Towson 64, Morgan St. 60Cal staves off Sacramento State for third straight winChinese spy campaign scooped up data from 9th telecom network, White House says
ITV I'm A Celeb fans 'gutted' as Ant and Dec halt show to make big announcementManufacturers urged to embrace technology to boost output
British Columbia Premier David Eby said Canada must approach Donald Trump's plan to impose a 25 per cent U.S. tariff on Canadian goods from a position of strength, as business, trade and community organizations called for quick action on the trade threat. Eby said premiers and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would meet this week to discuss "our strategic approach" to the U.S. president-elect's plan to impose the tariff on Canadian and Mexican imports immediately after his inauguration on Jan. 20, unless action was taken to stem the cross-border flow of migrants and illegal drugs. The B.C. premier made the comments Tuesday in a speech to the annual convention of the B.C. Federation of Labour in Vancouver. "Obviously, this will be devastating to workers on both sides of the border," he said. "Both in the U.S. and in Canada, the impact on families will be profoundly significant." Canada and the U.S. have long been top trading partners, on imports as well as exports, and the strength of this relationship put Canada in a solid position when it came to Trump's tariff threat, Eby said. "We have more in common with Americans than what separates us," he said. "We buy more American stuff than France, than China and Japan and the United Kingdom combined. So, we are negotiating, I believe, from a position of strength." Eby called for a united Canadian approach to the proposed U.S. tariff. "We're going to stand together and we're going to ensure we negotiate from a position of strength and that we negotiate hard and ensure any decisions that are made are in the best interests of British Columbians and Canadians," he said. Eby acknowledged improvements could be made on Canada's border, especially when it came to policing contraband and illegal drugs. "We've called repeatedly, for example, for port police to ensure what comes into B.C. is not contraband, is not illicit drugs or precursor chemicals," he said. "These are things that we can do to make life better here in B.C., as well as respond to concerns that have been raised south of the border." Trump issued a statement on social media on Monday saying Canada and Mexico had the power to solve their border issues, which he called a "long simmering problem." Opposition B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad called for the immediate recall of the B.C. legislature Tuesday to provide funding to secure borders to stop the flow of illegal drugs and migrants. Business organizations in B.C. called on the provincial and federal government to immediately address Trump's tariff plan, which they said would will hurt businesses. The proposal would have significant consequences for B.C. businesses of all sizes and would harm communities and workers across the province, said Fiona Famulak, B.C. Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer. “Ottawa must take this news seriously and work proactively with representatives of the incoming U.S. administration immediately to address the issue before the tariffs are implemented," she said in a statement. "We cannot afford to wait until January to take action." The Metro Vancouver city of Surrey, which has two U.S. border crossings, said in a statement the proposed tariff would have severe implications for the city's business community. Most of B.C.'s manufacturing industry is located in Surrey and the city is also home to many thriving import-export-reliant businesses, which would face increased costs and potential job losses if the U.S. tariff was imposed, said Jasroop Gosal, Surrey Board of Trade spokesman. The B.C. Lumber Trade Council said the proposed tariff would hurt U.S. consumers and homebuyers by driving up the cost of building materials from Canada, while the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade said the U.S. was B.C.’s most important trading partner, accounting for 54 per cent of the province’s commodity exports in 2023. "It is imperative that we engage constructively with our U.S. counterparts to advance our collective interests," said Bridgitte Anderson, board of trade president and CEO. "This should act as a wake-up call to all levels of government that a new Team Canada approach is required," said Anderson. "We saw the reaction in the markets, and we saw the (Canadian) dollar fall. The shock waves were quite significant and we shouldn't underestimate what the impact of this could be." She said some of B.C.’s top exports to the U.S. are natural gas, softwood lumber, agricultural products, and minerals and metals. But some economists and policy analysts warned against falling for familiar Trump negotiation tactics. “He likes nothing more than to see his negotiating partners trembling in fear or running around screaming with their hair on fire," said Carlo Dade, trade and infrastructure director at the Alberta-based Canada West Foundation. "So, we need to react, but we need to do so with prudence, with firmness, with thought and without fear and panic." Prof. Nicolas Schmitt said the tariff proposal was a threat rather than a solid policy decision. “We should not panic about the 25 per cent threat right now," said Schmitt, who teaches economics at Simon Fraser University. "It's a bullying tactic. It's like bullying in the schoolyard." B.C. government data says the province's exports to the U.S. in the first half of 2024 were worth $16.9 billion, down 1.1 per cent compared to the same period last year. The U.S. is by far B.C.'s largest export destination, with mainland China in second place receiving goods worth $4.9 billion in the year to July, up 13.2 per cent. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 26, 2024. Dirk Meissner and Nono Shen, The Canadian Press
