Jessica Simpson poses with mini-me daughter Maxwell, 13, after split from husband Eric Johnson

shared a selfie with her mini-me daughter Maxwell Drew Johnson on Tuesday following their recent trip to Paris to celebrate her 13th birthday.
The 44-year-old former pop star - who boasts 15.4M social media followers - captioned the mother-daughter snap: 'Let the good times roll into the 7th grade my beautiful Maxwell Drew.'
Jessica feels like her eldest child has 'been a teenager for a while' because she's 'an old soul.'
'I learn a lot from Maxwell. I don't know if she's just my firstborn or what, but she's just a well of depth, like, she's so amazing,' Simpson gushed to Extra on May 19.
'She knew more about Paris than my mom and I. So, you know, TikTok, she knew everywhere to go. Like, we had all these places to go, and she discovered, like, she has the nose.
'Like, she loves perfume, so going to a perfumery a private perfumery creating our own perfume. She'll say, "No, for the Maxwell Johnson Collection."'
On June 30, the Jessica Simpson Collection CEO and her estranged second husband Eric Johnson will celebrate the 12th birthday of their son Ace, and they're also proud parents of six-year-old daughter Birdie.
Jessica legally separated from the 45-year-old retired NFL tight end in January after a decade of marriage, and she also put her $11.5M seven-bedroom Hidden Hills marital mansion on the real estate market for $17.9M.
Eric was still technically married to former pole-dancing instructor Keri D'Angelo when he originally met Simpson through a mutual friend at her May 2010 house party, and he finalized his divorce just five months later.
The Breadcrumbs belter was roasted for made her 'cringey' musical comeback performing new single Blame Me and a cover of These Boots Are Made for Walking during the 23rd season finale of ABC singing competition American Idol on May 18.
It marked Jessica's first time performing on TV in 15 years.
'Oh, my god, I was dying. I can't even tell you how long it's been since I've been that nervous. Like, I had to put hairspray on my feet to stand still, like, not that it actually keeps me put, but, like, my feet were sweating. I'm like, my feet don't sweat,' Simpson admitted to Extra.
'I just kept telling myself, "Do not cry. Do not cry. I know this is a big moment… do not cry." And then I see my dad, like, up in the corner and I'm like, "Ah, I'm going to cry. I'm going to cry. Do not cry. Just sing your songs. Just sing your songs."'
Simpson gushed to Extra on May 19: 'I learn a lot from Maxwell. I don't know if she's just my firstborn or what, but she's just a well of depth, like, she's so amazing. She knew more about Paris than my mom and I!' (pictured with Tina Simpson last month)
Jessica legally separated from the 45-year-old retired NFL tight end (L, pictured in 2015) in January after a decade of marriage, and she also put her $11.5M seven-bedroom Hidden Hills marital mansion on the real estate market for $17.9M
Simpson was roasted for made her 'cringey' musical comeback performing new single Blame Me and a cover of These Boots Are Made for Walking during the 23rd season finale of ABC singing competition American Idol on May 18
Jessica also 'had a blast' portraying a 'very crazy role' that required 'eight hours of prosthetic makeup' in Ryan Murphy's legal drama All's Fair, which premieres this fall on Hulu
The platinum-blonde Texan - who gets 679K monthly listeners on Spotify - will release her EP Nashville Canyon: Part 2 this summer.
Jessica also 'had a blast' portraying a 'very crazy role' that required 'eight hours of prosthetic makeup' in Ryan Murphy's legal drama All's Fair, which premieres this fall on Hulu.
Kim Kardashian, Naomi Watts, Niecy Nash, Teyana Taylor, Sarah Paulson, Glenn Close, Matthew Noszka, Elizabeth Berkley, Ed O'Neill, Judith Light, and Brooke Shields will also appear in the series.
Simpson impressively celebrated seven years of sobriety on November 1.
The Walmart collaborator first found fame with her three-octave soprano pipes followed by her quirky demeanor on MTV reality show Newlyweds (2003-2005) with first ex-husband Nick Lachey.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

