online game of the generals

online game of the generals NEW YORK, Dec. 22, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of common stock of Enphase Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: ENPH) between April 25, 2023 and October 22, 2024, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than February 11, 2025. SO WHAT: If you purchased Enphase common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Enphase Energy class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=25593 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than February 11, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts, about Enphase’s business and operations. Specifically, defendants systematically overstated Enphase’s ability to maintain its pricing levels and market share for microinverter products in Europe in the face of competition from low-cost, Chinese alternatives. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the Enphase class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=25593 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm , on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/ . Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. ------------------------------- Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.comGrasping at playoff hopes, Dolphins face downtrodden Browns

Trump asks Supreme Court to delay TikTok ban so he can weigh in after he takes officeBy Ross Cristantiello Earlier this month, the state Civil Service Commission vacated the termination of a Boston police officer who was fired for posting tweets in support of Donald Trump while in Washington, D.C. for the Jan. 6, 2021 “Stop the Steal” rally. The commission concluded that officer Joseph Abasciano did not engage in misconduct on Jan. 6, and that there was no just cause for his termination. Two internal BPD investigations in 2021 determined that Abasciano did not violate the department’s rules. But in 2022, new BPD leadership reopened Abasciano’s file and came to a drastically different conclusion: that he should be fired for “conduct unbecoming.” In its recent decision , the commission favored the two earlier investigations. The third review is “far less thorough, more subjective, exudes a tinge of being result-driven and fails to sufficiently explain how the two starkly different conclusions can be reconciled,” Commissioner Paul Stein wrote. The commission, therefore, allowed Abasciano to appeal his termination. The specifics of what this means for him will be determined at a later date. “The scope of the relief, if any, financial or otherwise” must be adjudicated “in another forum with authority to interpret and enforce the applicable provisions” of the laws involved, Stein wrote. Abasciano, an Iraq War veteran who joined the BPD in 2007, was spoken of highly by colleagues and had no prior disciplinary issues. He accumulated several notable injuries during his time as a Boston police officer, and in July 2020 he began using his sick leave. He was approved of continuous leave through Jan. 23, 2021, according to the report. He attended the Jan. 6 rally while on leave, with another off-duty officer. They attended Trump’s speech, but did not participate in the riot at the Capitol. In writing the decision, Stein specifically stated that it does not “overlook the fact that most citizens, including members of this Commission, rightly reject the Appellant’s misinformed opinions contained in his tweets about the 2020 election and its aftermath.” “This decision should not be construed to condone or turn a blind eye to the unconscionable criminal acts committed by those who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021,” Stein wrote later in the report. In one tweet, Abasciano replied to a post from Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling , writing “I can’t wait to see you dragged away in handcuffs.” In another tweet from Jan. 6, Abasciano wrote “today there will be only two parties in America. Traitors and Patriots!” per the report. The tweets were posted from an account Absciano kept anonymous. He later told investigators that he had been targeted by harassment and vandalism at his home in the past due to his support for Trump during the 2020 election. Abasciano had shut down his Facebook account, but kept using his Twitter account because he believed its anonymity was secure, according to the report. After Trump finished speaking that day, Abasciano and the other officer slowly began walking to the Capitol. It reportedly took more than an hour to reach a grassy area near the Capitol, and by that time a mob had already broken into the building. They observed the attack on the Capitol from afar, and never crossed any barricades or lines, the reported noted. After seeing some of the violence, they drove back to Boston. Abasciano’s link to the anonymous twitter account was revealed by another BPD officer who was not on good terms with Abasciano, he told investigators. The two 2021 investigations were then initiated, one from the BPD’s Anti-Corruption Division (ACD) and another from the department’s Internal Affairs Division (IAD). The former determined Abasciano did not personally participate in the Capitol attack or commit any criminal acts, while the latter concluded that Abasciano’s tweets were not intended to incite or condone violence and that they did not impact his ability to do his job. Mayor Michelle Wu appointed Police Commissioner Michael Cox in the summer of 2022. About a month after being sworn in, Cox assigned a new head of IAD and directed them to review several files that needed a decision by Cox. Abasciano’s file was the largest, according to the report. By December, Cox received a “non-concurrance” letter from the IAD that accused Abasciano of misconduct. BPD officials determined that Abasciano’s tweets negatively impacted the department and actually did warrant disciplinary action. So Cox sent a letter to Abasciano in March 2023 informing him that his termination was effective immediately. At a commission hearing after Abasciano’s firing, Boston police Captain Sean Martin answered questions about Abasciano, who he had supervised for about five years. Martin said he knew Abasciano to hold “very conservative” political views, but that this never led to bias in his policing. “Basically, these tweets . . . are extremely, extremely passionate about politics. He is very emotional, but looking at these, I don’t see how, given my history, my experience, and the time I supervised and worked with Joe, I don’t see how this – I have never seen this impact his ability to do his job or how he treated anybody,” Martin said when asked about Abasciano’s Jan. 6 tweets, per the report. Ultimately, the commission concluded that Abasciano’s tweets were constitutionally-protected instances of private free speech and that they could not be sanctioned as “conduct unbecoming.” The commission found multiple issues with the 2022 findings, and said that the preponderance of evidence supports the 2021 findings. “In sum, the decision in this appeal comes down to choosing between conflicting reports, with starkly different conclusions, completed by the same Department at different times,” Stein wrote. “Ultimately, the BPD’s 2021 ACD and IAD reports were more thorough, more objective and more reflective of the actual facts associated with the Appellant’s actions on January 6, 2021.” Ross Cristantiello Ross Cristantiello, a general assignment news reporter for Boston.com since 2022, covers local politics, crime, the environment, and more. Boston.com Today Sign up to receive the latest headlines in your inbox each morning. Be civil. Be kind.