Biden issues veto threat on bill expanding federal judiciary as partisan split emerges
Russian president Vladimir Putin said his military used a new intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) called “Oreshnik” to hit a defence factory in the city of Dnipro in eastern Ukraine on Thursday, in response to Ukraine striking targets in Russia for the first time with US Atacms ballistic missiles and British Storm Shadow cruise missiles. Ukraine presented parts of the missile to the media over the weekend and said it flew at a top speed of Mach 11 (more than 13,000km/h) and carried six non-nuclear warheads, each with six submunitions. Mr Putin said Oreshnik missiles cannot be stopped by any existing western air defence systems and that his military had a stock of the weapon ready for use. Ukraine and western states have questioned his claims and suggested that the missile, rather than being entirely new, is based heavily on previously known models. The Kremlin is known for making overblown claims about its arms: before its full-scale invasion of its pro-western neighbour in February 2022, Mr Putin said Russia’s Kinzhal missile could not be shot down. However, Ukrainian forces have intercepted several using US-supplied Patriot air defence systems that are about 40 years old. “Just last night, our air defence forces managed to shoot down nearly 50 strike drones. Over the past week, Russia has launched more than 800 guided aerial bombs, around 460 strike drones, and over 20 missiles of various types against Ukraine and our people,” Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Sunday. “Ukraine is not a testing ground for weapons...Yet, Russia persists in its attempts to destroy our people, sow fear and panic and weaken us. Ukraine needs more air defence systems and we are actively working with our partners on this. Strengthening the protection of our skies is absolutely critical.” Long blackouts now affect millions of Ukrainians almost every day after Russia destroyed more than 60 per cent of the country’s electricity-generating capacity with waves of missile and drone strikes this year, and more attacks are expected as winter begins to bite, potentially using the kind of missile fired on Thursday. “Russia’s use of an IRBM is typical blackmail. Putin tries to scare everyone off from supporting Ukraine,” Kyiv’s minister for foreign affairs Andrii Sybiha said on Sunday. “Ukraine’s partners should do the exact opposite: reject blackmail, increase support, and strengthen Ukraine’s air shield with systems capable of intercepting such missiles.” [ If Russia is indeed planning an attack against a Nato state, distance and neutrality will provide no defence Opens in new window ] Russia has been grinding slowly forward in eastern Ukraine all year, without capturing any large cities, and has retaken about half of the roughly 1,500sq km of its Kursk border region that Kyiv’s forces seized in a lightning attack in August. Ukraine is pressing allies to provide as much military support as possible urgently, amid uncertainty over how Donald Trump will approach the war when he returns to the White House in January. He has said he could stop the war in a day, without explaining how. Western states have condemned North Korea’s deployment of at least 10,000 troops to help Russia, as Moscow tries to bolster its depleted army ranks without conducting another unpopular round of mobilisation. In a bid to tempt new recruits, Mr Putin signed a law on Saturday to offer a debt write-off of up to 10 million roubles (€92,000) to Russians who sign up to fight in Ukraine for at least one year. Daniel McLaughlin is a contributor to The Irish Times from central and eastern EuropeCal staves off Sacramento State for third straight win
Stock market today: Wall Street hits records despite tariff talkFORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — Navy quarterback Blake Horvath read the play perfectly and turned it into the longest in school history, a 95-yard touchdown run in the Armed Forces Bowl. “By somebody that’s not really that fast,” Horvath said after the 21-20 win over Oklahoma on Friday. The Midshipmen (10-3) fell behind by two touchdowns less than 10 minutes into the game, but Horvath's record run late in the third quarter tied the game at 14-all. He put them ahead on a 6-yard TD with 4:34 left before Navy’s defense stopped an Oklahoma 2-point conversion with six seconds left in the game. “Probably over-pursued by them,” Horvath said of the 95-yarder. “Some tendencies they showed earlier, just thought I could get a pull.” After faking a handoff on the read-option play, Horvath ran straight up the middle into the open field. Brandon Chatman cut off a pursing defender around the Sooners 20. By time another defender, cornerback Woodi Washington, was able to catch up and started to bring him down, Horvath stretched the ball over the goal line — though he was initially ruled short before a replay review resulted in the touchdown. “Brandon Chatman actually busted his tail to get his butt down the field,” Horvath said. “I can see him out of the corner of my eye busting his butt. And honestly, it’s almost not even my touchdown without him and the offensive line blocking.” The previous longest play for the Midshipmen came during the Roger Staubach era, when Johnny Sai had a 93-yard run against Duke in 1963. Horvath also had a 90-yard TD run against Memphis, making him only the second Navy player with two 90-yard runs in the same season. The other was quarterback Malcolm Perry in 2017, when he had runs of 92 and 91 yards. “That’s a play we know can hit big and it did, and definitely exciting to see,” fullback Alex Tecza said. “I was getting tired just chasing him. ... It's great. He's being doing that all year.” Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football