BBC News

27 minutes ago

• BBC News

Swindon film blends fairy tale with 'horrors' of Ukraine war

A mature student who made a film merging fantasy fiction with an interpretation of the war in Ukraine, said it is a "magical feeling" to complete his first project. Alexander Hutchings, 49, from Swindon, came up with the idea of Pralis, as part of his film course at New College, said he had been inspired by classmate Ihor Kuraliesin, 20, and his experience in Ukraine, so decided to feature an all-Ukrainian cast of Mr Hutchings put his concept to the team, they shared ideas and cast member Daniella Michel wrote the script, weaving in more of her experience in Ukraine and the emotions the war stirred. The fantasy film of "never-ending enchantment," has one male character, who is doing what he thinks he should do, but the film questions whether he would do that if he could see the whole are drawn with a fictional soldier fighting for Russia, Mr Hutchings female characters, played by Tetiana Tymofeienko, 30, Angelina Kosenko, 26, and Daniella Michel, 23, represent the resilience, uncertainty and obedience. Ms Michel, who came to Swindon from Ukraine on Boxing Day, 2023, got involved in the project through a creative group of Ukraine nationals in the said the film was "a big chance to raise my voice on the invasion using the script and character to share the rage I - and my fellow Ukrainians - felt, and feel, about it"."The feelings of being forgotten, robbed, raped, and everything Ukrainians have been through and writing the script has made me stronger," she Hutchings said because of the authentic emotions, the cast, who are all new to acting, "didn't need advice on the acting or production as everyone channelled real emotion at the horror of war which drove the characters behaviour". The film, which is 12 minutes long, was filmed in a forest in Wiltshire, over five days, and the colours of Ukraine, blue and yellow, were woven into the film through the colours of the cast had creative freedom over the costumes, ensuring they were more "authentically" symbolic of Ukraine, Mr Hutchings Hutchings, who was the producer, director, camera person and editor on the film, spent about four weeks on post production and has now uploaded the film to hopes to continue the narrative with more short films and "help and inspire others" with the project, he said.

Reuters

an hour ago

• Reuters

Equity investors seeking clarity should be careful what they wish for

LONDON, June 23 (Reuters) - Financial markets famously hate uncertainty, but getting answers to many of the open questions currently hanging over markets may end up offering investors little comfort. Several recent global developments, including President Donald Trump's April 2 tariff announcement and subsequent 90-day pause as well as the breakout of the Israel-Iran war, have sparked some of the highest levels of uncertainty in decades. If recent U.S. stock market performance is anything to go by, investors seem convinced that everything will work out just fine. Investors will likely get more clarity on several of these issues in the coming weeks, but they may find that this optimism is unwarranted. On July 9, the 90-day pause on Trump's Liberation Day 'reciprocal tariffs' will end, and unless the delay is extended or multiple trade deals are struck, U.S. import tariffs will essentially double from the 10% level today. So far, only the UK has managed to agree on a trade deal, and, even here, there is little clarity about the future of tariffs on UK steel exports. Negotiations with the European Union and Japan have stalled, and the EU has prepared a range of potential retaliatory measures. At the same time, the U.S. Commerce Department is preparing to present its findings on investigations into semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, copper, aircraft, jet engines and a host of other goods, opens new tab. It is widely expected that once these findings are presented, the U.S. government will act quickly to impose additional tariffs or import restrictions. Meanwhile, the Senate is expected to vote on the Trump administration's budget bill in July. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated, opens new tab that in its current form, this bill will add $3.3 trillion in extra debt over the coming decade. Investor confidence in the dollar and the safety of U.S. Treasuries has been shaken recently, partly due to the country's deteriorating fiscal outlook, so this deficit-expanding budget will only add fuel to the fire. And now, the war between Israel and Iran has been thrown into the mix, with the U.S. attacking Iranian nuclear sites on Sunday. Oil prices have increased by roughly 10% since the war broke out, though the price as of June 20 was still in line with the 2024 average. After the U.S. attacks, we could see Iranian retaliation against oil fields in the Middle East or the all-important Strait of Hormuz, which could drive oil prices much higher. With all these moving parts, it is easy to lose sight of what matters right now and what doesn't. While many actions, such as the extension of the 2017 tax cuts in the budget bill, will take years to unfold, the rise in tariff levels could have an immediate impact. The tariffs currently in place (e.g., base tariffs and tariffs on steel, aluminium and autos) could add 0.9 percentage points to U.S. inflation over the next 12 months, as importers are forced to pass tariff costs on to consumers. If there are no additional trade deals struck and tariffs revert to the higher levels announced on Liberation Day, another 0.7 percentage points could be added. And that doesn't even include potential tariffs on pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and other goods. The inflation impact from the budget bill will likely be much smaller at roughly 0.1 percentage points over the next 12 months, and an oil price spike to $80 per barrel is apt to have roughly the same impact. Only if oil prices spike to about $100 and remain in that region for the next six months would we have to be seriously worried about an inflation shock from the war in the Middle East. Of course, if all these developments, including a 20% oil price spike, come to pass, U.S. inflation could rise from current levels by up to two percentage points in the next twelve months, dwarfing the likely impact on the UK and euro zone. Despite these concerning figures, U.S. equity investors seem nonplussed. U.S. stock markets, perhaps banking on another TACO moment, have rallied 15% above the level justified by macroeconomic fundamentals, based on my estimates. Over the last 10 years, a deviation of this size was followed by an average decline of 7% in the S&P 500 in the subsequent three months. The gap between performance and fundamentals is smaller in the euro zone and UK, suggesting any mean reversion would be less extreme there. Now, it's possible that everything – from the trade war to the real war – will end well. And stock markets have an uncanny ability to ignore adversity for a long time. However, if much of this uncertainty is resolved negatively, resulting in either higher U.S. inflation or lower growth, U.S. equities' surprising resilience is likely to be challenged. (The views expressed here are those of Joachim Klement, an investment strategist at Panmure Liberum, the UK's largest independent investment bank). Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab, opens new tab and X., opens new tab ​