( MENAFN - Gulf Times) In recent years, the concept of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) has gained significant attention from the international community, including the UN and the G20, as a new policy paradigm for development. But understanding the risks of DPI is crucial to ensuring that its potential benefits materialise. The risks stem from the fact that“digital public infrastructure” lacks a clear definition. The term encompasses the many digital technologies that serve as economic and social infrastructure, from digital identification and payment systems to data exchanges and health services. As a policy initiative, though, DPI refers to a vague vision of using these technologies to serve the public interest. This could result in the Internet and technological innovation working for everyone – or just as easily turn them into tools for political control. In discussions about DPI, policymakers often point to cases that highlight how technology and connectivity can spur development. They frequently cite India's Unified Payments Interface, which has expanded financial inclusion and reduced the costs of digital transactions for its hundreds of millions of users. It is also understood that such infrastructure is to be built with Digital Public Goods (DPGs), a concept that encompasses open-source software, open standards, and other non-proprietary components. This definition is partly intended to position DPIs as being“for the public” but also to enhance competition and mitigate concentrations of power in the global digital economy. Lastly, proponents point out that DPI could bolster international co-operation, particularly as the 20-year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) approaches. This important UN initiative has provided the framework for countries to collaborate on digital development. Although authoritarian states have previously sought to assert greater control over the Internet's governance during these negotiations, a focus on promoting DPI could avoid this politicised debate and instead foster a constructive agenda to bridge digital divides. But basing policy on such an ill-defined concept poses significant risks. Ideally, governments would convene other stakeholders to create an enabling environment for DPI and safeguard users' rights and interests. It is easy to imagine, however, that some governments will place their own interests above civil liberties and fundamental rights, using this infrastructure for surveillance and targeting in the name of law enforcement or national security. An especially pernicious example could involve the monitoring and regulation of individual behaviour through dystopian social-credit systems. Moreover, while many proponents hope that DPI could chip away at Big Tech's outsize power, it has also been associated with narratives of digital sovereignty that could contribute to the Internet's fragmentation – a systemic threat to global communications. For example, one can imagine scenarios in which some governments challenge the multi-stakeholder model for governing global Internet resources like IP addresses and domain names on the grounds that they constitute DPIs. The policy vision of DPI will continue to evolve, and ongoing discussions, it is hoped, will help identify and clarify further opportunities and risks. Initiatives such as the UN's Universal DPI Safeguards Framework, which seeks to establish guardrails for DPI, are a promising start. But much more must be done. For example, the UN's framework has recognised the need for continuous learning to ensure that the right safeguards are in place. As the concept of DPI gains traction in the UN system and other multilateral organisations, vigorous and informed debate regarding its potential advantages – and pitfalls – will be essential. With clear-cut policy guidelines and protections, we can help prevent these technologies from becoming tools for surveillance and repression, ensure that everyone benefits from the burgeoning digital economy, and keep the Internet open, globally connected, and secure. – Project Syndicate MENAFN23122024000067011011ID1109025649 Legal Disclaimer: MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.Michael Saylor ‘s MicroStrategy Inc. MSTR fell in the last five sessions amid heightened volatility due to concerns over hurdles in its S&P 500 inclusion and falling Bitcoin BTC/USD prices . What Happened: While MicroStrategy meets the S&P 500’s market capitalization and trading volume benchmark requirements, it doesn’t fulfill the earnings criteria, said Benchmark, according to a report by Investing.com. In order to be listed on the S&P 500, a company is required to have positive earnings in the latest quarter. Additionally, the listing criterion states that it should have had positive earnings in the preceding four quarters, as well. The company also faces an issue wherein its Bitcoin holdings cannot be accounted for in its financial statements. Benchmark analyst Mark Palmer says that MicroStrategy is poised to adopt new Financial Accounting Standards Board guidelines for Bitcoin accounting in Q1 2025. This change is anticipated to immediately boost the company’s earnings, potentially aligning it with the S&P 500’s inclusion standards. By meeting these criteria, MicroStrategy could significantly broaden its investor base. This includes institutional investors and index funds tracking the S&P 500, which could increase demand for the company’s stock. See Also: Hawkish Powell Aside, This Analyst Expects 4 Fed Rate Cuts In 2025: Here’s Why Why It Matters: MicroStrategy stock closed 14.44% lower over the last five sessions at $364.20 on Friday, according to Benzinga Pro data. For context, Bitcoin has fallen by 9.95% to $93,912.90 over the last five days. Whereas, iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF IBIT dropped by 4.32% in the same period. MicroStrategy now controls nearly 2.1% of the total Bitcoin supply. Benchmark has assigned a “Buy” rating to the company with a $650 price target. This valuation is derived from a sum-of-the-parts analysis, factoring in the potential value of the company’s Bitcoin holdings in 2026. They anticipate a Bitcoin price of $225,000 by the end of that year. Despite the challenges with S&P 500 inclusion, the shares of the company will be listed on the Nasdaq 100 on Monday, Dec. 23. This is possible because companies eligible for inclusion are primarily chosen according to their market capitalization ranking on the last trading day of November. What Are Other Analysts Saying: About 12 analysts tracked by Benzinga have a consensus “Buy” rating on the stock with a price target of $449.5 per share. The three most-recent analyst ratings between Bernstein, TD Cowen, and Barclays imply a 76.82% upside for MSTR. Read Next: Nike’s New CEO Blames Promotions For Declining Profits, Says Turnaround Efforts May Hurt As Company Moves To Clear Excess Inventory: ‘We Lost Our Obsession With Sport’ Photo courtesy: Shutterstock © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.A 9th telecoms firm has been hit by a massive Chinese espionage campaign, the White House says

Middle East latest: Israel bombs hundreds of sites across Syria as army pushes into border zone

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina's current governor and his successor tacked on another lawsuit Monday disputing a key provision within a GOP law that erodes the powers of several incoming Democratic state leaders — the latest in a longstanding power struggle between North Carolina's executive and legislative branches over who controls the state's elections. The challenges one of the law's core power shifts that move the ability to appoint members of the North Carolina State Board of Elections from the governor's authority to the state auditor's office — which will be run by Republican Dave Boliek next year. Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper and Gov.-elect Josh Stein, who currently serves as the state attorney general, filed the suit in Wake County Superior Court on Monday, saying in the complaint that the provision is unconstitutional and violates the separation of powers. The change to state election board appointments will take place next spring if it isn't blocked in court. The state elections board would likely remain under GOP control for the next few years and would trickle down to county boards as well. “We have had the same structure for our state board of elections for nearly a century and it has served North Carolina well, with fair and secure elections across our state through every cycle,” Cooper said in a news release Monday. “These blatantly partisan efforts to give control over elections boards to a newly elected Republican will create distrust in our elections process and serve no legitimate purpose.” The suit from Cooper and Stein is the the pair has levied against the GOP-controlled state legislature concerning the law. Cooper and Stein are also contesting another provision that prevents the governor from choosing his State Highway Patrol commander. Those alterations to the governor's powers were to several statewide offices that Democrats won in November and will preside over next year — such as attorney general, state schools superintendent and lieutenant governor. If the law withstands the court challenges, it would further underscore the over the other two branches of government since Republicans took control of the General Assembly more than a decade ago. Last year, GOP supermajorities in both the House and Senate firmed up power even more. Pending , Republicans could lose their supermajority if Democratic challenger Bryan Cohn's attempt to oust incumbent Republican Rep. Frank Sossamon proves successful. That would give Stein a slightly more effective veto stamp on future Republican legislation if Democratic lawmakers stay