NoneBy KEVIN FREKING WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans teed up a vote this week on bipartisan legislation to gradually expand by 66 the number of federal judgeships across the country. Democrats, though, are having second thoughts now that President-elect Donald Trump has won a second term. The White House said Tuesday that if President Joe Biden were presented with the bill, he would veto it. A Congress closely divided along party lines would be unlikely to overturn a veto, likely dooming the bill’s chances this year. It’s an abrupt reversal for legislation that the Senate passed unanimously in August. But the GOP-led House waited until after the election to act on the measure, which spreads out the establishment of the new district judgeships over about a decade to give three presidential administrations the chance to appoint the new judges. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said the bill was negotiated with the understanding that three unknown, future presidents would have the chance to expand and shape the judiciary. No party would be knowingly given an advantage. He said he begged GOP leadership to take up the measure before the presidential election. But they did not do so. “It was a fair fight and they wanted no part of it,” Nadler said. Rep. Jim Jordan, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, explained the timing this way: “We just didn’t get to the legislation.” The change of heart about the bill from some Democrats and the new urgency from House Republicans for considering it underscores the contentious politics that surrounded federal judicial vacancies. Senate roll-call votes are required for almost every judicial nominee these days, and most votes for the Supreme Court and appellate courts are now decided largely along party lines. Lawmakers are generally hesitant to hand presidents from the opposing party new opportunities to shape the judiciary. Related Articles National Politics | Trump lawyers and aide hit with 10 additional felony charges in Wisconsin over 2020 fake electors National Politics | After withdrawing as attorney general nominee, Matt Gaetz lands a talk show on OANN television National Politics | What will happen to Social Security under Trump’s tax plan? National Politics | Republican-led states are rolling out plans that could aid Trump’s mass deportation effort National Politics | Trump promises to end birthright citizenship: What is it and could he do it? Nadler said that the bill would give Trump 25 judicial nominations on top of the 100-plus spots that are expected to open up over the next four years. “Donald Trump has made clear that he intends to expand the power of the presidency and giving him 25 new judges to appoint gives him one more tool at his disposal to do that,” Nadler said. Nadler said he’s willing to take up comparable legislation in the years ahead and give the additional judicial appointments to “unknown presidents yet to come,” but until then, he was urging colleagues to vote against the bill. Still, few are arguing against the merits. Congress last authorized a new district judgeship more than 20 years ago, while the number of cases being filed continues to increase with litigants often waiting years for a resolution. “I used to be a federal court litigator, and I can tell you it’s desperately needed,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said of the bill. Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., first introduced the bill to establish new judgeships in 2020. Last year, the policy-making body for the federal court system, the Judicial Conference of the United States, recommended the creation of several new district and court of appeals judgeships to meet increased workload demands in certain courts. “Judges work tirelessly every day to meet growing demands and resolve cases as quickly as possible, but with the volume we have and the shortage of judges we have, it just makes it a very difficult proposition,” Judge Timothy Corrigan, of the Middle District of Florida, said in a recent blog post on the website of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The blog post states that caseloads are creating delays that will erode public confidence in the judicial process, but the bill would meet many of the federal judiciary’s needs for more judges. Jordan said that as of June 30th, there were nearly 750,000 pending cases in federal district courts nationwide, with each judge handling an average of 554 filings. When asked if House Republicans would have brought the bill up if Vice President Kamala Harris had won the election, Jordan said the bill is “the right thing to do” and that almost half of the first batch of judges will come from states where both senators are Democrats, giving them a chance to provide input on those nominations before Trump makes them. But in its veto threat, the White House Office of Management and Budget said the bill would create new judgeships in states where senators have sought to hold open existing judicial vacancies. “These efforts to hold open vacancies suggest that concerns about judicial economy and caseload are not the true motivating force behind passage of the law,” the White House said. Shortly before the White House issued the veto threat, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he would be curious to hear Biden’s rationale for such action. “It’s almost inconceivable that a lame-duck president could consider vetoing such an obviously prudential step for any reason other than selfish spite,” McConnell said.Dow futures gain 300 points Monday following Trump's pick of Bessent for Treasury: Live updates
Flag football uses talent camps to uncover new stars