Telegraph

an hour ago

• Telegraph

Why Nato's spending plans don't add up

'They're delinquent, as far as I'm concerned,' Donald Trump vented as he stood front and centre amongst allies at a customary leaders' photo op ahead of a Nato summit in 2018. 'Massive amounts of money is owed,' the US president went on as the awkward figures of Germany's Angela Merkel and Britain's Theresa May looked on. Berlin was the main victim of the metaphorical artillery barrage against those national governments failing to meet an annual defence spending target of 2 per cent of GDP. Mrs Merkel had presided over more than a decade of neglect of the Bundeswehr, while pouring billions into Russia's budget through the purchase of cheap oil and gas. 'So we are protecting you against Russia, but they're paying billions of dollars to Russia?' Mr Trump asked sarcastically. Those chaotic 48 hours in Brussels, the Belgian capital, are said to have been the most consequential in Nato's recent history. That is until Mr Trump touches down in the Hague this week as the Western military alliance holds its traditional annual summit. Seven years on, the US president's feelings about Nato have not changed. European diplomats and officials still fear he could decide to pull US troops from the continent at the drop of a hat. That is why any talks in the Dutch capital will focus on one thing, and one thing only – a pledge to increase defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. Most allies believe the times we live in and geopolitical challenges they face warrant such a decision. However, the main reason for signing off on a decision to hike defence expenditure by more than two-fold lies almost solely in who occupies the White House's Oval Office. Same old faces There are a host of familiar faces from the 2018 summit still floating around the alliance. Mark Rutte, the former Dutch prime minister, is now Nato's secretary-general. Pedro Sanchez remains Spain's prime minister, and France is still ruled by president Emmanuel Macron. But this time round, all the planning is designed to avert these returning politicians, or anyone who did not experience it, becoming victims of a barrage of hellfire from Mr Trump. A tale of the pre-summit tape reveals that most allies have made a concerted effort to follow the narrative required to keep the US president on the straight and narrow. And all eyes will be on Mr Trump, who made the biggest gamble of his presidency on Saturday night when he bombed Iran's heavily fortified Fordow nuclear facility. The damage to the site remains unclear but, if Mr Trump has made the right move, he will have destroyed Tehran's hopes of building a nuclear weapon – at least for now. If it was the wrong decision, the Middle East could be plunged into violent turmoil and draw America into a 'forever war'. For Nato, that would mean its biggest donor turning its attention away from the military alliance, away from the Ukraine war, and towards its own war. It could also mean Nato's fears coming true – Mr Trump pulling American troops from Europe. The second Donald in the room will be Donald Tusk, the Polish prime minister, whose government presides over the highest defence spending per percentage of GDP in the entire alliance at 4.12 per cent. In theory, Poland is the only member state, including the US, that hits the 3.5 per cent 'core defence' target when it is signed off in The Hague. Washington only spends about 3.38 per cent, according to the latest figures released by Nato. Those figures show that 23 of the alliance's 32 allies are currently hitting the 2 per cent target of GDP set over a decade ago in 2014. Canada, Italy, Luxembourg and Spain will only reach that decade-old goal this year. Spain poses biggest challenge Mr Sanchez and Madrid pose the biggest challenge to any attempt to further increase the overall defence spending goal to 5 per cent. In a letter to Mr Rutte ahead of the Hague summit, the Spanish prime minister wrote: 'Reaching 5 per cent defence spending will be impossible unless it comes at the cost of increasing taxes on the middle class, cutting public services and social benefits for their citizens.' The letter worked for Mr Sanchez, with Spain reaching a deal with Nato exempting it from the alliance's 5 per cent target – a move that will further frustrate Mr Trump. 'Spain has just concluded a deal with Nato... which will allow us to respect our commitments towards the Atlantic alliance... without having to raise our defence spending to five percent of gross domestic product,' Mr Sanchez said in a speech from the Moncloa palace on Sunday. Spain is one of the governments arguing that hitting new Nato capability targets does not require extra money but smarter spending. Luxembourg has delivered a similar message. 