unified. Republican legislators passed the in both chambers earlier this month — not without scathing disapproval from crowds of protesters in the building. The bill drew the ire of House and Senate Democrats, as well as some community organizers, who denounced it as a “power grab.” They also criticized Republican lawmakers for tying the power shifts to disaster relief funding for western North Carolina in Hurricane Helene's aftermath. Most of the $252 million in recovery funds included in the law can't be spent until the next time the General Assembly acts. But GOP legislators defended the bill, with incoming House Speaker Destin Hall saying during the House vote that the changes are within the legislature's constitutional right. Republicans also point to , such as weakening the state’s first GOP governor in 1972, as reasons necessitating the legislation. Spokespeople for Senate leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Tim Moore — who are both defendants listed in the lawsuit — did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday evening. A state elections board spokesperson also did not immediately respond. Changes to the state elections board aren't a first for GOP lawmakers. Previous attempts have been , including a suit last year that would move board appointment authority . Berger and Moore's attorneys moved to dismiss that case last week, and the new lawsuit from Cooper and Stein seeks to replace it. Makiya Seminera, The Associated PressNoneGerman President Steinmeier calls for unity in Christmas address

Dangote Sugar Refinery has unveiled its Series 6 and 7 commercial paper offerings, seeking to raise up to N50 billion from the debt market. This follows the company’s successful issuance of its Series 4 and 5 commercial papers in mid-June, which collectively raised N42.79 billion at competitive rates of 23% and 25%, reflecting strong investor confidence. Series 4, with a tenure of 181 days, raised N12.93 billion, while Series 5, with a longer tenure of 265 days, raised a larger sum of N29.86 billion. Related Stories FMCGs record 133% increase in finance cost in 2024 Dangote Sugar posts N104.6 billion pre-tax loss in second quarter of 2024, amidst 140% rise in raw materials cost Building on this momentum, Dangote Sugar has now returned to the market as part of its N150 billion debt issuance program, aimed at bolstering its working capital. Announced in December 2024, the Series 6 and 7 papers highlight the company’s ongoing commitment to leveraging Nigeria’s capital markets for strategic financing. According to reports, the subscription window for Dangote Sugar’s Series 6 and 7 commercial papers closes on December 12, 2024, offering investors a chance to support its expansion goals. The series 6 and 7 commercial papers form part of Dangote Sugar’s N150 billion debt program. Series 6, with a 180-day tenor, is offered at a 24.9 per cent discount rate, providing an implied yield of 28.5% to investors. Similarly, Series 7, with a 270-day tenor, is priced at a 24.55 per cent discount rate, offering an implied yield of 30%. The offer remains open to the investing public until December 12, 2024. In mid-June 2024, Dangote Sugar Refinery successfully issued its Series 4 and 5 commercial papers, raising a total of N42.79 billion. These papers were offered under the company’s N150 billion commercial paper issuance program, with Series 4 and 5 carrying discount rates of 23% and 25%, respectively. Series 4 raised N12.93 billion with a 181-day maturity, while Series 5 raised N29.86 billion for a 265-day tenor. According to a notice from the company, the issuance attracted a diverse range of investors, including pension and non-pension asset managers, as well as institutional and individual participants. The company initiated its N150 billion debt issuance program in early 2024 with the launch of Series 1, which raised N39.39 billion. This issuance had a 266-day maturity and was offered at a 17.08% discount rate. Building on this, the company issued Series 2 notes, raising N6.15 billion with a 184-day maturity at a 19.84% discount rate. Series 3 marked a significant increase, generating N53.47 billion through 254-day notes at a 21.30% discount rate. With Series 1 to 5, Dangote Sugar has successfully raised a cumulative N141.8 billion, underscoring its ability to tap into Nigeria’s debt markets to fuel its growth and operational needs. In January, Dangote Sugar’s stock surged from an opening price of N57 to close at N67.90, driven by a robust trading volume of 95.1 million shares—a promising start to the year. Yet, the optimism was quickly dampened as bearish pressure took hold in February, pulling the stock back to N57.50, accompanied by a slightly lower trading volume of 81 million shares. The company’s stock faced a rocky period from February to October, as investment sentiment weakened in Nigeria’s industrial and consumer goods sectors. While a brief rally in May, with a trading volume of 35.2 million shares, hinted at recovery, the momentum fizzled out. By October, the stock had dipped to N30.80. Nonetheless, a glimmer of optimism appeared as the stock closed November in positive territory, suggesting a potential rebound from the October low. The company’s ongoing commercial paper program, part of its N150 billion debt issuance initiative, is expected to play a crucial role in stabilizing operations. By raising much-needed capital, Dangote Sugar aims to maintain smooth business activities, enhance performance, and bolster investor confidence, setting the stage for improved market sentiment moving forward.Blockmate Ventures Announces Closing of Strategic Investment and Incentive Grant

Heavy travel day starts with brief grounding of all American Airlines flightsLAS VEGAS — With a restructuring at Andretti Global that pushed Michael Andretti into a smaller role, the chances of his organization landing a Formula 1 team have substantially increased. So much so that F1 and Formula One Management could have a decision to grant the General Motors-backed entry a spot as the 11th team on the grid in the coming weeks. Dan Towriss, now the majority owner of the Andretti organization, was at the Las Vegas Grand Prix on Thursday scoping his chances of entering the top motorsports series in the world. So was the FBI, allegedly, as part of a Department of Justice investigation into why F1 denied the Andretti organization expansion into the series. F1 currently has 10 teams that field 20 cars and only one — the organization owned by California businessman Gene Haas — is an American team. Las Vegas marks the third race this season in the United States, more than any other country, as F1 has exploded in American popularity over the last five years. Even so, Andretti could not get approval from F1 to enter the series. But, the situation changed in September when Andretti scaled back his role with his namesake organization. Now with Towriss in charge, talks have amplified, even though it is not clear what the name of an Andretti-less F1 team would even be. Cadillac would do the engines — but says it won't be ready until 2028 — which means a 2026 Towriss-led F1 team would be GM branded but with a partner engine supplier. Most of the existing teams have been largely opposed to an 11th team entering F1, citing a dilution in prize money and the massive expenses they've already committed to the series. But, Andretti among others believed the teams' position was personal in that they simply didn't like Andretti, who ran 13 races in the 1993 season. His father, Mario, is the 1978 F1 world champion. The Andretti application had already been approved by the FIA, which is F1's ruling body, but later denied by F1 itself. F1 promised to revisit the issue once General Motors had an engine ready to compete. The existing 10 F1 teams have no actual vote or say in if the grid is expanded, which Mercedes boss Toto Wolff reiterated Thursday when The Associated Press asked why the sudden chance of acceptance in a potential 11th team. "We have an obligation, a statutory obligation as directors, to present the standpoint that is the best for our company and for our employees, and we've done that," Wolff said. "I think if a team can add to the championship, particularly if GM decides to come in as a team owner, that is a different story. "And as long as it is creative, that means we're growing the popularity of the sport, we're growing the revenue of the sport, then no team will be ever against it. So I'm putting my hope in there." Wolff has been eager to hear from Towriss directly on what the plans for the organization are now that Andretti has a smaller role. "No one from Andretti or Andretti Global or whatever the name will be has ever spoken to me a single sentence in presentation of what the creative part is," he said. "But they don't need to because the teams don't decide. It is the commercial rights holder, with the FIA, we have no say. If I want to be invited to a party and go to the party, I'm sitting down at the table and telling who I am and why I'm really good fun and sitting here and everybody will enjoy my presence. "That hasn't happened, but you know, that's now my personal point of view, not a professional, because there's nothing we can do, nothing we can say," Wolff continued. "And I don't know the people. I've obviously spoken to Mario. I didn't speak to his son. I didn't speak to any other people that are behind that. I don't know who they are. So I know GM, GM is great." Fred Vasseur, team principal at Ferrari, said he's not opposed to another team if it adds value to F1. "The discussion is between FIA, the team, and FOM. It's not our choice," he said. "For sure, as Toto said, that if it's good for the sport, good for the show, good for the business, and adds value on the sporting side, that we are all OK." Get local news delivered to your inbox!

