is i5 4200u good for gaming

is i5 4200u good for gaming WASHINGTON (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump has promised to end birthright citizenship as soon as he gets into office to make good on campaign promises aiming to restrict immigration and redefining what it means to be American. But any efforts to halt the policy would face steep legal hurdles. Birthright citizenship means anyone born in the United States automatically becomes an American citizen. It’s been in place for decades and applies to children born to someone in the country illegally or in the U.S. on a tourist or student visa who plans to return to their home country. It’s not the practice of every country, and Trump and his supporters have argued that the system is being abused and that there should be tougher standards for becoming an American citizen. But others say this is a right enshrined in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, it would be extremely difficult to overturn and even if it’s possible, it’s a bad idea. Here’s a look at birthright citizenship, what Trump has said about it and the prospects for ending it: What Trump has said about birthright citizenship During an interview Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Trump said he “absolutely” planned to halt birthright citizenship once in office. “We’re going to end that because it’s ridiculous,” he said. Trump and other opponents of birthright citizenship have argued that it creates an incentive for people to come to the U.S. illegally or take part in “birth tourism,” in which pregnant women enter the U.S. specifically to give birth so their children can have citizenship before returning to their home countries. “Simply crossing the border and having a child should not entitle anyone to citizenship,” said Eric Ruark, director of research for NumbersUSA, which argues for reducing immigration. The organization supports changes that would require at least one parent to be a permanent legal resident or a U.S. citizen for their children to automatically get citizenship. Others have argued that ending birthright citizenship would profoundly damage the country. “One of our big benefits is that people born here are citizens, are not an illegal underclass. There’s better assimilation and integration of immigrants and their children because of birthright citizenship,” said Alex Nowrasteh, vice president for economic and social policy studies at the pro-immigration Cato Institute. In 2019, the Migration Policy Institute estimated that 5.5 million children under age 18 lived with at least one parent in the country illegally in 2019, representing 7% of the U.S. child population. The vast majority of those children were U.S. citizens. The nonpartisan think tank said during Trump’s campaign for president in 2015 that the number of people in the country illegally would “balloon” if birthright citizenship were repealed, creating “a self-perpetuating class that would be excluded from social membership for generations.” What does the law say? In the aftermath of the Civil War, Congress ratified the 14th Amendment in July 1868. That amendment assured citizenship for all, including Black people. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” the 14th Amendment says. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” But the 14th Amendment didn’t always translate to everyone being afforded birthright citizenship. For example, it wasn’t until 1924 that Congress finally granted citizenship to all Native Americans born in the U.S. A key case in the history of birthright citizenship came in 1898, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark, born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants, was a U.S. citizen because he was born in the states. The federal government had tried to deny him reentry into the county after a trip abroad on grounds he wasn’t a citizen under the Chinese Exclusion Act. But some have argued that the 1898 case clearly applied to children born of parents who are both legal immigrants to America but that it’s less clear whether it applies to children born to parents without legal status or, for example, who come for a short-term like a tourist visa. “That is the leading case on this. In fact, it’s the only case on this,” said Andrew Arthur, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports immigration restrictions. “It’s a lot more of an open legal question than most people think.” Some proponents of immigration restrictions have argued the words “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment allows the U.S. to deny citizenship to babies born to those in the country illegally. Trump himself used that language in his 2023 announcement that he would aim to end birthright citizenship if reelected. So what could Trump do and would it be successful? Trump wasn’t clear in his Sunday interview how he aims to end birthright citizenship. Asked how he could get around the 14th Amendment with an executive action, Trump said: “Well, we’re going to have to get it changed. We’ll maybe have to go back to the people. But we have to end it.” Pressed further on whether he’d use an executive order, Trump said “if we can, through executive action.” He gave a lot more details in a 2023 post on his campaign website . In it, he said he would issue an executive order the first day of his presidency, making it clear that federal agencies “require that at least one parent be a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident for their future children to become automatic U.S. citizens.” Trump wrote that the executive order would make clear that children of people in the U.S. illegally “should not be issued passports, Social Security numbers, or be eligible