This past fall was the eight-year anniversary of Angelina Jolie filing for divorce from Brad Pitt just days after he attacked her and their six kids on a private plane. Their divorce was bifurcated in 2019, but they spent the bulk of the past eight years in a dispute over money and custody of their children. It?s been a long road, especially when Angelina went to the California Supreme Court and successfully voided a joint-custody ruling from a compromised private judge. In recent years, the divorce negotiations seemingly stood at a stand-still because Brad has been suing Angelina over the sale of her half of Chateau Miraval, and Angelina?s countersued. Recently, in the winery dispute, Angelina successfully got the court to order Brad to turn over all of his communications with his publicist and crisis management team. Weeks later, the Jolie-Pitt divorce has been settled. Coincidence?

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have reached a settlement in their divorce eight years after the Maria star filed to end their two-year marriage, citing irreconcilable differences.

Jolie, 49, and Pitt, 61, signed off on their divorce on Monday, Dec. 30, according to Jolie?s lawyers.

?More than eight years ago, Angelina filed for divorce from Mr. Pitt. She and the children left all of the properties they had shared with Mr. Pitt, and since that time she has focused on finding peace and healing for their family,? Jolie?s lawyer James Simon tells PEOPLE in a statement.

?This is just one part of a long ongoing process that started eight years ago. Frankly, Angelina is exhausted, but she is relieved this one part is over.?

A source close to Jolie adds, ?She doesn?t speak ill of [Pitt] publicly or privately. She?s been trying hard to be light after a dark time.?

[From People]

Again, I love how Angelina?s lawyers are so much more proactive these days with giving statements to the press. She?s needed that for years. TMZ had some additional information ? Angelina signed off on the divorce on Christmas Day, and the paperwork was filed yesterday. According to TMZ?s sources, Angelina is ?forgoing spousal and family support from Brad.? Which could mean that he?s giving her a lump-sum settlement (I think that seems likely). There?s also not an agreement over custody, but Knox and Vivienne are 16 years old now and most family courts would say they?re old enough to decide which parent they want to live with and see. TMZ also says that Brad and Angelina recently ?exchanged final financial disclosures.? Interesting.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Backgrid.

Unsurprisingly, Blake Lively covers this week?s issue of People Magazine. She filed her complaint with the California Civil Rights Department just before Christmas, and it?s more than likely that she will end up suing Justin Baldoni, his production company, his publicist and his crisis manager. It?s also quite likely that Baldoni will file a lawsuit against Blake and her team in the new year, at least that?s what they?re telegraphing. People?s cover story is mostly a recap of where we are now, including a comprehensive summary of Blake?s case, with Baldoni?s lawyer interjecting here and there. It also includes a summary of everyone lining up behind Blake. Including People Magazine, but they were always going to take her side. Here?s the part which came from Blake?s team:

The whole ordeal has been a nightmare for Lively, who shares children James, 10, Inez, 8, Betty, 5 and 22-month-old son Olin with Reynolds, 48. Behind closed doors, says the complaint, she has suffered ?grief, fear, trauma, and extreme anxiety? in the alleged campaign?s aftermath.

She is seeking unspecified damages from Baldoni and Wayfarer for ?intentional infliction of emotional distress? and ?interference? in her other businesses, like her Blake Brown haircare company, which launched in early August and suffered a decline in sales by ?56-78%? amid the bad press and negative social media comments, Lively?s lawyers claim. ?The Baldoni-Wayfarer astroturfing campaign forced each of Ms. Lively?s businesses to go ?dark? on social media in August,? according to the complaint.

A Lively source says putting together the legal case has been painful but necessary work. ?Blake along with her team have been working on this lawsuit for months. It?s truly been so ugly for her. And insanely stressful. She?s never dealt with anything like this before,? explains the source.

What happens next? Lively?s legal team is currently evaluating her options while awaiting a decision from the California Civil Rights Department, which has 60 days to notify her if they will investigate the matter.

?If they find some barrier to it, a lot of times they?ll step in and try to mediate a solution with the employer,? says legal expert Gregory Doll, a California attorney who is not involved in the case. ?If not, they?ll give her what?s called the right to sue letter, which means that she can go to court now and submit her claim there.?