WEST JORDAN, Utah, Dec. 10, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. ("Sportsman's Warehouse" or the "Company") SPWH today announced third quarter financial results for the thirteen and thirty-nine weeks ended November 2, 2024. "Despite a pressured consumer and complex macroeconomic environment, we focused our efforts on driving sales and achieved growth in our fishing, camping and gift bar categories during the quarter," said Paul Stone, Sportsman's Warehouse President and Chief Executive Officer. "We continue to make progress on our business reset initiatives with a focus on improved in-stocks, in-store and online customer experience and our Great Gear | Great Service program." "To improve our holiday relevancy and drive traffic during the season, we introduced an omni-channel marketing campaign highlighting gear perfect for gifting or for treating yourself, primarily centered around value," continued Stone. "This is a new approach to engaging our customers, which we coupled with an upgraded store experience creating a fully integrated customer experience. As we move through the balance of the holiday season and navigate a pressured consumer environment, we'll continue to prioritize traffic-driving marketing and product pricing initiatives, exceptional customer service and prudent inventory management. Emphasizing the balance sheet and ending the year with positive free cash flow remain our primary objectives." For the thirteen weeks ended November 2, 2024: Net sales were $324.3 million, a decrease of 4.8%, compared to $340.6 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023. The net sales decrease was primarily due to the continued impact of consumer inflationary pressures on discretionary spending, resulting in a decline in store traffic and lower demand across most product categories, particularly in ammunition, apparel and footwear. This decrease, however, was partially offset by year-over-year sales growth in our fishing, camping and optics and accessories departments. Same store sales decreased 5.7% during the third quarter of fiscal year 2024, compared to the third quarter of fiscal year 2023, primarily as a result of the impact of consumer inflationary pressures and recessionary concerns on discretionary spending. Gross profit was $103.1 million, or 31.8% of net sales, compared to $103.2 million or 30.3% of net sales in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023. This 150 basis-point increase, as a percentage of net sales, was primarily driven by improved product margins in our apparel and footwear departments, partially offset by increased freight and shrink. Selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses were $100.0 million, or 30.8% of net sales, compared to $100.1 million, or 29.4% of net sales in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023. Net loss was $(0.4) million, compared to a net loss of $(1.3) million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023. Adjusted net income was $1.4 million, compared to adjusted net loss of $(0.2) million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). Adjusted EBITDA was $16.4 million, compared to $16.2 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). Diluted loss per share was $(0.01), compared to diluted loss per share of $(0.04) in the third quarter of fiscal year 2023. Adjusted diluted earnings per share were $0.04, compared to adjusted diluted loss per share of $(0.01) for the third quarter of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). For the thirty-nine weeks ended November 2, 2024: Net sales were $857.2 million, a decrease of 6.6%, compared to $917.6 million in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023. This net sales decrease was primarily driven by lower demand across most product categories due to current consumer inflationary pressures on discretionary spending. This decrease was partially offset by same store sales growth in our fishing department and the opening of 1 new store since October 28, 2023. Stores that have been open for less than 12 months and were not included in our same store sales, contributed $30.8 million to net sales. Same store sales decreased 9.4% compared to the first nine months of fiscal year 2023, primarily as a result of the same factors noted above that impacted net sales. Gross profit was $266.9 million or 31.1% of net sales, compared to $284.0 million or 31.0% of net sales for the first nine months of fiscal year 2023. This increase, as a percentage of net sales, was primarily due to higher overall product margins, versus last years apparel and footwear clearance events which put pressure on our gross margin, partially offset by increased shrink. SG&A expenses decreased to $288.7 million or 33.6% of net sales, compared with $301.5 million or 32.9% of net sales for the first nine months of fiscal year 2023. This absolute dollar decrease primarily related to our ongoing cost reduction efforts and decision to not open new stores during fiscal year 2024, partially offset by increases in rent and depreciation expenses. The increase as a percentage of net sales was largely due to lower net sales. Net loss was $(24.3) million, compared to net loss of $(20.3) million in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023. Adjusted net loss was $(21.7) million, compared to adjusted net loss of $(16.6) million in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). Adjusted EBITDA was $15.1 million, compared to $19.3 million in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). Diluted loss per share was $(0.65), compared to diluted loss per share of $(0.54) in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023. Adjusted diluted loss per share was $(0.58), compared to adjusted diluted loss per share of $(0.44) in the first nine months of fiscal year 2023 (see "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures"). Balance sheet and capital allocation highlights as of November 2, 2024: The Company ended the third quarter with net debt of $151.3 million, comprised of $130.0 million of borrowings outstanding under the Company's revolving credit facility, $24.0 million of net borrowings outstanding under the Company's term loan facility, and $2.7 million of cash and cash equivalents. Inventory at the end of the third quarter was $438.1 million. Total liquidity was $150.8 million as of the end of the third quarter of fiscal year 2024, comprised of $148.1 million of availability under the Company's revolving credit facility and term loan facility and $2.7 million of cash and cash equivalents. Company Outlook: "Given the current consumer environment and the shift towards value and promotion-driven shopping, we intensified our marketing and advertising campaigns to drive sales, which placed additional pressure on our margins this quarter," said Jeff White, Chief Financial Officer of Sportsman's Warehouse "To ensure strong core product in-stocks and to bring fresh offerings to our stores, we made strategic inventory investments aimed at improving sales during the hunting and holiday seasons. As we progress through the remainder of the year, we will remain disciplined in managing our expenses, and will reduce total inventory levels to generate positive free cash flow. Our mid and long-term objectives will be centered on improving our topline with a focus on margins and profitability." The Company is adjusting its guidance for fiscal year 2024 and expects net sales to be in the range of $1.18 billion to $1.20 billion, adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of $23 million to $29 million and total inventory to be below $350 million. The low end of the adjusted EBITDA range still assumes positive free cash flow for the full year. The Company now expects capital expenditures for 2024 to be in the range of $17 million to $20 million, primarily consisting of technology investments relating to merchandising and store productivity. No new store openings for the remainder of fiscal year 2024 are currently anticipated and we plan to open one new store in fiscal year 2025. The Company has not reconciled expected adjusted EBITDA for fiscal year 2024 to GAAP net income because the Company does