'It will be the capabilities that will keep us safe, not percentages,' Yuriko Backes, its defence minister, recently argued. But these are rare shows of dissent, with most member states keen to flatter Mr Trump into a state where he's not willing to raise questions over the alliance's unity. Even before he entered office, most European and Canadian allies had decided to raise defence spending because of the renewed threat posed by Russia. This won't stop them from attributing those decisions to the US president. The Baltics and recently joined Sweden and Finland have surged spending in response to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Estonia has set out plans to spend at least 5 per cent of its annual GDP on defence for the foreseeable future. Lithuania and Latvia have budgeted for more than 3 per cent. Britain's defence woes Britain has always been considered a front-runner when it comes to Nato's spending targets. Since the Wales pledge of 2 per cent in 2014, the country was one of four allies to have met the target consistently. But with 5 per cent looming as a new goal, Sir Keir Starmer risks falling well behind. The Prime Minister has committed to spending only 3 per cent by 2034, long after the envisaged deadline of 2032. British officials have argued that the country will need extra time to meet the goal of 3.5 per cent without putting government finances under unnecessary pressure. Another caveat is that the world could be considered a greatly different place in nine years time. The main change is that there will be no Mr Trump in the White House to badger European allies and Canada over their defence expenditure. Whatever happens, Britain will be likely to slip down the rankings of Europe's most reliable armed forces. Yes, the nuclear deterrent will remain committed to Nato's joint strategy, but the likes of France 's, Germany's and the Netherland's militaries will have grown at a much faster rate if their spending plans are delivered as promised. Mr Macron has promised defence spending will jump to over 3 per cent, while Berlin has set out a strategy for assuming the mantle of Europe's most powerful military, taking that title from Britain. 'We are following him there,' Johann Wadephul, the German foreign minister, said of Mr Trump's demand for spending to increase to 5 per cent of GDP. Creative accounting The consensus for meeting Mr Trump's demanded target is largely there. But the catch is that it will require a large degree of compromise and creative accounting to hit those numbers. Mr Rutte, who was made Nato's secretary-general almost entirely because of his past successes of dealing with the American, has delivered the first element of creativity. His plan for the new benchmark is to divide it up into different areas of spending. The first 3.5 per cent will be spent on areas of core defence: tanks, fighter jets, air defence systems, long range missiles and troops. The remaining 1.5 per cent will be able to include government budgets spent on 'defence and security-related investment, including in infrastructure and resilience'. The Telegraph recently reported that Sir Keir is looking to broaden the scope of national security in Britain to help meet that target. Essentially this means things like rural broadband, useful for communications if Britain is one day attacked, or runway expansions, handy for warplanes, can be counted towards the 1.5 per cent goal. Spain is hatching similar plans, suggesting it will allocate money already spent on past Nato challenges, like migration and climate change. Diplomatic sources within Nato have said ministries across the alliance dealing with infrastructure projects will be licking their lips at the prospect of funds being redirected their ways to help with the targets. The prevailing view is that numbers and not battle plans will be the only way to woo Mr Trump enough to prevent him from repeating the ruckus of 2018. Olga Olike, of the Crisis Group, said: 'The hard part isn't agreeing to a percentage of GDP. The hard part will be defining, and then implementing, strategies that credibly deter Russia and assure allies, regardless of what the US does.' Lessons learnt The main lesson taken from that chaotic summit in Brussels was that the best way of handling the US president is to acknowledge, appease and ultimately praise him. Officials supporting Mr Rutte will have produced a mass of data to back up his claims that Europe and Canada are already spending more because of Mr Trump. It took Mr Trump less than two minutes to use a figure of $33 billion in extra defence spending that was handed to him hours earlier at the past summit: 'I let them know that I was extremely unhappy with what was happening, and they have substantially upped their commitment,' he told a post-summit news conference. 'And now we're very happy and have a very, very powerful, very, very strong Nato, much stronger than it was two days ago.' While he is not scheduled to give a press conference, officials will be looking to arm him with enough positive ammunition should he change his mind, as was the case in 2018. This time, those numbers will be much greater. Since 2018, Nato member states, excluding the US, have pledged around $500 billion of extra defence spending - more than 55 per cent since Mr Trump's intervention in Brussels. And then there is that spending commitment of 5 per cent, a number conflated entirely to meet demands set by the US President.