free slots game

The states that saw the most active attacks against election certification two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Others said they weren’t so sure. Certification proceeded normally this year in part because Donald Trump won the presidential race, quieting his supporters after he had spent the campaign making unsubstantiated claims that he could lose only through widespread cheating . The statewide certification votes Tuesday in Nevada and New Mexico follow a vote Monday to certify the results in Arizona. In all three states, the certification process was tumultuous during the 2022 midterms when Democrats won most statewide offices. Those controversies followed attempts by Trump and his allies to halt or challenge certification in Michigan, Georgia and other battleground states in 2020, disrupting what until then had been a routine administrative process. This year, some who have been the most vocal in questioning the integrity of elections have instead been celebrating Trump’s victory. “The results are being accepted in the manner that they are, in part, because those who have been eroding trust or casting doubt on the integrity of U.S. elections have a result they feel good about,” said David Levine, a former local election official in Idaho who now advises on election administration issues. “Hopefully we can get back to a place where Americans can feel confident in the results even if it’s one they disagree with.” On Tuesday, Nevada and New Mexico certified their statewide results with little discussion. During Monday’s certification in Arizona, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes reflected on the lack of controversy this year. “I think the age of election denialism, for all intents and purposes, is dead,” he said. Sitting next to Fontes, state Attorney General Kris Mayes, a fellow Democrat, said she was more skeptical. Her Republican opponent in 2022 spent two years challenging his loss . “Do I think election denialism is dead? No, I don’t,” she said. “We’ll see over the next couple of election cycles what happens, but I don’t think we’re there yet.” Public confidence in elections has dropped since Trump challenged his loss in 2020 and made false claims of widespread fraud, particularly among Republicans . Some Republicans began targeting the certification process, when local and state boards certify the results after local election officials provide them with the final tally of votes. A firestorm erupted in Georgia over the summer when the state election board, with a new pro-Trump majority, attempted to politicize the certification process with changes later blocked by the courts. While certification battles did not surface after the Nov. 5 election , a vocal segment within the Republican Party remains deeply skeptical of election processes, particularly of the availability of mail ballots and the use of ballot scanners to tally votes. During a forum Monday on the social platform X led by the group Cause of America, the group's director expressed doubt about voting equipment. Shawn Smith, who also is a retired Air Force colonel, argued the certification process suppresses legitimate concerns and goes against “the sovereignty of the people.” Story continues below video Although not as widespread as four years ago, this sentiment did surface sporadically at the local level this month. In Washoe County, Nevada, which includes Reno and voted narrowly for Vice President Kamala Harris, the vote to certify the results was 3-1 with one abstention. Commissioner Jeanne Herman has consistently voted against certification and did not make a public comment about her vote this year. Commissioner Mike Clark, a staunch Trump supporter who had also previously voted against certification, said he would abstain and left before the vote. “I am not an election denier and clearly the person I wanted to win, won this state,” Clark said before leaving the meeting. “However, that does not mean that all the protocols were followed and that we can truly certify the election.” Such skepticism, whether in Nevada or elsewhere, leaves the door open to certification disputes during future elections. The questioning of election results isn't limited to Republicans. Even though Harris quickly conceded after losing all seven presidential battleground states , online posts among her supporters continue to raise concerns about her loss. One Reddit community that has amassed 23,000 members features a steady drumbeat of Democrats scrutinizing a result they can’t believe is real. Some posting in the group have issued calls to contact Harris and her running mate to ask them to demand a recount or otherwise object to the outcome. Among the battlegrounds, Michigan was among those where Trump and his allies pressed to halt certification of the 2020 election for Democrat Joe Biden amid false claims of fraud and manipulation. Two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers who initially opposed certification eventually relented. The state board of canvassers eventually voted to certify, even after one Republican member abstained. This year, the state board voted unanimously on Nov. 22 in favor of certifying and praised the state’s election workers. In Georgia, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger certified his state’s results on Nov. 22. Four years ago, the Republican state official was facing immense pressure from Trump and his allies to investigate their unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Also certifying results Tuesday, and doing so unanimously, was the state Board of Elections in North Carolina. It was the only presidential battleground state won by Trump in 2020 — and the only one where he and his allies didn't make claims of fraud. Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Ken Ritter in Las Vegas, Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, and Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.Irish-language rappers Kneecap win case against UK funding blockfree slots game 。

