involve high-profile national figures.

Legal and Media Attention

The news has also drawn increased attention from legal analysts who are closely monitoring the broader investigations connected to the case. Experts note that document releases, witness testimony, and court filings can all become key moments that influence public perception and legal strategy.

Media coverage has expanded rapidly, with networks and political commentators offering various interpretations of the situation.

Impact on the Political Landscape

As the story continues to unfold, observers say it could shape political discussions in the coming months. Developments related to major legal or political cases often influence public opinion, campaign messaging, and national debates about accountability and governance.

For now, officials have indicated that the situation remains part of an ongoing legal process, and additional updates may emerge as proceedings move forward.

What Happens Next

Legal experts say the next steps will likely involve careful review of the newly public information, along with responses from attorneys and political representatives. As with many high-profile cases, the full impact may only become clear over time.

Regardless of political viewpoints, the developments highlight how closely the public and media continue to follow stories involving major national figures.

JUST IN: A Group of senior U.S. general files a $50m federal administrative lawsuit challenging Their wartime removal by Pete Hegseth on Donald Trump’s Order amid Iran’s war, alleging the Pentagon violated required procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act

A senior U.S. military general has launched the first major legal challenge against the Pentagon’s sweeping leadership shake-up, filing a federal lawsuit that claims his abrupt removal during an active conflict was carried out in violation of established law and procedure.

The lawsuit, filed against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and senior Defense Department officials, argues that the dismissal breached key provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies make decisions and requires them to follow fair and lawful processes.

A Legal Battle Begins

In the filing, the general alleges that his removal was “arbitrary and capricious,” a legal standard often used to challenge government actions that appear unjustified or improperly executed. According to the complaint, the Pentagon failed to follow its own procedures and did not provide adequate justification for the decision—especially significant given that it occurred during an ongoing conflict with Iran.

The case marks a dramatic escalation in what has already become one of the most controversial military leadership shake-ups in recent history.

Challenging Wartime Authority

While the President, Donald Trump, holds broad authority as Commander-in-Chief, the lawsuit contends that this power is not unlimited. It argues that even in wartime, executive actions must comply with statutory requirements and cannot bypass basic administrative safeguards.

Legal experts say the case could test how far courts are willing to go in reviewing military personnel decisions made under wartime conditions—an area where judges have historically shown strong deference to the executive branch.

“This lawsuit is essentially asking the courts to draw a line,” one legal analyst explained. “It’s not about who should command troops, but whether the rules governing those decisions were followed.”

What the General Wants

Rather than seeking immediate reinstatement to a combat role, the lawsuit reportedly focuses on:

A formal ruling that the dismissal was unlawful Potential correction of official military records Restoration of rank, status, or benefits tied to the position

Such remedies are more typical in cases involving senior military personnel, where courts are reluctant to directly interfere with operational command decisions.

Broader Implications

The case could have far-reaching consequences for civil-military relations in the United States. If the court finds that proper procedures were ignored, it may impose new constraints on how future administrations handle military leadership changes—particularly during times of war.

At the same time, a ruling in favor of the Pentagon could reinforce the already broad discretion granted to defense officials and the White House.

A Growing Crisis

The lawsuit adds a new legal dimension to the ongoing political and military tensions surrounding the Pentagon’s recent actions. Lawmakers are already calling for investigations, while allies and defense observers continue to monitor the situation closely.

As the conflict with Iran continues, the case now moves into the courts—setting up a high-stakes legal battle that could shape not only the fate of one general, but the boundaries of executive power in wartime America.

A grassroots campaign has launched to strip President Donald Trump’s name from federal buildings, monuments, and U.S. currency.

Organizers, backed by a coalition of activist groups, aim to eliminate what they call Trump’s personal branding from public institutions. The effort, which has quickly gathered thousands of online signatures, focuses on removing his name from government-owned properties and official currency.

Supporters contend that Trump’s divisive rhetoric and policies make his name inappropriate for symbols that are meant to represent the entire country. They argue that federal landmarks and assets should not serve as lasting tributes to any single individual, especially one viewed as polarizing.

Opponents dismiss the initiative as a purely political gesture designed to rewrite history and diminish a democratically elected president. Critics warn that allowing such targeted removals could create a dangerous precedent, where future administrations erase the legacies of their predecessors based solely on partisan disagreements.

The push reflects the deep cultural and political divisions in the U.S. today. For many Americans, the debate boils down to a simple question: Is this a necessary act of accountability, or an example of excessive political overreach?

THE TRASH HAS BEEN COLLECTED: Kennedy Center Finally Scrubs the Stain of Trump From Its Walls!

Eighty-seven seconds—that was all it took to wipe out a legacy defined by scandal.  The Kennedy Center has finally taken the step millions have been waiting for: removing the Trump name like a stubborn stain.

There was no applause, no respect—only the cold sound of chisels ringing out like a final sentence for a man who forever craves attention. As the letters fell, the illusion of power vanished along with them. This isn’t vandalism; it is a necessary purification, allowing America to finally breathe again

THE FULL STORY BELOW! 

In a quiet, workmanlike moment that spoke louder than any rally or speech, the Kennedy Center this week removed the last visible references associated with Donald Trump’s tenure and influence. There were no cameras, no ceremony, and no attempt to dramatize the act—just staff doing what institutions eventually do when they decide to move on. The process was swift and unceremonious, a deliberate contrast to the spectacle that defined the era being erased.

For many observers, the removal felt less like revenge and more like housekeeping. The Kennedy Center, long regarded as a cultural space meant to transcend partisan noise, had carried the residue of years marked by controversy, boycotts, and political posturing. Scrubbing those symbols away was not about rewriting history, supporters argue, but about restoring focus to art, performance, and shared civic life—values that had been overshadowed by constant conflict.

Whether critics see the move as symbolic overreach or overdue accountability, its meaning is hard to miss. Power, once stripped of attention and reverence, fades quickly. With the walls cleared, the Kennedy Center signals a desire to close a turbulent chapter and reclaim its identity—not as a billboard for political ego, but as a national home for culture, memory, and, finally, a quieter kind of dignity.