If she does sue and she and Baldoni don?t settle beforehand, they?d head to a trial. ?The most likely cases that don?t settle are the ones like this where it gets intensely personal between two people,? he notes.

Baldoni could countersue as well, something Doll says is very likely due to the bitter back and forth between the two legal teams: ?Based on what I have observed, it?s almost guaranteed that he will file a counterclaim,? he predicts.

But no matter what happens, Lively has a vast support system of family and friends who have her back ? especially her husband.

?Ryan is always her rock,? says a Lively source, who adds that the actress has been focusing on her family after filing the complaint. ?For now, she?s said what needed to be said.?

[From People]

I?m on Blake?s side about so much of this situation, but this caught my eye: ?like her Blake Brown haircare company, which launched in early August and suffered a decline in sales by ?56-78%? amid the bad press and negative social media comments, Lively?s lawyers claim.? If Blake Brown launched in August ? which she did on purpose to promote her haircare line alongside It Ends With Us ? then what metrics are they using to determine that sales of Blake Brown went down? Declined compared to what? You can believe Blake and be on her side and still think that there are some really interesting legal issues contained in this complaint.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

Stephen Mangan is a 56-year-old British actor and writer. He?s really well-known in the UK for his long history on British television, but he?s also done a lot of stage work and some film work. Plus, he?s a regular on chat shows because he?s so charming and funny, and I recognize him from his multiple appearances on Graham Norton?s show. While he?s described everywhere as ?English,? it turns out that his parents were Irish republicans and their republicanism affects him even now. Mangan was profiled by the Times of London, and they asked him if he would accept one of those British ?honors? like an OBE or CBE. Some highlights from the Times:

He became a first-time father at 39: ?Before that, being settled didn?t feel like a goal in my work or private life, but I look at friends who have children now in their twenties and think it must have been nice having kids when you were younger. I?ve an eight-year-old. I?m not quite in Mick Jagger or Al Pacino territory but .. I had a great time in my twenties and thirties, so it?s all worked out. It keeps you young hanging out with the parents of other eight-year-olds. I have to keep reminding myself a lot of them are twenty years younger than me, so if I start talking about Bagpuss they?re, like, ?What? Sorry?? ?

America isn?t for him. ?LA?s such a tense town. Everyone measures each other?s status on an hourly basis. Who?s up, who?s down, who?s important, who?s not ? it?s so tedious. I know I could probably have earned more money or been more famous or been in bigger jobs if I?d stayed, but the variety of what I do now fills me with joy. I suppose I feel I?m catching lots of little fish, instead of going out there to catch one big fish.?

His parents? early deaths. He runs ? ?I?m addicted? ? eats healthily and has virtually quit alcohol. His ageing role model is his 91-year-old Portrait Artist co-presenter and Primrose Hill neighbour Joan Bakewell. ?When I was cast I went round to her house and explained that I?d lived in the area for 25 years, and she said, ?Yes, it?s not been the same since Ted and Sylvia left.? ? She was referring to Hughes and Plath. ?I was, like, ?OK, you win.? ?

On the possibility of an honor: ?I wouldn?t do any of that. I?m from an Irish republican family. I?m not bowing down in front of King Charles.? Has he been offered something? He arches an eyebrow. ?I wouldn?t be at liberty to say.?

[From The Times]

I always like when British actors do this, announce that they?re not interested in playing games and sucking up to the Windsors or the establishment. Even though I love Emma Thompson, I?m constantly disappointed in how much she sucks up to King Charles and Prince William. Judi Dench as well. The honors/honours have very little to do with achievements at this point, especially when the Tory leaders made sure to give themselves knighthoods as they were all leaving. Not to mention, Charles passed out knighthoods to anyone who handed him a bag full of cash. It?s cool that Mangan is like? yeah, I would never bow to these people. Good for him.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Rihanna made a post-Christmas Target run. [Just Jared]
Mark Wahlberg did a 4 am cold plunge. [Socialite Life]
The 20th anniversary of Lost? GTFO. [Pajiba]
The year of Timothee Chalamet?s fashion. [Go Fug Yourself]
Adam McKay thinks Wicked could be banned in 3-5 years. [OMG Blog]
I missed this ? Ariana Grande in vintage Dior. [RCFA]
Remember Kieran Culkin in Home Alone? [Seriously OMG]
What happened to the Duggars over Christmas? [Starcasm]
Jimmy Carter?s family photos. [Hollywood Life]
All of these bosses are awful. [Buzzfeed]