US coach Emma Hayes admits to anthem uncertainty ahead of England stalemate

BUCHAREST (Reuters) - Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President-elect Donald Trump's choice to head the U.S. health department, will be in Romania next week to meet Calin Georgescu, the surprise far-right winner in the first round of a presidential election, a Romanian television station said. Georgescu finished first in last Sunday's vote, and secured a place in a run-off scheduled for Dec. 8, in a win that could upend politics in Romania and undermine its pro-Western stance. However, the election result has been challenged at Romania's top court, which ordered a recount of all the votes cast last Sunday. The court will decide on Monday whether to annul the first round. Romania also holds a parliamentary election on Sunday. Kennedy will be in Bucharest next week to launch his book on the coronavirus pandemic, with a preface written by Georgescu, private television station Realitatea said in a statement. Kennedy is an environmentalist who has spread misinformation about vaccines. "Realitatea is a media partner of the year-end meeting between the future Health Secretary in Donald Trump's government and the surprise winner of the presidential vote," Realitatea said in a statement. It added the televised discussion will take place on Dec. 5. A spokesperson for Kennedy, and representatives of Republican Trump's transition team, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Georgescu told Realitatea earlier this week that Kennedy might come to Bucharest. On Saturday, his communications team neither denied nor confirmed the meeting. (Reporting by Luiza Ilie; Additional reporting by Tim Reid in West Palm Beach, Florida.; Editing by Frances Kerry)

AP Business SummaryBrief at 12:30 p.m. ESTUS budget airlines are struggling. Will pursuing premium passengers solve their problems?At a town hall meeting with the bureau workforce, Mr Wray said he would be stepping down “after weeks of careful thought”. Mr Wray’s intended resignation is not unexpected considering that Mr Trump had picked Mr Patel for the role in his new administration. Mr Wray had previously been named by Mr Trump and began the 10-year term — a length meant to insulate the agency from the political influence of changing administrations — in 2017, after Mr Trump fired then-FBI director James Comey. Mr Trump had demonstrated his anger with Mr Wray on multiple occasions, including after Mr Wray’s congressional testimony in September. “My goal is to keep the focus on our mission — the indispensable work you’re doing on behalf of the American people every day,” Mr Wray told agency employees. “In my view, this is the best way to avoid dragging the bureau deeper into the fray, while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work.” Mr Wray continued: “It should go without saying, but I’ll say it anyway — this is not easy for me. I love this place, I love our mission, and I love our people — but my focus is, and always has been, on us and doing what’s right for the FBI.” Mr Wray received a standing ovation following his remarks before a standing-room-only crowd at FBI headquarters and some in the audience cried, according to an FBI official who was not authorised to discuss the private gathering and spoke on condition of anonymity to The Associated Press. Mr Trump applauded the news on social media, calling it “a great day for America as it will end the weaponisation of what has become known as the United States Department of Injustice” and saying that Mr Patel’s confirmation will begin “the process of Making the FBI Great Again”. If confirmed by the Senate, Mr Patel would herald a radical leadership transformation at the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency. He has advocated shutting down the FBI’s Washington headquarters and called for ridding the federal government of “conspirators”, raising alarm that he might seek to wield the FBI’s significant investigative powers as an instrument of retribution against Mr Trump’s perceived enemies. Mr Patel said in a statement Wednesday that he was looking forward to “a smooth transition. I will be ready to serve the American people on day one”.

