fortune gems 2 slot tada games
That displeasure tracks with the bipartisan uproar in Washington that ignited over the president's about-face. The survey found that a relatively small share of Americans "strongly" or "somewhat" approve of the pardon, which came after the younger Biden was convicted on gun and tax charges. About half said they "strongly" or "somewhat" disapprove, and about 2 in 10 neither approve nor disapprove. The Democratic president said repeatedly that he would not use his pardon power for the benefit of his family, and the White House continued to insist, even after Republican Donald Trump's election win in November, that Biden's position had not changed — until it suddenly did. "I know it's not right to believe politicians as far as what they say compared to what they do, but he did explicitly say, 'I will not pardon my son,'" said Peter Prestia, a 59-year-old Republican from Woodland Park, New Jersey, just west of New York City, who said he strongly disagreed with the move. "So, it's just the fact that he went back on his word." In issuing a pardon Dec. 1, Biden argued that the Justice Department had presided over a "miscarriage of justice" in prosecuting his son. The president used some of the same kind of language that Trump does to describe the criminal cases against him and his other legal predicaments. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said it was a decision that Biden struggled with but came to shortly before he made the announcement, "because of how politically infected these cases were" as well as "what his political opponents were trying to do." The poll found that about 4 in 10 Democrats approve of the pardon, while about 3 in 10 disapprove and about one-quarter did not have an opinion or did not know enough to say. The vast majority of Republicans and about half of independents had a negative opinion. For some, it was easy to see family taking priority over politics. "Do you have kids?" asked Robert Jenkins, a 63-year-old Democrat who runs a lumber yard and gas station in Gallipolis, Ohio. "You're gonna leave office and not pardon your kid? I mean, it's a no-brainer to me." But Prestia, who is semiretired from working for a digital marketing conglomerate, said Biden would have been better off not making promises. "He does have that right to pardon anybody he wants. But he just should have kept his mouth shut, and he did it because it was before the election, so it's just a bold-faced lie," Prestia said. Despite the unpopularity of his decision, the president's approval rating has not shifted meaningfully since before his party lost the White House to Trump. About 4 in 10 Americans "somewhat" or "strongly" approve of the way Biden is handling his job as president, which is about where his approval rating stood in AP-NORC polls since January 2022. Still, the pardon keeps creating political shock waves, with Republicans, and even some top Democrats, decrying it. Older adults are more likely than younger ones to approve of Biden's pardoning his son, according to the poll, though their support is not especially strong. About one-third of those ages 60 and older approve, compared with about 2 in 10 adults under 60. The age divide is driven partially by the fact that younger adults are more likely than older ones to say they neither approve nor disapprove of the pardon or that they do not know enough to say. About 6 in 10 white adults disapprove of the pardon, compared with slightly less than half of Hispanic adults and about 3 in 10 Black adults. Relatively large shares of Black and Hispanic Americans — about 3 in 10 — were neutral, the poll found. "Don't say you're gonna do something and then fall back," said Trinell Champ, 43, a Democrat from Nederland, Texas, who works in the home health industry and said she disapproved of the pardon. "At the end of the day, all you have is your word." Champ, who is Black, voted for Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris over Trump. "I just had my hopes up for her, but I wasn't 100% positive," she said. Champ also said she does not approve of Biden's handling of the presidency and thinks the country is on the wrong track. "While he was in office, I felt like I really didn't see a lot of changes," she said. "I just felt like everything just kind of stayed the same," Champ said. Overall, though, the pardon did not appear to be a driving factor in many Americans' assessment of Biden's job performance. The share of Black Americans who approve of the way he is handling his job as president did fall slightly since October, but it is hard to assess what role the pardon may have played.