for certain taxpayer funded welfare benefits.” This would almost certainly end up in litigation. Nowrasteh from the Cato Institute said the law is clear that birthright citizenship can’t be ended by executive order but that Trump may be inclined to take a shot anyway through the courts. “I don’t take his statements very seriously. He has been saying things like this for almost a decade,” Nowrasteh said. “He didn’t do anything to further this agenda when he was president before. The law and judges are near uniformly opposed to his legal theory that the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States are not citizens.” Trump could steer Congress to pass a law to end birthright citizenship but would still face a legal challenge that it violates the Constitution. __ Associated Press reporter Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report. More articles from the BDN

After Trump’s win, Black women are rethinking their role as America’s reliable political organizersAfter Trump’s win, Black women are rethinking their role as America’s reliable political organizersAmerican and European stock markets mostly rose on Wednesday after inflation data cemented expectations that the US Federal Reserve will trim interest rates next month. While the Dow fell slightly, the other two major US indices advanced, led by the tech-rich Nasdaq, which piled on almost two percent to close above 20,000 points for the first time. The consumer price index (CPI) rose to 2.7 percent last month from a year ago, up slightly from 2.6 percent in October. "With the CPI numbers broadly in line, it is likely that the Fed will not be derailed and will cut rates again next week," Jochen Stanzl, chief market analyst at CMC Markets. "The data is not a showstopper for the current bull run on Wall Street," he added. Ahead of the data, investors priced in an 86 percent chance the Fed will cut interest rates next week by a quarter percentage point. That rose to more than 98 percent after the CPI data was published. Stocks in Paris and Frankfurt rose ahead of the European Central Bank's own interest rate announcement on Thursday, with analysts expecting another cut as it seeks to boost eurozone growth. Investors are also eyeing political developments in France, where officials said President Emmanuel Macron aims to name a new prime minister "within 48 hours" as he seeks to end political deadlock following the ouster of Michel Barnier. In company news, shares in German retail giant Zalando shed more than four percent on Frankfurt's DAX index, after it acquired domestic rival About You in a deal worth around 1.1 billion euros ($1.2 billion). Shares in Zara owner Inditex slid more than six percent after a record quarterly profit for the group fell short of market estimates. Among US companies, Google parent Alphabet earned 5.5 percent as it announced the launch of Gemini 2.0, its most advanced artificial intelligence model to date. That added to gains after Google also announced Tuesday details of a breakthrough quantum chip. Shares in Shanghai rose but Hong Kong gave up an early rally to end in the red. Traders were keeping tabs on China to see if it will announce further measures to support its struggling economy as leaders were to gather Wednesday for a conference to hammer out next year's agenda. President Xi Jinping and other top leaders on Monday announced their first major shift in policy for more than a decade, saying they would "implement a more active fiscal policy and an appropriately relaxed" strategy. Those remarks sparked hopes for more interest rate cuts and the freeing up of more cash for lending. New York - Dow: DOWN 0.2 percent at 44,148.56 (close) New York - S&P 500: UP 0.8 percent at 6,084.19 (close) New York - Nasdaq Composite: UP 1.8 percent at 20,034.89 (close) London - FTSE 100: UP 0.3 percent at 8,301.62 (close) Paris - CAC 40: UP 0.4 percent at 7,423.40 (close) Frankfurt - DAX: UP 0.3 percent at 20,399.16 (close) Tokyo - Nikkei 225: FLAT at 39,372.23 (close) Hong Kong - Hang Seng Index: DOWN 0.8 percent at 20,155.05 (close) Shanghai - Composite: UP 0.3 percent at 3,432.49 (close) Euro/dollar: DOWN at $1.0498 from $1.0527 on Tuesday Pound/dollar: DOWN at $1.2752 from $1.2771 Dollar/yen: UP at 152.40 yen from 151.95 yen Euro/pound: DOWN at 82.31 from 82.42 pence Brent North Sea Crude: UP 1.8 percent at $73.52 per barrel West Texas Intermediate: UP 2.4 percent at $70.29 per barrel burs-jmb/mlm

Trump promises to end birthright citizenship: What is it and could he do it?Former National Party Minister Nikki Kaye has died after battle with cancer

By KENYA HUNTER, Associated Press ATLANTA (AP) — As she checked into a recent flight to Mexico for vacation, Teja Smith chuckled at the idea of joining another Women’s March on Washington . As a Black woman, she just couldn’t see herself helping to replicate the largest act of resistance against then-President Donald Trump’s first term in January 2017. Even in an election this year where Trump questioned his opponent’s race , held rallies featuring racist insults and falsely claimed Black migrants in Ohio were eating residents’ pets , he didn’t just win a second term. He became the first Republican in two decades to clinch the popular vote, although by a small margin. “It’s like the people have spoken and this is what America looks like,” said Smith, the Los Angeles-based founder of the advocacy social media agency, Get Social. “And there’s not too much more fighting that you’re going to be able to do without losing your own sanity.” After Trump was declared the winner over Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris , many politically engaged Black women said they were so dismayed by the outcome that they were