Beirut: Israel and Lebanese armed group Hezbollah are set to implement a ceasefire on Wednesday at 1pm (AEDT) as part of a US-proposed deal for a 60-day truce to end more than a year of hostilities. The text of the deal has not been published and Reuters has not seen a draft. Israeli soldiers organise equipment as they stand on a tank near the border with Lebanon in northern Israel. Credit: Getty Images US President Joe Biden announced the deal, saying it was designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities. Israel’s security cabinet has approved it and it will be put to the whole cabinet for review. Lebanon Prime Minister Najib Mikati welcomed the deal, which Hezbollah approved last week. The agreement, negotiated by US mediator Amos Hochstein, is five pages long and includes 13 sections, according to a senior Lebanese political source with direct knowledge of the matter. Hezbollah fighters carry the coffin of a colleague. The Lebanese group is expected to leave its position in southern Lebanon to move north. Credit: AP Here is a summary of its key provisions. Halt to hostilities The halt to hostilities is set to begin at 4am local time (2am GMT) on Wednesday, Biden announced, with both sides expected to cease fire by Wednesday morning.Biden team briefed Trump transition on Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire

None

What does Big Tech hope to gain from warming up to Trump?NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Married couples across the U.S. have had access to no-fault divorce for more than 50 years, an option many call crucial to supporting domestic abuse victims and key to preventing already crowded family courts from drowning in complicated divorce proceedings. But some advocates for women worried as old comments from now Vice President-elect JD Vance circulated during the presidential campaign opposing no-fault divorce. After President-elect Donald Trump and Vance won the election, warnings began popping up on social media urging women who might be considering divorce to "pull the trigger" while they still could. Some attorneys posted saying they saw a spike in calls from women seeking divorce consultations. Donald and Ivana Trump pose in May 1988 outside the Federal Courthouse in New York after she was sworn in as a United States citizen. Trump — who is twice-divorced — hasn't championed overhauling the country's divorce laws, but in 2021 Vance lamented that divorce is too easily accessible, as have conservative podcasters and others. "We've run this experiment in real time and what we have is a lot of very, very real family dysfunction that's making our kids unhappy," Vance said during a speech at a Christian high school in California, where he criticized people being able to "shift spouses like they change their underwear." Marriage rates held steady but divorce rates of women age 15 and older declined from 2012 to 2022, according to U.S. Census Bureau data released in October. Despite concerns, even those who want to make divorces harder to get say they don't expect big, swift changes. There is not a national coordinated effort underway. States determine their own divorce laws, so national leaders can't directly change policy. "Even in some of the so-called red states, it hasn't gotten anywhere," said Beverly Willett, co-chair of the Coalition for Divorce Reform, whose group unsuccessfully attempted to convince states to repeal their no-fault divorce laws. A couple exchanges wedding bands Oct. 11, 2018, at City Hall in Philadelphia. Mark A. Smith, a political science professor at the University of Washington, said while many Americans became accustomed to no-fault divorce being an option, Vance's previous comments on making it more difficult to separate from a spouse could help jump-start that effort. "Even though he's not directly proposing a policy, it's a topic that hasn't gotten a ton of discussion in the last 15 years," Smith said. "And so to have a national profile politician talk that way is noteworthy." Meanwhile, Republican Party platforms in Texas and Nebraska were amended in 2022 to call for the removal of no-fault divorce. Louisiana's Republican Party considered something similar this year but declined to do so. A handful of proposals were introduced in conservative-led statehouses over the years, but all immediately stalled after they were filed. In January, Oklahoma Republican Sen. Dusty Deevers introduced legislation that would have removed married couples from filing for divorce on the grounds of incompatibility. Deevers backed the bill after writing a piece declaring no-fault divorce was an "abolition of marital obligation." Sen. JD Vance smiles as his wife Usha Vance applauds Nov. 6 at an election-night watch party at the Palm Beach Convention Center in West Palm Beach, Fla. Similarly, in South Carolina, two Republican lawmakers in 2023 filed a bill that would have required both spouses to file for a no-fault divorce application rather than just one. In South Dakota, a Republican lawmaker attempted to remove irreconcilable difference as grounds for divorce since 2020. None of the sponsors of these bills responded to interview requests from The Associated Press. All are members of their state's conservative Freedom Caucus. Nevertheless, some Democratic lawmakers say they remain worried about the future of no-fault divorce. They point to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the constitutional right to abortion in 2022 as an example of a long-accepted option that was revoked through a decades-long effort. "When you