2 injured in firing over property dispute
The Chase enthusiasts have slammed ITV chiefs following a tense round that took an unexpected twist. In the episode aired on Wednesday (December 11), host Bradley Walsh introduced a new set of contestants eager to snatch the substantial cash prize. Viewers settling in for the evening's entertainment saw Adrian step up to the plate, joining three other contestants in a bid to outsmart chaser Paul Sinha and pocket a hefty sum. Adrian, hailing from Oldham, brought a commendable £7k from his cash builder round and bravely decided to chase the high offer of £40k, leaving viewers perched on the edge of their seats. However, when Adrian stumbled on a question, Bradley couldn't resist a jibe: "Do you think he gets it wrong?" referring to chaser Paul 'The Sinnerman' Sinha, before soliciting predictions from the team, reports the Express . Fortune favoured Adrian as The Sinnerman also fluffed the answer, sparing him from being knocked out. But moments later, Adrian faltered on another seemingly straightforward question, which should have sent him packing empty-handed. To the audience's amazement, The Sinnerman repeated his mistake, prompting suspicions among viewers about the sequence of events being "scripted". "What a fu**ing fix this is," raged one viewer. "That was 100% scripted, them asking if they think the Chaser will get it wrong when, in fact, he gets it wrong. Classic ITV ," wrote another. (sic) A third chimed in: "Why did the chaser getting that wrong feel scripted?" The team was sitting pretty with £46k in the pot after the first contestant, Elena, secured a cool £6k, leaving them with a hefty sum halfway through the show. "He's still in! Oh, I can't handle this drama! " exclaimed an excited viewer. Another commented: "It was an unexpected goal by Paul there. It was easy at home, of course, but Mercury is the smallest and the closest." The tension ramped up when contestant Ben managed to earn only £2k in his cash builder round but controversially decided to go for a lower offer of minus £7k. This move sparked outrage among viewers, as it would reduce the team's total to £39k. One irate fan remarked: "He shouldn't be allowed any money I would be foaming if he was on my team. -7 seriously?" Another agreed, saying: "That guy took -£7,000!! I would have pushed him off his stool". However, the strategy paid off for Ben, who successfully returned to the team for the final round. Even the chaser, Paul, weighed in to reassure the contestant, saying: "You had their (the team) blessing you took the lower offer. it's a tactical game - you're fine." In the end, despite their efforts, the team was defeated in the final chase and left with nothing. The Chase airs Mondays-Fridays at 5pm on ITV1.To access this post, you must purchase a subscription. Please click the button below to visit our subscriptions page to select a package. Subscriptions
Bridgestone expands partnership with Tegeta Holding to strengthen footprint in Caucasus region
Google and the US government faced off in a federal court on Monday, as each side delivered closing arguments in a case revolving around the technology giant's alleged unfair domination of online advertising. The trial in a Virginia federal court is Google's second US antitrust case now under way as the US government tries to rein in the power of big tech. In a separate trial, a Washington judge ruled that Google's search business is an illegal monopoly, and the US Justice Department is asking that Google sell its Chrome browser business to resolve the case. The latest case, also brought by the Justice Department, focuses on ad technology for the open web -- the complex system determining which online ads people see when they surf the internet. The vast majority of websites use a trio of Google ad software products that together, leave no way for publishers to escape Google's advertising technology, the plaintiffs allege. Publishers -- including News Corp and Gannett publishing -- complain that they are locked into Google's advertising technology in order to run ads on their websites. "Google is once, twice, three times a monopolist," DOJ lawyer Aaron Teitelbaum told the court in closing arguments. Presiding judge Leonie Brinkema has said that she would deliver her opinion swiftly, as early as next month. Whatever Brinkema's judgment, the outcome will almost certainly be appealed, prolonging a process that could go all the way to the US Supreme Court. The government alleges that Google controls the auction-style system that advertisers use to purchase advertising space online. The US lawyers argue that this approach allows Google to charge higher prices to advertisers while sending less revenue to publishers such as news websites, many of which are struggling to stay in business. The US argues that Google used its financial power to acquire potential rivals and corner the ad tech market, leaving advertisers and publishers with no choice but to use its technology. The government wants Google to divest parts of its ad tech business. Sign up to get our free daily email of the biggest stories! Google dismissed the allegations as an attempt by the government to pick "winners and losers" in a diverse market. The company argues that the display ads at issue are just a small share of today's ad tech business. Google says the plaintiffs' definition of the market ignores ads that are also placed in search results, apps and social media platforms and where, taken as a whole, Google does not dominate. "The law simply does not support what the plaintiffs are arguing in this case," said Google's lawyer Karen Dunn. She warned that if Google were to lose the case, the winners would be