reassessing — but not completely abandoning — their enthusiasm for electoral politics and movement organizing. Black women often carry much of the work of getting out the vote in their communities. They had vigorously supported the historic candidacy of Harris, who would have been the first woman of Black and South Asian descent to win the presidency. Harris’ loss spurred a wave of Black women across social media resolving to prioritize themselves, before giving so much to a country that over and over has shown its indifference to their concerns. AP VoteCast , a survey of more than 120,000 voters, found that 6 in 10 Black women said the future of democracy in the United States was the single most important factor for their vote this year, a higher share than for other demographic groups. But now, with Trump set to return to office in two months, some Black women are renewing calls to emphasize rest, focus on mental health and become more selective about what fight they lend their organizing power to. “America is going to have to save herself,” said LaTosha Brown, the co-founder of the national voting rights group Black Voters Matter. She compared Black women’s presence in social justice movements as “core strategists and core organizers” to the North Star, known as the most consistent and dependable star in the galaxy because of its seemingly fixed position in the sky. People can rely on Black women to lead change, Brown said, but the next four years will look different. “That’s not a herculean task that’s for us. We don’t want that title. ... I have no goals to be a martyr for a nation that cares nothing about me,” she said. AP VoteCast paints a clear picture of Black women’s concerns. Black female voters were most likely to say that democracy was the single most important factor for their vote, compared to other motivators such as high prices or abortion. More than 7 in 10 Black female voters said they were “very concerned” that electing Trump would lead the nation toward authoritarianism, while only about 2 in 10 said this about Harris. About 9 in 10 Black female voters supported Harris in 2024, according to AP VoteCast, similar to the share that backed Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. Trump received support from more than half of white voters, who made up the vast majority of his coalition in both years. Like voters overall, Black women were most likely to say the economy and jobs were the most important issues facing the country, with about one-third saying that. But they were more likely than many other groups to say that abortion and racism were the top issues, and much less likely than other groups to say immigration was the top issue. Despite those concerns, which were well-voiced by Black women throughout the campaign, increased support from young men of color and white women helped expand Trump’s lead and secured his victory. Politically engaged Black women said they don’t plan to continue positioning themselves in the vertebrae of the “backbone” of America’s democracy. The growing movement prompting Black women to withdraw is a shift from history, where they are often present and at the forefront of political and social change. One of the earliest examples is the women’s suffrage movement that led to ratification in 1920 of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution , which gave women the right to vote. Black women, however, were prevented from voting for decades afterward because of Jim Crow-era literacy tests, poll taxes and laws that blocked the grandchildren of slaves from voting. Most Black women couldn’t vote until the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Black women were among the organizers and counted among the marchers brutalized on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Alabama, during the historic march in 1965 from Selma to Montgomery that preceded federal legislation. Decades later, Black women were prominent organizers of the Black Lives Matter movement in response to the deaths of Black Americans at the hands of police and vigilantes. In his 2024 campaign, Trump called for leveraging federal money to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs in government programs and discussions of race, gender or sexual orientation in schools. His rhetoric on immigration, including false claims that Black Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating cats and dogs, drove support for his plan to deport millions of people . Related Articles Tenita Taylor, a Black resident of Atlanta who supported Trump this year, said she was initially excited about Harris’ candidacy. But after thinking about how high her grocery bills have been, she feels that voting for Trump in hopes of finally getting lower prices was a form of self-prioritization. “People say, ‘Well, that’s selfish, it was gonna be better for the greater good,”’ she said. “I’m a mother of five kids. ... The things that (Democrats) do either affect the rich or the poor.” Some of Trump’s plans affect people in Olivia Gordon’s immediate community, which is why she struggled to get behind the “Black women rest” wave. Gordon, a New York-based lawyer who supported the Party for Socialism and Liberation’s presidential nominee, Claudia de la Cruz, worries about who may be left behind if the 92% of Black women voters who backed Harris simply stopped advocating. “We’re talking millions of Black women here. If millions of Black women take a step back, it absolutely leaves holes, but for other Black women,” she said. “I think we sometimes are in the bubble of if it’s not in your immediate circle, maybe it doesn’t apply to you. And I truly implore people to understand that it does.” Nicole Lewis, an Alabama-based therapist