choose to be silent, you allow for this to creep in," said Democratic South Dakota Rep. Linda Duba. "These are the bills that gain a foothold because you choose to be silent." Before California became the first state to adopt a no-fault divorce option in 1969, married couples had to prove their spouse violated one of the approved "faults" outlined in their state's divorce law or risk a judge denying their divorce, said Joanna Grossman, a law professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. Qualified reasons varied from state to state, but largely included infidelity, incarceration or abandonment. Donald and Marla Trump wave to photographers Dec. 20, 1993, as they enter their wedding reception in New York's Plaza Hotel. The system was a particular burden on domestic violence victims, who are often women who could be stuck in dangerous marriages while they try to prove their partner's abuse in court through expensive and lengthy legal proceedings. "If there was any evidence that the couple both wanted to get divorced that was supposed to be denied because divorce was not something you got because you wanted it, it was something you got because you've been wronged in a way that the state thought was significant," Grossman said. To date, every state in the U.S. adopted a no-fault divorce option. However, 33 states still have a list of approved "faults" to file as grounds for divorce — ranging from adultery to felony conviction. In 17 states, married people only have the option of choosing no-fault divorce to end their marriages. Photo Credit: shisu_ka / Shutterstock Marriage—and divorce—in the U.S. today are starkly different than in earlier eras of the country’s history. A series of economic, legal, and social shifts reshaped marriage in the second half of the 20th century. outside of the home in the post-World War II era, which provided avenues to financial security and independence outside of marriage. Greater emphasis on and career development have led young people to wait longer to enter marriage. States began to adopt throughout the 1960s and 1970s that made it easier to end a marriage. Meanwhile, have made it more common for couples to cohabitate, combine finances, and raise children prior to getting married—or without getting married at all. These trends have contributed to a decline in the overall number of marriages and to delays in when people get married for the first time. In the U.S., there are currently only , compared to 10.9 five decades ago. For those who do choose to get married, the age of first marriage is happening later. As late as the early 1970s, the median age for a first marriage in the U.S. was just 22. By 2018, that figure had increased to 28.8. These shifts have also affected how likely married couples are to stay together. As women entered the workforce in the mid-20th century and feminism and the sexual revolution took hold, rates of divorce rose quickly throughout the 1960s and 1970s. From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate per 1,000 people in the U.S. more than doubled from 2.2 to 5.2. But the rate began to fall steadily after 1980, and as of 2018, the rate of divorce had dropped to 2.9 per 1,000 people. The between rates of divorce and age at first marriage has been borne out over time, but it also explains geographic differences in rates of divorce. Today, most of the states with the lowest rates of divorce are also those with a higher median age for marriage. States like New Jersey, New York, California, and Massachusetts all stand out for having fewer than 10% of adults divorced and an age at first marriage above 30. One exception to this is Utah, which has the lowest overall median age for first marriage at 25.5 but also the third-lowest share of divorced adults at 9%, likely due in part to the state’s strong religious ties to the . In contrast, Maine and Nevada lead all states in the share of the population currently divorced at 13.9% and 13.8%, respectively. And at the local level, many of the cities with the highest levels of divorce are found in Florida, Appalachia, and the Southwest. The data used in this analysis is from the U.S. Census Bureau’s . To determine the most divorced locations, researchers at calculated the percentage of adults currently divorced. In the event of a tie, the location with the higher percentage of adults currently separated was ranked higher. To improve relevance, only cities with at least 100,000 residents were included. Additionally, cities were grouped into cohorts based on population size: small (100,000–149,999), midsize (150,000–349,999), and large (350,000 or more). Here are the most divorced cities in the U.S. Photo Credit: Jacob Boomsma / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Sean Pavone / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Sean Pavone / Shutterstock Photo Credit: photo.ua / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Jonny Trego / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Tupungato / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Sean Pavone / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Kevin J King / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Sean Pavone / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Galina Savina / Shutterstock Photo Credit: f11photo / Shutterstock Photo Credit: CHARLES MORRA / Shutterstock Photo Credit: LHBLLC / Shutterstock Photo Credit: Valiik30 / Shutterstock Photo Credit: turtix / Shutterstock Stay up-to-date on the latest in local and national government and political topics with our newsletter.