not provide guidance for net (loss) income and is not able to provide a reconciliation to net (loss) income without unreasonable effort. The Company is not able to estimate net (loss) income on a forward-looking basis without unreasonable efforts due to the variability and complexity with respect to the charges excluded from Adjusted EBITDA, including stock-based compensation expense. Conference Call Information A conference call to discuss third quarter 2024 financial results is scheduled for December 10, 2024, at 5:00 PM Eastern Time. The conference call will be held via webcast and may be accessed via the Investor Relations section of the Company's website at www.sportsmans.com . Non-GAAP Financial Measures This press release includes the following financial measures defined as non-GAAP financial measures by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and that are not calculated in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"): adjusted net (loss) income, adjusted diluted (loss) earnings per share and adjusted EBITDA. The Company defines adjusted net (loss) income as net (loss) income plus expenses incurred relating to director and officer transition costs, costs related to the implementation of our cost reduction plan, costs related to legal settlements and related fees and expenses, and fees and expenses related to a settlement in the cancellation of a contract related to our information technology systems. Net (loss) income is the most comparable GAAP financial measure to adjusted net (loss) income. The Company defines adjusted diluted (loss) earnings per share as adjusted net (loss) income divided by diluted weighted average shares outstanding. Diluted (loss) earnings per share is the most comparable GAAP financial measure to adjusted diluted (loss) earnings per share. The Company defines Adjusted EBITDA as net (loss) income plus interest expense, income tax (benefit) expense, depreciation and amortization, stock-based compensation expense, director and officer transition costs, costs related to the implementation of our cost reduction plan, a legal settlement and related fees and expenses, and fees and expenses related to a settlement in the cancellation of a contract related to our information technology systems. Net (loss) income is the most comparable GAAP financial measure to adjusted EBITDA. The Company has reconciled these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures under "GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures" in this release. As noted above, the Company has not provided a reconciliation of fiscal year 2024 guidance for Adjusted EBITDA, in reliance on the unreasonable efforts exception provided under Item 10(e)(1)(i)(B) of Regulation S-K. The Company believes that these non-GAAP financial measures not only provide its management with comparable financial data for internal financial analysis but also provide meaningful supplemental information to investors and are frequently used by analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of companies in the Company's industry. Specifically, these non-GAAP financial measures allow investors to better understand the performance of the Company's business and facilitate a more meaningful comparison of its diluted (loss) earnings per share and actual results on a period-over-period basis. The Company has provided this information as a means to evaluate the results of its ongoing operations. Management uses this information as additional measurement tools for purposes of business decision-making, including evaluating store performance, developing budgets and managing expenditures. Other companies in the Company's industry may calculate these items differently than the Company does. Each of these measures is not a measure of performance under GAAP and should not be considered as a substitute for the most directly comparable financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP. Non-GAAP financial measures have limitations as analytical tools, and investors should not consider them in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of the Company's results as reported under GAAP. The Company's management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures allow investors to evaluate the Company's operating performance and compare its results of operations from period to period on a consistent basis by excluding items that management does not believe are indicative of the Company's core operating performance. The presentation of such measures, which may include adjustments to exclude unusual or non-recurring items, should not be construed as an inference that the Company's future results, cash flows or leverage will be unaffected by other unusual or non-recurring items. Forward-Looking Statements This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 as contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements in this release include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our progress on our business reset initiatives; our prioritization of traffic-driving marketing and product pricing initiatives, exceptional customer service and prudent inventory management; our emphasis on the balance sheet and ending the year with positive free cash flow; our ability to manage expenses, reduce total inventory levels to generate positive free cash flow; and our guidance for net sales and Adjusted EBITDA for fiscal year 2024. Investors can identify these statements by the fact that they use words such as "aim," "anticipate," "assume," "believe," "can have," "could," "due," "estimate," "expect," "goal," "intend," "likely," "may," "objective," "plan," "positioned," "potential," "predict," "should," "target," "will," "would" and similar terms and phrases. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about our business and the industry in which we operate and our management's beliefs and assumptions. We derive many of our forward-looking statements from our own operating budgets and forecasts, which are based upon many detailed assumptions. While we believe that our assumptions are reasonable, we caution that predicting the impact of known factors is very difficult, and we cannot anticipate all factors that could affect our actual results. The Company cannot assure investors that future developments affecting the Company will be those that it has anticipated. Actual results may differ materially from these expectations due to many factors including, but not limited to: current and future government regulations, in particular regulations relating to the sale of firearms and ammunition, which may impact the supply and demand for the Company's products and ability to conduct its business; the Company's retail-based business model which is impacted by general economic and market conditions and economic, market and financial uncertainties that may cause a decline in consumer spending; the Company's concentration of stores in the Western United States which makes the Company susceptible to adverse conditions in this region, and could affect the Company's sales and cause the Company's operating results to suffer; the highly fragmented and competitive industry in which the Company operates and the potential for increased competition; changes in consumer demands, including regional preferences, which we may not be able to identify and respond to in a timely manner; the Company's entrance into new markets or operations in existing markets, including the Company's plans to open additional stores in future periods, which may not be successful; the Company's implementation of a plan to reduce expenses in response to adverse macroeconomic conditions, including an increased focus on financial discipline and rigor throughout the Company's organization; impact of general macroeconomic conditions, such as labor shortages, inflation, elevated interest rates, economic slowdowns, and recessions or market corrections; and other factors that are set forth in the Company's filings with the SEC, including under the caption "Risk Factors" in the Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 3, 2024, which was filed with the SEC on April 4, 2024, and the Company's other public filings made with the SEC and available at www.sec.gov . If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if any of the Company's assumptions prove incorrect, the Company's actual results may vary in material respects from those projected in these forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement made by the Company in this release speaks only as of the date on which the Company makes it. Factors or events that could cause the Company's actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for the Company to predict all of them. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by any applicable securities laws. About Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. Sportsman's Warehouse Holdings, Inc. is an outdoor specialty retailer focused on meeting the needs of the seasoned outdoor veteran, the first-time participant, and everyone in between. We provide outstanding gear and exceptional service to inspire outdoor memories. For press releases and certain additional information about the Company, visit the Investor Relations section of the Company's website at www.sportsmans.com . Investor Contact: Riley Timmer Vice President, Investor Relations Sportsman's Warehouse (801) 304-2816 investors@sportsmans.com SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands, except per share data) For the Thirteen Weeks Ended November 2, 2024 % of net sales October 28, 2023 % of net sales YOY Variance Net sales $ 324,261 100.0 % $ 340,569 100.0 % $ (16,308 ) Cost of goods sold 221,173 68.2 % 237,384 69.7 % (16,211 ) Gross profit 103,088 31.8 % 103,185 30.3 % (97 ) Operating expenses: Selling, general and administrative expenses 99,973 30.8 % 100,113 29.4 % (140 ) Income from operations 3,115 1.0 % 3,072 0.9 % 43 Interest expense 3,317 1.1 % 3,944 1.2 % (627 ) Other losses - 0.0 % - 0.0 % - Loss before income taxes (202 ) (0.1 %) (872 ) (0.3 %) 670 Income tax expense 162 0.0 % 459 0.1 % (297 ) Net loss $ (364 ) (0.1 %) $ (1,331 ) (0.4 %) $ 967 Loss per share Basic $ (0.01 ) $ (0.04 ) $ 0.03 Diluted $ (0.01 ) $ (0.04 ) $ 0.03 Weighted average shares outstanding Basic 37,869 37,393 476 Diluted 37,869 37,393 476 SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands, except per share data) For the Thirty-Nine Weeks Ended November 2, 2024 % of net sales October 28, 2023 % of net sales YOY Variance Net sales $ 857,235 100.0 % $ 917,593 100.0 % $ (60,358 ) Cost of goods sold 590,343 68.9 % 633,547 69.0 % (43,204 ) Gross profit 266,892 31.1 % 284,046 31.0 % (17,154 ) Operating expenses: Selling, general and administrative expenses 288,727 33.6 % 301,450 32.9 % (12,723 ) Loss from operations (21,835 ) (2.5 %) (17,404 ) (1.9 %) (4,431 ) Interest expense 9,408 1.1 % 9,518 1.0 % (110 ) Other losses 457 0.1 % - 0.0 % 457 Loss before income taxes (31,700 ) (3.7 %) (26,922 ) (2.9 %) (4,778 ) Income tax benefit (7,364 ) (0.9 %) (6,664 ) (0.7 %) (700 ) Net loss $ (24,336 ) (2.8 %) $ (20,258 ) (2.2 %) $ (4,078 ) Loss per share Basic $ (0.65 ) $ (0.54 ) $ (0.11 ) Diluted $ (0.65 ) $ (0.54 ) $ (0.11 ) Weighted average shares outstanding Basic 37,729 37,500 229 Diluted 37,729 37,500 229 SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands, except par value data) November 2, February 3, 2024 2024 Assets Current assets: Cash and cash equivalents $ 2,666 $ 3,141 Accounts receivable, net 1,447 2,119 Income tax receivable 523 — Merchandise inventories 438,136 354,710 Prepaid expenses and other 19,745 20,078 Total current assets 462,517 380,048 Operating lease right of use asset 320,729 309,377 Property and equipment, net 175,181 194,452 Goodwill 1,496 1,496 Deferred tax asset 7,480 505 Definite lived intangibles, net 282 327 Total assets $ 967,685 $ 886,205 Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity Current liabilities: Accounts payable $ 112,690 $ 56,122 Accrued expenses 95,094 83,665 Income taxes payable — 126 Operating lease liability, current 48,866 48,693 Revolving line of credit 130,042 126,043 Total current liabilities 386,692 314,649 Long-term liabilities: Term loan, net 23,969 — Operating lease liability, noncurrent 313,454 307,000 Total long-term liabilities 337,423 307,000 Total liabilities 724,115 621,649 Commitments and contingencies Stockholders' equity: Preferred stock, $.01 par value; 20,000 shares authorized; 0 shares issued and outstanding — — Common stock, $.01 par value; 100,000 shares authorized; 37,957 and 37,529 shares issued and outstanding, respectively 379 375 Additional paid-in capital 85,144 81,798 Accumulated earnings 158,047 182,383 Total stockholders' equity 243,570 264,556 Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $ 967,685 $ 886,205 SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. Condensed Consolidated Statements Cash Flows (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands) Thirty-Nine Weeks Ended November 2, October 28, 2024 2023 Cash flows from operating activities: Net loss $ (24,336 ) $ (20,258 ) Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash used in operating activities: Depreciation of property and equipment 30,491 28,367 Amortization of discount on debt and deferred financing fees 217 114 Amortization of definite lived intangible 45 45 Loss on asset dispositions 501 — Noncash lease expense 3,239 24,493 Deferred income taxes (6,975 ) (6,664 ) Stock-based compensation 3,438 3,341 Change in operating assets and liabilities, net of amounts acquired: Accounts receivable, net 673 (1,051 ) Operating lease liabilities (7,964 ) (10,539 ) Merchandise inventories (83,426 ) (47,196 ) Prepaid expenses and other 220 (7,403 ) Accounts payable 56,128 26,081 Accrued expenses 9,727 (4,413 ) Income taxes payable and receivable (649 ) (1,554 ) Net cash used in operating activities (18,671 ) (16,637 ) Cash flows from investing activities: Purchase of property and equipment, net of amounts acquired (11,305 ) (71,170 ) Proceeds from sale of property and equipment 55 — Net cash used in investing activities (11,250 ) (71,170 ) Cash flows from financing activities: Net borrowings on line of credit 3,999 97,885 Borrowings on term loan 25,000 — Increase (Decrease) in book overdraft 1,670 (5,611 ) Proceeds from issuance of common stock per employee stock purchase plan 208 456 Payments to acquire treasury stock — (2,748 ) Payment of withholdings on restricted stock units (296 ) (1,649 ) Payment of deferred financing costs and discount on term loan (1,135 ) — Net cash provided by financing activities 29,446 88,333 Net change in cash and cash equivalents (475 ) 526 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 3,141 2,389 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 2,666 $ 2,915 SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands, except per share data) The following table presents the reconciliations of (i) GAAP net loss to adjusted net loss and (ii) GAAP diluted loss per share to adjusted diluted loss per share: For the Thirteen Weeks Ended For the Thirty-Nine Weeks Ended November 2, 2024 October 28, 2023 November 2, 2024 October 28, 2023 Numerator: Net loss $ (364 ) $ (1,331 ) $ (24,336 ) $ (20,258 ) Director and officer transition costs (1) 279 1,180 709 3,067 Cancelled contract (2) 205 - 911 - Cost reduction plan (3) - 351 - 1,216 Legal settlement (4) 1,750 - 1,750 687 Less tax benefit (519 ) (398 ) (783 ) (1,292 ) Adjusted net loss $ 1,351 $ (198 ) $ (21,749 ) $ (16,580 ) Denominator: Diluted weighted average shares outstanding 37,869 37,393 37,729 37,500 Reconciliation of loss per share: Diluted loss per share: $ (0.01 ) $ (0.04 ) $ (0.65 ) $ (0.54 ) Impact of adjustments to numerator and denominator 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.10 Adjusted diluted loss per share: $ 0.04 $ (0.01 ) $ (0.58 ) $ (0.44 ) (1) Expenses incurred relating to the departure of directors and officers and the recruitment of directors and key members of our senior management team. (2) Represents fees and expenses related to a settlement in the cancellation of a contract related to our information technology systems. (3) Severance expenses paid as part of our cost reduction plan implemented during the 13 weeks ended July 29, 2023. (4) Represents costs related to legal settlements and related fees and expenses. SPORTSMAN'S