who specializes in treating Black women’s stress, said she’s aware that Black women withdrawing from social impact movements could have a fallout. But she also hopes that it forces a reckoning for the nation to understand the consequences of not standing in solidarity with Black women. “It could impact things negatively because there isn’t that voice from the most empathetic group,” she said. “I also think it’s going to give other groups an opportunity to step up. ... My hope is that they do show up for themselves and everyone else.” Brown said a reckoning might be exactly what the country needs, but it’s a reckoning for everyone else. Black women, she said, did their job when they supported Harris in droves in hopes they could thwart the massive changes expected under Trump. “This ain’t our reckoning,” she said. “I don’t feel no guilt.” AP polling editor Amelia Thomson DeVeaux and Associated Press writer Linley Sanders in Washington contributed to this report. The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.News Don't miss out on the headlines from News. Followed categories will be added to My News. The full version of suspected murderer Luigi Mangione’s manifesto – detailing his alleged decision to fatally shoot UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson – has been published online. A post containing what’s purported to be the document was shared to Substack by user Ken Klippenstein’s newsletter overnight. The 262-word missive posted by Klippenstein, which has been quoted in part by officials and media outlets since the 26-year-old’s arrest, has not been verified by authorities. “To the Feds, I’ll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country,” the alleged manifesto begins. “To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn’t working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic ( computer-aided design ), a lot of patience. The spiral notebook , if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. “My tech is pretty locked down so probably not much info there.” Suspected shooter Luigi Mangione. Picture: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images/AFP UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Picture: UnitedHealth Group Chilling video allegedly shows Mangione shooting at Mr Brian Thompson. Picture: The New York Post Mangione purportedly goes on to apologise “for any strife of traumas but it had to be done”, adding “frankly, these parasites had it coming”, according to the document. While America has “the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world”, he (allegedly) wrote, “we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy”. While UnitedHealthcare, of which Mr Thompson was the CEO, is “the largest company in the US by market cap” and “has grown and grown”, the document states that Americans’ life expectancy has not. “The reality is, these (indecipherable) have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allowed them to get away with it,” it reads. “Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument.” It then refers by surname to prolific filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2007 documentary SICKO exposed the measures health insurers go to profit off Americans while simultaneously denying them care, and former New York Times reporter Elizabeth Rosenthal, whose book, American Sickness: How Healthcare Became Big Business and How You Can Take It Back , was published in 2017. Both, the manifesto reads, “have illuminated the corruption and greed ... decades ago and the problems simply remain”. “It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play,” he concluded. “Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.” Prolific US documentarian Michael Moore. Picture: Tiziana Fabi/AFP Investigators have not yet declared a definitive motive for Mangione – but have said the manifesto and inscribed casings on the bullets he used to shoot Mr Thompson (“deny, defend, depose”) suggest the killing was a “targeted attack” on both the CEO and health insurance industry as a whole. According to a New York Police Department internal report, obtained earlier this week by The New York Times , Mangione “appeared to view the targeted killing of the company’s highest-ranking representative as a symbolic takedown and a direct challenge to its alleged corruption and ‘power games’”. He “likely views himself as a hero of sorts who has finally decided to act upon such injustices,” the report said. Mangione’s own experience with the health insurance industry also may have contributed, sources claim. Friends of the alleged killer have detailed the impact his own medical issues – particularly the aftermath of a 2023 back operation – had on his mental and physical wellbeing. One source told Jack Mac, a staffer at media outlet Barstool Sports, that the surgery “‘ changed everything ’ for him and he went ‘absolutely crazy’”. Mangione ‘likely views himself as a hero of sorts who has finally decided to act upon such injustices’, an internal police report read. Picture: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images/AFP The notebook mentioned by Mangione in his alleged manifesto, two law enforcement officials told The New York Times detailed his plans for the shooting, and described going to a conference and killing an executive. Mangione wrote that he’d considered killing Mr Thompson with a bomb, but settled on a handgun because it was the only way to ensure no bystanders would be injured. “What do you do? You wack the CEO at the annual parasitic bean-counter convention. It’s targeted, precise, and doesn’t risk innocents,” one passage written in the notebook read, the officials said. Authorities in New York are currently working to have Mangione