rival tech giants such as Microsoft, Meta or Amazon, whose market share in online advertising is ascendant as Google's share is falling. The DOJ countered that it simply "does not matter" that Google is competing in the broader market for online ads. "That is a different question" than the market for ads on websites that is the target of the case, said Teitelbaum. Google also points to US legal precedent, saying arguments similar to the government's have been refuted in previous antitrust cases. Dunn also warned that forcing Google to work with rivals in its ad products would amount to government central planning that the court should reject. If the judge finds Google to be at fault, a new phase of the trial would decide how the company should comply with that conclusion. And all that could be moot if the incoming Trump administration decides to drop the case. The president-elect has been a critic of Google's, but he warned earlier this month that breaking it up could be "a very dangerous thing." arp/dw
NoneReport: Chargers expect WR Ladd McConkey, LB Khalil Mack to play vs. Ravens
NoneSupply Chain Established for Cargo Tanks Transporting Liquefied CO2 at Elevated Pressure (EP) NYK, KNCC, and JFE Shoji Advance Toward Social Implementation of CCS
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Corey McKeithan scored 28 points as La Salle beat Temple 83-75 on Saturday night. McKeithan shot 10 of 19 from the field, including 3 for 6 from 3-point range, and went 5 for 5 from the line for the Explorers (6-2). Demetrius Lilley added 13 points while shooting 5 for 12, including 2 for 4 from beyond the arc while he also had six rebounds. Jahlil White shot 3 of 13 from the field and 5 of 5 from the free-throw line to finish with 11 points, while adding 12 rebounds. Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.Report: Chargers expect WR Ladd McConkey, LB Khalil Mack to play vs. Ravens‘I would also contact their corporate office’: Woman says her items were stolen during Embassy Suites stay. She can’t believe the hotel’s response
US-Google face off as ad tech antitrust trial comes to closeSecret Level has proven to be divisive among critics, and the new Prime Video series has failed to get a 70% Rotten Tomatoes score, meaning it won't make it onto our best Prime Video shows round-up. Perhaps its audience was just too niche, targeting fans of specific games, or it simply hasn't lived up to the hype. Either way, this one has proven to be a bit of a disappointment. Whether or not you agree is up to you, of course! If you are looking for more critically acclaimed anthology shows, there's plenty out there to suit all tastes. Whether you want cautionary tales about technology, stories all focusing on the same number or stories set within the same motel room, there's plenty to uncover. Here are three of my favorite anthology shows you can stream now. Inside No 9 RT score: 100% Seasons: 9 Main cast: Reece Shearsmith, Steve Pemberton, various guest stars Creators: Reece Shearsmith, Steve Pemberton Where to stream it: The Roku Channel (US); BBC iPlayer (UK); Foxtel Now (AUS) One of my favorite British shows is streaming worldwide, and with a perfect Rotten Tomatoes rating, the reviews speak for themselves. Here, series creators Reece Shearsmith and Steve Pemberton star as an array of different characters from hapless cat burglars to a double act to a loved-up couple and police partners, there's not a character they haven't tried out, to be honest! With a rotating cast of huge talent including Natalie Dormer, Derek Jacobi, Nicola Walker, and Tamsin Greig, each episode is set in some sort of 'Number 9' whether that's a house, a dressing room, a train carriage, or a shoe. It has to be seen to be believed, as words really can't do this beloved anthology series justice. You'll laugh, cry, and be shocked along the way. Black Mirror RT score: 83% Seasons: 6 (7 is on the way) Main cast: Various, changes each season Creator: Charlie Brooker Where to stream it: Netflix (worldwide) Black Mirror shocked viewers from day one with a controversial first episode where Rory Kinnear plays a British Prime Minister who is blackmailed into doing something truly horrifying. Since then, it hasn't shied away from covering some pretty dark topics, striking a balance between humor and horror along the way. While not strictly billed as a horror anthology, some of the episodes are disturbing enough to warrant that label, you can trust me on that. There's so much to dive into, but we've ranked the top 10 Black Mirror episodes if you need help deciding. Get daily insight, inspiration and deals in your inbox Sign up for breaking news, reviews, opinion, top tech deals, and more. At the forefront of each episode is some sort of technology, whether it's AI, a new app, a chip in the brain, or some sort of advancement that is meant to benefit humanity. But, of course, it takes a dark turn, and people's lives are flipped upside down. Much like No 9 , there are some great guest stars in each season, including Bryce Dallas-Howard, Miley Cyrus, Aaron Paul, and Daniel Kaluuya. Black Mirror season 7 streams next year. Room 104 RT score: 88% Seasons: 4 Cast: Various, changes each season Creator: Mark Duplass and Jay Duplass Where to stream it: Max (US); Binge (AUS) One of the best Max shows comes in the form of an anthology series, and I'm such a huge fan of Room 104 . Here, a motel room is at the center of each story as we follow the stories of the guests who stay there, resulting in all sorts of different scenarios. Combining comedy, drama, horror, and thriller, this series is perfect if you want a combination of different things where you're never quite sure who you'll meet next. Stories include a woman hired to babysit, which takes a dark turn, an episode told through interpretive dance, a young man who has plans to blow up a political convention, and an elderly couple who decide to relive their first night together. Honestly, anything goes in Room 104 ; you'll see it all! Can’t wait to stream Carry-On on Netflix? Here are 3 more action movies with over 90% on Rotten Tomatoes Netflix’s #2 most-watched show Black Doves is the spy thriller I didn't know I needed – here are 3 more with over 92% on Rotten Tomatoes 3 new Netflix shows I've watched in December and would highly recommend