As many people noted last week, King Charles did not reference or mention the Duke and Duchess of Sussex at all throughout the Christmas holiday. I still believe that Charles and his minions did the most to brief the media, a month ago, that the Sussex family was not welcome in the UK and that they were not invited to Christmas at Sandringham. You could tell that stuff was coming from Charles?s camp because A) it didn?t center or mention Prince William?s rage towards his brother and B) there was zero mention of how the Sussexes wouldn?t have come to the UK even if they had been invited. Well, I don?t know why Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast is still fussing over this, but he seems quite upset that there were zero Sussex references over Christmas. Sykes also blames the whole thing on William.

King Charles? has been criticized for not acknowledging his son Prince Harry, his wife Meghan Markle, or their two children in a Christmas address, which focused on how the holiday was ?a chance for family and friends to come together.?

The closest Charles came to acknowledging his family in California was when he spoke about the need to protect and safeguard the environment ?for the sake of our children?s children,? however, no direct reference was made to Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. By contrast, multiple images were shown of his son, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, and their three children, Princess Charlotte, Prince George and Prince Louis.

The refusal to acknowledge Harry?s family went almost entirely unremarked in largely fawning accounts of the annual televised speech in the British media but was criticized on social media.

The Daily Beast has been told that Charles would like to reconcile with Harry but is being blocked from bringing him back into the family by William, who is implacably opposed to any such move. The elder son believes Harry?s betrayal of the family in his books and interviews, in which he accused a member of the family, later revealed to be Kate, of racism, has put him beyond the pale. William?s consent is needed because Charles, who is sick with cancer, feels he cannot bequeath his heir a settlement with Harry that William cannot live with.

[From The Daily Beast]

??But was criticized on social media.? Sure. You can find a tweet/post to justify saying ?Charles was criticized,? but honestly, I think most people just shrug about Charles at this point. It?s been abundantly well-established that he?s a horrible father and grandfather. It?s been abundantly well-established that he only gives a sh-t about Camilla (and even then, theirs is not a grand love story, despite their PR). Even if you believe that Charles has an okay relationship with William, the fact that Charles?s people are still tossing William under the bus over the Sussex situation shows that Charles still uses William as a scapegoat and fall guy.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Back in the day, the Daily Mail ran a popular annual series in which they added up the cost of the Princess of Wales?s clothing, shoes, purses and jewelry. Even though Kate has never worked that much at all, her annual wardrobe tallies skyrocketed every year? when she was the Duchess of Cambridge. Then when QEII died and Prince William became the Prince of Wales and got access to the Duchy of Cornwall funds, Kate rarely gets to buy or wear new clothes. The one exception was last year?s coronation, in which Kate blew ?32,000 on that terrible headpiece. Obviously, Kate has barely been seen this year, so I doubt we?ll even get an accounting on Kate?s 2024 wardrobe. But the Mail still wanted to yell about something, so they are once again pretending that the Duchess of Sussex is still being funded by the Windsors or the taxpayers somehow. Five years later, they?re still upset about Meghan?s clothes and jewelry, even though Meghan spends her own money buying her clothes (and investing in various companies). So here we go, Meghan spent ?a staggering ?102,989? on clothes and jewelry this year. Gasp.

Over the past year, Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, made a total of 56 public appearances across the world. For each of these outings ? from ?quasi royal tours? and private lunches, to gala dinners and polo matches ? the Duchess of Sussex stepped out in meticulously put-together outfits ? wearing a mix of time-honoured as well as brand new pieces from her ever-expanding wardrobe.

This year, Meghan, 43, was spotted in never-before-seen clothing and jewellery items totalling a staggering ?102,989 ? an increase of nearly ?20,000 from her 2023 total of ?86,612.

While a working member of the Royal Family, the cost of Meghan?s clothes for work engagements was covered by then-Prince Charles through the budget he gave the couple from the Duchy of Cornwall. However, since the couple became financially independent, it is not clear who is picking up the bill for Meghan?s clothes, whether she pays full price or receives discounts from designers.