extradited back to Manhattan to face charges of second-degree murder. Mangione, who has contested the extradition, is currently being held in a Pennsylvania prison. More Coverage Alleged CEO killer’s sex motive revealed Ronny Reyes - The New York Post TikTok exposes alleged CEO killer’s past Natalie Brown Originally published as ‘Had to be done’: Luigi Mangione’s full manifesto about insurance CEO’s killing released Join the conversation Add your comment to this story To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout More related stories Business Breaking News ‘Huge win’: Next step in Virgin-Qatar deal Aussies will soon have more options for international travel when Virgin Australia joins forces with one of the world’s largest airlines. Read more Business Aussie reveals his shock $50m lotto win A South Australian man had no idea he’d won this week’s mega $50 million Oz Lotto jackpot until checking his ticket on a whim, letting out a colourful reaction. Read moreJudge rejects request to sideline SJSU volleyball player

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and AFP commissioner Reece Kershaw (Image: AAP/Dominic Giannini) Immediately following the horrific antisemitic arson attack on the Adass Israel synagogue, before perpetrators or their motives had even been revealed — and before our communities had a chance to catch our breath — politicians and interest groups started capitalising on the attack by advocating for increased policing and a law and order response. As a Jewish historian, I’m deeply concerned that this approach fundamentally misunderstands antisemitism and how to combat it. Antisemitic arson attacks on synagogues and cars are beyond the pale and an attack on our collective values of diversity. The perpetrators must be investigated and held to account for the terror they have instilled in Jewish communities. But a broad police crackdown — including targeting protests, as suggested by Jillian Segal, the special envoy to combat antisemitism — will not make even a small dent in antisemitism. A synagogue minutes from my home was set ablaze. This is why many Jewish Australians live in fear Read More The Australian Federal Police has set up special operation Avalite , a mobile squad of counterterrorism investigators who will have expanded powers to focus on threats, violence and hatred toward the Australian Jewish community and parliamentarians. There is a real problem of antisemitism in Australia, but it can not be solved by more policing. It’s a problem of racism. At the Jewish Council of Australia, where I am executive officer, we cop antisemitic abuse daily — from the far right, from conspiracy theorists, from Zionists attacking our Jewish identity, and from a lot of people who think we are somehow responsible for Israel’s genocide. It’s well documented that antisemitic incidents increase whenever Israel is committing atrocities. Jewish identities trace back more than 3,000 years and span many cultures and traditions. Zionism is a political ideology with Jewish and non-Jewish adherents, just over 120 years old. When the media, politicians and pro-Israel lobby groups all consistently assert a fictitious, absolute alignment between Jewish identity in Australia and the actions of Israel, it’s not hard to see why a racist idea takes hold that Jews as a whole are to blame for Israel’s actions. But this form of racism does not take place in a vacuum. Contrary to Zionist rhetoric, antisemitism is a historical and political phenomenon , not an “eternal hatred” that simply recurs in all societies for thousands of years. It is not a pathology or a problem of “antisemites”, or an issue simply of the far right or far left. Antisemitism is a form of racism that has come to the fore at various points throughout Australian society since the 1890s, shaped by broader racial ideologies. Racism against different groups in Australia has always been tied to geopolitics and Western imperialism: from invasion and colonisation, to competition with China, to the War on Terror — from the exclusion of Chinese people through to panics around asylum seekers and Muslim migrants. White Jews in Australia were mostly considered “white” until the 1930s, when potential Jewish migrants — refugees from Germany and Austria — were racialised and considered unassimilable. Throughout the 1940s and early 1950s, Australia’s immigration policies discriminated against Jews. In the late 1940s, antisemitism was exacerbated by fears of Jewish terrorism in Palestine and stereotypes portraying Jewish Holocaust survivors as clannish, communist agents, black marketeers and anti-British. These racist ideas mirrored those directed against Asians, illustrating how antisemitism in Australia has always intertwined with and reinforced other forms of racism. ‘They’ll be more upset’: Albo flags shift in Australia’s Israel-Palestine position at private Labor event Read More Understanding antisemitism requires seeing beyond an exceptionalist narrative. It demands we recognise how racism works through an interconnected racial order that continually redraws boundaries of power and belonging. The Human Rights Commission’s recently released national anti-racism framework draws these links and gives us a solid plan to tackle all forms of racism across Australian society. The spectacle of arrests in a law and order crackdown, likely including some of the favourite Muslim and Palestinian targets of pro-Israel Jewish groups and the right-wing press, will serve as national security/anti-terror theatre. The optics aim to reassure the public, and Jews in particular, but they do so by racialising and marginalising others. The Scanlon Foundation’s recent “Mapping Social Cohesion” report found that negative