I spent my first American Christmas in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania visiting the family of a friend at Harvard. He was genial and easy-going, from a Christian Republican family. They took their religion very seriously, he said. Premarital sex was forbidden; I soon became the friend in whose room he officially slept when his girlfriend was visiting. I have a few vivid memories from that trip. The pretty little house where all the linen matched, like in a hotel. Roast turkey, that my fresh-off-the-boat Indian palate found bland and dry, and the much-anticipated angel food cake, that turned out to be ultra crumbly but surprisingly bland in a pleasant way. Years later, I discovered that this was because it eschews both butter and egg yolks, the two things that give plain cake its richness. We went to church. The sermon was largely unexceptionable, other than the recurring demand that ‘God bless America’, which seemed a tad parochial. There were declarations of concern for those less fortunate, which spilled over into the family’s discussion of the many things that they were doing to help the needy. What remains with me is the very genuine spirit of generosity and warmth that emerged from those conversations — they seem to genuinely believe that God’s love and munificence extended to everyone, even people who might have strayed a bit, and the implied need to do something for them as well. I never discussed abortion with them, or homosexuality, and I suspect those conversations would not have gone very far, but they were calm and polite and generous (for example, to me, an unapologetic heathen). A bit formal on the first meeting, but there was a softness behind it, a bit like the angel food cake. This was in 1983. President Ronald Reagan had recently launched his own plan to ‘Make America Great Again’: less taxes on the rich, less benefits for the poor, stronger businesses and weaker unions, private charities and private prisons, abstinence and an abortion ban. I thought of that visit after another Republican won the US election, and unexpectedly even carried the state of Pennsylvania. My hosts adored Reagan. Reagan was articulate and affable and gracious, with a rare ability to make the many racist things he said sound reasonable and even sympathetic. He was divorced but had remarried, and seemed to have a stable and loving marriage. He went to church regularly, and 1983 was the year he chose to be the ‘year of the bible’. His strength was his All-American blandness, that concealed a ruthless commitment to a right-wing agenda. Trump is very different: rude and brusque, with a great talent for making the (very) nasty things he says sound even nastier. His racism is overt and extends to all non-white people. He brags about his sexual conquests, claiming that he, as a star, is allowed to physically harass women, and has been very publicly sleeping around while married (allegedly when Melania was pregnant). A jury found him liable for sexual abuse and he is a convicted felon. He occasionally mentions God, but usually to highlight his own semi-divine status. If Reagan was angel food cake, Trump is a stale rusk in a village tea-shop that has only its hardness to offer. Both Reagan and Trump were/are machistas, but in very different ways. Reagan thought of himself as a cowboy in a broad-brimmed hat, a role he played in several films (he occasionally confused scenes from a film script with actual history). In his mind’s eye, he was tough, but gracious and fair. Trump, despite his elite upbringing, is more of a street-corner bully, a blow-hard and a lewd whistler. I disliked Reagan and still blame him for the disastrous anti-poor turn that the US took in the 1980s, whereas Trump, at least in his stated views, is more sympathetic to the US working class (though not to immigrants). But there is a crassness, dishonesty and violence that Trump brings to everything he does and says, that I cannot bear. Could my hosts (we have lost touch — I don’t even know whether they are with us), with their emphasis on good manners, propriety and conservative Christian values, have found in Trump what they loved in Reagan? And yet, a vast majority of conservative Christians said that they intended to vote for Trump and probably did. After all, in his last term, he gave them the judges that removed the right to abortion, and they might have worried that Kamala Harris would try to undo all that. And as it says in the hymn, God moves in mysterious ways, perhaps even to the point of making use of a retrograde. But hard-core religious conservatives are only about a quarter of the population. What about the rest? Why were they not put off by his violence and narcissism? Why would they expect anything from this supremely self-centered man? A part of the answer it seems to me is that Trump’s one talent is for expressing hate and contempt (possibly because he genuinely doesn’t like most people, which could explain why so many of his closest associates eventually turned on him). This is what made him an effective (nasty) boss in ‘The