WAREHOUSE HOLDINGS, INC. GAAP and Non-GAAP Financial Measures (Unaudited) (amounts in thousands, except per share data) The following table presents the reconciliation of GAAP net loss to adjusted EBITDA for the periods presented: For the Thirteen Weeks Ended For the Thirty-Nine Weeks Ended November 2, 2024 October 28, 2023 November 2, 2024 October 28, 2023 Net loss $ (364 ) $ (1,331 ) $ (24,336 ) $ (20,258 ) Interest expense 3,317 3,944 9,408 9,518 Income tax benefit 162 459 (7,364 ) (6,664 ) Depreciation and amortization 9,984 10,663 30,536 28,412 Stock-based compensation expense (1) 1,047 965 3,438 3,341 Director and officer transition costs (2) 279 1,180 709 3,067 Cancelled contract (3) 205 - 911 - Cost reduction plan (4) - 351 - 1,216 Legal settlement (5) 1,750 - 1,750 687 Adjusted EBITDA $ 16,380 $ 16,231 $ 15,052 $ 19,319 (1) Stock-based compensation expense represents non-cash expenses related to equity instruments granted to employees under our equity incentive plan and employee stock purchase plan. (2) Expenses incurred relating to the departure of directors and officers and the recruitment of directors and key members of our senior management team. (3) Represents fees and expenses related to a settlement in the cancellation of a contract related to our information technology systems. (4) Severance expenses paid as part of our cost reduction plan implemented during the 13 weeks ended July 29, 2023. (5) Represents costs related to legal settlements and related fees and expenses. © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.The next game from Hazelight Studios, the developer behind It Takes Two and A Way Out , has been teased for a little while now, but we'll get our first glimpse of it very soon indeed. On its official social channels, the team has confirmed its next title will be unveiled during The Game Awards 2024: The tease comes at the end of this quick-fire behind-the-scenes video, in which founder Josef Fares walks us through various spots in the Hazelight offices. It's a silly little clip, even referencing Fares' notorious "F*** the Oscars" moment , but we're here for it. Anyway, we'll be hearing about Hazelight's new game in just a couple of days. It's rumoured to be named Split Fiction , and is very likely to be another co-op only adventure. Another leak claims it's due out in March 2025 , too. Fares himself has been teasing this new game as far back as our exclusive 2021 interview , in which he described the It Takes Two follow-up as "even better", and that people will be "blown away" . Are you excited to see the studio's new game? Discuss in the comments section below.

By ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump promised on Tuesday to “vigorously pursue” capital punishment after President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of most people on federal death row partly to stop Trump from pushing forward their executions. Related Articles National Politics | Elon Musk’s preschool is the next step in his anti-woke education dreams National Politics | Trump’s picks for top health jobs not just team of rivals but ‘team of opponents’ National Politics | Biden will decide on US Steel acquisition after influential panel fails to reach consensus National Politics | Biden vetoes once-bipartisan effort to add 66 federal judgeships, citing ‘hurried’ House action National Politics | A history of the Panama Canal — and why Trump can’t take it back on his own Trump criticized Biden’s decision on Monday to change the sentences of 37 of the 40 condemned people to life in prison without parole, arguing that it was senseless and insulted the families of their victims. Biden said converting their punishments to life imprisonment was consistent with the moratorium imposed on federal executions in cases other than terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder. “Joe Biden just commuted the Death Sentence on 37 of the worst killers in our Country,” he wrote on his social media site. “When you hear the acts of each, you won’t believe that he did this. Makes no sense. Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening!” Presidents historically have no involvement in dictating or recommending the punishments that federal prosecutors seek for defendants in criminal cases, though Trump has long sought more direct control over the Justice Department’s operations. The president-elect wrote that he would direct the department to pursue the death penalty “as soon as I am inaugurated,” but was vague on what specific actions he may take and said they would be in cases of “violent rapists, murderers, and monsters.” He highlighted the cases of two men who were on federal death row for slaying a woman and a girl, had admitted to killing more and had their sentences commuted by Biden. On the campaign trail, Trump often called for expanding the federal death penalty — including for those who kill police officers, those convicted of drug and human trafficking, and migrants who kill U.S. citizens. “Trump has been fairly consistent in wanting to sort of say that he thinks the death penalty is an important tool and he wants to use it,” said Douglas Berman, an expert on sentencing at Ohio State University’s law school. “But whether practically any of that can happen, either under existing law or other laws, is a heavy lift.” Berman said Trump’s statement at this point seems to be just a response to Biden’s commutation. “I’m inclined to think it’s still in sort of more the rhetoric phase. Just, ‘don’t worry. The new sheriff is coming. I like the death penalty,’” he said. Most Americans have historically supported the death penalty for people convicted of murder, according to decades of annual polling by Gallup, but support has declined over the past few decades. About half of Americans were in favor in an October poll, while roughly 7 in 10 Americans backed capital punishment for murderers in 2007. Before Biden’s commutation, there were 40 federal death row inmates compared with more than 2,000 who have been sentenced to death by states. “The reality is all of these crimes are typically handled by the states,” Berman said. A question is whether the Trump administration would try to take over some state murder cases, such as those related to drug trafficking or smuggling. He could also attempt to take cases from states that have abolished the death penalty. Berman said Trump’s statement, along with some recent actions by states, may present an effort to get the Supreme Court to reconsider a precedent that considers the death penalty disproportionate punishment for rape. “That would literally take decades to unfold. It’s not something that is going to happen overnight,” Berman said. Before one of Trump’s rallies on Aug. 20, his prepared remarks released to the media said he would announce he would ask for the death penalty for child rapists and child traffickers. But Trump never delivered the line. One of the men Trump highlighted on Tuesday was ex-Marine Jorge Avila Torrez, who was sentenced to death for killing a sailor in Virginia and later pleaded guilty to the fatal stabbing of an 8-year-old and a 9-year-old girl in a suburban Chicago park several years before. The other man, Thomas Steven Sanders, was sentenced to death for the kidnapping and slaying of a 12-year-old girl in Louisiana, days after shooting the girl’s mother in a wildlife park in Arizona. Court records show he admitted to both killings. Some families of victims expressed anger with Biden’s decision, but the president had faced pressure from advocacy groups urging him to make it more difficult for Trump to increase the use of capital punishment for federal inmates. The ACLU and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were some of the groups that applauded the decision. Biden left three federal inmates to face execution. They are Dylann Roof, who carried out the 2015 racist slayings of nine Black members of Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; 2013 Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ; and Robert Bowers, who fatally shot 11 congregants at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life Synagogue in 2018 , the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S history. Associated Press writers Jill Colvin, Michelle L. Price and Eric Tucker contributed to this report.Legacy of a Legend: Shyam Benegal's Indelible Impact on Indian Cinema