attitudes towards Jewish people have increased from 9% in 2023 to 13% in 2024. While this is certainly worrying, it pales in comparison to the now one in three (34%) adults that have a somewhat or very negative attitude towards Muslims (up from 27%). These figures can’t be separated from the rhetoric of “anti-terrorism” and Israel’s genocidal war, which has seen anti-Palestinian and anti-Muslim racism proliferate . True safety for Jewish communities cannot be achieved through divisive crackdowns that associate Jews and the fight against antisemitism with the police and state power. The continued exceptionalisation of antisemitism, treating it as a standalone or special type of racism — put starkly by Senator Dave Sharma who recently condemned ALP ministers for talking about a “fictitious Islamophobia” in the same breath as antisemitism — is a recipe for the continued use of Jews as political footballs by both major parties and the entrenchment of anti-Jewish attitudes. Jewish communities deserve real protection — not a false sense of security purchased at the expense of other marginalised groups. We need solutions that address the roots of antisemitism in the broader problem of racism in Australian society, not law enforcement theatre that only breeds more division. Have something to say about this article? Write to us at letters@crikey.com.au . Please include your full name to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say . We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Jalen Hurts and A.J. Brown’s troubles connecting on the field have yet to blow into a family feud inside the locker room — honest, both Philadelphia Eagles stars said. Between Hurts and Brown, it’s all good in Philly. “Me and Jalen are good,” Brown said. Added Hurts, “We’re good, we’re good.” So there will be no sit-ups in the driveway, no apologies on the front lawn, and certainly, it seems, no rift between Hurts and his No. 1 receiver. Hurts and Brown each downplayed any hint of a fissure Wednesday between the two after defensive end Brandon Graham appeared this week on a Philadelphia sports radio station and suggested there was friction between the Pro Bowl duo. The two were close friends long before they became teammates and Hurts is the godfather for Brown’s daughter. Graham's comments — in which he noted “ things have changed ,” between the two, without offering specifics — exploded into tabloid and fan fodder this week in Philadelphia. His insinuations that the duo were not on the same page came on the heels of Brown's quote after a sluggish win over Carolina that the “ offense ” wasn’t playing up to standard, even with the Eagles at 11-2. “BG knows he spoke out of place,” Hurts said. Graham, who is sidelined with a triceps injury, clarified his comments later to an ESPN reporter, saying he made the wrong assumption about the relationship between Hurts and Brown and planned to apologize to both players. Brown, with 109 yards receiving combined the last two games, said his beef with the offense wasn't directed at Hurts. It was everything from offensive coordinator Kellen Moore's play calling to execution to all the ingredients in a successful offense that make a team a Super Bowl contender. The usually pass-happy Eagles have leaned more on running back Saquon Barkley, who set the franchise season rushing record of 1,623 yards against the Panthers and is chasing Eric Dickerson for the NFL mark. “Obviously, it's not about running the ball,” Brown told reporters. “He's about to win MVP. Clearly. What other things can we do on offense? We have to pass the ball. That can go into protection, that can go into picking up the block, that goes to us getting open quicker. Getting on the same page.” Eagles coach Nick Sirianni said he never witnessed any issues between Hurts and Brown and only saw two players who worked hard together, even working on routes after practice and seemed to have a deep personal connection on and off the field. “You guys get to see three hours every Sunday where emotions can play as high as they’re going to play,” Sirianni said. “I get to see these guys every single day, how they go about their business and interact with each other.” Brown, who was coming off consecutive 1,000-yard receiving seasons, wasn't necessarily wrong in his frustration with the recent stagnation of the passing game. Hurts, who signed a contract extension ahead of the 2023 season that was worth $179.3 million guaranteed , has thrown for fewer than 200 yards in three straight games. Wide receiver DeVonta Smith — who also complained Sunday about the offense — was also coming off consecutive 1,000-yard receiving seasons but has yet to break 100 yards in a game this season. Brown has four 100-yard games, well off last season’s run when he topped 100 yards in six straight games and seven times overall. Hurts has been more efficient than explosive this season but has still thrown 12 touchdown passes to just one interception — and rushed for 11 more scores — during the Eagles' nine-game winning streak that has them on the brink of clinching the NFC East. Maybe playing the Steelers on Sunday at home can snap the Eagles out of their offensive malaise. Hurts threw three TD passes to Brown in a 35-13 win in 2022. “Do we all have things to get better at in the passing game? Yeah, I think that’s obvious,” Sirianni said. “I think that’s what we’ve been talking about. We all have things that we’ve got to get better at, coaches, players. But this is why this is the greatest team sport there is. It takes everybody. It takes every single person being together, every single person for the success to happen. It’s just not a one-person thing.” AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/NFL