This year, the Duchess debuted two new Logan Hollowell diamond necklace ? estimated to be worth over ?35,000 in total ? as well as new pieces from Colombian designer Johanna Ortiz that stole the show during her visit to the South American nation earlier this year.

Meanwhile, she rewore her trusty Cartier Love Bracelet as well as Princess Diana?s Cartier Tank Francaise wristwatch multiple times, with Meghan paying subtle tribute to the late Princess of Wales with her sartorial choices.

[From The Daily Mail]

The Mail does this every year: ?since the couple became financially independent, it is not clear who is picking up the bill for Meghan?s clothes, whether she pays full price or receives discounts from designers.? Who the f?k do you think pays for Meghan?s clothes? Meghan the millionaire, who has friendships and associations with various designers and stores. She probably does get discounts and tons of free stuff, and good for her. Anyway, she wore some good looks this year, even if she?s still in love with that ghastly shade of beige.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Backgrid, Cover Images.

Over the weekend, Justin Baldoni?s team began to fight back against Blake Lively and her team. Just days before Christmas, Blake filed a suit against Baldoni, claiming that he sexually harassed her while they filmed It Ends With Us. Not only that, Blake?s team made some bombshell allegations about Baldoni waging a social manipulation campaign to destroy her reputation online. Blake?s story is backed up by her access to emails and texts between Baldoni?s publicist and crisis manager. Baldoni?s team went to the Daily Mail (yikes) to preview what?s next for him in this battle ? they said that Baldoni would countersue Blake and that (basically) Blake is just mad that her attempted smear campaign against Baldoni failed and boomeranged back onto her over the summer. After the Mail published that exclusive, People Magazine got their own exclusive from Baldoni?s team:

Justin Baldoni?s lawyer says that the actor?s impending lawsuit against Blake Lively will not only bring forth the ?truth? ? but also expose ?those who believe themselves untouchable.?

?This is not a response or countersuit ? it?s a deliberate pursuit of truth,? attorney Bryan Freedman exclusively tells PEOPLE of Baldoni?s forthcoming lawsuit, which follows Lively?s explosive complaint accusing Baldoni, 40, of sexual harassment on the set of It Ends with Us and a subsequent retaliatory smear campaign.

Freedman, a veteran Hollywood lawyer, also says that Baldoni?s filing will ?expose? falsities in Lively?s complaint ? specifically a series of private text messages that allegedly show Baldoni texting and emailing with PR executive Jennifer Abel and crisis management expert Melissa Nathan as they planned what Lively, 37, alleges was a smear campaign orchestrated to ?destroy? her reputation.

?This lawsuit will uncover and expose the false and destructive narrative that was intentionally engineered by a trusted media publication who relied upon nefarious sources and neglected a thorough fact checking process to confirm the validity of these texts,? Freedman tells PEOPLE. ?There is an insurmountable collection of authentic evidence, including timelines and communications, which have not been doctored or spliced without context, unlike the altered [New York Times] story that ran on Saturday, December 21st 2024,? he continues in the written statement.

The article Freedman is referring to ? titled ? ?We Can Bury Anyone?: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine? ? broke the news of Lively?s complaint the day after she filed it in California.

?In over three decades of legal practice, I?ve never witnessed such unethical behavior, fueled by those who abuse their power and manipulate the truth,? Freedman adds. ?This isn?t an isolated case; it?s a recurring pattern in Hollywood and the mainstream media where careers and reputations are destroyed to maintain control. Legacy media has long weaponized their platforms to distort the truth, exploit vulnerabilities, and destroy lives without accountability,? the attorney continues. ?These lawsuits will confront this system head-on, ensuring that no individual or entity, no matter how influential, can continue perpetuating this cycle of fear and destruction.?

?The truth will not only come to light ? it will dismantle the illusions propped up by those who believe themselves untouchable,? Freedman concludes.

A representative for Lively did not immediately respond to PEOPLE?s request for comment on Sunday, Dec. 29.