Apprentice’, the TV show that made him famous. Perhaps voters, angry with their own lot in life, find resonance in the hurtfulness of his words and ignore the content. Looking from India, the claim that anger is driving American voters might seem puzzling. It is, after all, the most powerful country in the world. Yet, when asked if their country is on the right track, 70% or more Americans say no. The principal complaint seems to be about the economy: in most polls, voters blamed Biden-Harris for the weak economy. The only problem is that the economy is not weak — it is the strongest in many ways it’s ever been. 2024 GDP is substantially higher than what it was projected to be before the pandemic. Employment rates are near their all-time high and real (i.e. inflation-adjusted) wages for production workers and other non-supervisory staff (read lower-level workers) have never been higher, with a particularly steep trajectory in the Biden years. And the biggest increments were among the lowest-paid workers. Why are they complaining? Perhaps the voters are concerned about the more long-term prospects. It is true that the last 40 years have not been great for the American worker. Reagan was successful in pushing workers down. Real wages fell through the Reagan years and under his Republican successor, George Bush, despite a growing economy. They started to rise in the 1990s, but it’s only in 2020 (or perhaps a little earlier depending on how inflation is calculated) that real wages reached levels that the present worker’s parents and grandparents enjoyed in the early 1970s. By this time, GDP per capita was twice as high, but almost none of that extra income had trickled down to the working classes. This is in a country where historically each generation did better than the previous one. To make matters worse, some groups, like low-education male workers, kept falling behind the rest. No wonder lots of low-income Americans (especially low-wage males) are angry, and think something has gone very wrong. And a lot of them blame it on some (somewhat fuzzy) notion of elites, for supporting what they see as anti-worker policies, like globalization, immigration and big tech, though, interesting, not Reaganomics (Reagan remains a hero). They see in Trump an ally. Trump, I think, genuinely resents the elites, for treating him, during his years as a man-about-town, (unsurprisingly) as a corrupt buffoon. Moreover, what makes Trump credible is that he does not behave like the present-day elites. He doesn’t finish his sentences, thrives on racist and sexist jokes, boasts about his peccadillos and has contempt for the law. I am absolutely not saying that most non-elites behave in these ways, but I think it so clearly violates the current elite norm that it powerfully signals Trump’s difference. This might be why even low-income women believe that Trump is more in their corner than Harris, a representative of the California elite. And for that reason, they are grateful when he spews hate on the elites, on immigrants, on that largely imaginary cabal of ‘woke’ feminists and gender-fluid people. If I am right, then there is both bad news and good news. The bad news is that we may be in the trap of low expectations. People in the US, especially poorer people, expect very little from the government, according to polls. They vote for Trump less in the hope that he will do a lot for them, than based on cynicism about the whole project: since governments are mostly useless, why not pick someone who will at least make your (mostly internal) enemies uncomfortable? But then very little will change, and the anger will still be there waiting to be harvested. The good news is that the rage against the trans and the immigrants and so on may be more against the elite world view that supports them than against them as human beings. The big news for the world (including India) is that Trump reflects America’s crisis and not its greatness. We must not opt for a strong-man because the US now has one — loudmouths and bullies only serve themselves — there is nothing wrong with bland, as long as bland gets the job done. In that spirit let me offer a nice dessert that starts with the (very bland) angel food cake. Recipe for Angel Food Cake Sift 3⁄4 cup sugar, 1/8th tsp of salt and 1 cup cake flour very well together. Separate eggs till you have 11/2 cup egg whites (ideally buy just egg whites) and let it come to room temperature. Beat with 1 tsp vanilla essence and 11⁄2 tsp cream of tartar till frothy and beat at high speed, adding 12 tbs sugar, one tbs at a time, till the whites form glossy firm peaks. Fold in the flour with soft hands, 1 tbsp at a time. Pour into a tube pan and bake for 35-40 minutes. Let it cool completely before taking it out of the pan. Serve with a berry or mango compote. To make the compote, stew 3 cups of fresh or frozen berries or fresh mango in 4 tbsp orange juice and 6 cardamom pods for 15 minutes, mashing the fruit with the back of a spoon as it cooks. Add sugar to taste, if the fruits are too tart. Serve slices of the cake with a generous serving of the compote. This is part of a monthly column by Nobel-winning economist Abhijit Banerjee illustrated by Cheyenne Olivier. ILLUSTRATION CREDIT: Cheyenne OIivier (France)
Investors gain N183bn on NGX
North Korea's Kim vows the toughest anti-US policy before Trump takes office
Schumer tells feds he’ll call a vote on windfall elimination provision repeal - Government Executive
Defending champs UConn basketball falls to Memphis in Maui Invitational | Social reactionsENGAGESMART SHAREHOLDER ALERT: CLAIMSFILER REMINDS INVESTORS of Lead Plaintiff Deadline in Class Action Lawsuit Against EngageSmart, Inc. - ESMT