Qatar tribune Tribune News Network Doha The Plastic and Orthopaedic Surgery teams at Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC) recently achieved a groundbreaking milestone by performing two complex surgeries to reconstruct the thigh bone and save limbs from amputation. This innovative procedure marks a first-of-its-kind medical accomplishment in Qatar. Dr Mohammad Mounir, consultant, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Hamad General Hospital, highlighted the effectiveness of the innovative technique in reconstructing long bones, including the arms, legs, and thighs. These bones often suffer significant loss or fragmentation due to trauma, advanced cancerous tumours, or severe bone infections. Employing this technique enables preserving the limbs and mitigating the risk of amputation caused by acute bone loss. Dr Mounir said the highly skilled and experienced surgical team successfully treated two complex cases using this innovative technique. The first case involved a 16-year-old patient who had previously undergone multiple reconstructive surgeries following the removal of a malignant tumour in the thigh bone. The second case was of a man in his 30s who suffered severe trauma to the thigh due to a vehicular accident. After both cases were referred to the surgical and plastic teams at HGH, the decision was carefully made to utilise the Capa-Masquelet technique to reconstruct the thigh bone and prevent amputation. “This medical achievement aligns seamlessly with HMC’s strategy to achieve excellence in delivering medical services and enhancing the patient experience. It is in line with Qatar’s Third National Development Strategy and Qatar National Vision 2030, under which HMC is committed to adopting the latest medical technologies and providing advanced healthcare that significantly improves patients’ lives”,said Dr. Mounir. He added, “The Capa-Masquelet technique represents a qualitative leap in long bone reconstruction, as it combines the benefits of the Capa-Masquelet method, which uses boosting tissue to regenerate bone, and the Capanna technique, which involves bone grafting. This unique approach effectively reconstructs missing bone segments, restoring strength, stability, and functionality to damaged femurs.” Dr Ahmad Mounir, consultant in Bone Surgery at HMC, explained that this technique is particularly well-suited for advanced cases of long bone loss, especially where reduced blood circulation hinders the success of traditional methods. By replacing lost bone and repairing gaps, the technique promotes bone healing while maintaining the same leg length. This allows patients to recover and regain mobility within a remarkably short period. Typically, patients begin to heal after about six weeks, with a return to normal activities within four to six months of surgery. Dr Ahmad Mounir added, “The successful implementation of the Capa-Masquelet technique opens up new avenues for treating critical bone injuries, offering hope to patients facing significant challenges in improving their quality of life.” Copy 23/12/2024 10FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump promised on Tuesday to “vigorously pursue” capital punishment after President Joe of most people on federal death row partly to stop Trump from pushing forward their executions. Related Articles Trump criticized Biden’s decision on Monday to change the sentences of 37 of the 40 condemned people to life in prison without parole, arguing that it was senseless and insulted the families of their victims. Biden said converting their punishments to life imprisonment was consistent with the moratorium imposed on federal executions in cases other than terrorism and hate-motivated mass murder. “Joe Biden just commuted the Death Sentence on 37 of the worst killers in our Country,” he wrote on his social media site. “When you hear the acts of each, you won’t believe that he did this. Makes no sense. Relatives and friends are further devastated. They can’t believe this is happening!” Presidents historically have no involvement in dictating or recommending the punishments that federal prosecutors seek for defendants in criminal cases, though Trump has long sought more direct control over the Justice Department’s operations. The president-elect wrote that he would direct the department to pursue the death penalty “as soon as I am inaugurated,” but was vague on what specific actions he may take and said they would be in cases of “violent rapists, murderers, and monsters.” He highlighted the cases of two men who were on federal death row for slaying a woman and a girl, had admitted to killing more and had their sentences commuted by Biden. On the campaign trail, Trump often called for expanding the federal death penalty — including for those who kill police officers, those convicted of drug and human trafficking, and migrants who kill U.S. citizens. “Trump has been fairly consistent in wanting to sort of say that he thinks the death penalty is an important tool and he wants to use it,” said Douglas Berman, an expert on sentencing at Ohio State University’s law school. “But whether practically any of that can happen, either under existing law or other laws, is a heavy lift.” Berman said Trump’s statement at this point seems to be just a response to Biden’s commutation. “I’m inclined to think it’s still in sort of more the rhetoric phase. Just, ‘don’t worry. The new sheriff is coming. I like the death penalty,’” he said. Most Americans have historically supported the death penalty for people convicted of murder, according to decades of annual polling by Gallup, but support has declined over the past few decades. About half of Americans were in favor in an October poll, while roughly 7 in 10 Americans backed capital punishment for murderers in 2007. Before Biden’s commutation, there were 40 federal death row inmates compared with more than 2,000 who have been sentenced to death by states. “The reality is all of these crimes are typically handled by the states,” Berman said. A question is whether the Trump administration would try to take over some state murder cases, such as those related to drug trafficking or smuggling. He could also attempt to take cases from states that have abolished the death penalty. Berman said Trump’s statement, along with some recent actions by states, may present an effort to get the Supreme Court to reconsider a precedent that considers the death penalty disproportionate punishment for rape. “That would literally take decades to unfold. It’s not something that is going to happen overnight,” Berman said. Before one of Trump’s rallies on Aug. 20, his prepared remarks released to the media said he would announce he would ask for the death penalty for child rapists and child traffickers. But Trump never delivered the line. One of the men Trump highlighted on Tuesday was ex-Marine Jorge Avila Torrez, who was sentenced to death for killing a sailor in Virginia and later pleaded guilty to the fatal stabbing of an 8-year-old and a 9-year-old girl in a suburban Chicago park several years before. The other man, Thomas Steven Sanders, was sentenced to death for the kidnapping and slaying of a 12-year-old girl in Louisiana, days after shooting the girl’s mother in a wildlife park in Arizona. Court records show he admitted to both killings. Some families of victims expressed anger with Biden’s decision, but the president had faced pressure from advocacy groups urging him to make it more difficult for Trump to increase the use of capital punishment for federal inmates. The ACLU and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were some of the groups that applauded the decision. Biden left three federal inmates to face execution. They are Dylann Roof, who carried out the in Charleston, South Carolina; 2013 Boston Marathon bomber ; and Robert Bowers, who fatally shot 11 congregants at Pittsburgh’s , the deadliest antisemitic attack in U.S history.

Johansson shining at right time