[From People]

For what it?s worth, I think it?s odd and notable that there?s so much focus on the ?social manipulation? part of Blake?s claim and not the sexual harassment part. Blake?s case against Baldoni for sexual harassment and inappropriate/toxic behavior seems to be more cut and dry, and from what I?ve seen, she has some documentation to back it up, including lots of high-level meetings with the studio. The social manipulation part of her claim is a lot trickier than her side wants to admit. As someone who reads ?legacy media? and gossip outlets like Page Six on a daily basis, I remember the curious, anti-Baldoni stories ?planted? in various outlets ahead of IEWU?s release. Now, does Baldoni actually have evidence that Blake?s team was trying to hurt him over the summer, or is it all insinuation? I don?t know.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.

It?s been a minute since Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift were together in New York, but that?s where they were over the weekend. On Friday night, they were seen out on a double date with Jack Antonoff and Margaret Qualley ? they went to BondST for dinner, and People Mag carried those photos exclusively. On Saturday, Travis and Taylor went to dinner at Chez Margaux, a members-only ?supper club? and nightclub in the Meatpacking District. Taylor is a member of several of those private clubs in New York!

I saw people complaining about Taylor?s ensemble from Saturday night, but I sort of like it? Her coat is Simkhai Ganni, and she carried a Stella McCartney bag. She also wore Louboutins, the red soles of which ?matched? Travis?s hideous ensemble. This is how so many celebrity couples look these days ? it?s giving Justin and Hailey Bieber, right? The guy looks like he?s coming from the gym or like he slept in his clothes, all while the woman looks like she spent two hours in hair and makeup. It was rainy all weekend across the Eastern seaboard, I?m surprised Taylor?s hair didn?t get frizzy (mine certainly did).

Meanwhile, Page Six recently claimed that Taylor plans on spending more time in Kansas City and Nashville now that the Eras Tour has wrapped. Page Six?s ?insider? claims this will be ?Taylor?s domestic era? where she?s more focused on Travis and her relationship. We?ll see ? I think Travis enjoys being in New York, and lord knows how much longer he?ll play football.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

There are few things funnier than a ?royal expert? Britsplaining Americans and American customs to a British audience. I?ll never forget the royal experts fumbling to explain the importance of the Fourth of July to a British audience, not to mention their convoluted explanations for Thanksgiving. Well, Prince Harry and Meghan just spent their fifth Christmas in a row in Montecito (in 2019, they spent the holiday in Canada). They have not spent Christmas in the UK since 2018. The royal experts are at a loss to explain why Harry and Meghan are not desperate to follow German-Christmas rules whilst sleeping on lumpy cots in the servants? quarters of Sandringham. So royal expert Ingrid Seward was called upon to Britsplain the oh-so-American Christmas customs Harry and Meghan might follow. Some highlights:

Sandringham is the golden ticket!! At a recent solo outing, Meghan touched on what Christmas would look like for the Sussexes, saying they would have a great meal and play games before hinting they would have a singalong with a guitar. And royal biographer Ingrid Seward says this couldn?t be more different for Harry who used to view Christmas at Sandringham as the ?golden ticket?. She told the Mirror: ?The present opening on Christmas Eve with his extended family and then church and traditional Christmas lunch the next day. Then the Boxing Day pheasant shoot and in between loads of party games and drinking.?

A happy-holidays tradition: ?Since his marriage to Meghan in 2018, Harry has only had Christmas at Sandringham once in December the same year. Instead, he has embraced the traditions of the ?happy holidays? favoured by his adopted country. The only relative he has in California is his mother-in-law, Doria and according to Meghan, she will be have been with them at their Montecito home. They will have picked a tree from the rows upon rows of Christmas pines in one of the local stores. Their house will be decorated, and the yard (garden) strung with festive lights. The wealthy residents of Montecito hire interior designers to decorate their houses and trees to perfection.?

Meghan would never hire anyone to decorate for the holidays: ?It would not look good if Meghan who publicises herself as the all-American homemaker was to hire someone to adorn their house and decorate their tree. She will have done it herself and made the gingerbread house as is traditional in America.?

Why King Charles didn?t invite the Sussexes: Ingrid added: ?Back at Sandringham it will have been the traditional Christmas UK style that Harry knows so well. King Charles would have loved the opportunity to see his grandchildren Archie and Lilibet, but he knew inviting Harry and Meghan would have been awkward for the rest of the family. So, there was no official invitation.

The Sussexes were invited to Althorp though: ?Harry and Meghan were invited for Christmas at Althorp with thrice-married Uncle Charles, now Earl Spencer, but have decided to stay in California. Meghan says it?s important for her that Archie and Lilibet can have ?connective memories? of Thanksgiving and Christmas at home and enjoy the traditions like putting out ?carrots for the reindeer.?

[From The Daily Mirror]

C-Word is killing me: ?It would not look good if Meghan who publicises herself as the all-American homemaker was to hire someone to adorn their house and decorate their tree.? Decorating the tree is one of the best moments of the holidays, why would Meghan and Harry outsource that? And does Seward imagine that the Windsors decorate their own trees? Please, of course not. Now, considering the size of the Sussexes? enormous Montecito property, I bet they do hire professionals to put lights on their mansion and in their yard. Anyway, I?m sure the Sussexes had a lovely Christmas full of their new family traditions and I bet Meghan cooked and baked a lot throughout the week. Look at me, I can do the same thing as Seward: it is believed that Harry, following gauche American peasant traditions, played dress up as someone called ?Santa Claus? and gave ?gifts? to his children. It is understood that the Sussexes? marriage is on its last leg because Meghan was seen kissing Santa underneath the mistletoe.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Netflix.

President Jimmy Carter passed away at his home in Georgia on Sunday. He lived to 100 years old, the oldest any former president has ever lived. His beloved wife Rosalynn Carter passed away in November 2023, and President Carter basically held on throughout this year so he could cast his vote for Kamala Harris. Now that Carter has passed away within weeks of the inauguration, that means all federal buildings will be flying their flags at half-mast when that ugly orange man is sworn in. Which is fitting. It?s also fitting that President Carter adiosed out of the sh-tshow that will be 2025 and the second Donald Trump administration.

Former President Jimmy Carter died on Sunday at his home in Plains, Ga., after deciding nearly two years ago to forgo further medical care following a series of medical crises, according to two people close to the family and The Carter Center, the nonprofit he and his wife founded.

At 100, he was the longest-lived president in American history and became known as much for his post-presidential diplomacy and charitable works as for his single, economically turbulent term in office.

Tributes poured in on Sunday from his White House successors, including President Biden, who said in a statement that ?America and the world lost an extraordinary leader, statesman and humanitarian.? President-elect Donald J. Trump said in a statement that Mr. Carter ?did everything in his power to improve the lives of all Americans. For that, we all owe him a debt of gratitude.?

Mr. Carter, a peanut farmer and former Naval officer who served aboard submarines and studied nuclear physics, was elected governor of Georgia as a Democrat in 1970. With a promise never to lie to the American public, Mr. Carter positioned himself as the reformist antidote to an era of deep political mistrust after Watergate and the Vietnam War and won the presidency in 1976.

He presided over four tumultuous years plagued by long gas lines, high inflation and the Iran hostage crisis. But he also signed a strategic arms limitation agreement with the Soviet Union and helped forge the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel. Mr. Carter cemented his legacy with a deeper engagement in public affairs than any other former president of modern times and was awarded the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize.

Chip Carter, the former president?s son, said in a statement his father was a hero to ?everyone who believes in peace, human rights, and unselfish love.? He added, ?The world is our family because of the way he brought people together, and we thank you for honoring his memory by continuing to live these shared beliefs.?

[From The NY Times]

He was a very spiritual man, a mensch among men, a humanitarian and a blessed peacemaker. I?m not sure what I believe at this point, but I hope he?s reunited with Rosalynn and that he watches over all of us.

When I look at Jimmy Carter, I see a man not only for our times, but for all times. A man who embodied the most fundamental human values we can never let slip away.

And while we may never see his likes again, we would all do well to try to be a little more like Jimmy Carter. pic.twitter.com/I0xDM05xmH

? President Biden (@POTUS) December 30, 2024

Over six decades, Jill and I had the honor of calling Jimmy Carter a dear friend.

But, what?s extraordinary about Jimmy Carter, though, is that millions of people throughout America and the world who never met him thought of him as a dear friend as well. pic.twitter.com/irknhZ6CJY

? President Biden (@POTUS) December 29, 2024

I kept changing my mind which Jimmy Carter cartoon i should go with. Here’s all three. pic.twitter.com/SxYD0YmCdZ

? mike luckovich (@mluckovichajc) December 29, 2024

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.